    [Senate Hearing 118-741, Part 2]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                      S. Hrg. 118-741, Pt. 2

                     DEPARTMENT  OF  DEFENSE   AUTHORIZATION
                      REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR  FISCAL
                      YEAR 2025 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE
                      PROGRAM

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       ON

                                    S. 4638

         TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 FOR MILITARY
    ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
       FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
       MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
                                    PURPOSES

                                   ----------

                                     PART 2

                                    SEAPOWER

                                   ----------

                                  MAY 1, 2024

                    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services

                                                      S. Hrg. 118-741, Pt. 2

                     DEPARTMENT  OF  DEFENSE   AUTHORIZATION
                      REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR  FISCAL
                      YEAR 2025 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE
                      PROGRAM

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       ON

                                    S. 4638

         TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 FOR MILITARY
    ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
       FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
       MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER
                                    PURPOSES

                                   __________

                                     PART 2

                                    SEAPOWER
                                   __________

                                  MAY 1, 2024
                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services

                   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                     Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                    ______

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    62-123 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2025

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                       JACK REED, Rhode Island, Chairman
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
    KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York      DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
    RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      TOM COTTON, Arkansas
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
    TIM KAINE, Virginia                  JONI ERNST, Iowa
    ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine            DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts      KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
    GARY C. PETERS, Michigan             RICK SCOTT, Florida
    JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia       TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
    TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois            MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
    JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  TED BUDD, North Carolina
    MARK KELLY, Arizona                  ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri
                   Elizabeth L. King, Staff Director
                 John P. Keast, Minority Staff Director

                                     ------

                            Subcommittee on Seapower

                          TIM KAINE, Virginia Chairman
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
    RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              RICK SCOTT, Florida
    ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine            TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
    GARY C. PETERS, Michigan             ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri

                                      (ii)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  -----------

                                  May 1, 2024

                                                                       Page

    Navy and Marine Corps Investment Programs........................     1

                               Member Statements

    Senator Tim Kaine................................................     1

    Statement of Senator Kevin Cramer................................     3

                               Witness Statements

    Guertin, Hon. Nickolas H., Assistant Secretary of the Navy for        5
      Research, Development, and Acquisition; Vice Admiral James E.
      Pitts, USN, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Warfighting
      Requirements and Capabilities; Lieutenant General Karsten S.
      Heckl, USMC, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and
      Integration.

    Questions for the Record.........................................    52

                                     (iii)

                     DEPARTMENT  OF  DEFENSE   AUTHORIZATION
                      REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR  FISCAL
                      YEAR 2025 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE
                      PROGRAM

                                  ----------

                             WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 2024

                          United States Senate,
                              Subcommittee on Seapower,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                                        Washington, DC.

                   NAVY AND MARINE CORPS INVESTMENT PROGRAMS

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 4:29 p.m., in
    room 222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Time Kaine
    (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
        Subcommittee Members present: Senators Kaine, Shaheen,
    Blumenthal, King, Peters, Cramer, Sullivan, and Scott.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TIM KAINE

        Senator Kaine. The hearing is coming to order, and it is
    historic because never have we started a hearing early in my 12
    years in the Senate, but my clock says it is 4:29 p.m., so why
    not make history. We are a minute early.
        I want to thank my Ranking Member, Senator Cramer. He and I
    are both from coastal States, and I want to thank our witnesses
    for this important hearing of the Seapower Subcommittee as we
    are getting ready to start to write the NDAA [National Defense
    Authorization Act], both in the Subcommittees and in the main
    Committee, moving toward a markup in the middle part of June.
        It is kind of hard to believe that the markup comes around
    faster and faster. It doesn't seem like a year ago that we were
    doing this, but we have a lot to talk about. The hearing takes
    place at an extraordinary time for the United States Navy.
        Commercial vessels from around the world, our naval
    vessels, and those of our partners have been attacked dozens
    and dozens of times in the past 6 months in the Red Sea. And we
    need to take a moment to appreciate the bravery of the women
    and men who sail those waters, their skill, their competence,
    and the competence of all those who have trained them and
    equipped them to undertake a very dangerous mission.
        No one here needs to be reminded of the responsibility that
    we have to provide weapons systems to young men and women to
    serve them well on their worst days, but it has been a long
    time since the Navy was presented with such a vivid
    illustration of this priority.
        This generation of senior flag officers knows that the
    difference between a successful campaign and a travesty can be
    as small as one or two missiles. Today, in the Red Sea where
    our warfighters are operating within reach of threat systems
    every day, those one or two missiles, one or two drones, or one
    or two USVs are out there waiting for our people and for our
    systems to slip up.
        No one in this room would deny the difficult tradeoffs
    between cost, schedule, and performance that our requirements
    officers and program managers work through every single day.
    But the Red Sea has to remind us all how well we balance those
    tradeoffs ends up being measured in very concrete ways in times
    of crisis.
        For months now in the Red Sea, we have been in a position
    where we have to succeed 100 percent of the time, not 99, not
    98, with our sailors, many from Virginia, in harm's way--those
    connected to the enterprise and others in that strike group in
    harm's way. We have to succeed 100 percent of the time.
        A weapon system that delivers too late, is too expensive to
    afford, or not mission capable when it needs to be is not doing
    anything for sailors and marines as they go into harm's way,
    and getting these tradeoffs wrong will also consume taxpayer
    dollars that could buy real time capability elsewhere. I don't
    say any of this as a critique.
        I just think we have been blessed with a very impressive,
    dedicated individuals in your positions over the past several
    years, but we are seeing in real time the consequences of
    decisions that have been made for decades that are now being
    relied upon to keep our folks safe.
        Despite the best efforts of all predecessors, we have
    watched as the performance of Navy shipbuilding has slowly
    declined, and this is something I know we are going to talk a
    lot about today. And we know that the pacing threat for the
    Navy and Marine Corps is even more stressing, ultimately, than
    the challenge that we face in the Red Sea.
        The Navy's list of headlines is familiar to everyone in
    this room. The use of the term once in a generation investment
    has become all too frequent in these settings. Must pay bills
    to modernize the Nation's strategic to turn and rebuild the
    infrastructure for nuclear vessel maintenance are coming due as
    we come to grips with the consequences of losing an entire
    generation of skilled shipbuilders to retirement during the
    pandemic.
        Flagship programs like the Columbia struggle despite
    consistent prioritization, and secondary but just as vital
    programs are floundering too. There are success stories. People
    are great success stories.
        The amphibious warship and destroyer production are both
    moving forward apace, but even these programs face pretty
    severe workforce shortages. As the saying goes, the first step
    is admitting we have a challenge, admitting we have a problem.
        So, thank you, Secretary Guertin, and please pass my thanks
    to Secretary Del Toro for starting a hard conversation about
    the State of Navy shipbuilding with your 45 day review. I hope
    we can continue that conversation here and during the entire
    NDAA process and do what we can to make this problem better.
        There is certainly areas we are going to--we are going to
    need to make big, painful investments to preserve our capacity
    to build warships for the generations to come, but there are
    also areas where money is not going to make a difference, or at
    least not make enough of a difference fast enough to be worth
    the investment.
        Today I want to hear about how we are being intentional
    about those trades and the opportunity costs that go with them.
    In particular, we had a Readiness subcommittee hearing earlier
    today, and we talked an awful lot about the workforce. We
    talked about recruiting into the uniform service, but we talked
    about the workforce in our industrial base.
        My belief, and I think, I am on the Health, Education,
    Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, so I focus a lot on
    education and workforce issues, is an awful lot of the
    challenge that we are seeing is a workforce challenge.
        We sometimes say another part of the challenge is the
    supply chain challenge, but that is a workforce challenge too
    because an awful lot of our supply chain backups are driven by
    our industrial partners having the same workforce challenges
    attracting and retaining good talent as we see in the military
    and in our prime contractors.
        General Heckl, I want to finish and just say a word about
    you. This is your last hearing in front of the subcommittee.
    Unless there is some emergency that crops up in the next couple
    of days that causes to have another one, and I want to make a
    particular point of thanking you.
        Since you took this job, you have given very candid, frank
    testimony in front of this Committee in the midst of the most
    consequential reorganization of the Marine Corps in recent
    memory.
        You have been open with us. You have been willing to tell
    us what you think we need to hear, even if it is maybe not what
    we want to hear, or even if you know you might face some
    disagreement from some on this Committee.
        I hope to discuss Force Design a little bit today, as we
    have many times before, but I also want to applaud the sense of
    urgency and professionalism with which General Berger, General
    Smith, yourself, and many other fine marines have approached
    these efforts. You remind us of why America wants a Marine
    Corps.
        And as you head into a well-deserved retirement, you have
    earned thanks from a grateful Corps, a grateful Congress, and a
    grateful Nation, and with that, now let me yield to my
    colleague, Senator Cramer, for his opening comments.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR KEVIN CRAMER

        Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and great to be
    your partner. As the Chairman alluded to, we are not both from
    coastal States, but together we know a lot about the seas and
    the prairies.
        But that said, thank you to all of our witnesses, and I
    might as well start where the chairman ended, General Heckl,
    and thank you for your service. Congratulate you on your
    retirement, and I am sure you could find another role that
    would allow you to come and testify before Congress.
        I am sure that is one of your favorite things that you will
    miss the most in your job. But anyway, thank you. To that
    point, to the point about your directness, your bluntness, that
    is something that we appreciate very much on this Committee.
        As I mentioned, others as well, Admiral, we look forward to
    hearing from you, and Mr. Secretary, I have appreciated our
    discussion earlier this week. But the plain truth is something
    we all need to hear and share with each other from time to
    time, realizing that the political constraints we work in.
        We are also in a--you know, we are in a dangerous world
    right now, and we need to know what is necessary and what is
    doable, and you need to tell us what you need from us, and I
    appreciate all of you being here today and look forward to
    working with you.
        The importance of sea power is obviously only going to
    increase over the years, and it is pretty darn important right
    now. Our Navy thwarts Houthi drones and missile attacks on a
    daily basis, our Marine Corps campaigns in the Western Pacific
    with allies and partners to deter the aggression of the Chinese
    Communist Party.
        I, along with every other Republican Senate Armed Services
    Member, expressed serious concerns with President Biden's order
    to build a temporary pier on the Gaza coast because of the
    serious risk to United States personnel.
        Unfortunately, as predicted, they came under mortar fire
    from Hamas terrorists just last week, which demonstrates the
    importance of contested logistics. No other nation can match
    the capabilities of our great Navy and Marine Corps, but there
    is always room for improvement, and we want to talk about that
    and be part of that.
        Our sealift and logistical capabilities are in need of
    attention. While the Navy partially owns these
    responsibilities, sealift moves more than 90 percent of
    military equipment and supplies. We simply do not have adequate
    capacity.
        For example, one large ship enroute to Gaza turned around
    due to an engine room fire, creating an indefinite delay. If we
    struggle to build a temporary pier in the Mediterranean, how
    will we build them in the hundreds in the Pacific? During World
    War II, the Navy's famed Seabees built over 400 advanced bases.
        I also expect the Navy will improve its support to the
    Marine Corps as they pivot back to their traditional naval and
    expeditionary formations. Amphibious ships are in a deplorable
    State of readiness. Only one amphibious ship out of three was
    ready to participate in this year's international exercise,
    Cobra Gold.
        Additionally, chronic instability of amphibious ship
    procurement puts the industrial base at great risk. A multi
    ship buy of amphibious ships is desperately needed. Instability
    in shipbuilding is not limited to amphibious ships, as you
    know. Forecasted shipbuilding plans have seen massive variation
    from year to year.
        The difference between high and low procurement estimates--
    estimates procurement in a fiscal year has averaged six ships
    over the past decade. The December 2020 shipbuilding plan
    forecasted the procurement of ships in fiscal year 2025, but
    here we are discussing the 2025 budget that requests just 6, a
    difference of 13 battle force ships.
        Industry investments, which take 5 to 10 years to
    materialize, require stability in shipbuilding orders. We need
    to send the right market signals and the right demand signals.
    I am also concerned with progress toward the unmanned fleet.
        The Navy wants to jump into large, unmanned vessels, while
    largely ignoring the transition of small and medium systems
    that can be deployed to the fleet much sooner. For example, the
    Navy never planned to transition to small, unmanned surface
    vessel program. It has been thrust upon them from the outside.
        We must learn, experiment, and scale these emerging
    technologies ahead of our adversaries. The United States enjoys
    the most innovative commercial and startup ecosystem in the
    world, and we must harness this advantage for National
    Security. Thank all again, all of our witnesses, and look
    forward to their testimony.
        Senator Kaine. We needn't have introduction, since we know
    you really well. So, maybe I will start with Secretary Guertin,
    and then ask Admiral Pitts and General Heckl to testify, and
    then we will open up 5 minute rounds of questions.

        JOINT STATEMENT OF HON. NICKOLAS H. GUERTIN, ASSISTANT
         SECRETARY OF THE NAVY FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND
    ACQUISITION; VICE ADMIRAL JAMES E. PITTS, USN, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
    NAVAL OPERATIONS FOR WARFIGHTING REQUIREMENTS AND CAPABILITIES;
     LIEUTENANT GENERAL KARSTEN S. HECKL, USMC, DEPUTY COMMANDANT
                 FOR COMBAT DEVELOPMENT AND INTEGRATION

        Mr. Guertin. Thank you, Chairman Kaine and Ranking Member
    Cramer, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. On
    behalf of myself, Vice Admiral Pitts, and Lieutenant General
    Heckl, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today
    and address the Department of the Navy's fiscal year 2025
    budget for sea power capabilities.
        We would like to thank this Subcommittee for your
    leadership and support in shipbuilding, naval aviation, and
    ground programs, and to maintain maritime security in defense
    of our Nation. Thank you also for mentioning the sailors and
    marines operating around the world.
        As the action over recent weeks have shown, support for our
    allies remains resilient on a superior naval force
    strategically postured to adapt to consistently evolving
    geopolitical challenges and threats. The sailors of the
    Eisenhower, the Arleigh Burke, the Carney, and others have to
    watch to defend against the Iranian Houthi aggression.
        That includes engaging and destroying more than 80 one-way
    attack UAVs and at least six ballistic missiles intended to
    strike Israel from Iran and Yemen. We are grateful for the
    professionalism and skill of our sailors and marines, and
    mindful of the sacrifices of their families at home.
        The investments that Congress made in previous budgets
    enabled our success. I also want to express the Department's
    gratitude at the passage of the security supplemental to make
    additional investments in submarine industrial base, while
    supporting our allies and partners.
        As we look forward to 2025, the actions of the Navy and
    Marine Corps team reassures international allies and partners,
    deters potential adversaries, and responds to those who
    threaten the lives of our sailors, marines and civilian
    merchant mariners engaged in lawful international commercial
    activities.
        The Navy remains focused on the pacing challenge of
    managing strategic competition with the People's Republic of
    China, Russia's illegal war of invasion of Ukraine, the Houthis
    strikes in the Red Sea, and Iranian aggression of our allies.
        The President's Fiscal Year 2025 Budget provides the
    resources necessary for the Navy and Marine Corps to continue
    to implement the 2022 National Defense Strategy. This request
    builds and sustains the right mix of capabilities to keep the
    seas open and free, deter conflict, and defend against current
    and future threats.
        In alignment with the Secretary of the Navy's priorities,
    the budget request enables a one Navy, Marine Corps team to
    continue to strengthen our maritime dominance, building on our
    culture of warfighting excellence, and enhancing strategic
    partnerships.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
    Subcommittee today. Our mission begins and ends with providing
    the best possible capabilities to our sailors and marines in
    the fleet, and the three of us look forward to answering your
    questions.
        [The prepared joint statement of Mr. Guertin, Vice Admiral
    Pitts, and Lieutenant General Heckl follows:]

    Joint Prepared Statement by Mr. Nickolas H. Guertin, Vice Admiral James
                 Pitts, and Lieutenant General Karsten S. Heckl

        Chairman Kaine, Ranking Member Cramer, and distinguished Members of
    the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
    today to address the Department of the Navy's fiscal year 2025 budget
    request for Seapower capabilities. Maintaining a world-class and
    worldwide deployable Navy and Marine Corps as a first line of defense
    for the United States is a continuous effort. The Department of the
    Navy (DON) appreciates the support of Congress and this Committee for
    the Department's acquisition, sustainment, research, and development
    programs that allow us to continue to build and operate a lethal,
    capable, integrated, and forward-postured Navy and Marine Corps.
        The security of our country and preservation of our national
    interests remains reliant on a superior naval force, strategically
    postured to adapt to constantly evolving geopolitical challenges and
    threats. The actions of the Navy and Marine Corps team reassures
    international allies and partners, deters potential adversaries and
    responds to those who threaten the lives of our sailors, marines and
    civilian merchant mariners engaged in lawful, international commercial
    activities. The DON remains focused on the pacing challenge of managing
    strategic competition with the People's Republic of China (PRC),
    Russia's illegal war and invasion of Ukraine and the Houthi strikes in
    the Red Sea. The DON is investing in lethal capabilities across a broad
    spectrum of platforms and programs to equip our warfighters for
    potential combat operations with credible and sufficient capability to
    deter, and when necessary, prevail in conflict. The investments we make
    today will shape DON's future and support the Secretary's three
    enduring priorities of strengthening maritime dominance, building a
    culture of warfighting excellence, and enhancing strategic
    partnerships.
        Since the start of fiscal year 2023 we have delivered 11 battle
    force ships to the Fleet including three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers
    (DDG 51), one Virginia-class (SSN), three Littoral Combat Ships (LCS),
    one Replenishment Oiler (TAO-205), two Spearhead-class expeditionary
    fast transport dock (EPF), and one Lewis B. Puller-class expeditionary
    sea base (ESB). Today, the Navy has 293 battle force ships, with an
    additional 87 ships under contract and 58 ships in construction, with
    the balance of ships in pre-construction activities such as long lead
    material procurement and planning efforts. The Department has made
    great strides in recapitalizing Naval aviation platforms. Last year we
    delivered 60 new aircraft for the Navy and Marine Corps team, including
    F/A-18E/F production and ongoing procurement and fleet integration of
    F-35, E-2D, V-22, P-8, KC-130J, CH-53K, VH-92A, and unmanned aircraft
    MQ-4C, MQ-9A Extended Range (ER), and MQ-25. Naval Aviation is now
    predominantly comprised of new airframes, made possible through a
    deliberate strategy of evolutionary, controlled technical risk
    development programs. We are continuing making advancements in fiscal
    year 2024 for unmanned aviation. The MQ-4 program is meeting schedule
    objectives, completing Initial Operational Capability (IOC) in July
    2023 with its first orbit stand up in INDOPACOM. The Program is
    currently in the process of standing up its remaining two operational
    orbits in EUCOM and CENTCOM, scheduled for quarter 2 fiscal year 2024
    and quarter 1 fiscal year 2025 respectively. The MQ-4 will undergo
    continuous spiral upgrades throughout the next 4 years, to include
    Link-16 targeting with LRASM in 2024 culminating in Full Operational
    Capability in fiscal year 2028 enabling near-24/7 ISR coverage in
    simultaneous theaters of operation.
        The Unmanned Carrier Aviation Mission Control System (UMCS) is the
    system-of-systems required for MQ-25 air vehicle and payload command
    and control. UMCS integrates multiple networks and systems both afloat
    and ashore and is synchronized with the MQ-25 to provide a complete
    capability to the carrier. The program conducted its first C4I
    Operational Network Evaluation that validated network connectivity over
    Navy networks and wideband satellite communications in January 2024.
    The first ground control station will be installed on CVN 77 in fall
    2024. Nine systems have been delivered to date and the first carrier-
    based ground control station installation will complete on CVN 77 in
    the fall of 2024. UMCS will also be the control system for the Air Wing
    of the Future.
        The first Joint System Verification Test event to validate the
    initial software build was conducted in January 2024. The Static test
    article aircraft was completed in January 2024 and will begin testing
    in spring of 2024. The first EDM aircraft is scheduled to be delivered
    early 2025 with its first flight scheduled for summer of 2025. MQ-25 is
    scheduled to reach IOC in 2026.
        For the Marine Corps, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Squadron (VMU)-1
    recently conducted phase zero operations with MQ-9A ER, including
    multisensory imagery reconnaissance, electronic support, unmanned
    escort of surface forces, and maritime domain awareness in support of
    the Joint Force and Coalition Partners in CENTCOM, totaling over 3,800
    hours. VMU-3 started transition to the MQ-9A ER with flights to begin
    in 2023.
        Over the last year, global events have continued to pressurize the
    need for rapid change across the Services and the DON has taken note,
    aggressively seeking and implementing new and improved ways to operate,
    integrate, and sustain our forces. Russia's ongoing war against Ukraine
    has affirmed our perception of the modern-day character of war.
    Specifically, Russia's war against Ukraine has displayed the value of
    enhanced sensors and long-range precision fires, the importance of
    freedom of navigation, and the ability to sustain a force. The war
    highlights the need for increased industrial capacity, and has shown
    the genuine value in maintaining relationships among partners and
    allies. Additionally, it has shown us that persistent, forward presence
    is essential for the success of our Nation's deterrence efforts.
    Moreover, recent provocations by China, such as flying collection
    assets directly over the continental United States, clearly show their
    willingness to compete below the threshold of armed violence.
        The Marine Corps' activation of new units, including the 3d Marine
    Littoral Regiment and Task Force 62 are indicative of efforts made to
    compete and reassure allies and partners. Additionally, the
    establishment of Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Blaz on Guam is yet
    another positive for the Marine Corps and the Joint Force, as it will
    serve as a critical logistics and inside force enabler. These new
    organizations and installations will actively participate and support
    operational concepts, including Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO),
    Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO), and Stand-In Forces.
    However, continued fielding and sustainment of advanced capabilities in
    mobility, logistics, kill webs, and command and control will be
    essential for the entire Marine Corps to remain credible and lethal.
        The security environment demands ships, aircraft, subs,
    expeditionary forces, special operations forces, and sailors ready to
    fight and win. Readiness is generated across the DON, from shipyards
    and aviation depots, to our global network of bases and stations, to
    the steaming and flight hours our sailors and marines need to hone
    their skills. For surface ship maintenance, we are reinforcing our
    commitment to our industry partners to share future demand signals. We
    are seeing the benefits of improved maintenance package planning,
    earlier contract awards, and delivery of long-lead time material to our
    repair yards. Continued investments in spares supports readiness for
    training and operational units while simultaneously improving endurance
    for sustained operations. Funding of some availabilities that cross
    fiscal year boundaries via the OPN funding pilot also shows positive
    results. These initiatives enable a stable and predictable workload for
    our industry partners and ensure a balance of operational requirements
    with industrial capacity.
        The Navy continues to expand opportunities for manned/unmanned
    teaming (MUMT) and recently stood up 4th Fleet's hybrid fleet providing
    continuous maritime domain awareness. 4th Fleet also demonstrated a
    multi-domain SINKEX and manned/unmanned teaming to include operations
    from the expeditionary fast transport USNS (T-EPF-10). This work
    expands on the lessons learned from TF-59 and the commercial use
    technology they continue to experiment with.
        Another great example of recent successes of MUMT is when the
    Navy's USV prototypes deployed as participants in Integrated Battle
    Problem (IBP) 23.2 to the Western Pacific in 2023. During this -6-month
    exercise, our Unmanned Surface Vessel (USV) prototypes Ranger, Mariner,
    Sea Hunter, Seahawk reached 3,191 hours operating in autonomy mode,
    totaled 39,10 nautical miles travelled under autonomy control and
    accomplished 1,333 autonomous missions. They participated in Autonomous
    Warrior, and one USV visited Yokosuka, Japan. This event is paying
    dividends to inform our sailors on future CONOPS to include our USVs
    doing astern refueling from a fleet oiler and operating with a
    controlling Aegis Destroyer. In order to ensure our people have the
    right skills to maintain our unmanned capabilities, the Navy recently
    established the first ever Robotics rating. This rating is designed to
    train our sailors to maintain our current and future unmanned
    capabilities. SURFDEVRON is also establishing Unmanned Surface Vessel
    Squadron 3 in fiscal year 2025, a new organization to support the TTP
    and CONOPS development for small USVs.
        The Navy is also supporting and investing in Deputy Secretary of
    Defenses' Replicator Initiative to build and field attritable
    autonomous capabilities at scale within 18 to 24 months.
        In keeping with accelerating innovation, the Navy established the
    Disruptive Capabilities Office (DCO) to produce disruptive warfighting
    advantages by rapidly identifying and evaluating innovation solution
    paths for emerging operational problems in the execution and budget
    years. The DCO will stay aligned with, the Replicator Initiative.
        Fiscal year 2024 and fiscal year 2025 will continue with more MUMT
    experimentation in order to expand our awareness, command and control,
    and forward contested logistics. This collaborative approach on
    innovation, experimentation and integration will leverage industries'
    pace of technology, allies, and partners' capabilities, while exploring
    new concepts.
    The Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget Request
        The President's Fiscal Year 2025 Budget provides the resources
    necessary for the Navy and Marine Corps to continue to implement the
    2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS). This request builds and sustains
    the right mix of capabilities to keep the sea lanes open and free,
    deter conflict, and defend against current and future threats. In
    alignment with the Secretary of the Navy's priorities, the budget
    request enables the One Navy-Marine Corps Team to continue
    strengthening our maritime dominance, building on our culture of
    warfighting excellence, and enhancing our strategic partnerships.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget request is strategy-based and
    analytically driven to meet our strategic goals, while balanced with
    reform targeted at maximizing the value of every dollar. The budget
    reflects the Department's commitment to building and sustaining a
    modernized naval force and operating forward with sufficient
    capability, size, and mix to deter and defend. Fiscal year 2025
    continues key investments in advanced technologies and modernization of
    our current Seapower and Projection forces. In this request we are
    prioritizing the recapitalization of the strategic ballistic missile
    submarine, the Columbia-class, which remains the Department's top
    acquisition priority. It requests the second year of incremental
    funding for the second Columbia-class SSBN and full funding for two DDG
    Flight IIIs, one SSN, one FFG, one LPD and the first LSM, while
    providing the next increment of funding for construction of CVN 80 and
    CVN 81. The budget supports modernization of our warfighting
    capabilities across all domains, including research and development
    (R&D) funding for the future attack submarine (SSN(X)), future
    destroyer (DDG(X)), the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) manned
    strike fighter (F/A-XX), Marine Corps Unmanned Expeditionary (MUX) FoS,
    and recapitalization of the Take Charge and Move Out (TACAMO) mission
    (E-XX).
        The Department requests $16.2 billion in fiscal year 2025 and
    includes 75 fixed-wing, rotary-wing, and uncrewed aircraft to modernize
    our capabilities that can achieve lethal and persistent effects inside
    adversary weapon engagement zones. This budget funds 53 fixed-wing
    aircraft to include 13 F-35B and 13 F-35C Lightning II strike fighters
    to continue transitioning our 4th generation fighter squadron and 27 T-
    54A multi-engine training system aircraft. Last, three MQ-25 Stingrays
    are requested to conduct aerial refueling and Intelligence,
    surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR). The fiscal year 2025 budget
    prioritizes readiness recovery, continuing prior year gains on ship and
    aircraft maintenance efforts to improve overall department readiness.
    It includes significant funding to improve operational readiness,
    material availability and reduce maintenance periods for submarines.
    The request continues investment to develop improved war-fighting
    capabilities across all domains and distributed maritime operations,
    investing in long range fires and hypersonic weapons as well as
    increases to unmanned platforms. This budget also develops the
    Integrated Combat System (ICS) which will deliver decision superiority
    at rapid speed and enable ships to operate force-wide as an integrated
    system. USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81) began operating with a
    virtualized Aegis Combat System, a crucial step in the wider transition
    to a single integrated system, in July 2023. In 2024, the Arleigh
    Burke-class destroyer USS Lenah Sutcliffe Higbee (DDG 123), as well as
    five more ships and four land based test sites are also projected to
    run virtualized Aegis combat systems.
        The budget request increases investment in the Commandant's Force
    Design priorities by $98.7 million, moving programs from concept/
    experimentation to production within five lines of effort (LOE)--sense
    and detect; fuse, understand and decide; act; protest; transmission
    paths; and sustain and move. These investments provide unique
    capabilities the Marine Corps requires to enable joint force access,
    sense and make sense of the battlefield, to close kill chains, and
    apply lethal fires when required to deter or defeat adversaries.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget continues investment in the defense
    industrial base to ensure the continued viability of the crucial
    businesses and infrastructure needed to ensure our ships, aircraft, and
    ground equipment are available when needed for the defense of the
    Nation and our interests abroad. The budget request includes a $8.8
    billion investment across the FYDP in the submarine industrial base to
    support serial production of Columbia-class nuclear-powered, ballistic
    missile submarines (SSBN) in parallel with Virginia-class nuclear-
    powered attack submarine (SSN) construction and sustainment of the
    existing submarine force. The Navy is leveraging the implementation of
    dedicated workforce development incentives on Navy contracts to
    attract, recruit, develop and retain the workforce at our Nation's
    shipbuilding partners. President's Budget 2025 continues the Workforce
    Development Incentives awarded in fiscal year 2023 on the DDG-51 MYP
    contracts (fiscal year 2023 to fiscal year 2027). Additionally, the
    Navy is implementing dedicated Workforce Development Incentives on
    upcoming new contract awards for Virginia-class, San Antonio-class, and
    Medium Landing Ship.
    Summary
        The Navy and Marine Corps team continues to meet challenges head
    on--in cyberspace, in outer space, on the sea, under the sea, in the
    littorals and in the air every single day. With Congress' support, the
    Department of the Navy is focused on rapidly researching, developing,
    acquiring, and fielding the material solutions required to be more
    lethal, sustainable, resilient, survivable, agile, and responsive. We
    are committed to providing the Nation with a combat-credible, dominant,
    globally responsive naval force to keep the sea lanes open, deter
    aggression, and when called upon, decisively win our Nation's wars.
        Programmatic details regarding Navy and Marine Corps capabilities
    are summarized in the following section.

                u.s. navy and marine corps seapower capabilities
                                 ship programs
    Submarines
        The Columbia-class SSBN, with the TRIDENT D5 Life Extension 2
    (D5LE2) will ensure the effectiveness and availability of the Nation's
    Sea Based Strategic Deterrent (SBSD) through the 2080s. Columbia-class
    is the Navy's #1 acquisition priority as its construction and delivery
    are critical to pace the retirement of current ballistic missile
    submarines.
        The lead ship of the class, District of Columbia, started full
    construction in fiscal year 2021. This ship must be on patrol by fiscal
    year 2031 to meet USSTRATCOM requirements. While the District of
    Columbia is progressing into the next phases of construction the margin
    to the 84-month contract delivery schedule has been consumed and the
    shipbuilders' performance must improve to regain schedule. The Navy is
    driving both General Dynamics Electric Boat (GDEB) and Huntington
    Ingalls Newport News Shipbuilding (HII-NNS) to identify mitigations to
    recover critical path schedule, improve overall performance, and
    deliver on time. Because of the significance of the SBSD mission, the
    Navy is holistically managing SSBN inventory across the portfolio using
    targeted Ohio-class SSBN service life extensions to mitigate possible
    Columbia delays. The second ship of the class, Wisconsin, commenced
    full construction in October 2023 and learning is being demonstrated
    through reduced spans for early construction activities. The fiscal
    year 2025 budget request includes the second year of incremental
    funding for Wisconsin, as well as funding for advance procurement,
    advance construction and continuous production across the class.
    Continued funding for these initiatives are critical to reducing
    construction schedule risk and enabling cost savings across the class.
    The Navy appreciates Congress's continued support of these authorities.
        As of March 2024, the Navy has taken delivery of 22 Virginia-class
    submarines with 16 additional under contract. Hyman G Rickover (SSN
    795) delivered October 2023 and New Jersey (SSN 796) is planned to
    deliver in April 2024. The second ship of the Block V contract will
    introduce the Virginia Payload Module, which helps mitigate the loss of
    undersea strike capability with the retirement of SSGNs. All Block V
    ships will incorporate Acoustic Superiority program improvements.
    Virginia-class construction performance continues to be challenged to
    meet the required two per year delivery cadence and is currently at
    81.2/year. With congressional approval, the Navy intends to award the
    next Virginia multi-year procurement (MYP) contract, Block VI, in
    fiscal year 2025 which will include nine ships. Given the challenges in
    meeting the required construction rates, the fiscal year 2025 budget
    includes funding for one Virginia SSN, which provides an opportunity
    for the shipbuilders to balance production for VCS Block VI
    construction and serial Columbia production in fiscal year 2026 and
    allows for maturation of improvements in manufacturing, outfitting and
    assembly and test, as well as industrial base investments. The fiscal
    year 2025 budget also includes advance procurement (AP) and economic
    order quantity (EOQ) funding in support of Block VI ships. AP and EOQ
    allows for critical sub-tier vendors to be kept on cadence and support
    the procurement of long lead materials and components that are critical
    to the program. Cost to complete funding for Block IV and V boats are
    also included in this budget and well as funding for continued
    development of capabilities and technologies for future blocks.
        The submarine industrial base (SIB), consisting of the public
    shipyards and two prime shipbuilders, General Dynamics Electric Boat
    (GDEB) and Huntington Ingalls Industries Newport News Shipbuilding
    (HII-NNS), along with the 16,000 suppliers across the country, supports
    both new-construction submarines and sustainment of the in-service
    submarine fleet. The SIB faces an increase in demand across the
    enterprise as the Navy ramps up production of the Columbia-class,
    continues to increase production to two Virginia-class submarines per
    year beginning in fisal year 2026, while increasing SSN operational
    availability and supporting international commitments under the AUKUS
    partnership. The unprecedented demands on the submarine industrial base
    require a whole-of-nation effort. Our shipbuilders and their supporting
    high-tech supplier base are building up from a lengthy drawdown and our
    SIB requires a once-in-a-generation effort to modernize our force and
    develop our allies' submarine capabilities so we can fight alongside
    each other. The Navy appreciates congressional support to address these
    challenges. In 2021 and again this year, the Navy and DOD performed a
    study looking at the health of the industrial base. The fiscal year
    2025 budget request expands upon the foundational investments made in
    prior budget cycles and are critical to shore up the SIB to produce
    Virginia and Columbia, sustain in-service submarines and ramp up to the
    build rate necessary to support AUKUS requirements. Investments are
    targeted in six key areas to include infrastructure, supplier
    development, scaling of new technologies, workforce development,
    strategic outsourcing and government oversight of these efforts. The
    Navy has seen significant benefit from investments made to date
    including installation of multiple additive manufactured components
    additively manufactured components on in-service submarines; graduation
    and placement of over 300 people from the Accelerated Training in
    Defense Manufacturing program, which will scale to train and place 800-
    1000 skilled trades by fiscal year 2025, and increased infrastructure
    for submarine production through the groundbreaking of the multi-class
    submarine production facility at Newport News, VA.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget continues the efforts in support of
    requirements development, Analysis of Alternatives execution, concept
    design and technology development for the Future Attack Submarine
    (SSN(X)). As the Columbia design workforce efforts diminish, SSN(X)
    design efforts will ramp up, thereby maintaining the strength of the
    submarine design workforce.
    Aircraft Carriers (CVNs)
        The fiscal year 2025 budget fully funds the operations and
    maintenance of 12 In-Service Aircraft Carriers, and three Ford-class
    Carriers under construction. The fiscal year 2025 budget continues
    investment in Sailor Quality of Service at Newport News Shipbuilding to
    improve the living conditions of our sailors onboard aircraft carriers
    and other ships undergoing extensive maintenance or construction.
        The USS Gerald R Ford (CVN 78) completed a highly successful
    deployment to support international partners and allies, with critical
    new systems performing well. CVN 78 spent 239 days underway, sailed
    over 83,476 nautical miles, and worked with 17 nations throughout its
    deployment during critical strategic exercises. Her crew and embarked
    air wing logged over 17,826 flight hours and 10,396 sorties, conducted
    33,444 flight deck moves, 3,124 hangar bay aircraft moves, 2,883
    aircraft elevator moves, 16,351 aircraft fueling evolutions, and
    transferred 8,850 pallets of cargo and mail.
        John F Kennedy (CVN 79) is over 90 percent construction complete
    and scheduled for delivery in the fourth quarter of 2025. Enterprise
    (CVN 80) construction is 37 percent complete, and Doris Miller (CVN 81)
    14 percent complete with material procurements pacing ahead of previous
    Ford-class carriers. The Navy remains committed to reducing and
    controlling the cost of Ford-class aircraft carriers and continues to
    benefit from the $4 billion acquisition savings achieved through the
    two-ship block buy contract award for CVN 80 and CVN 81. The aircraft
    carrier industrial base has significant overlap with the submarine
    industrial base, both at the shipyard and at major suppliers. The
    Navy's investments in SIB in many cases also benefit aircraft carrier
    programs by improving performance, efficiency, and capacity at these
    critical suppliers.
        The Nimitz-class Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH) is the refueling
    of the ship's reactors and full recapitalization of the carrier in
    support of the second half of its service life. USS John C Stennis (CVN
    74) is 61 percent complete, and USS Harry S Truman (CVN 75) awarded its
    RCOH execution Advanced Planning (AP) contract earlier this year.
        The Navy has completed the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the
    disposal of decommissioned, defueled Ex-Enterprise (CVN 65), and
    announced via Record of Decision (ROD) in September 2023 to select and
    implement a full commercial dismantlement. This decision will allow the
    Navy to reduce the Navy inactive ship inventory, eliminate costs
    associated with maintaining the ship in a safe stowage condition, and
    dispose of legacy radiological and hazardous wastes in an
    environmentally responsible manner, while meeting the operational needs
    of the Navy.
    Large Surface Combatants
        Arleigh Burke-class (DDG 51) destroyers are the workhorse of the
    Fleet, with 73 ships delivered as of February 2024, including the very
    first DDG 51 FLT III ship. At the beginning of August 2023, the Navy
    awarded the next DDG 51 FLT III Multi-Year Procurement contracts to BIW
    and HII. These contracts awarded 9 DDG 51 FLT III ships (6 ships to HII
    and 3 ships to BIW) across the fiscal year 2023 FYDP. Additionally,
    each shipbuilder's contract contained options for additional ships over
    the next 5 years, providing the Navy and Congress flexibility to
    increase DDG 51 build rates, if authorized and appropriated. Fiscal
    year 2023 option ship was awarded to HII at the end of August 2023. As
    of today, the DDG 51 shipbuilders have a total of 26 DDG-51s under
    contract and 11 ships in various stages of production.
        Flight III DDG 51s will provide enhanced Integrated Air and Missile
    Defense (IAMD) with the AN/SPY-6(V)1 (SPY-6) and AEGIS Baseline 10
    (BL10). SPY-6 meets the growing ballistic missile threat by improving
    radar sensitivity and enabling longer range detection of increasingly
    complex threats. The program demonstrated design maturity through its
    successful completion of all developmental testing. SPY-6 is in
    production for delivery to support Flight III ships. Initial shipboard
    testing of the radar and combat system has commenced on the first DDG
    51 Flight III ship, USS Jack H Lucas (DDG 125), which was delivered in
    June 2023.
        Integration testing for the Flight III Combat System continues to
    progress steadily. Testing of BL10 integration with the SPY-6 array at
    a land-based development yielded significant risk reduction of first-
    time integration at the waterfront aboard DDG 125. Notably, the
    incorporation of software modifications identified during these tests
    facilitated the delivery of multiple combat system software increments
    to DDG 125 each adding capability and increasing stability, readiness,
    and performance. Each of these increments has enhanced the vessel's
    capabilities, bolstering its stability, readiness, and overall
    performance. The first at-sea Live Fire Event completed in September
    2023 with the successful launch of a Standard Missile at a drone
    target. Additionally, in Flight Test Other (FTX-23) DDG 125
    demonstrated the first BL10, BMD 6, and SPY-6 integrated detection,
    tracking, and simulated engagement of a target at sea in February 2024.
        The Zumwalt-class (DDG 1000) guided missile destroyers are multi-
    mission surface combatants designed to provide long-range, offensive
    surface strike capabilities. The DDG 1000 program continues to
    accomplish first-time integration of unique combat systems elements,
    complete Post Delivery Test and Trials, demonstrate operational
    performance and start the installation of the first Conventional Prompt
    Strike (CPS) hypersonic weapon system on a maritime platform. In fiscal
    year 2023, DDG 1000 started her Building Yard Modernization Period
    (BYMP) at HII shipyard. DDG 1001 is completing Post Delivery Test and
    Trials (PDT&T) with combat system and final ship delivery planned for
    July 2024. DDG 1002 continues her Combat Systems Activation (CSA)
    period at HII.
        DDG(X) will be the next enduring large surface combatant (LSC) that
    follows the highly successful DDG 51 class. Like DDG 51's evolution
    from CG 47, the initial flight of DDG(X) is a new hull form built
    around the DDG 51 Flight III's SPY-6 with AEGIS BL10 to deliberately
    reduce execution risk. DDG(X) will provide significant increases in
    range, efficiency, and time-on-station compared to the DDG 51 class,
    providing Fleet Commanders with increased operational flexibility and
    decreasing the demand on Fleet Logistics. When deployed with the FFG 62
    class, which is designed to relieve LSCs of lower-tier missions, the
    resulting Fleet mix will directly contribute to the Navy's concept of
    DMO.
        DDG(X) will provide the flexibility and margins (space, weight,
    power, and cooling reservations) to accommodate required future
    capacity and capability upgrades to counter evolving threats. The Navy
    is committed to a smooth and successful transition from DDG 51 to
    DDG(X) in order to preserve the critical shipbuilding and supplier
    industrial base. Additionally, the Navy is executing a collaborative
    design process with current DDG 51 shipyards and transitioning to a
    proven limited competition model between these shipyards at the right
    point in ship construction.
        In 2023, the Navy took this opportunity to re-engage with Surface
    Warfare leadership and Fleet Commanders to ensure that the final Top
    Level Requirements (TLRs) represent the necessary warfighting
    capabilities in the next enduring LSC. This resulting validation across
    the Requirement and Acquisition communities will ensure that the
    delivered capability is aligned with and will support future
    operational needs.
    Small Surface Combatants
        The Constellation Class Frigate (FFG 62) is the evolution of small
    surface combatants with increased lethality, survivability, and
    improved capability to support the full range of military operations as
    part of a more lethal Joint Force. The FFG 62 acquisition strategy is
    informed by previous shipbuilding programs and takes advantage of
    proven systems that increase commonality across platforms including the
    SPY-6 (V)3 radar, Vertical Launch System (VLS) missile launchers, and
    Aegis combat system software. The first four ships, the future USS
    Constellation, USS Congress, USS Chesapeake, and USS LaFayette are
    under contract with USS Constellation under construction. There have
    been schedule delays experienced in fiscal year 2023, and Navy and the
    shipbuilder have take action to complete the design and design reviews
    are ongoing to ensure achievement of required capability. The Navy is
    confident in the capability FFG 62 will deliver to the Fleet!
        The LCS program will deliver its final ships by the end of fiscal
    year 2025, having delivered 31 of the 35 total funded ships to date. As
    the LCS class matures, the Navy continues to invest in making the ships
    more lethal and more survivable to elevate their value in the strategic
    fight. Eight LCS platforms have Naval Strike Missile (NSM) installed,
    and all LCS hulls are programmed to receive the weapon system by fiscal
    year 2032. LCS Lethality and Survivability (L&S) upgrades will begin in
    fiscal year 2025 as the Navy continues development of a Common Combat
    System that utilizes program of record government furnished equipment
    in place of shipbuilder procured contractor furnished equipment. In
    addition to enhancing lethality, this transition will vastly improve
    the Department's ability to affordably maintain and sustain the ships'
    combat and mission systems. Additionally, USS Mobile successfully
    employed Aerosande Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS) as it conducted
    counter-UAS testing with enhanced surveillance capabilities, and USS
    Savannah executed a successful proof-of-concept launch of an SM-6
    missile from a MK 70 Payload Delivery System. Further, the LCS Strike
    team and Task Force LCS continue to produce measurable increases in
    materiel availability, as demonstrated by the completion of a
    successful 26-month deployment of USS Charleston in 7th Fleet as well
    as USS Oakland, meeting all operational commitments for 531 days with
    no mission days lost. In the past year, the Navy reached a significant
    milestone in modernizing mine countermeasure (MCM) capability, as the
    MCM Mission Package (MP) declared IOC in March, 2023. Initial
    deployments of the MCM MPs aboard Independence Variant LCS will begin
    in fiscal year 2025, and MCM MPs remain on track to fully replace the
    aging Avenger-class MCM fleet by the end of fiscal year 2027.
    Large Deck Amphibious Warfare Ships
        Amphibious warfare ships remain a critical component of the
    Nation's global forward presence, supporting deterrence, crisis and
    contingency response missions and providing decision space for our
    Nation's leaders. These ships support the amphibious assault, special
    operations, and expeditionary warfare missions of U.S. Marines and
    often Special Operations Forces by providing sovereign bases at sea,
    offering flexible services that provide shelter and sustainment, and
    enabling marines, sailors, and Special Operations Forces to plan and
    train a tailorable force.
        The America Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LHA 6) program provides
    a lethal and versatile platform to serve as the flagship for the
    Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG)/Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) now and
    in the future. Among other capabilities, these ships host the fifth-
    generation F-35B Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft that are critical
    to maintaining air combat superiority. Bougainville (LHA 8), first of
    the LHA Flt I class, is at 63 percent construction complete and was
    christened in 2023. LHA 8 includes a well deck to increase operational
    flexibility and a reduced island structure increasing flight deck space
    to enhance aviation capability. Fallujah (LHA 9) will be the second
    Flight I ship and is a rollover of the LHA 8 design with obsolescence-
    related changes incorporated. Its construction contract was awarded in
    October 2022 and fabrication started in December 2022. Following
    advance procurement funding appropriated in fiscal year 2023, this
    year's budget requests full funding of LHA 10 as an fiscal year 2027
    ship.
    Other Amphibious Warfare Ships
        San Antonio-class Amphibious Transport Docks (LPD 17) provide the
    ability to operate offensively in a medium-density, multi-threat, anti-
    access littoral environment by being a seabase for the Marine
    Expeditionary Unit (MEU), capable of launching and recovering
    helicopters, tiltrotor aircraft, landing craft, amphibious vehicles,
    and Special Operations Forces. The San Antonio-class LPD is an
    essential component to reaching the statutory requirement of not less
    than 31 amphibious warfare ships, and continues to be affordably
    constructed with capabilities critical to providing strategic mobility,
    force projection, and the range to campaign across the globe. Richard M
    McCool Jr (LPD 29) conducted Acceptance Trials in February of this year
    with ship delivery this spring. LPD 29 will be the first ship operating
    the SPY-6 (V)2 rotating variant of Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar
    (EASR), outfitting the ship with the latest technology and most
    sustainable equipment. LPD 28 and LPD 29 are the last of the LPD 17
    Flight I line to be constructed and are the transition ships to the LPD
    17 Flight II. This year's budget request includes the procurement of
    three LPD 17 Flight II ships in fiscal year 2025, fiscal year 2027 and
    fiscal year 2029, a testament to the Navy's commitment to maintain a 31
    amphibious ship fleet at the most cost efficient pace.
    Landing Craft
        The Ship to Shore Connector (SSC) program continues to make
    progress on craft quality and delivery cadence. Resolution of early
    technical issues have enabled production to progress as originally
    envisioned producing four craft per year, with the delivery of Hull 109
    anticipated in March 2024. While no SSC are requested in fiscal year
    2025, SSC procurement is planned to continue in future fiscal years.
    Four craft were delivered in fiscal year 2023, and the program is on
    track to deliver four craft in fiscal year 2024. The additional craft
    provided by Congress have been instrumental in buying craft efficiently
    and supporting the unique vendor base.
        The Navy is also replacing its aging Landing Craft Utility (LCU)
    fleet with the LCU 1700 program which recapitalizes the capabilities
    and flexibility currently provided by the LCU 1610 class in a more fuel
    efficient, cost effective, and updated design. The fiscal year 2025
    budget request reflects a strategic pause in procurements to allow time
    to reevaluate the LCU 1700 acquisition approach to ensure the Navy is
    getting craft delivered on time and on budget.
    Expeditionary, Auxiliary, and Other Vessels
        Expeditionary support vessels are flexible platforms used across a
    broad range of military operations in support of multiple operational
    phases. The Medium Landing Ship (LSM) is planned to fill the capability
    gap that exists in the littoral environment between the Navy's large,
    globally deployable, high endurance, multipurpose amphibious warfare
    ships and smaller complementary landing craft. The Navy and Marine Corp
    have collaboratively finalized the best mix of Industry-informed
    requirements to efficiently and affordably procure LSM in support of
    integrated deterrence and distributed mobility, maneuver and
    sustainment for littoral expeditionary forces. Release of Detailed
    Design and Construction (DD&C) Request for Proposal (RFP) occurred in
    January 2024. The fiscal year 2025 funding request supports lead hull
    contract award. The program is also exploring alternate acquisition
    approaches to deliver LSMs more rapidly to the Fleet.
        The LSM will be the primary maneuver and sustainment platform for
    marine elements of the Stand-in Force (SIF). However, current
    programmatic timeline for LSM delivery does not support the
    requirements to provide littoral mobility for one Marine Regiment until
    fiscal year 2034. In the interim, the DON is evaluating a diverse group
    of existing naval platforms (e.g., EPF, Commercial Charters, Ancillary
    Surface Connectors, etc.) to serve as the Littoral Maneuver Bridging
    Solution (LMBS) to support SIF operating in the Indo-Pacific. For
    example, the Marine Corps has chartered a commercial Stern Landing
    Vessel (SLV) to experiment and prototype the SLV's use in providing
    logistics/sustainment capability to support SIF conducting EABO. This
    vessel provides Marine Corps formations with the ability to use
    littoral waterspace for maneuver, distribution, and resupply using a
    roll-on/roll-off vessel capable of beaching in various shore
    environments. On February 13, 2023, the first SLV was officially
    undocked from its dry-dock location and underwent final shipyard
    modifications, various trials, and inspections. In addition to the SLV,
    the Marine Corps is pursuing a future strategy for a smaller craft to
    enable littoral maneuver, distribution, and sustainment--OMm00*the
    Ancillary Surface Connector (ASC). ASC will be built by industry to
    answer a Service requirement for a III Marine Expeditionary Force
    inter-island connector that supports the maneuver of forces within the
    littoral environment and delivery of logistics over the ``last tactical
    mile.'' Furthermore, the Fast Transport (EPF) adds value to the LMBS
    through rapid, agile, intra-theater maneuver of personnel and equipment
    in support of Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO) and Littoral
    Operations in a Contested Environment (LCOE). These vessels have and
    continue to support critical partnerships throughout the Indo-Pacific
    and the globe, to include theater security cooperation events,
    Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief missions such as Exercise
    Talisman Sabre and evacuation efforts.
        The EPF Flight II (EPFs 14-16) does not have the autonomous
    capability of EPF 13 but is a modified EPF design that incorporates
    engineering, design and operational improvements which will provide
    Combatant Commanders with a more flexible and capable platform and
    enable an embarkable Role 2 Enhanced (R2E) medical capability. EPF
    Flight II will be capable of conducting the same missions conducted by
    the EPF but with a reduced lift capacity.
        EMS is an EPF variant that has a similar shallow draft, is all
    aluminum, and is a commercial-based catamaran design. However, it is
    optimized to provide dedicated R2E medical care and intra-theater
    patient movement. The EMS will provide combatant commanders high-speed
    transport mobility to move casualties over operational distances.
    Fiscal year 2023 appropriations included the contract award of two
    Expeditionary Medical Ships (EMS). Construction of the first EMS ship
    is expected to start in fiscal year 2025.
        The Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) is a modified commercial ship that
    acts as an afloat forward staging base. ESBs are versatile ships that
    provide a flight deck platform, mission deck and cargo capacity, and
    command and control capabilities for mission planning and execution.
    The Navy accepted delivery of USS John L. Canley (ESB6) in March 2023
    and commissioned her in February 2024. Robert E. Simanek's (ESB 7) keel
    was laid in October 2022. Hector A. Cafferata Jr. (ESB 8) started
    construction in August 2023.
        The John Lewis (T-AO 205)-fleet replenishment oiler recapitalizes
    the T-AO 187 as the primary refuel asset vital to ensuring Navy intra-
    theater replenishment capabilities. USNS Harvey Milk, T-AO 206,
    delivered in July 2023. T-AO hulls 207 to 213 are under contract. Cost
    and schedule performance is starting to stabilize with the leveling of
    inflation, serial production and learning. President's Budget 2025 does
    not request additional T-AOs as the program finalizes a block buy
    acquisition strategy for T-AO 214 to 221, leveraging authorities
    provided by Congress.
        Ten T-ATS Towing, Salvage, and Rescue vessels are currently under
    production across two Gulf Coast shipyards: five hulls at Bollinger
    Houma Shipyard and five hulls at Austal USA. In April 2022, Austal USA
    opened their first steel production line utilizing DPA Title III
    funding to expand their shipyard capability to enable construction of
    both steel and aluminum ships. The Auxiliary General Ocean Surveillance
    ships (T-AGOS 25 Class) consists of a ten--vessel program of record.
    Austal USA was awarded a Detail Design Contract for the lead ship in
    May 2023 with options for lead ship construction as well as
    construction of 6 additional ships. Fiscal year 2025 reflects a gap
    year to allow sufficient time to complete detailed design work on the
    lead hull. The T-AGOS 25 ships will replace the T-AGOS 19 and T-AGOS 23
    class ships.
    Strategic Sealift
        The DON remains committed to sealift readiness and
    recapitalization, working with our partners in USTRANSCOM and the
    Maritime Administration (MARAD). This recapitalization strategy
    includes procurement and refurbishment of used commercial Roll-On Roll-
    Off ships for replacement of aging Ready Reserve Force capacity. The
    buy-used recapitalization program provides a stable acquisition profile
    with forecasted maintenance and repair costs to meet strategic mobility
    requirements at a moderate level of risk. On February 27, 2023, MARAD
    completed the purchase of three ships that recapitalize over 660,000
    square feet of Sealift capacity. The purchase of the three ships that
    make up the Jolly-class was the second purchase of the Buy-Used program
    which began with the purchase of the first used vessels in March 2022.
        In fiscal year 2024, the first two used vessels (Cape Arundel and
    Cape Cortes), received their Certificate of Inspection, conducted sea
    trials, relocated from vessel acquisition outfitting pier to final
    layberth location, completed post sea trial regulatory findings, and
    enter into the Ready Reserve Force with 432,000 square feet of
    capacity. The work to modify and outfit these used vessels will
    continue to be performed by U.S. shipyards.
        In parallel with recapitalizing strategic sealift, the Navy and
    Marine Corps are in the early stages of developing requirements for the
    next generation of maritime prepositioned ships. A new construction
    program is the most appropriate to substitute to the current Maritime
    Prepositioning Force (MPF) ship portfolio. This is due to capability
    adaptations to a concept oriented on campaigning that utilizes sea
    basing to persistently project, sustain, and maintain discrete forces
    forward in the competition space. In fiscal year 2023, military sealift
    command (MSC) transitioned eight MPF vessels from full operational
    status (FOS) to a reduced operational status (ROS) located in CONUS.
    Vessels were placed in ROS status as part of cost-reduction offset to
    prioritize higher Navy priorities.
        In fiscal year 2024, the Navy is developing initial new
    construction concept designs and top-level requirements for the future
    MPF to support a first ship delivery in approximately fiscal year 2033.
    Sustainment, Modernization, Service Life Extensions and Divestments
        The Navy continues to prioritize readiness to ensure the Navy is
    postured to deter, defend, and win against any threat at any time.
    Proper platform maintenance is a critical enabler to ensure the Navy is
    ready to fight. For surface ship maintenance, completing availabilities
    on time and with required work completed remains the top focus and
    challenge to the maintenance and acquisition communities as Fleet
    Commanders must be able to depend on every player on the field to be
    on-time and ready. To support this, over the last 5 years, the Navy has
    been utilizing data analytics to improve availability planning, award
    contracts, procure material, and integrate schedules, so industry and
    government can better maximize every day in an availability and
    continue to drive out Days of Maintenance Delay. Additionally, the Navy
    is continuing its efforts to strengthen partnerships with industry via
    proper work package planning and early communication of workload
    projections for every surface Navy homeport to allow industry to better
    predict and manage its workload, infrastructure, and workforce.
        In addition to the Navy's focus on maintaining the Fleet, the Navy
    team is executing critical modernization efforts on key platforms to
    ensure the Fleet has relevant combat capability. The Navy is continuing
    its program to invest $17 billion over 17 years to modernize 25 Flight
    IIA DDGs to provide combat capability nearly identical to our future
    DDG Flight III ships, enabling the Navy to accelerate delivery of
    Terminal Defense and Long-Range Fires capabilities to the fleet and
    ensure these hulls are being upgraded to maintain relevance and
    reliability through their expected service life (ESL). The fiscal year
    2025 budget includes funding for the third procurement of a SPY-6
    variant for back-fit on two in-service DDGs, the combined hull,
    mechanical & electrical and combat system/AEGIS modernization upgrade
    installations on two DDGs in fiscal year 2025, the necessary
    procurements for additional installs planned in fiscal year 2026 and
    2027, and the procurement of another two high efficiency super chiller
    shipset planned for installation in fiscal year 2028. The Navy has
    worked to incorporate Cruiser Modernization lessons learned into the
    DDG Modernization acquisition strategy, including availability
    planning, solicitation strategies, appropriate contract types, system
    lay-up and reactivation, crew manning, and training. All of this
    collectively has been incorporated into the Navy's ``crawl-walk-run''
    approach for the program that will enable the collective Navy/industry
    team to be properly prepared and experienced for the magnitude and
    complexity of the upcoming full DDG Mod 2.0 availabilities, the first
    of which is scheduled for fiscal year 2028.
        The Navy is committed to balancing the submarine maintenance
    workload within the public and private shipyards, as well as
    maintaining a healthy industrial base for both submarine maintenance
    and new construction. The Navy will continue its investments in the
    Virginia-class Material strategy to improve material stock level and
    continue ramping outsourced work from public shipyards to the private
    sector to match public shipyard demand and capacity. The Navy will
    continue to work with our industry partners to improve cost and
    schedule performance for submarine maintenance, providing valuable
    maintenance surge capacity.
        The National Defense Strategy (NDS) transforms the foundation of
    the future force by designing ``transition pathways to divest from
    systems that are less relevant to advancing the force planning
    guidance.'' President's Budget 2025 supports the NDS by divesting of
    less survivable force structure, resource-intensive weapon systems, and
    less-relevant combat platforms that are not critical to maintaining our
    warfighting advantage against the People's Republic of China (PRC) and
    Russia. Careful prioritization in the near-term will result in a Navy
    battle force that is more ready, sustainable, and lethal. The Navy
    remains committed to ensuring resources are most effectively utilized
    and directly aligned to supporting NDS priorities, and to support this,
    the Navy's fiscal year 2025 budget proposes decommissioning 19 ships in
    fiscal year 2025. Of these 19 ships, 9 are at or beyond ESL and ten are
    prior to ESL. The inactivation of the nine ships at or beyond their ESL
    is a standard practice at the end of a ship's lifecycle. Legacy
    platforms that are extremely expensive to repair and maintain and
    cannot stay relevant in contested environments must be retired in order
    to invest in essential capabilities the Navy needs for our national
    security, and the Navy has identified ten ships to divest of in fiscal
    year 2025 (2 CG, 1 LSD, 2 LCS, 4 T-EPF, 1 T-ESD) to support this larger
    effort. The DON assesses no potential gaps in warfighting capability
    will result from removing the projected ships from service. Navy will
    only grow ready, lethal, warfighting capacity at a rate supported by
    fiscal guidance and our ability to sustain that capacity in the future.
    Therefore, President's Budget 2025 does not resource capacity beyond
    what can be reasonably sustained--manning, training, maintenance,
    ordnance, operations, and future modernization.
    Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP)
        The Navy's four public shipyards perform an essential role in
    national defense by executing maintenance on submarines and aircraft
    carriers to provide combat-ready ships to the fleet. SIOP will deliver
    required dry dock repairs and upgrades to support current and planned
    future classes of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines,
    optimize workflow within the shipyards through significant changes to
    their physical layout, and recapitalize industrial plant equipment with
    modern technology that will substantially increase productivity and
    safety. SIOP will improve the Quality of Service for the over 37,000
    engineers, artisans, and sailors who work at the four public shipyards.
        The Navy instituted a first-of-its-kind infrastructure acquisition
    process for SIOP, similar to major defense acquisition programs. In
    2023, the SIOP-tailored acquisition process selected a preferred
    alternative, determined capability requirements, and established
    threshold and objective parameters to guide overall cost, schedule, and
    performance at each shipyard. The master plan to deliver these
    capabilities to Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard (PHNS) has been completed.
        The Navy is instituting a first-of-its-kind infrastructure
    acquisition process for SIOP, similar to major defense acquisition
    programs. The SIOP-tailored acquisition process will guide program
    execution and establishes threshold and objective parameters for
    overall cost, schedule, and performance of the SIOP at each shipyard
    with total program cost.
        With the tremendous support received from Congress--to include the
    $2.0 billion appropriated in fiscal year 2023--the program is advancing
    three lines of effort: dry dock modernization, optimization, and
    capital equipment. The Navy has $6 billion of SIOP construction under
    contract and $577 million of capital equipment projects in progress. In
    fiscal year 2023, the program started construction of a new dry dock at
    Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, awarded $240 million in repair projects to
    maintain mission readiness at the four shipyards, and continued
    construction of dry docks at Norfolk and Portsmouth Naval Shipyards.
    During the year, SIOP completed electrical upgrades of Puget Sound Dry
    Dock 4 and Pier 3; renovation of Dry Dock 4, flood protection
    improvements of Dry Docks 2 and 3, and the Production Training Facility
    at Norfolk; and completed caisson flood protection improvements of Dry
    Docks 2 and 3 and the renovation of Berth 6 at Portsmouth. To date,
    SIOP has delivered 138 items of capitalized industrial plant equipment
    to the shipyards. The President's Fiscal Year 2025 budget continues the
    Administration's commitment to this program and requests $2.8 billion
    for SIOP.
    Unmanned Surface and Undersea Vehicles
        The DON remains committed to maturing the enabling and core
    technologies needed to deliver unmanned surface and undersea
    capabilities. These capabilities will serve as the backbone to achieve
    the hybrid fleet of the future. Employing a Family of Systems in both
    surface and undersea domains increases our magazine depth, standoff,
    and battlespace awareness while providing protection of our manned
    platforms and reducing risk to our sailors and marines. In fiscal year
    2025, we will continue to mature our USV systems engineering pillars.
    We have made great strides in demonstrating reliable Hull, Mechanical
    and Electrical capability with our industry partners via land based
    testing as well as advancing our networks and radios; common core USV
    Combat System; vessel control software; sensory perception and mission
    autonomy. During 2023, USV Division 1 (USVDIV 1) successfully conducted
    a developmental deployment to Seventh Fleet AOR, transiting more than
    39,000nm and over 1300 hours of autonomous operation.
        The Navy has an operational MUSV Land-Based Test Site and will
    continue operating several USV prototypes including three Overlord USVs
    (Ranger, Mariner and Vanguard), and two Medium Displacement USVs (Sea
    Hunter and SeaHawk) during 2024 and 2025. In September 2023, the MCM
    USV program established its ACAT II Program of Record (PoR) and was
    approved for Full Rate Production (FRP). The MCM USV program delivers
    multiple capabilities to the MCM MP requirements via payload delivery
    systems to include mine-hunting, and minesweeping. The program
    continues to develop Barracuda to provide future mine neutralizing
    capability. The Navy remains committed to investing in a family of
    Unmanned Undersea Vehicles (UUVs) designed to expand the DON's reach
    and persistence. In December 2023, the Navy took delivery of the Extra
    Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (XLUUV) test asset which is a pier-
    launched UUV capable of carrying large payloads and is on schedule to
    deliver and test the remaining prototypes in 2024 and 2025. In fiscal
    year 2023 the Navy paused funding of the Large Displacement Unmanned
    Undersea Vehicle (LDUUV), which will support Subsea and Seabed Warfare
    (SSW) and Intelligence Preparation of the Operating Environment.
    However, the Navy restored funding in fiscal year 2024 and prototype
    testing resumed in February 2024. The Navy is also partnering with DIU
    to evaluate and test large UUV commercial capabilities.
        The submarine community has successfully launched and recovered
    both small and medium sized UUVs in fiscal year 2023 and is continuing
    to work on converting existing medium UUVs for torpedo tube launch and
    recovery capabilities during fiscal year 2024. Lionfish is the next
    generation fully cyber compliant, small UUV with increased capabilities
    relative to the legacy MK18 MOD1 system. The Navy awarded a 5-year
    Lionfish production contract to Huntington Ingals Industries (HII) in
    September 2023 supporting procurements for Navy Expeditionary, Naval
    Special Warfare (NSW), and USMC forces. The Navy will continue to
    develop and procure small and medium UUV PoRs during fiscal year 2024
    and 2025 increasing subsea and seabed warfare reach and persistence.
        The Marine Corps plans in fiscal year 2024 continue developing the
    Long-Range Unmanned Surface Vessel (LRUSV). In July 2023, the Combat
    Development Directorate, Deputy Commandant for Capability Development
    and Integration issued a Capability Requirement Change shifting LRUSV
    focus from a fires mission payload in support of the Marine Littoral
    Regiment (MLR) to a sensor and communication mission payload as part of
    the Maritime Reconnaissance Company (MRC) and to pursue risk reduction
    activities using the prototype Unmanned Surface Vessel (USV) and
    Contact Vessel (CV) as surrogates for a future USV and Multi-Mission
    Reconnaissance Craft (MMRC).
        In accordance with our plans to build a DMO hybrid fleet, the Navy
    and Marine Corps are conducting studies and experimentations to assess
    the supporting infrastructure requirements of unmanned systems, to
    include ``motherships''. Additionally, the Navy kicked off an Unmanned
    Systems Expeditionary Support and Integration Requirements Evaluation
    Team that is looking at ashore or afloat employment capability gaps for
    mobility, sustainment and command and control of current and future
    unmanned systems at sea in all domains.
    Combat Systems
        The Navy remains at the forefront of global surface and submarine
    combat systems, continually investing in cutting-edge technology to
    bolster the capabilities in the Fleet. Embracing the ever-evolving
    landscape of commercial technology, the Navy strives to provide
    reliable and real-time capabilities, breaking from traditional
    hardware-software dependencies. Investments continue for the Forge and
    the Foundry, the Navy's combat system software and hardware factories,
    to uphold industry standards such as Infrastructure as a Service,
    Platform as a Service, and Software as a Service. This approach enables
    the rapid deployment of iterative updates to the Aegis Weapon System
    and embeds continuous innovation processes into the delivery and
    maintenance of shipboard hardware. Increased operator feedback from Red
    Sea operations are driving smaller, more frequent software deliveries
    to the Fleet. Integrated Combat System development efforts continue
    within the Navy, with both new construction and existing Aegis BL9 and
    BL10 ships receiving upgrades through Capability Packages. In February
    2024, Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81)
    became the first ship running a fully virtualized Aegis Combat System
    to successfully intercept an air target with a missile, proving that a
    virtualized system can work on an operational ship in a combat
    environment. This event marks a significant step in the Navy's plan to
    field a single force-level integrated combat system to all surface
    ships, enabling faster, over-the-air delivery and proliferation of
    capability.
        The integration of the AN/SPY-6(V)1 Air and Missile Defense Radar
    (AMDR) into Aegis BL10 provides significant performance over BL9 and
    the AN/SPY-1 radar. This upgrade expands sensor coverage, bolstering
    the Navy's ability to counter increasingly sophisticated and numerous
    threats in the Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) mission.
    Building upon the design and testing maturity of the AN/SPY-6(V)1, the
    Navy is poised to deploy the AN/SPY-6(V)2 and AN/SPY-6(V)3 across
    various naval platforms including CVNs, LPDs, LHAs, and FFGs.
    Additionally, existing DDG Flight IIA destroyers are slated for
    retrofit with SPY-6(V)4, ensuring common training and sustainment
    benefits across the Fleet.
        The Navy maintains the undersea warfare edge by constantly evolving
    our undersea combat systems, continuing the highly successful Submarine
    Warfare Federated Tactical Systems (SWFTS) modernization process for
    hardware Technology Insertions and Advanced Processing Build software
    upgrades. Leveraging commercial off-the-shelf technologies, the SWFTS
    modernization process enables advanced capability improvements at lower
    cost, delivering a decades-long progression in warfighting capabilities
    including advancements in the combat, sonar, electronic warfare, and
    imaging systems. SWFTS Technical Insertion upgrades continue to deliver
    more cyber resilient system architectures, more capable payload
    integration, and increased lethality. Additionally, the next wave of
    upgrades will provide a larger Common Computing Environment (CCE)
    footprint, paving the way for faster and more efficient modernization
    of the Navy's submarine combat systems.
        Furthering investments initiated in prior years, the fiscal year
    2025 budget supports continued adoption of Agile and DevSecOps software
    development best practices at SWFTS vendors to increase quality,
    expedite capability delivery, and improve cybersecurity by engraining
    cyber resiliency into the system architecture. Modernizing processes as
    well as capabilities will elevate the Fleet's ability to rapidly adapt
    to evolving threats and strategic priorities.

                               tactical aviation

    Carrier Air Wing (CVW)
        The striking power of the CVW remains the cornerstone of power
    projection capability from 11 of the world's most survivable airfields,
    our aircraft carriers (CVNs). The modernization of the air wing and its
    weapons keeps the aircraft carrier relevant through the ship's 50 year
    service life. Today's air wing is transitioning to a mixture of 4th and
    5th Generation strike fighter aircraft that continue to incorporate
    advanced capabilities to support the objectives of the NDS. The F-35C
    is replacing the early lot F/A-18E/Fs. E-2Ds, with an advanced airborne
    radar, networking, and aerial refueling capability are replacing the
    legacy E-2C. The CMV-22B is replacing legacy C-2As in support of strike
    group logistics, and Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) pods will augment and
    eventually replace the legacy ALQ-99 pods on the EA-18G and provide
    full spectrum integrated non-kinetic effects.
        The Air Wing of the Future (AWOTF) refers to the evolution and
    composition of the CVW as it on-ramps advanced capabilities and
    capacity, measured at key milestones in the near, mid, and long term.
    The CVW will adapt and transform from an all ``manned'' to a teamed
    ``manned-unmanned'' force structure over the next two decades.
        In the near-term, the AWOTF achieves a mix of F-35C Lightning II,
    F/A-18E/F Block III Super Hornet strike fighters, and EA-18G Growlers,
    and introduces the MQ-25 Stingray unmanned air vehicle (UAV). The MQ-25
    will take over the air wing's organic aerial refueling mission,
    extending strike range and persistence, enhancing maneuverability, and
    enabling all strike fighters to focus directly on delivering effects in
    the high-end fight. In the mid and long term, the AWOTF will deliver
    game-changing lethality and survivability through the Next Generation
    Air Dominance Fighter (F/A-XX), further development and capability
    integration of unmanned systems, and continued development of jointly
    integrated multi-domain kill-chains.
        The 2024 NDAA granted the Navy relief from the Title 10 requirement
    to stand up a 10th CVW by October 1, 2025 pending SECNAV submission of
    a report to Congress analyzing potential approaches to the manning,
    operation, and deployment of a 10th CVW. That report is on schedule to
    be submitted by the end of the current fiscal year. The current CVN
    maintenance schedule efficiently pairs nine CVWs to nine operational
    CVNs according to ship availability; 11 total CVNs with two under
    planned service-life maintenance. With an 11 CVN force structure, nine
    CVW are the optimal number of air wings for readiness, capability, and
    force generation.
    Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) Aviation Combat Element (ACE)
        The Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) is the embodiment of the Marine
    Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF), providing the Nation with a critical
    strategic capability for naval campaigning, crisis response, and
    contingency operations. Deployed on a 3-ship Amphibious Ready Group
    (ARG), marines and sailors leverage the maritime domain as maneuver
    space to posture without the constraints and restraints of access,
    basing, and overflight. The self-sustained and flexible ARG/MEU can
    swiftly transition from steady-State competition and campaigning to
    crisis response or high-end warfighting without external augmentation,
    playing a vital role in integrated deterrence, global campaigning, and
    reinforcing American resolve.
        As a lethal, forward-deployed, sea-based expeditionary force, the
    ARG/MEU operates across a spectrum of military operations with a
    tailorable and uniquely suited complement of aircraft. The MEU's
    Aviation Combat Element (ACE) inventory includes the F-35B, MV-22B, H-
    1, and CH-53E/K. The F-35B, the sole 5th Generation platform designed
    for amphibious warfare ships and expeditionary landing fields, stands
    as a cornerstone of Marine Corps' modernization efforts, integral to
    the Stand-in Force concept, and a crucial enabler for the Joint Force.
    Offering strategic agility, enhanced situational awareness, and
    increased maneuverability in contested environments, the F-35B provides
    commanders with a decisive advantage.
        The MV-22B tiltrotor aircraft remains the most capable assault
    support platform in the joint inventory, revolutionizing assault
    support with its superior speed, range, and survivability. The H-1s,
    with their versatility, remain pivotal for the MEU's crisis response
    force and have played an indispensable role in safeguarding our capital
    ships. Finally, the new CH-53K, the only fully marinized heavy-lift
    rotorcraft, serves as a critical asset for mobility and logistical
    support in distributed operations within contested environments.
        The ARG/MEU team represents one of the Nation's most capable crisis
    response tools, persistently forward deployed and ready to provide
    Combatant Commanders with options across the spectrum of military
    operations. With its complement of capable aviation platforms, the MEU
    ACE ensures seamless projection of power from the sea, air, and land,
    bolstering the ARG/MEU's organic operational mobility.

                        airborne electronic attack (aea)

        The EA-18G Growler is a critical enabler for the Joint force,
    bringing fully netted electronic warfare capabilities to the fight and
    providing essential capabilities in the Electromagnetic Maneuver
    Warfare environment. The fiscal year 2025 budget retains and fully
    funds the EA-18G aircraft and squadrons across the FYDP. Next
    Generation Jammer (NGJ) pods will augment and eventually replace the
    legacy ALQ-99 pods on the EA-18G to provide full spectrum integrated
    non-kinetic effects. The delivery of NGJ Mid-Band (MB) increases EA-18G
    Growler's lethality today providing a multi-generational leap in
    capability against adversary radars and communication targets utilizing
    advanced AEA techniques, as well as improved reliability and
    maintainability over legacy ALQ systems. NGJ is phased by threat, with
    initial focus on MB spectrum capability, followed in the future by Low-
    Band (LB) capability. NGJ High Band remains unfunded.
        NGJ-MB is a cooperative development and production program with
    Australia, with Full Rate Production Decision expected in 3rd quarter
    fiscal year 2024. Three LRIP I shipsets were delivered in fiscal year
    2023. The first LRIP II shipset were delivered in 2nd quarter fiscal
    year 2024 with the remaining four LRIP II shipsets planned for delivery
    in fiscal year 2024. Upon conclusion of operational test, IOC and
    initial deployment will occur in fiscal year 2024. The fiscal year 2025
    budget includes $86.7 million in RDT&E funding to continue development
    of the NGJ-MB Extended (MBX) Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) to
    extend the upper frequency range coverage limit of the system to
    counter modern and adaptive threats. The fiscal year 2025 budget
    request also includes $453.2 million in APN-5 funding for 10 Lot 5
    shipsets, associated support equipment, training equipment and
    production support.
        NGJ-LB is also a cooperative development program with Australia and
    is a critical AEA capability to augment and replace the legacy ALQ-99
    Tactical Jamming System on the EA-18G in the low frequency bands where
    modern adversary radars have proliferated posing significant threats to
    joint forces. The fiscal year 2025 budget request $209.6 million RDT&E
    for NGJ-LB to focus on pod design, advanced capabilities development,
    and the build of aeromechanical and mission systems test pods to
    support ground and flight testing.
        Growler Block 2 (GB2) will deliver capabilities to the warfighter
    to detect, locate, identify and counter advanced Integrated Air Defense
    Systems and complex emitters. GB2 will utilize a phased approach for
    spiral development of AEA capabilities to modernize processing,
    sensors, and aircrew
        decision aids to maintain dominance in the modern electromagnetic
    spectrum. Phase 1 will include an upgraded Next Generation Electronic
    Attack Unit with open mission systems architecture, multi-level
    security, and incorporation of the reactive electronic attack measures
    capability. Phase 2 is the addition of the advanced multi-function
    array into the inboard leading edge flaps of the aircraft, augmenting
    the ALQ-218 functionality and capability. GB2 serves as a critical
    technology development and risk reduction effort to support Naval
    AWOTF.
        The Marine Corps, through the INTREPID TIGER II program, is
    bringing advanced Electronic Warfare (EW) to all its aviation platforms
    and is focused on MUM-T to answer the MAGTF's requirements for AEA. The
    Marine Corps has worked in conjunction with OSD to purchase the first
    two XQ-58 Valkyrie CCA platforms to test EW effects in partnership with
    F-35 and our assault support platforms.
        AIRBORNE COMMAND AND CONTROL AIRCRAFT
        The E-2D Advanced Hawkeye is the Navy's carrier-based airborne
    command and control aircraft, equipped with an advanced airborne radar,
    aerial refueling capability, and network connectivity required by naval
    and Joint Force commanders to provide command and control air and sea
    superiority, and to counter adversary anti-access and area denial
    strategies. The E-2D provides unique Theater Air and Missile Defense
    capabilities, and is a cornerstone of the Naval Integrated Fire Control
    (NIFC) system of systems linking Navy and Marine Corps fighter
    aircraft, Navy surface combatants, and Marine Corps ground units.
        As of March 2024, the Navy has taken delivery of 60 E-2D aircraft
    with an additional 20 in production or on contract. Modernization
    priorities focus on Fleet capabilities to outpace the threat, including
    interoperability, communication and navigation hardware; essential
    Command and Control; networking and sensor performance capabilities
    that are critical enablers to Naval Integrated Fire Control; and vital
    upgrades and improvements to enable Joint All-Domain Command & Control
    (JADC2).

          assault support and intra-theater logistics support aircraft

    Tiltrotor Aircraft (Marine Corps Osprey and Navy CMV-22B)
        The V-22 tiltrotor capability remains in high demand from Combatant
    Commanders for the essential transportation of personnel and equipment
    in support of worldwide operations. Navy CMV-22B, in coordination with
    Navy Unique Fleet Essential Airlift (NUFEA), provide the last leg
        of Navy Intra-theater Airlift (NITA) for time-critical cargo and
    personnel from distributed logistics sites essential to extending the
    range of CSGs, SAGS, and ESGs during DMO. The V-22 program is focused
    on remaining ready, reliable, and relevant in support of naval
    operations, with the safety of aircrew and personnel as the number one
    priority.
        In 2025, the program continues progress toward improvements in
    safety and reliability through enhancements to the design and
    monitoring of critical components, including the V-22 drive system. The
    Osprey Drive System Safety and Health Instrumentation (ODSSHI) system
    provides continuous monitoring of the components of the drive system to
    identify issues prior to in-flight experiences. The tragic mishap of an
    Air Force CV-22 off the coast of Japan reinforced the need for this
    type of system on the V-22, which is critical to the continued safe
    operation of Navy and Marine Corps V-22s.
        The Navy CMV-22 program declared IOC in December 2021, and
    completed its third deployment in 2023, in support of the USS Carl
    Vinson CSG. The fiscal year 2025 budget requests $109.4 million in
    RDT&E for continued development of the Input Quill Assembly re-design,
    Digital Helmet Mounted Display for operations in Degraded Visual
    Environment, as well as other product improvements to maintain tactical
    relevance in support of modernization.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget also includes $295.2 million in APN for
    modifications to maintain commonality, implement safety and reliability
    improvements, improve capability, and support production line shutdown
    and engineering support through delivery of the final Lot 28/fiscal
    year 2024 aircraft. The fiscal year 2023 congressional add procured
    four CMV-22 funding the Navy for the full program of record quantity of
    48 and one MV-22 funding the Marine Corps for the fully program of
    record quantity of 360. The fiscal year 2024 congressional add will
    procure five additional CMV-22 for the Navy. Production Line Shutdown
    for MV-22 and CMV-22 begins in fiscal year 2024.
    Heavy Lift (Marine Corps CH-53K)
        The CH-53K replaces the legacy CH-53E as a faster, more efficient
    heavy lift helicopter with greater payload capacity than any current or
    emerging rotorcraft. Last year, the Marine Corps took delivery of 5 CH-
    53K and eclipsed 6,500 total program flight hours as the service
    continued the transition from the legacy platform to the CH-53K. In
    October 2023, Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 461 demonstrated the
    unique performance of the CH-53K when it recovered a crashed MH-60S at
    an altitude of ?10,000 ft in terrain unreachable by vehicles. This is
    the only aircraft capable of such a feat. In fiscal year 2024, the
    program continues execution of Follow-On Test and
        Evaluation activities focusing on secondary missions testing,
    updated aircraft survivability equipment testing, interoperability
    testing, and correction of deficiencies. All System Development and
    Demonstration flight testing completed in 2023 with ground testing
    planned to complete this year.
        Last year the CH-53K program awarded Lot 7, the first Full Rate
    Production lot and the first year of 2-year block buy contracts for
    aircraft and engines with plans to award Lot 8 in fiscal year 2024. The
    DON is requesting fiscal year 2025 congressional authorization for
    another 2-year block buy contract for airframes and a 5-year multi-year
    contract for engines. These opportunities leverage aircraft volume
    quantity to realize significant cost savings, encourage improved
    production efficiencies, and provide much needed stability to the
    rotorcraft industrial base. The fiscal year 2025 President's Budget
    requests $86.1 million in RDT&E to continue the CH-53K development,
    test, and standup of organic test capabilities for follow-on
    improvements and $2.642 billion in APN for procurement of 19 Full Rate
    Production aircraft, initial spares, and modifications.

                           executive support aircraft

        The VH-92A Presidential Helicopter provides worldwide safe,
    reliable, and secure executive transportation with survivability,
    maintainability, and reliability improvements over the legacy VH-3D and
    VH-60N. Production of VH-92A completes in fiscal year 2024 while the
    program continues to focus on improvements to support all mission
    types. The fiscal year 2025 President's Budget Requests $51.4 million
    in RDT&E for VH-92A Helicopter Improvements which supports product
    improvements related to mission systems, maintainability, reliability,
    and obsolescence issues. These efforts include Mission Communications
    System hardware and software upgrades, Wideband Beyond Line-of-Sight
    capability enhancement, distributed network communications, cockpit
    upgrades, extended range cabin noise reduction, power margin, high-hot
    aircraft performance enhancements, and improved rotor blades. APN in
    the amount of $69 million is required for mission computer software
    efforts including modifications to the VH-92A Mission Communications
    System.

                              fixed-wing aircraft

    TAKE CHARGE AND MOVE OUT (TACAMO)
        The Navy's TACAMO mission is to deliver and provide survivable,
    reliable, and endurable airborne nuclear command, control, and
    communications (NC3) capabilities to the President, Secretary of
    Defense, and the United States Strategic Command. The TACAMO mission is
    currently flown on the aging E-6B Mercury, a Boeing 707 airframe. The
    platform is undergoing simultaneous sustainment and modernization
    efforts, but TACAMO requires a new platform to ensure continued success
    of the mission in the future. The TACAMO recapitalization (E-XX)
    program will utilize the C-130J-30 (stretched Super Hercules) aircraft
    as the air vehicle replacement with a combination of existing and
    modernized NC3 mission systems developed and integrated onto the
    platform by a third-party contractor.
        In fiscal year 2025, the Navy will invest $775.3 million in RDT&E
    toward platform development. This includes $659.9 million for the
    TACAMO Weapon System (TWS) Engineering and Manufacturing Development
    (EMD) contract, $15.2 million for non-recurring engineering contracts
    on the C-130J airframe, and $15.2 million for very low frequency (VLF)
    transmit system development and modernization. The TWS EMD contract has
    a planned award in first quarter fiscal year 2025 and will provide for
    the modification and integration of NC3 systems onto the C-130J-30 for
    the TACAMO mission. Fiscal year 2025 sets the stage for successful
    TACAMO mission integration on the C-130J-30 supporting U.S. nuclear
    deterrence and Columbia's assured second strike for decades to come.

                            maritime patrol aircraft

        The P-8A is the DOD's only long-range full-spectrum Anti-Submarine
    Warfare (ASW), cue-to-kill platform, with substantial armed Anti-
    Surface Warfare (ASuW) and networked Intelligence, Surveillance, and
    Reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. The P-8A program continues to
    incrementally field warfighting capabilities via Engineering Change
    Proposals. Increment 3 Block 2 (Inc 3 Blk 2) is on track to initially
    field in fiscal year 2026 and delivers the final planned spiral upgrade
    to the platform to fulfill the validated baseline requirement for full
    ASW, ASuW and ISR warfighting capability at the Higher-than-SECRET
    (HTS) level. Inc 3 Blk 2 provides the full war-fighting capability
    required for Major Combat Operations (MCO) incorporating HTS
    processing, Integrated Broadcast System (IBS), ASW-Signals Intelligence
    (SIGINT), Multi-static Active Coherent-Enhanced (MAC-E), enhanced track
    management and sensor fusion (Minotaur) and Wide Band Line of Sight
    (WBLOS) SATCOM capability.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget request includes $173.5 million in
    RDT&E for final integration, completion of DT and commencement of OT
    testing for Inc 3 Blk 2 and additional rapid capability development
    efforts, such as LRASM testing, to pace emergent threats. $319.6
    million in APN is requested to fund additional ECP-6/7 kits for fleet
    instructor training and squadron transition safety upgrades, and the
    initiation of Boeing's P-8A production line shutdown activities. Boeing
    intends to initiate P-8A production line shutdown activities in fiscal
    year 2025 (for final line shutdown in fiscal year 2027) if no
    additional P-8A orders are received.

                        unmanned aircraft systems (uas)

        Naval Aviation continues to integrate unmanned systems into the
    fleet to enable a fundamental shift in the way the DON conducts multi-
    domain integrated naval operations. Broadening unmanned aviation
    efforts will decrease risk to personnel, allow greater persistence,
    longer ranges, improved data speed and accuracy, and a faster decision
    cycle. These capabilities offer the DON increased asymmetric
    operational opportunities and tactical advantages that provide the
    warfighters an edge to dominate and win in ongoing and future
    conflicts. The fiscal year 2025 budget prioritizes the continued
    development and production of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) to
    support current fleet ISR requirements and future UAS integration into
    the CVW, ARG, and MEU.
    MQ-25A Unmanned Carrier Aviation
        MQ-25A will increase the strike range, persistence, capability, and
    lethality of the CVW through organic mission and recovery tanking, and
    provide an ISR capability to the CSG. As the primary CVW mission and
    recovery tanker, MQ-25A will increase available CVW strike fighter
    assets and preserve F/A-18E/F service life. MQ-25 is integral to the
    AWOTF and establishes the foundation for MUM-T and autonomous
    operations from the CVN. The fiscal year 2025 budget continues
    investment in MQ-25 and the Unmanned Carrier Aviation Mission Control
    System (UMCS) development, begins testing of Navy MQ-25A, and procures
    three MQ-25A air vehicles to increase fleet inventory. MQ-25A will IOC
    in late 2026. The fiscal year 2025 budget request supports procurement
    for the MQ-25 Stingray with $552.3 million in APN and continues RDTE
    funding with $214.94 million.
    MQ-4C Triton
        The MQ-4C Triton is a persistent force multiplier that delivers
    situational awareness of the battle space to shorten the sensor-to-
    shooter decision loop in the maritime domain. MQ-4C Triton's
    persistence and sensor mix is integral to Navy's Maritime Strategy to
    build and maintain a more lethal and effective global Joint Force
    Common Operational Picture.
        The program is in the process of standing up its second and third
    operational orbits in the USEUCOM and USCENTCOM AORs (fiscal year 2024/
    fiscal year 2025), after successfully standing up its first orbit in
    INDOPACOM in fiscal year 2023. The multi-intelligence (Multi-INT)
    variant of Triton is currently executing in the western Pacific,
    providing Combatant and Fleet commanders with timely and actionable
    intelligence products.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget requests $281.2 million in APN to
    continue procurement of associated support elements and retrofit
    baseline units to Multi-INT configuration, and $14.4 million in
    baseline RDTE for correction of deficiencies. An additional $428.4 RDTE
    is requested for advanced MQ-4C safety systems and sensor modernization
    efforts as part of Increment 2 capability development efforts.
    MQ-9A Extended Range (ER)
        The Marine Corps MQ-9A ER is a critical enabler for the Naval and
    Joint Force providing an extended range, long-endurance multi-mission
    ISR capability through a suite of sensors designed to detect surface
    and air threats. The MQ-9A ER is a linchpin in providing Maritime
    Domain Awareness (MDA), as well as providing resilient and persistent
    information flow, enabling command and control of EABO and DMO forces
    against near or peer threats.
        The Indo-Pacific has unique challenges requiring the Stand-in Force
    to be able to operate over significant distances between ground units.
    An MQ-9A ER overhead equipped with an Airborne Network Extension (ANE)
    payload facilitates connectivity for Stand-in Forces operating at the
    forward edge of the battlespace. MQ-9A ER will also provide an
    Electronic Warfare and Airborne Early Warning capability to enhance the
    situational awareness of decisionmakers, and provide input to the joint
    common operational picture.
        With the addition of a Smart Sensor autonomous capability, the MQ-
    9A ER will be enhanced through automatic cueing and fusing of tracks to
    other onboard sensors. The Marine Corps is set to have 20x MQ-9A Block
    5 air vehicles, 16 x Ground Control Stations (GCS), and payloads to
    conduct assigned missions. Existing U.S. Air Force and Air National
    Guard efforts are being leveraged to reduce cost as the Marine Corps
    matures this nascent Service-level capability, reducing risk.

                                weapons programs

    Munitions Inventory and Industrial Base
        The President's Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Requests $6.6 billion for
    the Weapons Procurement account. Signifying a commitment to modernize
    our arsenal with crucial capabilities to bolster readiness.
    Additionally, a substantial portion of this funding is allocated to
    expanding production capacity, aimed at increasing critical munitions
    inventories.
        Continued United States assistance to Ukraine, Israel, and
    operations in the Red Sea during Operation Prosperity Guardian
    underscores the imperative for investments across the industrial baseto
    bolster readiness for the United States, its allies, and partner
    nations. The DON collaborated closely with industry partners to
    accelerate the replenishment of stocks, identifying barriers to
    production and strategizing on targeted investments to enhance
    inventory, capability, and capacity. Investment continues to be
    directed toward expanding and expediting production throughput,
    optimizing testing processes, and fortifying critical component supply
    chains. Concurrently, the Department intensifies its focus on
    recertification as a cost-efficient method to maintain and enhance
    short-term inventory levels. Together with these ongoing replenishment
    efforts, these investments signal a steadfast and stable demand signal
    to prioritizing munitions inventories.
        Leveraging authorities extended in the Fiscal Year 2024 National
    Defense Authorization Act, the Department pursues MYP contracts for
    vital munitions programs such as Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) and Naval
    Strike Missile (NSM). MYP contracts for Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-
    Air Missile (AMRAAM) and LRASM will be joint efforts with the USAF.
    This strategy harnesses savings generated through Economic Order
    Quantity (EOQ) financing to procure additional missile lots, thereby
    enhancing efficiencies and yield.
    Missile Programs
        As the Navy carefully manages the approach to end of life of Ohio-
    class SSBNs, addressing the viability of the Strategic Weapons System
    (SWS) throughout the life of the Columbia-class SSBNs remains a
    priority. The current TRIDENT D5 Life Extension (D5LE) remains an
    effective and credible Strategic Weapon System on both the Ohio-class
    and Columbia-class SSBNs into the 2040s, supporting the Ohio-class
    submarine through end of service life and serving as the initial
    Strategic Weapon System for the Columbia-class SSBNs. Modernization of
    the SWS, D5LE2, is required to maintain the Sea Based Strategic
    Deterrent starting with the ninth Columbia-class submarine by ensuring
    sufficient missile inventory and seamlessly supporting USSTRATCOM
    requirements. D5LE2 incorporates the necessary flexibility and
    adaptability needed to maintain demonstrated performance and
    survivability in the dynamic threat environment until Columbia-class
    end of life. The Administration's Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) states
    that D5LE2 needs to begin deploying on Columbia-class in the late 2030s
    to sustain sufficient missile inventories to support the U.S. sea-based
    strategic deterrent as well as the United Kingdom's independent nuclear
    deterrent. The Navy will prioritize near-term investments in accordance
    with the NPR to ensure that D5LE2 is effective in the expected threat
    environment and delivers on time.
    Tomahawk
        The Navy is continuing investment into Tomahawk Block V new
    production, Maritime Strike Tomahawk, and recertification/modernization
    of Tomahawk Block IV. Ally and partner interest in Tomahawk capability
    emphasized missile production throughput challenges. The fiscal year
    2025 budget request continues to fund factory improvements to increase
    industrial capacity, increasing throughput to 600 missiles per year by
    fiscal year 2027.
        In the fiscal year 2025 budget request, the Department sustains the
    Tomahawk as the Nation's premier all-weather, long-range, survivable
    deep strike offensive weapon to include new production of and
    recertification of current inventory into modernized BLK V Tomahawk
    missiles. BLK V(a) Maritime Strike Tomahawk (MST) provides a long-range
    moving maritime strike capability to meet current and future threats,
    supporting the Surface Warfare Mission area through the inclusion of a
    seeker suite in the Tomahawk BLK V missile. The fiscal year 2025 budget
    request for MST provides continuation of Operational and Integration
    Testing and ultimately fields hardware, software, and munitions for the
    MST capability in 2025. The fiscal year 2025 budget request continues
    engineering, manufacturing, and development of the Joint Multiple-
    Effects Warhead System (JMEWS), which will deliver a hardened target
    penetration capability with the Tomahawk BLK V(b) missile in fiscal
    year 2027. The fiscal year 2025 budget request continues engineering,
    manufacturing, and development of the Military Code Global Positioning
    System (GPS) receiver, which will deliver significant increased
    resiliency in spoofing and jamming threat environments capability to
    the Tomahawk BLK V missile in 2026.
        Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare (OASuW) Increment 1/ Long Range
    Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), LRASM C-1/C-3, and OASuW Increment 2 / HALO
        The LRASM C-1 and C-3 variants add near-term, cost-effective
    capacity to the DON's long range strike capability while enhancing the
    OASuW mission. The Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget Requests $102.5
    million in procurement funding to buy 30 DON LRASM C-1 weapon systems
    with associated support to provide economic order quantity funding in
    support of the MYP initiated in fiscal year 2024, and to provide the
    assets for operational test of the C-1 configuration. The Fiscal Year
    2025 President's Budget Request also includes $163.3 million in RDT&E
    funding for the continuing development of the LRASM C-3 capability
    improvement. Navy AGM-158 development efforts involve integration of a
    Beyond Line-of-Sight radio subsystem to enable enhanced operational
    flexibility.
        The Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget continues developing the
    AGM-158 C-3 variant through software development and test, platform
    integration, and entry into integrated test. The Fiscal Year 2025
    President's Budget Request also includes $223.9 million for procurement
    of 60 LRASM in the C-3 configuration migrating the primary production
    line to the more-capable C-3 configuration as the program reaches
    sufficient maturity.
        The Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget includes $178.6 million for
    development of OASuW Increment 2, which is now referred as Hypersonic
    Air Launched OASuW (HALO). HALO supports the national imperative to
    mature hypersonic capabilities and transition them into warfighting
    systems, increasing the lethality and deterrent effect of our Carrier
    Wings. The program represents a longer-term capability that encompasses
    increased performance and will provide the Navy with the necessary air-
    launched, carrier-based weapon to address evolving long-range,--threats
    from near peer competitors. HALO will complete Milestone B and enter
    formal Engineering and Manufacturing Development, to include a
    competitive contract award during fiscal year 2025.
    Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) & AARGM Extended-Range
            (AARGM-ER)
        AARGM domestic procurement completed in fiscal year 2021 with the
    award of the last Navy Full Rate Production (FRP) contract. There have
    been 1450 AARGMs (All Up Rounds, Training Missiles, and Spares)
    delivered to the Fleet as of March 2024. Program of record delivery is
    1803 missiles. Deliveries continue through fiscal year 2025 in support
    of the transition to AARGM-ER. AARGM-ER provides the DON with a 5th
    generation compatible extended range asset to project power and provide
    Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses, both at-sea and on land. The first
    AARGM-ER delivery is scheduled for 3rd quarter fiscal year 2024. The
    fiscal year 2025 President's Budget requests $22.3 million in RDT&E to
    support operational and integration testing of production
    representative hardware. The budget requests $248.6 million in Weapons
    Procurement, Navy (WPN) to procure 151 AARGM-ER all-up-rounds and six
    Captive Air Training Missiles and advance procurement.
    Hypersonic Program
        The DON is developing a hypersonic weapon system that will enable
    precise and timely strike capability against deep inland targets in
    contested environments. In collaboration with the Army, the Department
    is leveraging a common missile design and joint test opportunities to
    field a conventional hypersonic weapon system. Zumwalt-class DDGs will
    be the first Navy platform to field this hypersonic capability in the
    mid to 2020s, followed by Block V Virginia-class SSNs. In March 2020,
    the Services executed a successful flight test of the Common Hypersonic
    Glide Body, and in 2022, the Services followed up that testing with
    several static-fire tests and a flight test of the newly developed two
    stage Solid Rocket Motor. The DON has validated the design of the
    Navy's cold-gas launch approach and is continuing subscale and
    component testing in support of future capability development,
    manufacturability, and affordability improvements. This rapid
    development and demonstration of hypersonic strike weapon systems
    supports the U.S. ability to deter, and if necessary, defeat potential
    adversaries.
        The Department's fiscal year 2025 budget request will support
    critical milestones on the path to fielding CPS to the first Zumwalt-
    class DDG. The request totals $903.9 million in CPS R&D funding.
        The Marine Corps is working toward the capability to employ
    smaller, highly mobile hypersonic weapons through science and
    technology initiatives. The Marine Corps is pursuing an acquisition
    strategy that leverages the developmental work of other Services and
    agencies, investing when the capability has reached a higher technology
    readiness level that allows for expedited prototype experimentation at
    reduced costs.
    Torpedoes
        As the primary weapon in maintaining an advantage in the undersea
    domain, Heavyweight and Lightweight Torpedoes remain a critical
    component of the Department's munitions inventory. Continued
    investments in torpedo capacity and capability are vital to outpace our
    strategic competitors. The MK 48 Heavyweight Torpedo remains the Navy's
    primary submarine-launched ASW and ASuW weapon, while the MK 54
    Lightweight Torpedo provides additional undersea dominance from the
    surface and air domains. The Navy continues to modernize and upgrade
    existing inventory to incorporate the latest capability advancements,
    the Navy has also restarted production of the MK 48, ramping up
    production through fiscal year 2023 after accepting delivery of the
    first new production heavyweight torpedoes in over 20 years during the
    summer of 2022. Furthermore, the MK 48 MOD 8 and MK 48 MOD 9 will bring
    new capabilities and technologies to ensure our advantage is maintained
    will into in the future. The Department also continues to deliver and
    upgrade MK 54 Lightweight Torpedoes to surface ships and air platforms
    to maintain our edge over the ASW threat. Producing the upgraded MK 54
    MOD 1 for the U.S. Navy as well as MK 54 MOD 0 torpedoes for our allied
    partners ensures the torpedo industrial base remains healthy.
        The Department continues its partnership with industry and
    university affiliated research centers to develop next-generation
    torpedoes. These include the MK 54 MOD 2 Advanced Lightweight Torpedo
    designed to fight the high-end threat, and the Compact Rapid Attack
    Weapon, a Very Light Weight Torpedo with multi-mission capability
    providing both a hard-kill torpedo countermeasure and a short range ASW
    weapon. The Navy continues to procure the High Altitude ASW Weapon
    Capability (HAAWC) wing kit to employ MK 54 from high altitude via the
    P-8A, and we've made great progress in developing the Hammerhead
    encapsulated effector, continuously demonstrating the flexibility and
    effectiveness of MK 54 payloads for the United States and our Allies.

                          marine corps ground programs

        The Marine Corps has made significant progress in modernization
    initiatives and is a more lethal and appropriately postured naval
    expeditionary force-in-readiness. By operating inside actively
    contested maritime spaces, the Navy and Marine Corps team provides the
    Joint Force a naval expeditionary warfare strategic advantage capable
    of operating in times of campaigning, or conflict, anywhere around the
    world to ensure global maritime commons remain free and open. However,
    operating forward within an adversary's weapons engagement zone
    presents unique challenges that pose threats to our networks,
    formations, and sustainment capabilities. As a result, the Marine
    Corps' fiscal year 2025 modernization investments prioritize resilient
    command and control systems, advanced air defense capabilities, and
    distributed logistics networks to enhance Joint Force lethality.
    Command & Control and Sensing Capabilities
        Through the Stand-in Force (SIF) concept, marines will be on the
    forward edge of a maritime defense-in depth. The Marine Corps has a
    unique requirement for rapidly deployable capabilities to sense and
    communicate across multiple domains to project Joint Force lethality
    inside an adversary's weapon engagement zone. Through this concept and
    approach, marines will be strategically placed on key maritime terrain
    to operate with allied and partners during competition, and respond to
    crises, or conflict to deter adversary actions, and if necessary, fight
    and win conflicts in support of the Joint Force. Our stand-in forces
    will increase maritime domain awareness, provide quality intelligence
    for sound decisionmaking, diversify redundancy in asset allocation, and
    increase targeting successes within the anti-access/area-denial
    environment.
        The Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar (G/ATOR) is a multi-role,
    ground-based, expeditionary three-dimensional radar system that
    provides surveillance of airborne targets, detection of cruise
    missiles, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), rockets, artillery, and
    mortars. As a sensing asset, the G/ATOR exercises its cueing capability
    to the appropriate air defense platform. Furthermore, the G/ATOR
    increases maritime domain awareness for the Naval and Joint Force by
    providing persistent detection of aerial threats within an
    interoperable network via the Common Aviation Command and Control
    System (CAC2S). The Marine Corps has fielded or received funding for
    (54) G/ATOR systems with President's Budget 2025 requesting $71.9
    million to fund radar upgrades. Complementing these systems is the
    Medium-Range Air Defense Radar (MRADR), which will provide a
    persistent, high-quality, 360-degree field of view air picture with no
    detectable electromagnetic footprint. Although it is in development,
    the Marine Corps invested $9 million for the first four prototype
    systems in fiscal year 2024 and anticipates investing $16 million in
    fiscal year 2025.
        The Common Aviation Command and Control System (CAC2S) enables a
    collaborative network of Marine Corps and Joint sensor inputs to
    facilitate detection and targeting decisions. The Marine Corps
    continues to invest in CAC2S as the command-and-control interface for
    air surveillance radars and Naval Cooperative Engagement Capability.
    Additionally, this capability, and future enhancements, enable the
    Marine Corps to share air surveillance tracks and radar measurement
    information with Joint partners in support of integrated air and
    missile defense, integrated fire control, and battle management
    effects. The 3d Marine Littoral Regiment (MLR) received one CAC2S Small
    Form Factor (SFF) Data Module System (DMS) in fiscal year 2023. The DMS
    is a SFF prototype that provides interim capability prior to SFF full-
    rate production in fiscal year 2025. The SFF system will achieve
    initial operational capability in fiscal year 2025 with five systems
    fielded and expect to achieve full operational capability in fiscal
    year 2029 with (42) systems. The President's Budget 2025 request of
    $103.1 million supports these efforts to field CAC2S capabilities.
        The Family of Integrated Targeting Cells (FITC) is a naval combat
    system that leverages data from national sources, processed and fused
    at the forward edge with additional tactical sensors to enable stand-in
    forces to support Joint Long-Range Fires (LRF) and all domain
    intelligence support to targeting against dynamic threats. The Marine
    Corps continues to invest in the FITC and the tactical-national
    interfaces that can support over-the-horizon awareness, identification,
    and targeting in contested environments. FITC is deployed at echelon
    for employment across multiple formations. Prototypes include the
    Maritime Targeting Cell--Expeditionary (MTC-X), the MTC-Mobile (MTC-M),
    and the Tactical Edge Node--Expeditionary (TEN-X) designed for highly
    mobile and dispersed units. Prototypes will demonstrate resilient
    networking and processing capabilities that integrate with national,
    commercial, and in-theater tactical feeds to increase capabilities
    operating at the tactical edge. Collectively, FITC uses a variety of
    sensors in numerous domains to create a comprehensive operational
    picture to drive real time decisionmaking on behalf of the stand-in
    force. The President's Budget 2025 request of $104 million supports the
    Marine Corps efforts to field the FITC capabilities.
    Air Defense
        As the threat environment continues to be defined by increasing
    technological advancements, the Marine Air Defense Integrated System
    (MADIS) and Medium Range Intercept Capability (MRIC) provide
    complementary warfighting advantage to our naval expeditionary stand-in
    forces operating inside an adversary's weapons engagement zone.
        The MADIS provides an upgradeable expeditionary capability that
    utilizes organic sensors for detecting and targeting aerial threats to
    increase force protection for ground forces, installations, and
    critical assets. Employed with a pair of Joint Light Tactical Vehicles
    (JLTV), the MADIS can defend against fixed and rotary wing aircraft,
    group 1-5 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) threats, with non-lethal
    electromagnetic attack and lethal fires. The approved acquisition
    objective is (190) MADIS systems comprised of (380) total vehicles with
    a $132.2 million request to support the procurement of (13) systems in
    President's Budget 2025. Initial operational capability is the first
    quarter of fiscal year 2025 with the delivery of (13) systems to III
    Marine Expeditionary Force.
        The Light-MADIS (L-MADIS) is an MV-22/CH-53 internally
    transportable pair of Ultra-Light Tactical Vehicles (ULTV) capable of
    defeating fixed and rotary wing aircraft and group 1-5 Unmanned
    Aircraft Systems (UAS), within the L-MADIS engagement zone, via
    electromagnetic attack and man portable air defense systems. L-MADIS'
    small size and lightweight design is tailor-built for air and
    amphibious assault, providing forwards postured forces organic sensors,
    and aviation command and control functions in a littoral environment.
    The approved acquisition objective is (21) systems consisting of (42)
    ULTVs with a $33.2 million request to support procurement of (5)
    systems in President's Budget 2025. Initial operational capability
    scheduled for the second quarter of fiscal year 2025 with the delivery
    of three systems to III Marine Expeditionary Force.
        Complementing the Marine Corps air defense capabilities, the MRIC
    defends forward-deployed forces and installations against threat cruise
    missiles, fixed and rotary wing aircraft, groups 3-5 UAS, and other
    aerial threats. This is accomplished through the integration of fielded
    Marine Corps systems including the CAC2S, the TPS-80 G/ATOR, the Iron
    Dome Battle Management Control console, and the SkyHunter missile and
    guidance uplink. In February 2024, industry partners broke ground
    establishing a U.S. based production facility in Camden, AR which will
    ensure continued access to a supply of domestic produced interceptor
    missiles. The Marine Corps currently plans to field a firing battery to
    each Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) that can distribute four
    independently deployable firing platoons.
        The Marine Corps is utilizing a Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA) rapid
    prototyping approach to procure and certify an MRIC prototype platoon
    that provides an initial capability by the end of fiscal year 2025. The
    first complete battery will be fielded by fiscal year 2026 followed by
    an additional battery in fiscal year 2027 and fiscal year 2028. In
    total, the Marine Corps seeks to field three firing batteries with
    several hundred missiles for each battery. The fiscal year 2025 request
    of $111 million supports the procurement of (12) launchers and (242)
    missiles to begin fielding the MRIC capabilities to forward deployed
    marine formations.
    Marine Corps Global Positioning Network (MCGPN)
        Global sustainment operations are at risk of being contested from
    our home stations and bases to our forward postured forces. Therefore,
    the Marine Corps is actively wargaming, experimenting, and modernizing
    logistics capabilities to sustain marines in these contested spaces.
    Sustainment modernization efforts include expanding the positioning of
    materiel, and diversifying distribution capabilities through the Marine
    Corps Global Positioning Network (MCGPN). The MCGPN is an integrated
    global network of materiel positioned afloat and ashore in key
    strategic locations that support operations and active campaigning by
    the Marine Corps.
        The MCGPN includes the current afloat Maritime Prepositioning Force
    (MPF) and the Marine Corps Prepositioning Program in Norway (MCPP-N),
    as well as multiple ashore sites we are preparing to establish in the
    Indo-Pacific. The Service has programmed resources for the
    establishment of three sites in the Indo-Pacific as a priority effort
    across fiscal year 2024 and fiscal year 2025. In fiscal year 2024, the
    Marine Corps received $44 million for one ashore based MCGPN site, and
    in fiscal year 2025, the Marine Corps is requesting an additional $38.5
    million for an additional two sites. Ashore sustainment sites
    strengthen our relationships with allies and partners by providing
    forward stocks for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, as well
    as critical capability sets during potential conflict.
        Additionally, the Marine Corps continues to expand its methods and
    nodes available to the installation and logistics enterprise for
    staging, delivering, and recovering mission critical assets and
    logistics services. We are investing and experimenting with emerging
    unmanned platforms for smaller form-factor logistics support from the
    air. Fielding has begun for the Tactical Resupply Unmanned Aerial
    System (TRUAS) as the smallest in a family of unmanned aerial logistics
    systems. The TRUAS has an authorized acquisition objective of (179)
    systems and achieved initial operating capability in the first quarter
    of fiscal year 2024 with the fielding of the first systems to 3d Marine
    Littoral Regiment (MLR) in Hawaii. The PB25 request of $16.1 million
    supports procurement of systems in pursuit of reaching full operating
    capability in fiscal year 2028. For the medium variant, the Marine
    Corps is conducting rapid prototyping of the Medium Aerial Resupply
    Vehicle Expeditionary Logistics (MARV-EL) utilizing other transaction
    authority to develop two prototype systems. In fiscal year 2024 the
    program will down select to one of these two prototypes and begin
    assessment of the medium capability to enable planned acquisition. The
    President's Budget 2025 Request includes $17.2 million in research,
    development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) to further mature MARV-EL
    prototypes and develop a production representative system.
    Campaign of Learning
        Through an iterative, threat informed, and concept-based approach,
    the Marine Corps utilizes a campaign of learning to inform its balanced
    approach focused on modernizing a force that stands-in during
    competition, is postured to respond to crisis, and organically move,
    fight, and win during conflict. To enhance our modernization efforts,
    the General Robert B. Neller Center for Wargaming and Analysis (Neller
    Center) will provide a comprehensive digital environment to conduct
    fully informed, data-enabled wargames that contribute to the Service's
    balanced approach to modernizing a force that campaigns during
    competition, is postured to respond during crisis, seizes and defends
    key maritime terrain during conflict.
        The state-of-the art venue will enable wargaming within threat-
    informed future operating environments at multiple classification
    levels to support senior leader decisionmaking. The Neller Center's
    primary use will be facilitating concept development, capability
    development, and operational decisions and plans. The Neller Center is
    expected to achieve initial operating capability in fiscal year 2026
    and full operating capability in fiscal year 2028. At full operating
    capability, the Neller Center will possess the capability to ingest
    authoritative data accessed through twenty-one U.S. and coalition
    networks; and to conduct distributed wargames employing a collaborative
    electronic wargaming environment networked to an array of partners.
    Critical to achieving the Neller Center's optimal employment are the
    wargaming software material solution, and the Information Technology
    (IT) and Audio-Visual (AV) infrastructure. The IT/AV infrastructure
    includes complex programs requiring cyber authorizations of many
    technologies at all classification levels involving multiple approvals.
    The software material solution will require sustained resources to
    ensure the wargaming technology is current with the changing threat
    environment. The President's Budget 2025 request includes $13.9 million
    in software and hardware to reach critical milestones in the Neller
    Center's development.
    Conclusion
        Today's the Marine Corps is prepared to serve as a naval
    expeditionary force-in-readiness and operate inside actively contested
    maritime spaces in support of Joint campaigns. Continued
    experimentation and learning from real-world threats will undoubtedly
    uncover additional refinements to enhance our force, we are confident
    our collective efforts will result in a Marine Corps organized,
    trained, and equipped to meet the global challenges of the 21st
    century.

        Senator Kaine. Admiral Pitts.
        Admiral Pitts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Guertin
    covered the opening statement for the--all three of us. And I
    am looking forward to our discussion this afternoon and any
    questions.
        Senator Kaine. Same, General Heckl?
        General Heckl. Yes, sir.
        Senator Kaine. Okay. Well, we will jump in. So, let me say
    that it is not going to come as a surprise the first question I
    am going to ask is about the submarine industrial base and the
    one submarine request that came over this year.
        We have made a commitment not only to try to build two a
    year for us, but we made a commitment to build Virginia-class
    subs for the Aussies to be able to sell to them in the 2030s,
    and it is a commitment that is not just words. The Aussies have
    made a major investment in our workforce to enable this to
    happen.
        Imagine, to my colleagues, if we were having a floor debate
    on the Senate floor about investing $3 billion in the
    Australian workforce or the Korean workforce, that would not be
    an easy debate, and so, the Aussies have done a pretty heavy
    lift politically to make this investment. I have had
    conversations with them, and they are a little bit confused
    about the signal sent by the one Virginia-class sub.
        We know how vital this is, the Virginia-class sub, and we
    have been alarmed by the 45 day report, but other indicia of
    real problems in that program over the last few years, and a
    lot of it is on the workforce.
        We talk a lot about the workforce and supply chain
    development, and it seems like we talk about it a lot to try to
    push the boulder up the hill, but only make incremental
    advances. Earlier in the Readiness hearing, Senator Blumenthal
    was saying, we need to see kind of a great leap forward on this
    and we are not really seeing it.
        With this one submarine request, there is a real risk, I
    believe, that progress we have made on building up capacity
    across the supplier base could be at risk. So, Secretary
    Guertin, let me start with you.
        What is the impact of procuring only a single Virginia-
    class sub in fiscal year 2025 on our ability to meet our own
    needs, but also on our ability to meet the commitment that we
    have made on this really important AUKUS framework?
        Mr. Guertin. Senator, the resources we got in the
    supplemental, especially related to the submarine industrial
    base, are part of that clear message we are sending to----
        Senator Kaine. Is your mic on, Secretary Guertin?
        Mr. Guertin. Maybe I need to lean a little bit more
    forward.
        Senator Kaine. Okay. Great.
        Mr. Guertin. So, the submarine industrial base funding is
    critical to making sure that we can build the capacity that we
    need to buildup to not just two Virginias a year, but really
    two and a third so that we could satisfy the needs of our
    Australian teammates.
        In terms of the industrial base capacity, we have a lot of
    submarines on order, but we have also added additional
    resources for advanced procurement that will help smooth out
    those differences. Anything you would like to add, General,
    Admiral?
        Admiral Pitts. No, sir.
        Senator Kaine. Let me ask this just to followup. If
    workforce is a significant component of these delays, and we
    have known it for a while, and some of these industrial
    investments that we are making are to build a workforce, what
    are you seeing in kind of early returns, you know, priorities,
    projects, initiatives that are showing some signs of success
    that might give the committee confidence that we will get to
    where we need to with respect to these programs?
        Mr. Guertin. We have had some tremendous success in not
    only getting the message out that the Navy is hiring, not the
    Navy, but also industry, the industry we need to build say
    submarines, but also other parts of the Navy as well.
        So, we are seeing some definite improvement in the hiring
    rates in industry, but also the training that we are working
    with industry, with organizations in Virginia, in New England,
    and other places to improve the breadth of people we have
    available to do this waterfront tradecraft work, as well as the
    engineers and logisticians and other people in support of the
    work.
        Senator Kaine. Mr. Secretary, based on the conversation we
    had yesterday, just to share with the Committee, I find it
    interesting that you talk about the greening of the workforce
    in the ship and subspace.
        Many of our workforces in the country have a graying
    workforce where huge percentages are within 5 years of
    retirement. That has its own set of challenges.
        The greening of the workforce could be a good thing down
    the road if we can convince people to stay, but it also creates
    some significant challenges in production capacity. Now, could
    you talk about that a little bit?
        Mr. Guertin. Thank you. Yes. So as the challenges of COVID
    made themselves manifest, we found that a lot of the production
    work that was going on was being done by seasoned veterans who
    really knew their craft, needed very little supervision.
        But as they were retirement eligible and the challenges of
    working in a close proximity environment--I mean, you can't do
    shipbuilding over teams. They retired and we were able to hire
    in new people, but they required more supervision. Their first
    time quality wasn't as high.
        So, that caused some challenges with some of our marquee
    programs, and unfortunately, it was--where we are with, say,
    Columbia is, it probably wasn't going to get any better than
    where we are.
        Now, some of our other ship programs, we certainly are
    engaging with industry to improve and happy to be transparent
    with you about the work we are doing in that area.
        Senator Kaine. I am going to stick to my 5 minutes and now
    yield to Senator Cramer. I will have more questions in a second
    round once others are done. Senator.
        Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and on that point,
    Secretary Guertin, about--I call it the reverse hockey stick,
    the acceleration of a project, you know, with multiple
    experiences throughout it.
        I think Tim really hit the point, at this point, we are
    starting with some, you know, some fresh workforce. But what is
    the--what do we have to do differently to make sure that that
    fresh workforce turns gray while still building ships, or at
    least stays with long enough to get up to the speed of the
    adversaries.
        Mr. Guertin. The investments we are making in training and
    improving that capacity has to be met with investments with
    industry so that we can work on this problem together.
        We will do what we can to help them, but it is their
    business, and they are already appreciating some of the
    challenges with not being able to deliver in terms of the
    timing associated with their incentives, right.
        They are, you know, behind on schedule. They are missing
    out on profit. So, this is our problem together and we are
    going to work it with industry. But what we found is that
    getting people out to the waterfront or in these places where
    it is physical labor, it is interesting, and it is something
    you can build a career out of.
        There is ways of advancing in terms of going in as an
    apprentice, and then becoming a journeyman, and then a
    supervisor. These are great jobs for doing great work for this
    great nation.
        What we are finding though is if we can hang on to them for
    3 years, they are in it for the long term, but we are really
    learning, and we are helping industry figure this out together,
    is how do we get them to that third year so they will stay for
    the long haul.
        Senator Cramer. Yes. That is--you know, it is a great
    point. And you know, when you can get a workforce that works
    for mission as well as money, that is I think part of the
    secret sauce, and just let us know what we can do.
        Now, along the same lines, I think we discussed this the
    other day, I was recently in San Diego and in L.A.. I visited
    NASCO, as a matter of fact, and learned a lot about some of the
    things you are talking about right now.
        But I also visited the Air Force's Collaborative Combat
    Aircraft, a couple of the programs and it was, I don't mind
    telling you, a little bit excited about the recent awarding of
    what I would consider of the five companies that were competing
    to move forward, the two biggest disruptors were chosen,
    Anduril and General Atomics.
        There are other examples of how we have, you know, sort of
    expanded our industrial base. The Army selected Palantir for
    its Titan program. Obviously Space Force, which is newest, is
    only really successful because of some disruptors in the
    industry that sort of kept space alive, SpaceX, E-Space, and a
    newer entrance into things, Rocket Lab.
        Clearly the fleet has done a good job of experimenting. In
    fact, I think the Navy has the best research and development
    lab in the military. But can you describe any major Navy
    programs, not just prototypes that have been awarded, sort of
    innovative or nontraditional contracts or companies that have
    been able to get in the biz, if you will, and show some real
    innovation?
        Mr. Guertin. We have done some amazing innovations in the
    area of unmanned surface and undersea vessels. I will let
    Admiral Pitts talk about that. I did want to talk about how the
    Navy's effort in larger collaborative aircraft, the MQ-25,
    refueling aircraft, and we are making great progress.
        A little bit of a stumble to get that started, but Boeing
    is doing some important work in getting that aircraft through
    its testing so we can get in production, and we need that
    refueling jet in a big way. Admiral.
        Admiral Pitts. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. For innovation and
    getting things out much quicker, we have had some recent
    success in that we stood up in the Navy a disruptive
    capabilities office to take emerging operational problems from
    our fleet commanders. Swarm it. Work with industry. Work with
    all the experts on the--appropriate experts on the OP-NACSEV to
    include contracting and acquisition and see if we can deliver a
    very fast solution and capability to our fleet commanders.
        We are working hand in hand with OSD's replicator effort,
    which is scaling some of those mass smaller unmanned systems to
    meet operational challenges, and in that, we are introducing
    some newer companies and different companies that are showing
    innovation at scale, sir.
        Senator Cramer. Well, not wanting to offend the Chairman in
    any way since he kept to 5 minutes, I will do the same for this
    round, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you. Senator King is up next.
        Senator King. I have a reputation around here for being
    reasonable and calm. Today. I am not going to be. The budget
    for directed energy in the Department of Defense has fallen by
    50 percent in the last 2 years.
        We are spending $4 million to shoot down a $20,000 drone
    from the Houthis. What in the hell are you guys thinking? The
    Navy directed energy budget has gone practically to nothing. I
    don't get it.
        We are in a world of drones and low cost missiles and low
    cost drones, and this is the technology that can do something
    about this, and you are cutting the budget in half. This ought
    to be the highest priority.
        You ought to be doubling and tripling the budget, not
    cutting it in half. Can you give me any rational reason for not
    pursuing this critical technology as we move into a time of
    swarming drones? I mean, we can't shoot swarming drones down
    with missiles. Come on.
        Any answer to this?
        Admiral Pitts. So, the----
        Senator King. I am only getting started by the way. I have
    got another one coming. But seriously, this is--I have been
    beating this drum for three or 4 years. I am getting nowhere,
    and we are getting creamed, and we have got--we are getting
    creamed in the Red Sea. We are getting--the Ukrainians are
    getting creamed with cheap drones coming in from Iran, and we
    are cutting the damn budget for the technology that could save
    us.
        Admiral Pitts. The warfighters out on the fleet are using
    the tools they have to do the work they need----
        Senator King. But we are not giving them the tools.
        Admiral Pitts. Well, we are giving them tools that have
    been successful but perhaps are on the wrong side of the cost
    curve. So, I agree with you completely. The opportunity to
    invest in directed energy is all around us. However, it has to
    work. We have an experiment prototype put on a one destroyer--
    --
        Senator King. You HELIOS out in San Diego. I don't know why
    we are not testing HELIOS in the Red Sea, but that is another
    question.
        Admiral Pitts. We have one unit----
        Senator King. The point is budgets are policy, and your
    policy is, we don't give a damn about directed energy. That is
    what the policy is in this budget.
        I don't--I mean, I understand you got to make choices and
    everything else, but to me, this is an obvious choice. It is
    like telling of a soldier on the battlefield you can't have a
    rifle. This is the technology of the 21st century, particularly
    for aerial warfare.
        Mr. Guertin. I am excited about----
        Senator King. Anyone want to take a crack at that?
        Mr. Guertin. Go ahead.
        Senator King. Wouldn't you like to have directed energy on
    those destroyers?
        Admiral Pitts. Yes. Thank you, Senator. Yes, sir, we would,
    and we would--we are continuing efforts, and it is an absolute
    valid point that our budget was--we reduced our budget in this
    particular area of directed energy. It was part of that risk
    allocation----
        Senator King. The Navy reduced from $152 million to $82
    million at a time when the demand is going up. That is just--I
    cannot make that makes sense.
        Admiral Pitts. Yes, sir. But we are continuing efforts. Not
    as fast as we would like, in both lasers, as HELIOS is one
    example. Then working with OSD and the Joint Force on a higher
    energy laser, land based.
        Senator King. Right. Microwaves.
        Admiral Pitts. And high powered microwaves. Yes, sir.
        Senator King. Well, again, it's fine for you to tell me
    that, but the budget is what is talking here, and it is not
    talking very loudly about this essential need. Okay. Second
    issue that is really bothering me and that is readiness.
        You--there is a detachment on the Navy website that talks
    about ships underway, and there are 294 ships deployable, there
    70 that are underway. We have 12 aircraft carriers, 4 are
    underway. In other words, about 75 percent of the ships that we
    have aren't doing anything. What the hell is that all about?
        By the way, I did a little research today in the Carnival
    Cruise Line, and I know there are differences, but 90 percent
    of their ships are available all the time, and their average
    time in drydock is about 8 weeks.
        Those are complex ships. Those are like cities with 5,000
    cabins and heat and water and light and everything else. I am
    not saying they are comparable, but it is a damn sight
    difference between 90 percent availability and 25 percent
    availability.
        You as well know, as well as I do, a ship goes into one of
    our maintenance facilities and it is there. What can we do
    about that? We are appropriating a lot of money to build these
    ships. You are not using them.
        Mr. Guertin. Senator, excellent point.
        When I went through my confirmation hearing, I promised you
    and the rest of your colleagues that I would get out to the
    shipyards, I would see what is going on, and I would find out
    how to improve the way we not only build them, but also the way
    we maintain them.
        And I have been true to my word on that, and I have been
    getting out to the shipyards, and we are working on improving
    how that work.
        Senator King. If you need more money for more
    infrastructure for maintenance, tell us. But you know, we are
    spending a lot of money building ships that are sitting
    somewhere that aren't being used.
        A 25 percent utilization rate. If you were an airline--by
    the way, the numbers are similar for the airlines. They are
    about 90 percent available at all times. They would be out of
    business. I mean, the difference is they have to make a profit.
        I just hope you will look at it that way and think about a
    better utilization of the taxpayer's assets. When we spend $12
    billion for an aircraft carrier, it ought to be out in the
    ocean.
        And then the final point, I am out of time, is hypersonics.
    As near as I can tell, we have no defense against hypersonics,
    which renders our entire Pacific fleet vulnerable in the first
    hour of a conflict. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Senator King. Senator Sullivan.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen,
    thank you. We had a Readiness Subcommittee hearing with the
    Vice Chiefs, just about an hour ago. So, I am going to repeat
    some of the questions, but I am going to followup on Senator
    King's question.
        Mr. Secretary and Admiral, I asked the Vice CNO in the
    hearing we just had, so assume you have a magic wand, right,
    meaning you can get done whatever you think you think you can
    get done.
        The knuckleheads in Congress aren't in the way. The
    President of the United States, who in my view keeps putting
    forward budgets that don't reflect at all the sense of urgency
    and National Security challenges, those aren't limits.
        If you guys, in terms of our shipbuilding--we didn't talk
    about amphibious. 32 percent of the amphibs fleet is ready--32
    percent. Holy cow. Like Marine Corps can't deploy. The Boxer,
    you know, the big dock amphib that was supposed to go out with
    one of the mews just turned around because a screw doesn't
    work.
        I mean, it is a disaster. I think the Navy is in a ship
    building crisis. And I think the leadership, from the Secretary
    on down, is responsible. The Secretary of the Navy often, cause
    all those big, you know, defense contractors are plusing up
    their stock. I saw that was one of his quotes. He gets us his
    climate action plan 18 months ago.
        There is no statutory requirement, by the way, for the
    Secretary Navy to give us a climate action plan, but a
    shipbuilding plan is in disarray, disaster. So back to my
    question. Magic wand. No budget constraints.
        To Senator King's question, I think--I just met with a
    bunch of Republican Senators on the Armed Services committee
    this morning. We are ready. You want more shipyards, you want
    private shipyards, you want public shipyards, because this is
    an existential challenge to the United States. Why? Because the
    Chinese are cranking out 10 to 12 high-end navy ships a year.
    That is the challenge.
        So, for the two of you, what would be the top three things?
    Magic wand. Anything you want, we will give you. And I actually
    think we are close enough, all of us, to do that. What do you
    need?
        We are America. We can build ships faster than a goddamn
    Chinese Communist Party. But right now, we are not, and they
    are eating our lunch. And if we go to war with them in the
    Taiwan Strait, it could be really ugly. What do you need, Mr.
    Secretary? I don't know, what the hell do you need?
        Mr. Guertin. So, I probably am not well advised to take you
    up on your offer.
        Senator Sullivan. Why not?
        Mr. Guertin. I would have to tell you----
        Senator Sullivan. Aren't you in charge of this?
        Mr. Guertin. The biggest thing that we could use, honestly,
    is more capacity for repair and construction.
        Senator Sullivan. Okay, so what does that mean?
        Mr. Guertin. You need some----
        Senator Sullivan. Do we need another shipyard, public,
    private?
        Mr. Guertin. Honestly, we could use more shipyards.
        Senator Sullivan. Okay.
        Mr. Guertin. That would be an amazing place to end up. But
    China has been investing for 30 years on their ship repair--
    ship construction activities, and they have captured, I think,
    half of the commercial shipbuilding market right now.
        That means that we, as America, would need to value
    commercial shipbuilding as highly as they have in order to beat
    them at that game.
        Senator Sullivan. Well, your testimony is a little
    depressing. We can beat China at the game, right. Look at our
    history. We can do these things. We are America. We need
    leadership. We need ideas. Admiral, what is your idea? Magic
    wand.
        Admiral Pitts. Sir, I agree with Secretary Guertin that the
    additional capacity--if you look at our shipbuilding plan this
    year to achieve our 381 ships per our requirement from the
    BFSAR, it relies on our current industry to achieving the
    capacity and delivering our ships on time and on budget, along
    with resources to sustain that large of a fleet. And the number
    one item would be capacity, whether that is through outsourcing
    through another yard----
        Senator Sullivan. Can you guys just dig into the concept of
    capacity a little bit more. Like dive deeper on that. What do
    you mean by that? And what can we provide you?
        Mr. Guertin. The Maritime Statecraft Initiative that
    Secretary of the Navy started talking about and has been
    working across other Departments is a good place to start the
    conversation.
        And one of the things that we stepped away from in the
    1970s and 1980s was valuing a commercial shipbuilding industry.
    So, that is a policy thing that together, Navy and Congress and
    Department of Transportation--my personal opinion is we need to
    go back and revisit valuing building commercial ships as a part
    of what makes America strong.
        Senator Sullivan. Well, look, I am going to wrap up here,
    Mr. Chairman, but whatever you guys think, give us your big
    ideas. Maybe for the record, go back, you know, noodle on this
    a little bit. This is your job. This is your opportunity. You
    know, the history of our country is very promising in this
    regard.
        My team and I were looking at 1937 to December 6th, 1941. A
    lot of people think we start building ships after Pearl Harbor,
    which we did. We actually almost tripled the size of the U.S.
    Navy before Pearl Harbor.
        So, we can do this. It was Congress and it was a Navy. And
    so, we can do this. We just need help and direction. But I
    think you have a bipartisan motivation, given the threat, to
    get on it. We just need big ideas, bold ideas, and I certainly
    am one who would vote for them. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Senator. Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I want to
    followup on a couple of the questions that have been asked so
    far. And Secretary Guertin, you and I talked a little bit about
    this issue when we were together in Groton recently.
        I understand that there is an internal report that shows
    some of the delays. For example, the Columbia, I believe is
    more than a year behind schedule. Is that correct?
        Mr. Guertin. A year--16 months----
        Senator Blumenthal. And what is the Virginia-class
    construction delay look like?
        Mr. Guertin. We are building two variants of--I am sorry.
    We are building two variants of the Columbia--excuse me, of the
    Virginia, and one of the variants is up to 24 months behind.
    The other is 36 months behind.
        Senator Blumenthal. So, we are not just failing to build in
    terms of planning. We are way behind right now where we should
    be.
        And I think that those numbers are a measure of the crisis
    that we face in submarine construction, which is essential to
    our undersea superiority, which is in turn essential to our
    Navy strength and our defense. I am really at a loss for why we
    are planning on failure.
        And this is not personal because I know the bed was on fire
    when you got into it. You are not, you know, responsible for a
    lot of these delays, but all of us are responsible right now
    for a failure to invest, if we in fact, fail.
        The American public has no idea about this situation. My
    guess is that the numbers of people who really are familiar
    with it could fit on the floor of the U.S. Senate, but they are
    going to learn about it when that failure becomes apparent with
    the threats to us abroad. And it is not just the production
    capacity at Electric Boat or in Virginia.
        There are literally, for every one of those submarines,
    16,000 suppliers, 16,000 suppliers for whom the demand signals
    are, we ain't doing it anymore. In effect, go put your
    workforce on something else or disband your workforce.
        So, it is not just the 5,300 people that Electric Boat has
    to hire. It is also the workforce for those 16,000 suppliers,
    and I would just repeat the request from Senator Sullivan, tell
    us what you need, not what the budget is.
        The budget, I recognize, is not you are doing solely, but
    whether it is in a classified setting or in some other setting,
    give us what you need, and then it will be on us to meet those
    needs.
        Mr. Guertin. Senator, I would be happy to engage in that
    conversation. I will have to say that the problem is pervasive,
    it is deep, and it is broad.
        Our estimates is that just for getting to two and a third
    plus--Virginias, plus one Columbia, we are going to need up to
    10,000 more people, not just tradecraft, but also engineers and
    the other elements of support for the people on the waterfront
    doing that work.
        We have a big lift in front of us and we are gearing up for
    it. We are using the supplemental to engage with industry and
    create those trained people. It is going to be a long, hard
    run.
        Senator Blumenthal. I am going to interrupt, and I
    apologize, but it can't be long. It may be hard, but long is
    not acceptable, because long is in effect saying, we can't do
    this in the time that we need to do it.
        Mr. Guertin. Thank you for that correction.
        Senator Blumenthal. I want to second the point that my
    colleague Senator King made.
        I recently visited our base in Jordan, the joint base that
    we have with the Jordanians, and I heard a briefing on the
    Tower 22 drone attack, which is frightening, not just because
    we lost three of our troops there, but because the drones that
    were used there essentially are going to be the wave of the
    future.
        They are cheap. They are low flying. They are slow. They
    fly at about the rate of a car, and they are unstoppable if
    they come at us in swarms right now with what we have. This
    technology is a matter of keeping our men and women alive when
    we put them out in those locations with the asymmetric warfare
    they have right now.
        We are trying to combat them with missiles that cost
    millions of dollars. We don't have enough of them, and then
    they are not as effective as we need to be against them. So, I
    will followup on this line of questioning as well. Thanks, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Senator Kaine. You bet. Thank you, Senator Peters.
        Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank
    you for your testimony here today and your service to our
    country. I want to followup on some of the questions related to
    the submarine program and the industrial base.
        Senator Sullivan talking about, and my colleague is talking
    about what more do you need? However, it seems as if you do
    have a lot of money that has been appropriated for this. So, it
    is not a lack of cash, but you just can't keep throwing money
    out there and not doing things differently.
        In fact, I think Congress has allocated about $3.3 billion
    in the recent National Security Supplemental to support the
    submarine industrial base. So, there are plenty of resources
    there, and I would argue that there are a lot of suppliers out
    there that do have the capacity and do have the workforce.
        I speak from our industry and our industrial base in the
    State of Michigan. One thing we do in Michigan is we know how
    to make things. We are a major manufacturing State, and
    precision manufacturing is what folks do day in and day out.
    Highly skilled, union workforce is available there.
        And I know we have a number of suppliers that currently
    provide material for the submarine program. So, my question for
    you, Secretary Guertin, is that to what extent are you looking
    at existing industrial suppliers that are able to provide
    immediate capacity to be able to shorten this time lag that you
    have with the submarine programs?
        Certainly, I would want to work with you on Michigan, but
    to what extent are you looking at a very well developed and
    mature supply--industrial supply base in Michigan to help solve
    the problems that you are dealing with?
        Mr. Guertin. Thank you, Senator. It is amazing
    opportunities that we have for pushing work out of the
    waterfront activities, where we have these major shipyards,
    into other places that can build large sections or even smaller
    pieces that make up this overall thing we call, in this
    particular case, a submarine.
        The focus factory effort that we are doing with our major
    suppliers to push out things like building whole decks or doing
    preassembly of things so they can be brought to the shipyards
    to be installed to move as much that work out of the unique
    place by the water that have--where we have to actually build
    the submarine.
        Very interested in moving as much industrial activity out
    of those very dense places into areas, other places, other
    States where that work can be done effectively.
        Senator Peters. And you are familiar with some of
    Michigan's capabilities, our suppliers that are there, who do
    this kind of work, day in and day out, not just for the
    automotive industry, but actually a very growing and robust
    aerospace industry in Michigan and certainly naval
    construction. In fact, we have a major school that trains naval
    engineers at the University of Michigan. So, we are very, very
    well prepared. You are familiar with all of that?
        Mr. Guertin. I am learning more about Michigan's
    opportunities and other opportunities in other States as well.
    The University of Michigan is a particular important place for
    me because that is a place where we get a lot of our naval
    architects.
        Senator Peters. Right.
        Mr. Guertin. But we actually do need to share that joy and
    get more people into that business. And as well as advanced
    degrees besides, which I think University of Michigan may be
    the unique place where we get a master's and PhDs in naval
    architecture.
        Senator Peters. Right. Actually, has bachelor's, master's,
    and PhD. Is the only--our top tier research university that
    does that. So, could you--could the Navy provide me with a
    detailed accounting of the current Michigan submarine
    industrial base suppliers and future submarine suppliers'
    needs? Is that something that is available you could provide to
    me?
        Mr. Guertin. I am not going to be able to give that to you
    immediately, because I might miss something, and I don't want
    to get anything wrong. I would be happy to take that for the
    record.
        Senator Peters. I think that is going to be really
    important. I think it is important for us to fully understand
    that and understand how we can help solve that problem. We are
    all about solving that problem.
        So, if you could provide that for me and a commitment to
    work with me to try to figure out how we allow the Michigan
    industrial base to help solve this problem by making world
    class products for you.
        Mr. Guertin. I am happy to make that commitment and to any
    other State as well.

        Mr. Guertin. Senator Peters, the entire Great Lakes region,
    including Michigan, is a critical maritime center of gravity
    for the Navy's submarine enterprise, with more than 2,500
    suppliers located in the five Great Lakes states, including 41
    critical suppliers and 34 suppliers of sequence critical
    material. Michigan alone is home to more than 180 submarine
    suppliers, including eight critical suppliers. Since fiscal
    year 2018, the Navy has infused more than $160 million in
    supplier development funding to add capability and capacity to
    Great Lakes based submarine industrial base (SIB) suppliers and
    has invested more than $10 million since fiscal year 2023 in
    initiatives focused on workforce development and
    operationalizing advanced manufacturing technology.
        Regarding future supplier needs, the Navy will continually
    assess our SIB efforts to ensure the goal of achieving the
    required one Columbia plus two Virginia (1+2) construction
    cadence can be met. The SIB efforts are focused on six lines of
    effort, specifically supplier development, shipbuilder
    infrastructure, strategic outsourcing, workforce development,
    technology opportunities, and government oversight.

        Senator Peters. Secretary--in your 45 day ship building
    review, you identified a lot of the ship building delays and
    some of the things that you have talked about today.
        But as part of the review, it is not just submarines, you
    also highlighted delays to the Navy's new Constellation-class
    frigates. A couple of questions. What responsibility does the
    Navy share for the delays to the frigate program in particular?
        Mr. Guertin. Senator, it is a particularly troubling
    conversation because there were opportunities where we could
    have kept a better eye on the shop, to be perfectly frank. We
    did not do sufficient oversight prior to my arrival.
        However, what that 45 day study illuminated was some of the
    problems we were having relative to engaging with that company
    to make sure that they were doing the job necessary to perform
    with excellence.
        We have moved hard into that area. I have got a bunch of
    people now from both the program executive office, as well as
    Naval Systems Command, rotating through Marinette to provide
    the additional intellectual resources to get into a better
    place, as well as making sure they have other contract support
    work from other naval architecture firms.
        Senator Peters. Well, I am out of time, but I would love to
    have further discussion with you about that as to how we solve
    that problem as well, which is critical. Thank you. Thank you,
    Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Senator Peters. Senator Shaheen
    up next.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you all for being here. I would like
    to followup on some of these questions, but I have a good news
    story that I want to share with you, Secretary Guertin, as we
    are talking about the challenges the Navy faces.
        I want to thank you for the recent establishment of the
    Accelerated Welding Program in New Hampshire. It is a
    partnership between SENEDIA, Granite State Manufacturing, and
    the Manchester Community College. It is working very well, so
    it is going to help as we look at the--what we need to do to
    get those 100,000 new workers that we need for submarine
    production.
        But I want to better understand, Secretary Guertin, some of
    the things that you have said. When you talked about the
    utilization of our ships, is the issue that they aren't ready
    to--they are not seaworthy to go out? Is it that we don't have
    enough operating funds to put them--to deploy them out on--in
    the bases on which we need to do that? What is the issue with
    the utilization?
        Mr. Guertin. I am sorry, Senator, I maybe misspoke. Maybe
    Admiral Pitts would like to jump in about what it takes to make
    our ships more ready to go to sea and keep them at sea longer.
        Admiral Pitts. Thank you, Senator, for the question. In big
    picture, we have a tiered readiness system where a ship goes
    through a maintenance period, then it goes through basic
    training, integrated training, and then it is ready to deploy.
        And we deploy based on how the Secretary of Defense tells
    us to allocate to the COCOMS and deploy through our global
    force management. So, we may have some ships that are not
    deployed, but they are still doing training or in earlier
    phases of the full readiness for deployed operations.
        Now, the fair point is we still, as we are well aware, have
    some struggles right now of getting our ships through their
    maintenance, and that is one of the CNO's highest priorities to
    get more players on the field, to get--improve our maintenance
    performance so that we can get them in and out of maintenance
    and get them operational again.
        Senator Shaheen. Okay, so with respect to maintenance,
    Senator King and I share the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, where
    they have a very good record of maintenance. I think they
    continue to be on time and under budget, or at least on budget.
        And we have significant investment in the shipyard
    infrastructure optimization plan. Are you saying that once we
    have completed the SIOP and the four public shipyards, that we
    still are not going to have the capacity that we need to get
    the maintenance done on our ships to keep them out at sea?
        Mr. Guertin. So, I would like to take a first stab at that
    one. Admiral Pitts, you can join in. By the way, as a formal
    Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Navy reservist, big fan of the work
    going on there.
        I was up there not too long ago, and seeing the new drydock
    coming together and all the waterfront support facilities were
    really helping to change how they will do that work now and
    into the future so that we can do the repair and maintenance of
    these, especially submarines up there, faster and better as a
    continuum.
        This is something we are going to have to continue to
    invest on. We left that alone for a little too long, and now we
    are making these big investments now so that we can improve our
    public shipyards ability to do this work for the Nation.
        Senator Shaheen. I understand that. The question that I am
    asking, maybe I wasn't clear, is that once we have--according
    to our SIOP plan, we are going to make these investments.
        And at the end of that, are you saying that we are not--
    still not going to have the capacity we need to do the
    maintenance on the ships that are being maintained at those
    public shipyards? Is that one of the issues?
        Mr. Guertin. Yes, the SIOP plan reaches a crescendo, but I
    think as we get to--further out in years, we are going to want
    to continue to invest and keep that edge sharp so we can always
    do this work better and faster as a long term proposition.
        Senator Shaheen. Okay. I am still trying to get to what you
    were talking about when you were talking about needing more
    capacity. Do we need more capacity to build new ships? Do we
    need more maintenance capacity? Do we need both? And what is
    the plan to get there? Because I still am not sure that I
    understand how we are going to do that.
        Mr. Guertin. Both is good in terms of building and
    maintaining. In terms of specific capacity challenges--so the
    magic wand challenge that Senator Sullivan gave us, I would
    like to come back to the subcommittee and give you a more
    detailed and thorough understanding of what we could possibly
    do different in the future.
        Senator Shaheen. You didn't answer my question, I got to
    say. I appreciate that there was an effort to do that, but I
    don't feel like we have an answer to what we need to do as
    Members of Congress to support the work that the Navy is doing
    to get us to where we need to be on the fleet that we need. So,
    I will leave it at that, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Kaine. We are going to have a second round of
    questions. General Heckl, I am going to start with you. And it
    is an INDOPACOM reality that congested logistics is going to be
    a significant challenge in the INDOPACOM. And INDOPACOM,
    TRANCOM--(technical problems)--of that problem.
        But the Marine Corps--(technical problems)--logistical
    issues. So how within the Force Design and then Marine Corps
    planning are you working to provide options to commanders to
    support logistics for stand in forces who are within an
    adversary's weapons engagement zone?
        General Heckl. Sir, thanks. And I was enjoying the show, so
    don't feel the obligation to ask me a question, sir, so----
        [Laughter.]
        General Heckl. Sir, I will just say, you know, we have
    gotten after this from the beginning with Global Positioning
    Network, which is rethinking everything from maritime pre-
    positioning to--you know, because the conclusion--the
    assumptions we made before about our force was that we would be
    able to dump in our mountains somewhere and they would be okay.
    That is never going to happen again. Never going to happen.
        To Senator King's point about hypersonics, right. We--so we
    have to rethink everything. So, the way we approach this is a
    multi-tiered--we do have a Marine Corps concept for logistics
    in a contested environment.
        We have gone after that as well, and as you know, we have
    fielded two prototypes of autonomous low profile vessels. Semi
    submersibles, narco-sub that is almost impossible to track.
        We prioritized our focus of logistics. I told my staff
    focus on lethality, right. Good allies and partners. I met with
    the Commandant of the Philippine Marine Corps today. Our
    relationship is getting tighter and tighter every day.
        Our allies and partners are going to be there for us in a
    lot of ways, you know, chow, you know, other things. The
    discussion becomes a little more testy when you start talking
    about lethality, things that we can launch, and so we are
    focused on lethality.
        So, the ALPV, the autonomous low profile vessel, is form
    fit function for two naval strike missiles to get those to
    resupply points inside the weapons engagement zone of our
    pacing adversary. So, I think we are moving out on this
    already. And as you know, we have chartered a couple of
    vessels, stern landing vessels.
        One is about to move forward to the island chain with the
    3d Marine Littoral Regiment, and we are going to start
    experimenting with it now. And we will iterate and make
    adjustments to where we are going.
        Senator Kaine. Let me ask you a followup. I want to ask
    about a UAS question in the INDOPACON or--(technical problems).
    How are you working to counter the prevalence of UAS in defend
    case, but also to incorporate UASs into your own--(technical
    problems)----
        General Heckl. Well, sir, to your point about logistics,
    one of the UASs we have already fielded is the TRUAS, the
    tactical resupply unmanned aerial system. And it doesn't do
    heavy payloads but think chow, water, parts, and it has the
    range to do it within the first island chain, the range we
    need.
        As far as countering, as you know, we have already fielded
    the Marine Air Defense Integrated System, MADIS, which is a
    little bit better on the, you know, the cost curve, right.
    Fielded with things like Stinger, and it uses a 30 millimeter
    cannon.
        Now, the swarming part that Senator King is talking about,
    we are--you know, I think technology is catching up. I actually
    had discussion with a couple of industry partners today at
    Modern Day Marine about where--I specifically asked that
    question about swarming technology.
        Probably is not going to be lasers, not point defense, but
    when you talk about large mass swarming, you need things like
    high energy microwave, right, that can just drop masses of them
    at one time.
        I am going to tell you, sir, I am confident, 100 percent
    confident that technology is going to catch up to that, and we
    will field those, and we will get on the right side of the cost
    curve. Until then, we will keep pursuing other things. Like we
    are looking at APKWS, you know, Advanced Precision Kill Weapon
    System, a 2.75 rocket, much more affordable than SM-6 and SM-
    2s, and Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles.
        Senator Kaine. Secretary Guertin, Senator Peters asked you
    about the frigate and the challenges with that.
        You said something in the office yesterday that I would
    like my colleagues to hear, which is that part of the problem
    with the frigate was the way--(technical problems). It is great
    to do a fixed price contract.
        That is great for predictability. But if you do it on a
    first in a class and then the first in class has a lot of
    changes, it is pretty much guaranteed that that contracting
    vehicle, which looks good up front, may not be such a good
    contract. And could you share that insight?
        Mr. Guertin. So, one of the things that I have asked my
    team to do, as a result of the 45 day study, is to examine the
    way we balance risk with industry, the way we manage our
    incentives, and we restructure those kinds of contracts to make
    sure that we are utilizing the right tool at the right time.
        And that is an example of perhaps not using the right tool
    at the right time. I think that at this point I would have to
    say it is the only bad example we have of big structure in
    terms of, you know, using fixed price in one place and cost
    plus in another.
        But one of the things, other things that came up through
    that study is whether or not we are using the right balance of
    incentives and whether or not these publicly traded companies
    and how we reach to them and motivate their behaviors through
    the structure of profit--we are going to take a fresh look at
    that and see if we can, first of all, do that better risk
    balancing between Government and industry, and also make sure
    that their incentives are effective.
        Senator Kaine. And before I hand it to Senator Cramer, the
    other thing about the frigate is, you go into it with a plan.
        And then, okay, here is a platform that exists, and we will
    basically replicate 85 percent of the existing platform and 15
    percent new. By the end of the design, it is 50 percent
    existing and 85 percent new, then you are going to have some
    challenges getting the job done.
        I know that is a lesson from that as well. Senator Cramer.
        Senator Cramer. Thank you. I am going to ask one sort of
    open ended question about the budget from a different angle. I
    mean, I guess if we you could have more, you want more
    capacity, and we are struggling to understand what that is.
        But if we are stuck with this flat budget or really
    inflationary--you know, inflation adjusted negative, you know,
    cut, our budget cut, what areas of this budget assume the most
    risk in your mind?
        If we are stuck with what has been presented, what areas
    represent the greatest risk? And I think each of you could
    answer that.
        Mr. Guertin. Admiral, you want to take first crack at that
    one?
        Admiral Pitts. You want me to start?
        Mr. Guertin. Oh, yes, please do.
        Admiral Pitts. Sir, I will just say for the Marine Corps,
    we have--you know, we have been aggressively modernizing and we
    are very, very happy with where we are with forces design. And
    notice we don't call it 2030 anymore.
        It is never going to end, but now our barracks 2030
    initiative, which is one of the Commandant's top priorities.
    So, with this kind of budget, that pressurization on top--where
    I will take risks, sir, is in my war enterprise planning team.
    So, it is modernization. So, we will be forced to slow
    modernization.
        General Heckl. Senator, we think the priorities as laid out
    by the CNO in the second half were the right priorities, given
    the resources that we had allocated. Where we took risk is in
    our future fleet.
        Some of our--what we--we have the fleet in being. We are
    going to modernize the fleet that we have. Where we took risks
    is those follow on platforms to replace some of our legacy
    things, such as SSN(X) delaying procurement, air wing of the
    future. We have some risks there.
        Senator Cramer. Secretary.
        Senator Blumenthal. So, I like both those answers actually.
    I think that in terms of on the acquisition side, where we took
    risk is understanding what the outcome of the 45 day study and
    the realities of hire challenges with respect to labor, as well
    as the supply chain--the supply chain has fundamentally
    changed, right.
        It is just going to be longer. It is going to take longer
    to get more stuff. In an inflation, capped environment, that is
    going to be very challenging for us in terms of making sure we
    get product put out the door in the time we need to.
        Senator Cramer. All right. Nothing further. Thank you.
        Senator Kaine. Senator King.
        Senator King. Yes. Early in April, I requested the Pentagon
    to give me background on the directed energy budget, and I have
    an unclassified report which we got yesterday, which I would
    like to just submit for the record.
        Senator Kaine. Without objection.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator T4King. It is pretty sad, by the way, but there it
    is. I don't really have any followups except, General, I agree
    with you. You said--the technology is going to catch up with
    the risk. It ain't going to catch up with the risk if we don't
    fund it, if we don't do the research, the prototyping, and the
    development.
        It won't work without the investment and that is the point
    I am making. I came into this meeting with a cold, and you
    managed to help me clear my sinuses earlier, and I appreciate
    that. But seriously, I hope you will go back and think about
    directed energy, because it just makes so much sense and it is
    a place where the benefit is overwhelming.
        A shot from a high powered laser is about, I think, $0.25
    instead of $4 million, and on the other thing is about--I
    agree, ship building, all in. We need more ships, but we also
    need to utilize the ships we have better.
        I hope that you would--and by the way, the same criticism
    goes for the Air Force. If they were sitting here, they would
    be getting a load of this too. These are expensive assets, and
    we should be using them more efficiently. When the private
    sector invests in a capital asset, they use it. Those mills are
    open 24 hours a day.
        So, it would seem to me that it would be cost effective to
    really study maintenance patterns using AI to predict
    maintenance, what could be done on ship. For example, I think
    every ship should have a 3D printer, so you don't have to bring
    it into a dry dock to get a part.
        So, I think--I hope that this is an area where you would
    really do some study because 25 percent utilization of these
    very valuable capital assets is just unacceptable. So, I
    appreciate your testimony here today.
        Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your holding this hearing. Thank
    you.
        Senator Kaine. I have two more items that I would like to
    ask about, and they are both related to AUKUS. So, I am going
    to go AUKUS Pillar 2, then AUKUS Pillar 1. So, AUKUS Pillar 2,
    talk about--we are very familiar with Pillar 1.
        Pillar 2 is more open ended, so I am curious how both the
    Navy and the Marines are thinking about AUKUS Pillar 2 and our
    engagement with Australia and the UK. Just give us a little
    status report.
        Mr. Guertin. Thank you for the question, Senator. We are
    fully committed to AUKUS Pillar 2. We work very closely with
    our Australian and UK counterparts.
        In every domain that is underneath my charge, air, surface,
    undersea, science and technology, and digital warfare, we have
    efforts moving along the technology areas that are called out
    for AUKUS Pillar 2, whether that is hypersonics, undersea
    capabilities, AI, ML.
        It is a very strong relationship, and we are charging out
    there to help make us all stronger.
        Senator Kaine. General Heckl.
        General Heckl. Sir, I don't know that the Marine Corps has
    much in Pillar 2, but I failed in our office call the other day
    to mention on--we are actually doing, in the vein of the stern
    landing vessel, you know, we have done--we have gone to
    industry and chartered ships. Hornbeck Offshore is the first
    one that will soon be heading out to the first island chain.
        We are doing a full and comparative test with Australia's
    sea transport. It is going to be a cooperative operating
    agreement between the two countries, and we are super excited
    about it because Australians--specifically nothing with the UK
    other than we like getting on their boats and flying fifth gen
    fighters off of them.
        But for the Australians, sir, there is a lot of promise
    there. They know the theater better than most, so excited about
    that. But from Pillar 2, sir, I think our activities are
    minimal.
        Senator Kaine. Let me ask now back on a Pillar 1 question,
    although it is a little bit broader. So, Secretary Guertin, I
    am going to put you on the spot on this one. We got to get to 2
    plus 1, Virginia plus one Columbia, and then we got to get to
    2.3 plus 1 to meet the commitments that we have made in the
    AUKUS framework.
        Based on the investments we have made, based upon the
    investments that we have committed now in this supp, based upon
    the investments the Aussies have made, based upon the 2025
    budgetary requests, based upon what is in the FYDP for the
    submarine industrial base, when should we get to 2 plus 1, and
    when should we get to 2.3 plus 1?
        Mr. Guertin. I am going to give you a couple of dates, but
    if I get it wrong, permit me to catch up with you. I believe we
    will get to two Virginias by 2028, and I think it is 2032 that
    we get to two and a third.
        Senator Kaine. I see Admiral Pitts sort of nodding yes. Is
    that, General, your understanding as well?
        General Heckl. That is the General understanding, yes, sir.
        Senator Kaine. So, 2 by 2028, and 2.3 by 2032, and the
    commitment that we have made to the Aussies is to sell them 3
    to 5 Virginia-class subs in the decade of the 2030s. So, if you
    get to 2.3 by 2032, and let's see, 0.3 times 9 is 2.7.
        So, you are kind of maybe not quite getting the three in
    the 2030s that you would be able to sell. I mean obviously that
    pace--and they want to buy at least three. They said they might
    buy up to five.
        Look, I think some of the Pillar 1 is still kind of open
    ended in the sense of if they start buying the Virginia-class
    and they really like them, and they are interoperable, and they
    learn how to maintain and operate them in an interoperable way
    with us, there might be a decision down the road, like, we will
    just keep buying Virginia-class and work on that together,
    rather than build of a different design that is off a kind of a
    UK framework, even though there would be a lot of U.S.
    technology in it.
        But if--am I wrong to do the math that way? If we are doing
    2.3 by 2032, we are not going to be able to sell them three in
    the 2030s.
        Mr. Guertin. I think the first two are actually existing
    Virginias, and we are going to back fit our--we are going to
    plus hours in the future. So, I think we can get to three, even
    to five by the end of the 2030s.
        Senator Kaine. Well, 2028 is not far off. I mean, you know,
    to try to get to two by 2028 because what are we at now, like
    1.3?
        Mr. Guertin. We are investing mightily, sir, as you
    mentioned, in improving our ability to do this business.
        Senator Kaine. And then, when are we going to get to one a
    year of Columbia?
        Mr. Guertin. Well, we are committed to several productions
    starting in the third boat, and that is where we have to start
    one a year and I am confident we will get there, but we are
    going to have to run fast to get to it.
        Senator Kaine. Yes. Well, I think that seems to be a theme
    of the hearing. We are going to have to run fast to do what we
    have said we are going to do, and we need both provide you the
    resources to run fast, but we also, you know, again, on the
    workforce issues--I just worry that some of our issues, you
    know, cannibalize one workforce to meet another or one regions
    to help and others.
        We are not necessarily rowing the net and we got a
    declining birth rate as a Nation, and we got an economy that is
    pretty hot right now where people have a lot of competition for
    other jobs, and I don't see that necessarily changing. So, I
    mean, I appreciate, was it the Academy Awards? Yes. I mean,
    when I see an ad for the submarine industrial base during the
    Academy Awards, that is different.
        That is showing like, hey, we really are reaching out in a
    nontraditional way, but we are going to have to do a lot in the
    nontraditional space, I think, if we are going to have the
    workforce to meet the kind of dates that you are stating before
    the Committee.
        So, it has been a good hearing. We appreciate your service.
    We appreciate you being here. I will offer to my colleagues the
    chance to submit questions for the record by the close of
    business tomorrow.
        If they are submitted, you know, I hope that you will be
    both prompt and comprehensive in your response. With that, the
    committee--the subcommittee adjourns.
        [Whereupon, at 11:56 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                            ship maintenance issues

        1. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, you are responsible for
    sustainment matters, including maintenance. The Navy submitted a
    legislative proposal to Congress seeking authority to send up to 6
    U.S.-based ships a year to foreign yards in the Indo-Pacific for
    repairs to exercise for potential contingencies. While I am certainly
    in favor of keeping the ships, we have in optimal condition, I think it
    is short-sighted to outsource maintenance, especially when the Navy's
    own shipyards are in such disrepair. For example, the surface ship
    repair piers in Pearl Harbor are in poor shape, with only 4 of the 13
    berths available for use. Why isn't the Navy investing more in these
    badly needed repairs to our shipyards at home instead of outsourcing
    the work?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy's legislative proposal sought to allow
    a limited number of ships homeported in the United States or Guam to
    execute a limited maintenance availability in a foreign port as part of
    the U.S. Navy's Surface Wartime Repair and Maintenance (SWaRM) program.
    SWaRM supports the generation and sustainment of forces conducting
    distributed maritime operations within highly contested environments.
    The Navy did not propose this language as a result of insufficient or
    inadequate domestic capacity to complete required maintenance and
    repairs. SWaRM actions are intended to extend military operations
    within an adversary's weapons engagement zone. The SWaRM continuum
    begins with first actions by the crew in response to damage, then moves
    to afloat salvage, battle damage assessment, tow or heavy lift, and
    finally semi-permanent repair as well as maintenance.
        The Navy recognizes the critical upgrades required in our public
    shipyards and naval stations. The proposed execution of naval vessel
    maintenance outside of the United States in support of the SWaRM
    program does not impact investment in these facilities. Upgrades and
    expansion of public shipyards and naval stations are managed through
    the Navy's Military Construction (MILCON) and Facilities Sustainment,
    Restoration & Modernization (FSRM) programs. The annual MILCON and FSRM
    programs assess these infrastructure requirements against each
    project's mission need date, in considerations of strategic laydown
    plans as well as general berthing and maintenance demand.
        Regarding Pearl Harbor, investment in Joint Base Pearl Harbor-
    Hickam is amongst the Navy's top priorities for investment in submarine
    and surface ship infrastructure over coming years and has several
    projects in various stages of planning, design, and execution to
    address the surface ship berth condition in Pearl Harbor. The Navy has
    developed projects to address the surface ship pier condition in Pearl
    Harbor. These projects include electrical capability enhancements (to
    award this year), phased refurbishment of the depot-level surface
    maintenance piers, and a floating dry dock in the mid-fiscal year
    2030s.

        2. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, instead of asking for
    authority to do overseas maintenance on U.S.-based ships, why isn't the
    Navy simply sending the ships already based overseas into these foreign
    yards for maintenance and repair?
        Secretary Guertin. The exclusive use of naval vessels homeported
    outside the United States and Guam (also known as forward deployed
    naval forces, FDNF) for overseas maintenance and repair in foreign
    shipyards would increase the time FDNF sailors are out of homeport
    (also known as personnel tempo). Performing maintenance activities on
    these forward deployed ships would negatively impact high-tempo FDNF
    operations. It would also fail to realistically exercise the required
    capability. The use of non-FDNF naval vessels for these repair
    availabilities allows for reducing the operational tempo of already
    stressed FDNF ships. Furthermore, scheduled maintenance on non-FDNF
    ships would have limited to no impact on personnel tempo because the
    stop can be integrated into the ship's overall deployment schedule.

                     shipbuilding delays--secretary guertin

        3. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, the Navy recently released a
    45-day Shipbuilding Review that found delays across several major ship
    programs--aircraft carriers, submarines, and frigates are the most
    noteworthy. What is the Navy's plan to get these major acquisition
    projects back on track?
        Secretary Guertin. The 45 Day Shipbuilding Review found the largest
    challenges to shipbuilding performance is a dramatic change in the
    supply chain and a recent volatility in the skilled workforce both in
    availability and proficiency. Together with the shipbuilders, the Navy
    is working initiatives to drive improvement to these challenges to
    arrest the degradation in schedule completion and to improve overall
    shipbuilding performance. This includes the Navy assessing its
    contracting strategies to ensure an optimal risk balance between Navy
    and industry and that requirements meet the Navy's needs at time of
    contract award.

        4. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, I am particularly concerned
    about the submarine acquisition delays. The Navy is now taking the
    extraordinary step of buying only one Virginia-class submarine this
    year instead of two. How are we going to sell these boats to Australia
    for the AUKUS agreement if we can't produce enough for our own needs?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy's ability to reach and maintain a
    production cadence to meet our submarine requirements, sustain the
    existing submarine fleet and ramp to meet the AUKUS trilateral
    agreement is gated by the Submarine Industrial Base (SIB) capacity. The
    President's Budget 2025 budget request reflects a prioritization in
    undersea warfare capabilities, with sustained investment in the SIB.
        Removal of the second Virginia-class submarine in fiscal year 2025
    was a difficult choice, but the Navy is optimistic it provides an
    opportunity to recover the backlog within the production line and for
    the SIB investments to take greater effect. The single SSN procurement
    in fiscal year 2025 provides an opportunity for the shipbuilders to
    balance production for Virginia construction and serial Columbia
    production in fiscal year 2026 and allows for maturation of
    improvements in manufacturing, outfitting and assembly as well as
    industrial base investments.

        5. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, for the Columbia-class
    ballistic missile subs--does the Navy have a viable contingency plan to
    extend the Ohio-class boats if these delays continue?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy has established a plan to extend the
    service life of five Ohio-class SSBNs as a contingency against
    Columbia-class delivery schedule delays. The life extensions will be
    accomplished through a Pre-Inactivation Restricted Availability (PIRA)
    prior to the end of service life that will conduct necessary
    maintenance to ensure operability and hull certification up to an
    additional 3-year period. The Navy selected five PIRAs as providing
    sufficient and achievable risk mitigation if Columbia-class deliveries
    are delayed. Various five-SSBN PIRA combinations were analyzed against
    existing maintenance capacity, Strategic Weapons Facilities capacity,
    and ballistic missile inventory to identify executability, key
    limitations, and additional resource estimates to overcome these
    limitations. Navy will continue SSBN PIRA analysis throughout the Ohio
    to Columbia-class transition as uncertainties in Columbia-class
    delivery schedules, uncertainties in Ohio-class service life
    projections, and unknown/unforeseen factors manifest and require
    resolution.
                          dry dock 3 replacement costs

        6. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, I have significant concerns
    about the cost overruns associated with the replacement of dry dock 3.
    It is a critically important project but was recently beset by another
    cost increase of $834 million, over 400 million of which was due to
    poor planning on the Navy's part. And dry dock 3 is not an isolated
    case. As the GAO has previously reported, the Navy has had trouble
    estimating SIOP construction costs. What assurances can you give me
    that the Navy has cost overruns under control for the Pearl Harbor dry
    dock?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy is implementing Government
    Accountability Office (GAO) guidance to ensure consistency and
    completeness of SIOP cost estimates. Independent cost estimates are
    being developed for all major projects in accordance with legislation.
    In December 2022, the Department of Defense directed the use of the GAO
    best practice of comparing cost elements to available historical data
    for construction. Further, the Navy formalized SIOP cost estimating
    expectations for escalation, risk, uncertainty, format, and
    comprehensiveness. SIOP cost estimates, including Dry Dock 3 at Pearl
    Harbor NSY have implemented improved economic forecasting and cost and
    schedule risk analysis that is updated throughout design and
    construction. Construction contractors are now involved in the design
    phase to improve estimates for logistics and constructability.

                              uss i89boxer issues

        7. Senator Hirono. Secretary Guertin, after maintenance delays, USS
    Boxer left for deployment on April 1st with the 15th Marine
    Expeditionary Unit embarked onboard only to return to San Diego several
    days later following an issue with the rudder. The ship is now sitting
    pier-side waiting for repairs. While I was happy to see the Navy's
    commitment to 31 amphibious ships reflected in this year's budget to
    support Marine Corps operations, do you have concerns about the
    readiness of the amphibious fleet?
        Secretary Guertin. We are committed to improving maintenance
    processes and reducing maintenance delays for surface ship operational
    readiness through a data driven approach. Days of Maintenance Delay
    (DoMD) in private shipyards peaked in fiscal year 2019 and has trended
    downward since then. From fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2023 the Navy
    reduced surface ship DoMD by 18 percent--from 3,456 days to 2,839
    days--and saw a slight improvement in on-time availability completion
    (from 36 percent in fiscal year 2022 to 41 percent in fiscal year
    2023). President's Budget 2025 will continue to improve shipyard
    performance and reduce DoMD, particularly for our amphibious fleet.
        Additionally, Navy is in coordination and discussion with the
    Marine Corps on Amphibious Warship requirements to include but not
    limited to: total and projected operational availability (Ao), time of
    ships in training and deployment, and challenges the Navy and Marines
    face in force generation.

        8. Senator Hirono. General Heckl, how is this delay impacting the
    readiness of the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, especially since the
    Marine Corps was planning to conduct several training exercises with
    our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific?
        General Heckl. Fifteenth Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) stands
    trained, certified, and ready to respond to global crisis.
        Despite USS Boxer delays, the 15th MEU has executed 79 collective
    training events across their Pre-deployment Training Program / Fleet
    Response Training Plan and are certified across all 10 Mission
    Essential Tasks. Each ship in the Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) is task
    organized to perform the seven warfighting functions independently.
    However, the ARG/MEU is most effective when aggregated.
        Boxer missed Exercise Balikatan an annual exercise supporting the
    U.S. Philippine Mutual Defense Treaty. Although Boxer was absent, USS
    Harpers Ferry was able to join USS Somerset for the final few days of
    the exercise, which included our first ever deployed usage of
    Amphibious Combat Vehicles. Boxer currently will miss an additional
    three exercises in the Pacific Theater. (Specifics can be provided at a
    higher classification). The several delays Boxer has experienced to
    date resulted in the substitution of the original Battalion Landing
    Team, and several months of shipboard proficiency training lost.
        Elements of the 15th MEU and Amphibious Squadron (PHIBRON) Five are
    currently deployed onboard both Somerset and Harpers Ferry, and have
    continued their deployment in the Indo-Pacific working alongside allies
    and partners. Due to Boxer delays, the voyage plan was adjusted to have
    the Somerset support Exercise Tiger Strike in Malaysia and Exercise
    Cobra Gold in Thailand. As a result, Somerset's support to Exercise
    Rimpac was delayed causing her to miss the initial harbor phase. In an
    effort to cover the gap, 15th MEU sourced CONUS-based forces to support
    Rimpac. 3d FLT aligned the USS Germantown to provide opportune lift
    (OPLIFT) in support of Rimpac, with several hundred allocated rack
    spaces to transport CONUS-based 15th MEU forces to destination. These
    forces are aligned to support the first two phases of Exercise Rimpac.
    The Germantown is an OPLIFT vessel and is not being added to the ARG
    for employment in 7th FLT.
        Boxer is projected on track for a projected 1 July repair
    completion. The 8300 marines supporting RIMPAC will be recovered with
    the Boxer and continue west in support of the voyage plan.
        In the event Boxer is unable to get underway, alternative COAs are
    being pursued to recover the remainder of the CONUS based forces
    forward.
                                   __________

               Questions Submitted by Senator Angus S. King, Jr.
                       readiness and operational capacity

        9. Senator King. Secretary Guertin, the Navy and Marine Corps are
    responding to significant world crises. The Department is notoriously
    behind on submarine and ship repairs, thus affecting our operational
    and response capacity. What are you doing to prepare the industry to
    repair and maintain submarines, ships, and aircraft that are seeing an
    increase in operations?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy's budget request for fiscal year 2025
    prioritizes our people and readiness to deploy and fight today, while
    investing in our industrial base to build and maintain our fleet to be
    strategically ready for tomorrow. In regards to maintenance, we must
    get our ships, submarines, and aircraft in and out of their
    availabilities on time and on cost. The budget request increases
    funding to $14.5 billion in ship maintenance, including 58 ship
    availabilities, and covers private contracted availabilities as well as
    the Navy's four public shipyards, regional maintenance centers, and
    intermediate maintenance facilities. It also provides $1.3 billion in
    aviation maintenance that paces the Fleet Flying Hour Program, funding
    328 airframe and 1,486 engine events and sustaining aviation
    investments in depot overhauls and aircraft spares to increase mission
    capable aircraft numbers.
        The Navy's fiscal year 2025 request also significantly invests in
    the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) and Submarine
    Industrial Base to support submarine maintenance, increase the health
    of industry, build supply chain resiliency, and bolster our long-term
    capacity. The Navy is working with private industry partners to enhance
    cost-effectiveness and schedule adherence in submarine maintenance, and
    this collaborative effort aims to deliver valuable surge capacity for
    submarine maintenance operations. The Navy is continuing its efforts to
    drive out delays in finishing maintenance availabilities and enabling
    more players on the field through its collaborative efforts with
    industry.
        Additionally, as the demand for Naval Aviation forces increases,
    the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) is preparing industry to repair
    and maintain aircraft by ensuring delivery of integrated warfighting
    capability at increased speed and at a reduced cost. Navy air programs
    implement both organic and commercial strategies for Maintenance,
    Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) activities during a product's operations and
    support phase. Commercially, the Navy is increasing contract
    specificity and schedule emphasis with industry partners to create more
    effective, long-term strategic vehicles to deliver products and depot
    level repairable material and piece parts. A focus on enterprise-wide
    centralized planning and continued implementation of Naval Sustainment
    System--Aviation improvements are increasing capacity at organic Navy
    MRO facilities and leading to greater collaboration with industry
    through Public Private Partnerships. Fleet Readiness Centers partner
    with industry and other Services to leverage collective strengths and
    implement agile and innovative approaches to address complex challenges
    that cause capacity or capability constraints.

        10. Senator King. Secretary Guertin, additionally, what is the
    Department doing to take care of the sailors and marines that are
    seeing an increase in their deployments away from home?
        Secretary Guertin. The Department of the Navy is committed to
    ensuring the resiliency of sailors and marines while providing the
    resources necessary for successful reintegration following return to
    homeport. The Department adheres to the provisions set forth in
    Directive Type Memorandum (DTM) 21-005, Change 1 of October 13, 2022,
    establishing deployment-to-dwell and mobilization-to-dwell ratios for
    the Active and Reserve Components. These ratios ensure sailors and
    marines aren't exposed to disproportionate time away from homeport,
    station, or base unless required by operational necessity.
    Additionally, mental health support, post-deployment health
    assessments, financial counseling, religious outreach, and family and
    spouse reintegration are critical components to achieving positive
    outcomes.
        Sailors and marines are provided with ready access to a full
    continuum of mental health resources. For example, short-term non-
    medical counseling is provided to sailors and marines at the
    installation, while on deployment, and virtually. Licensed mental
    health providers offer assessment, diagnosis, treatment planning, and
    referrals at installation-based Fleet and Family Support Centers or
    Marine Corps Community Services before and after deployment. Deployed
    Resiliency Counselors embark on ships to provide solution-focused non-
    medical counseling to sailors and marines while underway. The
    Department of Defense's Military and Family Life Counseling Program
    augments the work of Deployed Resiliency Counselors with licensed
    clinicians who also provide non-medical counseling to sailors and
    marines while ashore. Embarked chaplains also provide confidential
    counseling regardless of religious affiliation. Virtual clinical
    counseling is available anywhere with an internet connection and
    provides clients with convenience and flexibility.
        The deployment of the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group
    (IKE CSG), provides a relevant example of the clinical and non-clinical
    mental health support offerings. Ships comprising the IKE CSG deployed
    with an embarked organic behavioral health services contingent
    consisting of licensed clinical social workers, clinical
        psychologists, and behavioral health technicians. Collectively, the
    behavioral health teams provide a wide variety of services from
    participating in Human Factors Councils to conducting individual sailor
    evaluations and group psycho-educational classes (psychological first
    aid, operational stress control, healthy life-style habits). Non-
    clinical resiliency services included embarked chaplains, a Deployed
    Resiliency Counselor, an integrated prevention coordinator, an
    expeditionary facility dog, and physical fitness and recreation
    coordinators.
        Financial compensation is another critical component to ensuring
    sailors and marines, and their families, are adequately supported while
    away from homeport. Deployed sailors and marines are afforded Special
    and Incentive compensation to include Family Separation Allowance,
    Imminent Danger Pay if deployed to qualifying locations, and sea pay.
    Furthermore, sailors and marines who experience extended deployments
    are eligible for additional financial compensation: Hardship Duty Pay--
    Tempo is paid for each day deployed over 220, at a rate of $495 per
    month ($16.50 per day).
        The Department of the Navy is constantly reviewing, evolving, and
    improving its level of care for its deployed sailors and marines, as
    well as their families. From mental and physical health resources, to
    increased financial payments through various compensation pays and
    allowances, the Department of the Navy remains steadfast and focused in
    taking care of its people at home and abroad.

        11. Senator King. Vice Admiral Pitts and Lieutenant General Heckl,
    the Navy and Marine Corps is being asked to do a lot in the Pacific,
    the Middle East, and Europe. Does this budget anticipate the increase
    in operations due to the crises and conflicts across multiple regions,
    and how does it account for subsequent effects?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. While it is not possible to budget for every
    contingency or crises, President's Budget 2025 allocates resources to
    support the Navy's operations, training, maintenance, and other
    readiness accounts to position forward naval forces in defense of
    global U.S. interests, while investing in our industrial base to build
    and maintain our fleet. Overall, President's Budget 2025 adds +$555
    million in fiscal year 2025 to our major readiness accounts, and +$600
    million in ship maintenance increases to support the Navy's priority to
    maximize players on the field by moving ships through and out of their
    maintenance periods on time. Additionally, President's Budget 2025
    invests in critical munitions, to accelerate production, increase
    resiliency, and improve interoperability.
        However, the effects of high Operational Tempo (OPTEMPO), extended
    deployments, unplanned Request for Forces, fiscal constraints,
    inflation, and budget uncertainty are compounding factors that add
    friction and risk, and create long-term impacts to Operational
    Availability (Ao). Preventing further maintenance delays, backlogs and
    shortages in the future requires strategic investments today.
    President's Budget 2025 invests $2.8 billion for Shipyard
    Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) for improvements to address
    inadequate facilities and industrial plant equipment at the four public
    shipyards.
        General Heckl. Yes. Our fiscal year 2025 budget request highlights
    our commitment to maintaining a balance between current and future
    readiness to facilitate operations around the world. We're requesting
    $17.4 billion in fiscal year 2025 for our Operation and Maintenance
    accounts, 32 percent of our total budget request, to sustain our
    current and projected operational requirements in support of the Joint
    Force and national tasking. Our Fleet Marine Force, which is comprised
    of all three Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEF) and Marine Forces
    Reserve (MARFORRES), are organized, trained, equipped, and postured to
    conduct a variety of missions in support of Marine Corps Title 10
    responsibilities. The Marine Corps maintains all organic crisis
    response capabilities that enable the forward posture and rapid
    deployment of flexible and tailorable forces to the needs of the
    Combatant Commanders (COCOMs). The Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) and
    Marine Expeditionary Units (MEU) are the most common Navy-Marine Corps
    tactical units that are forward deployed at the operational level and
    can accomplish strategic level engagements--these MEUs are resident in
    all MEFs. At the direction and request of COCOMs, units, such as the
    Marine Littoral Regiment, can be organized, trained, and equipped to
    conduct missions not normally assigned as core task.

                              navy ship readiness

        12. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, I noted
    that the Navy's website reports that it has 294 deployable ships with
    26 conducting local operations. Currently underway, the Navy has 70
    ships total with 44 deployed, including 4 carriers and 2 amphibs. It
    could imply that since 4 of 12 carriers are underway, only a small
    percentage of the force is ready for the fight tonight. My
    understanding is that of the 294 ships, some are in long-term
    maintenance overhauls while others are in shorter term maintenance
    overhauls, while crews are also conducting training. What is the Navy's
    assessment of ships ready for sea for the fight tonight, on average for
    the current fiscal year?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy employs a tiered
    readiness model that varies unit readiness levels as they cycle through
    the Optimized Fleet Response Plan (OFRP), which is designed to ensure
    sufficient time is dedicated for regular training and maintenance prior
    to deployment in order to generate long-term sustainable operational
    availability. On average, at any point in time, about one-third of our
    ships are deployed around the globe or in post-deployment sustainment;
    about one-third are completing training and certifications to be the
    next-to-deploy forces; and about one-third are undergoing critical
    maintenance and modernization necessary to be ready to deploy again in
    the future. Typically, the sustainment phase, which includes deployment
    and post-deployment, is the longest period of time in the OFRP cycle.
    Ships in post-deployment sustainment maintain readiness levels to surge
    for a fight, if called upon, for most of the sustainment phase.
    Likewise, the next-to-deploy forces finishing their final training and
    certification phases can also be surged for a fight to respond to
    crisis.
        The current readiness ratings, including current category (C)-
    ratings, are classified data that is regularly reported to Congress in
    the ``Department of Defense Semi-annual Readiness Report to the
    Congress (SRRC).'' The Navy is currently meeting operational
    requirements and is seeing improvements in readiness levels, but
    acknowledges key challenges to readiness, particularly with recruiting/
    personnel and delays with ship maintenance. The Fiscal Year 2025
    President's Budget specifically prioritizes taking care of our people
    and improving ship maintenance to focus on these challenges. More
    details can be provided at a classified level if desired.

        13. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, what is
    this average across the previous 5 fiscal years?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. Specific readiness
    ratings, including category (C)-ratings, are classified data that is
    regularly reported to Congress in the ``Department of Defense Semi-
    annual Readiness Report to the Congress (SRRC).'' The Navy has
    sustained an average of 110 deployed ships for the last 10 years, along
    with additional forces that can be surged for a fight to respond to
    crisis. More details can be provided at a classified level if desired.

        14. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, what is
    this projected to be at for fiscal year 2025?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. Specific readiness
    ratings, including category (C)-ratings, are classified data that is
    regularly reported to Congress in the ``Department of Defense Semi-
    annual Readiness Report to the Congress (SRRC).'' The Navy's Fiscal
    Year 2025 President's Budget request prioritizes readiness investments,
    particularly in ship maintenance and taking care of our people.
    However, readiness levels could be negatively impacted in fiscal year
    2025 if there is an extended continuing resolution, as lost time in
    readiness cannot be ``bought back.'' More details can be provided at a
    classified level if desired.

        15. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, what is
    the average number of ships on any given day in an overhaul or
    maintenance period of more than 4 months? What is this average across
    fiscal years 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and for the current
    2024 fiscal year? What is the projection for fiscal year 2025? Please
    break this down by ship class.
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. From fiscal year 2018
    through fiscal year 2025, at any point in time, there is an average of
    38 surface ships, 17 submarines, and 4 carriers in a CNO availability
    greater than 120 days in duration. The largest number of surface ships
    simultaneously in availabilities was in fiscal year 2018 with 47 ships
    undergoing maintenance simultaneously. In fiscal year 2019, the highest
    number of submarines in maintenance simultaneously was 24. Fiscal year
    2025 is projected to have the fewest number of ships in availabilities
    concurrently.
        The following table details the average number of ships
    simultaneously in CNO availabilities greater than or equal to 120 days
    from fiscal year 2018 through fiscal year 2025, separated by class:

                                                        Table 1. The Current and Future Triad Composition
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                        Fiscal Year
                              Class                          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 2018        2019        2020        2021        2022        2023        2024        2025
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CG......................................................         10          10           7           9           8           5           2           0
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DDG.....................................................         16          16          18          18          17          20          15          17
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LCC.....................................................          1           0           0           0           1           0           0           0
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LCS.....................................................          1           1           1           2           3           2           2           3
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LHA.....................................................          1           1           0           0           0           1           1           0
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LHD.....................................................          2           4           3           3           3           3           4           3
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LPD.....................................................          3           4           2           4           4           6           2
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LSD.....................................................          5           5           4           4           3           2           1           1
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    MCM.....................................................          3           2           2           1           2           1           1           1
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    PC......................................................          3           5           3           1           0           0           0           0
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CVN.....................................................          3           5           4           5           5           4           3           4
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SSGN....................................................          2           2           1           1           1           0           0           0
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SSBN....................................................          4           5           3           4           2           3           2           4
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SSN.....................................................         12          17          11          16          18          15          18          17
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fleet Total.............................................         67          76          61          66          67          60          55          52
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Note: The number of CNO Availabilities listed is rounded to the nearest whole number.

        16. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, what
    are the primary drivers for determining ships ready for the fight
    tonight?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Department of Defense
    measures readiness with category (C)-ratings, which are based upon
    readiness levels across personnel, equipment, supply, training, and
    ordnance (PESTO). The Navy's Optimized Fleet Response Plan (OFRP)
    generates and sustains C-1/C-2 readiness levels during the cycle by
    balancing resources across the PESTO pillars as the primary drivers for
    readiness. As units go through the training phase (basic and
    integrated, or advanced) of the Navy's OFRP cycle, they are certified
    for each of their respective warfare areas which generates a (C)-
    rating. C-1 and C-2 are the highest readiness levels and are defined as
    units which possess the required resources and are trained to undertake
    the full (C-1) or most of (C-2) the wartime mission(s) for which they
    are organized or designed.

        17. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, what
    are ways the Navy is working to put ``more on the playing field'' as
    described by the CNO? What are the limiting factors (i.e. personnel,
    training resource, and maintenance shortfalls in terms of funding,
    workforce, and shipyard capacity)?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy is concentrated
    on getting more operationally ready, capable players on the field--
    people and platforms while balancing Strategic Readiness to meet the
    National Defense Strategy priorities. To this end, we are coordinating
    efforts to receive our investments on time and on cost; getting our
    platforms in and out of maintenance on time; and advancing stewardship
    by taking care of what we have so that we can keep our players on the
    field. We are also getting the right people, right munitions, and the
    right parts in the right place at the right time. To strengthen our
    Navy team, we must recruit and retain talented people from across the
    Nation. Our recruiting and manning crises are themselves existential
    threats. The Navy's Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget prioritizes and
    allocates resources to recruiting, quality of life, operations,
    training, maintenance, and other readiness accounts to position forward
    naval forces in defense of global U.S. interests.
        For shipyard capacity, dry docks generally represent the most
    constrained aspect of the repair industrial base. Availability of dry
    docks can limit the scope and volume of maintenance able to be
    performed, thereby constraining the workforce. Navy has significant dry
    dock efforts ongoing on both United States coasts and Hawaii, as
    detailed in our Fiscal Year 2025 Long-Range Plan for Maintenance and
    Modernization of Naval Vessels Report to Congress.

                       personnel and underway operations

        18. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, we
    discussed civilian shipyard readiness rates, such as Carnival cruise
    line having a 90 percent availability rate. I am not advocating our
    sailors spend 90 percent of their days at sea. Help me understand the
    current impact of underway operations on the force and Navy personnel.
    What are the number of days that servicemembers are away from their
    home station to perform their duties broken down from E1 to O6 since
    fiscal year 2018? What is it projected for fiscal year 2024 and fiscal
    year 2025?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The below charts provide
    the number of days that Service Members were away from home station for
    fiscal year 2018-fiscal year 2023 and for fiscal year 2024 year to
    date. Of note, the information in this table corresponds to the data in
    the PERSTEMPO application. The accuracy of PERSTEMPO data primarily
    depends on whether commands correctly record the time that members
    spend away from their homeport or permanent duty station by capturing
    these events in the PERSTEMPO application. We regularly stress the
    importance to commands about capturing this data and we continue to
    look for ways to improve data quality.

        19. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, what is
    it projected for fiscal year 2024 and fiscal year 2025?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The below charts provide
    data for the number of days that Service Members were away from home in
    fiscal year 2024 to date. The data provided cannot be accurately
    projected for fiscal year 2025 as it involves individual personnel,
    paygrades and commands.

                               shipyard capacity

        20. Senator King. Secretary Guertin, you testified that there is a
    need for more shipyard capacity. Does the Navy assess the country has
    the workforce available over the next 10 years to provide for the
    current shipyard base and add an additional shipyard, and what is the
    basis for your assessment?
        Secretary Guertin. The current limiting factor in the shipbuilding
    industrial base and associated supply chain is the lack of a skilled
    labor pool to adequately staff shipyards, original equipment
    manufacturers, suppliers, ship designers, and associated supply chains.
        The foundation of a healthy shipbuilding industrial base is to have
    stable, executable acquisition profiles that promote private sector
    development and retention of highly skilled workforces and investments
    in world-class manufacturing and shipbuilding facilities, while
    allowing the shipbuilders to maintain a reasonable return on
    investment. The Navy is focused on growing and modernizing the
    shipbuilding and repair base as a national security imperative through
    thoughtful acquisition strategies, targeted industrial base
    investments, increased collaboration with both Government and industry,
    and working with our allies and partners to identify and leverage
    opportunities to share best practices and promote foreign investment
    into our Nation's existing shipbuilding industry.
        The Navy is working with industry and community colleges to improve
    the availability of the shipbuilding workforce. Congress has been
    providing the Navy with resources to improve the training availability
    and the demand signal for shipyard workers.

                               requirements creep

        21. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, I have
    served on this Committee for a long time, and a constant lesson is to
    minimize requirements creep starting with the uniformed military all
    the way to detailed design. What is the current status for DDG(X)
    requirements in terms of warfighting and design?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. DDG(X) Top Level
    Requirements (TLR) were approved by the CNO in December 2020. However,
    during the Concept Design phase, the Navy identified several TLRs that
    needed refinement and revalidation to ensure alignment with the
    warfighting requirements necessary to support the next enduring Large
    Surface Combatant while maintaining a focus on: flexibility, mobility,
    capability, and affordability. Refined TLRs have been approved by the
    CNO and shared with industry to support informed decisions regarding
    propulsion plant technology and configurations.

        22. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, in
    reference to the previous question, are there any current, ongoing, or
    assessed needs for changes, and when will you lock down these
    requirements?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. As of August 2024, the
    CNO has concurred with the DDG(X) Top Level Requirement (TLR).

                                directed energy

        23. Senator King. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, the
    Navy has previously testified to this Committee that the future is
    directed energy weapons, including fielding such weapon systems on
    DDG(X), however the Navy has significantly cut directed energy funding
    and future plans pertaining to its implementation on DDG(X) are
    unclear. What is the Navy's plan for directed energy and implementation
    on DDG(X), and what is the path to getting directed energy weapons
    fielded for operational use within the next 5 years?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. DDG(X) top level
    requirements include space, weight, and power for future incorporation
    of mature, high power directed energy (DE) systems that work against
    threat weapons. The Navy intends to take advantage of lessons learned
    from previous and current shipboard systems as well as the upcoming
    High Energy Laser Scaling Initiative to effectively incorporate the
    weapons onto the platform as they become mature and proven.
        In support of fielding DE systems, the Navy awarded a contract to
    Leonardo DRS for the development of an Energy Magazine System capable
    of providing power to DE weapons on a DDG(X) platform with delivery in
    late fiscal year 2027. The system includes a modular design with
    separate cabinets for power conversion and control, and energy storage.
    This will reduce risk by increasing vendor flexibility and shipboard
    arrangement requirements.
        Across the next 5 years, the Navy will continue to collaborate with
    OUSD, Army, and other partners on the Joint Beam Control System. This
    program brings together multiple services and stakeholders to design a
    common architecture in order to standardize components and stimulate
    industry by reducing variations in designs. The collaboration helps
    promote predictability for core requirements as it pertains to future
    acquisitions while allowing flexibility to address service specific
    needs. These efforts, in conjunction with the High Energy Laser Scaling
    Initiative, will feed directly into the next generation high-energy
    laser system.

        24. Senator King. Lieutenant General Heckl, what is the Marine
    Corps learning from Army efforts at utilizing directed energy weapons,
    and how is the Marine Corps applying those to your organic systems?
        General Heckl. The Marine Corps leverages investments made on
    behalf of the naval services by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) and
    the Joint Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office (JCO) toward
    developing capabilities that will address identified Marine Corps gaps
    and draft requirements for expeditionary directed energy weapon
    systems. High powered microwave (HPM) research to defeat UAS includes
    short, intense pulses of electromagnetic energy at high peak power or
    high repetitive rates to damage/disrupt critical electronics with
    persistent effects. This also offers potential for deep magazines to
    counter electronics for UAS, vessels, vehicles, or critical
    infrastructure. Engagement times are shorter than a laser, have broader
    effected areas, but also are closer-in systems. Solid State HPM systems
    in use by ONR reduce the size, weight, and power requirements for
    expeditionary systems for short-range protection. The current system
    can fire for 10-30 seconds in burst mode before recharging is required,
    which takes 2 minutes. The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory (MCWL)
    is planning to receive a JLTV trailer sized HPM intended to be towed
    behind a Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS) from ONR in late
    fiscal year 2025 for follow on experimentation. ONR, partnered with
    MCWL, is also leading Marine Corps directed energy research, including
    high energy lasers and high-powered microwaves to counter-UAS, suitable
    for integration in tactical vehicles or trailers, and scalable to
    larger platforms. ONR has accumulated a large volume of lethality
    testing, along with Joint partners, to inform tactical use cases and
    design reference missions. Current capabilities include a 10-kW fiber
    laser integrated into a HMMWV platform. This includes the tracking
    system and laser beam director, power, thermal management, and joint
    laser deconfliction safety system. ONR recently accomplished the first
    airspace deconfliction on a Marine Corps live weapons firing range with
    a High Energy Laser (HEL) Weapon and achieved multiple successful laser
    hard kill defeats of group 1 and 2 unmanned air vehicles/drones by
    including in-flight US manned military aircraft. There is funding to
    increase HEL components to 20-kW to enhance range capabilities and
    decrease laser dwell times. ONR is coordinating with the Marine Air
    Defense Integrated System (MADIS) program of record since this HEL
    potentially meets objective requirements for future desired
    improvements. Those future upgrades are currently unfunded. HELs may
    offer deep magazines and low cost per kill with considerable standoff
    but also have system cons like high overall system cost and the need to
    dwell on a target several seconds for 10-kW to achieve effects.
        Systems in development with USMC interest:
          High Energy Laser Expeditionary (HELEX)
          Expeditionary Directed Energy CUAS System (ExDECS)
          Joint Evaluation of Solid-State Technology for
    Electromagnetic Radiators (JESTER)

                                    ukraine

        25. Senator King. Vice Admiral Pitts and Lieutenant General Heckl,
    what lessons are you learning from Ukraine and how are those reflected
    in this year's budget?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. While primarily a land conflict, Ukraine's
    conduct of the conflict in the Black Sea highlights the timeless impact
    of operations at sea on the conduct of operations ashore. In this case,
    Ukraine's effective denial of the Black Sea to Russian naval forces
    constrained to land strategy and sustainment of their forces in
    southeastern Ukraine via a vulnerable line of communication thru
    Crimea. In this regard, the Navy has observed combat operations in
    Ukraine, with particular focus on UxV employment to effect Sea Denial,
    counter-UAS, and the critical importance of munitions depth--of all
    types, in a protracted conflict. The Navy is experimenting with
    advanced capabilities based on these lessons, including innovative
    operations conducted by Navy's Combined Task Force (CTF) 59/Hybrid 4th
    Fleet, thru ongoing experimentation in Navy's Integrated Battle
    Problems, and Large-Scale Exercises (LSE). These efforts are aligned
    with equally innovative OSD efforts including Rapid Defense
    Experimentation Reserve (RDER), Replicator, and Defense Innovation Unit
    (DIU).
        General Heckl. The war in Ukraine is teaching us how drones can
    have an asymmetric impact on the battlefield as cheap platforms can
    inflict damage on multimillion dollar platforms. Unmanned Aircraft
    Systems (UAS) are changing the character of war in ways like the IED
    did 20 years ago. To combat the UAS threat, the Marine Corps is
    investing in five key programs: Marine Air Defense Integrated System
    (MADIS), Light-MADIS (L-MADIS), Medium Range Intercept Capability
    (MRIC), Installation C-UAS (I-CUAS), and Marine Electromagnetic Warfare
    Ground Family of Systems (MEGFoS) as a key component of the broader
    dismounted CUAS systems. MADIS, L-MADIS, and MRIC were specifically
    designed for Low Altitude Air Defense Battalions (LAAD Bn) conducting
    air defense in support of critical assets and maneuver forces. MEGFoS
    is a counter remote controlled IED / counter small UAS family of
    systems, both mounted and dismounted, that will proliferate defensive
    EA and electromagnetic sensing and direction-finding capabilities
    across the entire Fleet Marine Force. The dismounted CUAS system is
    intended to provide every element of the Marine Corps a means of self-
    defense against Group 1 and 2 small UAS via electromagnetic attack and
    passive detection paired with smart optics on standard service weapons
    for lethal defeat. Each program organically, or through command-and-
    control networking, will complete the entire CUAS kill chain (detect,
    track, identify, and defeat). Two prevailing challenges will be the
    balance between the size, weight, and power (SWaP) versus system
    capability and lethality; and the ability to provide at every echelon
    the notification of adversary UASs for force protection and cueing, as
    well as notification of the employment of friendly UASs to mitigate
    mis-identification.
    Additional Information:
          MADIS

          o  $132.2 million request to support the procurement of (13)
    systems in President's Budget 2025.

          o  Employed on a pair of Joint Light Tactical Vehicles.

          o  Can lethally defeat manned aircraft and group 3-5 UAS with
    Stinger missiles, and lethally and non-lethally defeat group 1-3 UAS.

          o  AAO is (190) MADIS systems comprised of (380) total vehicles.

          o  IOC scheduled for 1QFY25 with the delivery of (13) systems to
    III MEF.

          L-MADIS

          o  $33.2 million request to support procurement of (5) systems in
    President's Budget 2025.

          o  Employed on a pair of Ultra-Light Tactical Vehicles (ULTV).

          o  Can lethally defeat manned aircraft and group 3-5 UAS with
    Stinger missiles, and non-lethally defeat group 1-3 UAS.

          o  AAO is (21) systems consisting of (42) ULTVs.

          o  IOC scheduled for 2QFY25 with the delivery of (3) systems to
    III MEF.

          MRIC

          o  $111.4 million request to support the procurement of (12)
    launchers and (242) missiles in President's Budget 2025.

          o  Designed to lethally defeat sub-sonic and super-sonic cruise
    missiles, and capable of lethally defeating manned aircraft and group
    3-5 UAS.

          o  The first complete battery will be fielded in fiscal year
    2026, followed by an additional battery in fiscal year 2027 and fiscal
    year 2028.

          o  In February 2024, industry partners broke ground establishing
    a U.S.-based production facility in Camden, AR which will ensure
    continued access to a supply of domestically produced interceptors.

          I-CUAS

          o  Currently (6) UUNS systems fielded across the FMF

          o  Transitioning to PoR 3QFY25 to field across a total of 34
    sites and installations.

          o  Request $64.5 million in President's Budget 2025 to support
    initial PoR fielding and transition of capital lease UUNS systems.

          o  Provides C-UAS capabilities for CONUS and OCONUS Marine Corps
    installations including the full detect, track, identify, and defeat
    kill chain.

          MEGFOS

          o  $413.2 million request to support the procurement of (1050)
    signature management systems, (618) dismounted systems and (841)
    mounted systems in President's Budget 2025.

          o  Four variants programmed (fixed site, mounted, dismounted and
    signature management). o The first variant fielded will be the
    signature management variant in fiscal year 2026, Dismounted system
    fielding will begin in fiscal year 2027 followed by mounted fielding
    beginning in fiscal year 2028.

          o  Fixed site and body worn systems are planned for development
    and fielding beyond fiscal year 2030.

          Dismounted CUAS

          o  Low SWaP body-worn or man-portable system that provides
    marines at the small unit level an ability to detect and engage Group 1
    and 2 sUAS with organic weapon systems.

          o  Detect, track, and identification phase of the kill chain
    completed through a handheld graphic user interface to receive sensor
    data from external entities with an additional RF detection system.

          o  Combination of directional/omni-directional jammers and/or
    enhanced rifle optics to defeat sUAS.

          o  Urgent Needs and Program of Record Requirement Documents are
    currently in draft.
                                   __________

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
                              shipbuilding delays

        26. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts,
    imagine you weren't in a resource-constrained environment or operating
    under FRA caps, what are the top 5 changes that the Navy needs to build
    the fleet needed to effectively meet our worldwide commitments?
        Secretary Guertin. and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy's budget
    priorities of Sea Based Strategic Deterrence (Columbia, Trident II
    D5LE2/W93, etc.), Readiness, Capability, and Capacity directly support
    the overall Navy priorities of Warfighting, Warfighters, and the
    Foundation that supports them. To simultaneously sustain and modernize
    the current fleet and sustainably accelerate capacity growth of our
    fleet, the Navy will require sustained budget growth above actual
    inflation as described in the 30-year Shipbuilding Plan. The Navy will
    also need better performance from the shipyards and other contractors
    to deliver capabilities and capacity on time and on budget. Further,
    the Navy needs on time appropriations to avoid disruption to programs
    due to continuing resolutions.

        27. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, if you had a magic wand,
    how would you increase U.S. shipbuilding capacity?
        Secretary Guertin. Health and competition in the shipbuilding
    industrial base and supply chain is vital to meeting our National
    Defense Strategy. Strengthening the shipbuilding and repair industrial
    base requires a whole of government approach to rebuild the
    comprehensive maritime power of the Nation, both commercial and naval.
        With the help of Congress especially with investments in the
    Submarine and Surface Ship Industrial Base, and in coordination with
    local and State governments as well as national organizations, the Navy
    and its shipbuilders would continue identifying opportunities to
    generate resiliency and productivity in the shipbuilding industrial
    base, workforce and associated supply chain.

        28. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, are there any feasibility
    studies on having U.S. Navy ships built in a foreign build yard?
        Secretary Guertin. While the Navy is continually working with our
    allies and partners to identify best practices and lessons learned that
    could be shared and leveraged for our shipbuilding acquisition programs
    and shipyards, the Navy is not working on any feasibility studies for
    building U.S. Navy ships in a foreign shipyard. Additionally, given
    current statutory prohibitions on construction of naval vessels in
    foreign shipyards, without legislative relief, foreign construction is
    not a viable consideration for construction of U.S. Navy ships.

        29. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, the compensation
    differential between good paying jobs near shipyards and the hourly
    rate that shipyards are able to pay is very close and cited as a reason
    why shipyards are having trouble recruiting and retaining workers. What
    restrictions are there on SCN or other funds being used for pay
    incentives for the shipbuilding industrial base?
        Secretary Guertin. 10 U.S.C. Sec.  8696 requires the Navy to
    include a shipbuilding workforce development incentive in solicitations
    for covered contracts beginning June 1, 2023. Attraction and retention
    bonus programs are one of the permissible forms of these required
    shipbuilding workforce development incentives. Use of 10 U.S.C. Sec.
    8696 requires (a) that any incentive be equal to at least one quarter
    of one per percent and not more than 1 percent of the estimated cost of
    the covered contract and (b) matching funds from the prime contractor,
    subcontractor, state/county/local government, or industry association
    equal to the government contribution. The Navy is not aware of any
    current, additional restrictions on the use of SCN funds to support
    incentives under 10 U.S.C. Sec.  8696 beyond the conditions set forth
    in that provision.

        30. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, does the United States
    have enough build yards for conventional Navy ships?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The foundation of a healthy shipbuilding
    industrial base remains stable, executable acquisition profiles that
    promote private sector development and retention of highly skilled
    workforces and investments in world-class manufacturing and
    shipbuilding facilities, while allowing the shipbuilders to maintain a
    reasonable return on investment. The current limiting factor in the
    shipbuilding industrial base and associated supply chain is the lack of
    a skilled labor pool to adequately staff shipyards, original equipment
    manufacturers, suppliers, ship designers, and associated supply chains.
    The Navy is focused on growing and modernizing the shipbuilding and
    repair base as a national security imperative through thoughtful
    acquisition strategies, targeted industrial base investments, increased
    collaboration with both Government and industry, and working with our
    allies and partners to identify and leverage opportunities to share
    best practices and promote foreign investment into our Nation's
    existing shipbuilding industry.

        31. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, does the Navy maintain a
    list of recommended locations to add another build yard?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy has neither assessed nor developed
    recommendations for the creation of additional ship construction yards.

        32. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts,
    where would you recommend putting 1 to 2 more build yards?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy has neither
    assessed nor developed recommendations for the creation of additional
    ship construction yards.

        33. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, please explain what effect
    increasing commercial shipbuilding capacity in the United States might
    have on the ability to produce Navy ships?
        Secretary Guertin. The domestic shipbuilding industrial base
    includes shipyards, original equipment manufacturers, suppliers, ship
    designers, and associated supply chains that support both commercial
    and government shipbuilding efforts. Whole of government awareness,
    advocacy, and action to rebuild the comprehensive maritime power of the
    Nation, centered under the Maritime Statecraft effort, will contribute
    to a national effort to build comprehensive U.S. and allied maritime
    power, both commercial and naval. The goal of these efforts would be to
    increase overall shipping and shipbuilding capacity, incentivize
    private investment, grow the skilled labor pool, bolster resilience
    against hostile coercion, and ultimately result in a larger, more
    robust national shipbuilding base to deliver more ships, on time, and
    at lower cost than the current, naval-only industrial base.

        34. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, what is being done to
    address the historically low numbers of Naval Architects at Naval Sea
    Systems Command?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy's ship engineering and design workforce
    is paramount to our ability to construct and sustain Naval ships. The
    Navy has several efforts in progress to increase the number of naval
    architects and ship design engineers in the Naval Sea Systems Command
    (NAVSEA) Enterprise. These efforts include: re-establishing World Class
    Ship Design abilities, assessing and monitoring the health of the ship
    design and engineering workforce, producing enterprise Capabilities
    Health Assessments, and conducting additional engagements with academia
    to ensure new, young engineers are exposed to NAVSEA job opportunities.
    Additionally, NAVSEA's Collaborative and Enduring Concepts and Tools
    (COLLECT) effort is targeting increasing the number of capable
    designers and their output through a structured development pipeline,
    NAVSEA Warfare Centers' (NSWC) Naval Innovative Science and Engineering
    (NISE) program is implementing a variety of workforce development
    activities to recruit, retain, and develop the workforce, and NSWC
    Carderock's Center for Innovation in Ship Design is working to rapidly
    develop new-hire engineers into innovative and capable naval ship
    designers through realistic, concept-level, and team learning
    activities. These efforts collectively are helping the Navy define
    current NAVSEA naval architect workforce health, identify gaps and
    risks, adequately predict and plan for future workload, predict the
    required workforce, and attract, retain, and develop critical naval
    architects and the engineering workforce.

        35. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, what are the impacts of
    fewer naval architects at NAVSEA to shipbuilding design and
    contracting?
        Secretary Guertin. Recognizing the critical role that our ship
    engineering and design workforce play, fewer naval architects and
    engineers involved with ship design in general reduces the government's
    ability to lead, execute and oversee government and industry ship
    design efforts. These efforts span from concept through preliminary and
    detail design. Shortages in NAVSEA naval architect capacity can
    consequently have negative impacts on ship construction as well as
    maintenance, modernization and repair after a ship has been delivered.
    Fewer government engineers also impacts the government's timely,
    quality support of contractual tasks such as reviewing specifications,
    requests for proposals, proposals, contractual design reviews and
    detail design and construction contract deliverables. Overall, this
    shortage can impose increased risk to ship program cost, schedule,
    performance and sustainment. For all of the reasons above, the Navy has
    multiple efforts underway to attract and retain naval architects at
    NAVSEA and monitor the continued health of the workforce.

        36. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, Congressional Budget
    Office and Navy estimates for building ships are often wildly off. The
    Navy underestimates the cost to build ships by 25 to 40 percent, which
    leads to many issues, including delays as you reprogram or seek
    additional funds from Congress. Would more accurate cost estimates lead
    to more timely deliveries?
        Secretary Guertin. Ship delivery timing is most impacted by
    resource availability (people and materials) as well as program
    planning and execution, and not typically impacted by the initial cost
    estimate of the ship. The Navy agrees that better cost estimates
    improve program execution as well as budget planning and execution.

                       ffg-62 constellation-class frigate

        37. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, did the Continuing
    Resolution (CR) prevent the Constellation-class Frigate from starting
    earlier this year?
        Secretary Guertin. No, the Continuing Resolution did not prevent
    the Navy from awarding the fiscal year 2024 FFGs on time nor did it
    have any other financial impacts on the program. The Navy awarded the
    two fiscal year 2024 FFG ships, FFG 66 and FFG 67, on May 23, 2024 and
    executed the Government-furnished equipment contracts upon receipt of
    the fiscal year 2024 funding.

        38. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, what are the key design
    changes made to the FFG-62 class compared to the parent European
    Frigate FREMM design?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. Fincantieri Marinette Marine's (FMM) bid, and
    ultimately the awarded design, included changes from the Italian FREMM
    design to incorporate US Navy Standards and other changes such as
    lengthening the hull, changing the bow shape to support the Variable
    Depth Sonar (VDS), and altering the topside for a Government-furnished
    combat system. In order to incorporate all of these requirements, the
    parent ship of the FREMM had to be altered. For example, the space,
    weight, power, and cooling requirements drove changes to the FREMM
    piping, electrical and foundation designs of nearly every compartment.
    The structural hull and general compartment arrangements are similar to
    FREMM i.e., propulsion plant arrangement is similar, but the FFG 62
    design has different equipment.
        In the Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act,
    Congress mandated that the Tomahawk and Standard Missile-6 capability
    be added to the FFG 62 Class of ships starting on FFG 63, the second
    Frigate of the Class, prior to the first deployment. Since awarding the
    contract, the US Navy has taken tremendous care not to add or change
    the established requirements in order to avoid impacts to cost or
    schedule.

        39. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, by rough-percent, how
    similar is the FFG-62 to the European FREMM?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The FREMM parent design (versus clean sheet)
    provided an incremental step to use an existing hull integrated with US
    Navy systems. Key design changes between FREMM and FFG 62 were an
    outcome of FMM modifying their indicative parent design to comply with
    the requirements of the ship specification. There have been limited
    changes to the contract since award that were negotiated and agreed to
    with the shipbuilder.

        40. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, who directed the key
    design changes between the FREMM and the FFG-62 class ship?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. Fincantieri Marinette Marine (FMM), along with
    4 other shipbuilders, were provided system specifications during an 18-
    month concept design phase, which informed the FFG 62 Request for
    Proposal (RFP). FMM's bid, and ultimately the awarded FFG 62 Detailed
    Design and Construction (DD&C) contract, reflected their understanding
    of the system specifications and informed their developed build
    specifications. Key design changes between FREMM and FFG 62 were an
    outcome of FMM modifying their parent design to comply with the
    requirements of the ship specification and the incorporation of USN
    GFE.
        Since awarding the contract, the US Navy has taken tremendous care
    not to add or change the established requirements in order avoid
    impacts to cost or schedule. Ongoing functional and detailed design
    efforts are driven in large part by challenges in both the engineering
    workforce and industry-wide blue collar hiring and retention, combined
    with issues the shipbuilder has encountered in adapting the parent
    design to meet the specifications/standards that were reflected in the
    system specification used in the competition. There have been limited
    changes to the contract after award that were negotiated and agreed to
    with the shipbuilder. However, the Navy does not consider the
    negotiated changes to be a primary driver of functional or detailed
    design schedule delays. To mitigate ongoing delays in the schedule, the
    Navy and FMM are jointly pursing program-wide process improvements and
    mitigations across multiple program risk areas.
        In addition, the Navy is providing much greater onsite support and
    engineering to drive design maturity, arrest schedule slide and reduce
    impacts to production.

        41. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts,
    what benefit is added by having NAVSEA naval architects co-located in
    Marinette, WI at the Fincantieri build yard?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. In order to accelerate
    the completion of design stability and support production of the lead
    ship, the Navy has established a collaborative design site in
    Marinette, WI and surged both Navy and contracted design engineering
    personnel to work alongside the Shipbuilder's design engineering
    workforce. This collaborative environment enables acceleration of the
    Navy's technical review and adjudication process of FMM's design
    deliverables, as well as workforce augmentation and side-by-side
    development efforts. Further, FMM and the Navy have instituted
    proactive `swarm' events to further drive acceleration into the design
    approval process. In addition to the working-level collaboration, Navy
    Programmatic and Technical leadership has also established a persistent
    presence at the shipyard to coordinate efforts and proactively
    eliminate any roadblocks. This onsite presence significantly reduces
    administrative cycle time and is a key enabler for acceleration of
    design stability.

        42. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, CBO estimated in 2020 that
    ten FFG-62s would cost $12.3 billion, which is 40 percent more than the
    Navy's estimate of $8.7 billion. CBO is historically far more accurate
    than the Navy. What accounts for the significant differences in the
    Navy's and CBO's estimates, particularly for first-in-class ships?
        Secretary Guertin. Prior to Milestone B, the Naval Sea Systems
    Command Cost Engineering and Industrial Analysis (SEA 05C) completed an
    Informed Component Cost Position (CCP). This CCP reflects a buildup of
    discrete cost estimates across all appropriations and represents the
    programmatic and technical baseline per the November 2018 R3B, the
    September 2019 Final FFG(X) Cost Analysis Requirements Document (CARD)
    and March 2020 CARD Change Addendum, and the President's Budget 2021
    FFG(X) quantity profile, among other sources. The cost estimating
    methodology for Ship End Cost aligns with each of the budget exhibit P-
    5 categories: Plans, Basic Construction Cost (BCC), Change Orders (CO),
    GFE, and Other/Programmatics. Within each cost category, a combination
    of contract actuals and return data, estimating factors for
    manufacturing hours derived from other lead ships and major upgrades,
    Navy Ship Work Breakdown Structure (SWBS) weight-based cost estimating
    relationships derived from shipyard return data, proposal data material
    costs, GFE system cost estimates, and parametric estimates from similar
    shipbuilding programs are all collectively used to develop the cost
    estimate.
        While the Navy cannot speak to the CBO cost estimating process,
    based upon an April 2018 CBO report titled `How CBO Estimates the Cost
    of New Ships' there are fundamental differences in the way that CBO and
    the Navy conduct cost estimation. CBO develops their cost estimates for
    future ships based on historical, per thousand-ton cost data from an
    analogous ship class. They then apply various cost adjustments based on
    rate of production, learning efficiencies, and overall acquisition
    strategy. Inflation is applied using a derived calculation from
    historical data of GDP price inflation and shipbuilding industry
    inflation.
        The Navy acknowledges cost uncertainty parameters in the FFG 62
    CCP, including assumptions such as Economic Order Quantity (EOQ),
    competition savings, factor-based estimating methodologies,
    historically based GFE cost estimates, and learning curve assumptions.
    It is not possible to directly correlate these uncertainty parameters
    (realized or unrealized) to a 40 percent difference between the Navy
    and CBO cost estimates; however given the difference in overall
    approach there is some difference in cost estimates that should be
    expected.

        43. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin, several LCS built in
    Marinette, WI were delayed in delivery because of winter and ice
    conditions in the Saint Lawrence Seaway. What will be done to mitigate
    FFG-62 delivery delays based on icing over of the Saint Lawrence
    Seaway?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy will monitor the FFG production and
    testing schedule to deliberately account for the Saint Lawrence Seaway
    icing over in order to ensure all vessels are provided sufficient time
    to transit through the Saint Lawrence Seaway and clear all locks and
    canals in a single transit. Additionally, the Navy will also
    incorporate lessons learned from the LCS Program so that no future
    ships are stuck in a foreign port for an extended period of time due to
    ice and harsh weather.

                              navy force structure

        44. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, the Navy is required by
    law to produce have a plan to get a fleet of 355 ships. Is this still
    the desired size of the U.S. Navy's fleet?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The June 2023 Battle Force Ship Assessment and
    Requirement (BFSAR) Report as well as the analytic work supporting it
    reflects the tenets of the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the
    aligned Defense Planning Scenarios. This report identifies a future
    battle force objective of 381 ships in 2040 to meet future campaigning
    and warfighting demands.

        45. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, how will unmanned surface
    vessels count toward the Navy's fleet size?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. While unmanned platforms are not counted in the
    battle force, they are additive to Battle Force ships and will continue
    to be an important part of the Navy's Hybrid Fleet. The Navy continues
    to focus on unmanned capabilities on, above, and below the sea with key
    investments to field unmanned technologies to increase the fleet's
    capability, capacity, and lethality. As testing of these platforms and
    their concepts of employment continue to evolve, and deemed capable of
    contributing to combat operations, the CNO will recommend their
    reclassification and inclusion in the battle force count for SECNAV
    approval.

        46. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, other than total fleet
    size, what are other useful ways to think about the comparable strength
    of the U.S. Navy compared to our adversaries?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. An important way to compare the strength of
    world navies is to assess the overall naval power of each navy, which
    holistically includes elements of warfighting, warfighters, and
    foundation. For warfighting, the total fleet size is one factor, but
    the capability and technological advancement of each ship and weapon
    system are equally, if not more, important. For example, no other
    country has an aircraft carrier with the size or striking power of a
    Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier. For warfighters, people remain
    our greatest strength and advantage. U.S. sailors receive world-class
    training and education to be highly skilled, agile, innovative, and
    strategic thinkers who voluntarily serve with honor, courage, and
    commitment. For foundation, the United States has an unmatched network
    of Allies and partners who collaborate closely to deliver integrated
    deterrence against adversaries and aggression. The U.S. Navy continues
    to deliver the greatest overall naval power in the world by balancing
    investments and efforts across all elements of naval power.

        47. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts,
    Navy procurement profiles change annually as shown in both the FYDP and
    the Thirty-Year Shipbuilding program. These fluctuations create
    uncertainty and therefore hesitation to invest by shipbuilders. What is
    being done to have less fluctuation in procurement profiles?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy works resolutely
    to maintain a steady, consistent demand signal to the shipbuilding
    industrial base. Key drivers of variability include shipbuilder
    performance and capacity, construction schedules, inflationary cost
    increases, appropriated funding, and available resources within Navy
    topline. The Navy has worked to mitigate the impact on primary and
    secondary vendors in the industrial base by requesting resources to
    keep procurement of key components on-track.

        48. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts, are
    sustained and predictable procurement profiles more effective at
    encouraging private sector investment in shipbuilding capacity than a
    total battle force goal?
        Secretary Guertin and Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy remains
    committed to working with industry to provide clear expectations on
    upcoming requirements to allow for proper planning for and analysis of
    associated private sector investment. The Navy's procurement profiles
    are derived from our overarching battle force requirements; however,
    the foundation of a healthy shipbuilding industrial base remains
    stable, executable acquisition profiles that promote private sector
    development and retention of highly skilled workforces and investments
    in world-class manufacturing and shipbuilding facilities, while
    allowing the shipbuilders to maintain a reasonable return on
    investment. The procurement profiles provide greater specificity when
    it comes to platforms, timing, annual quantities, etc. to our industry
    partners that better enable businesses to plan and assess the return on
    private sector investment.

                    navy-marine corps fleet interdependence

        49. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, when will the required
    report on amphibious fleet readiness per section 352 of the Fiscal Year
    2024 NDAA be briefed to us?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The review of amphibious fleet readiness is
    still in progress and is currently under review at the SecNav level. An
    interim letter is being staffed to notify Congress of an adjusted
    completion date.
        Navy intends to provide a brief to Congress upon completion of the
    review and subsequent analysis and review internal to DON.

        50. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, what are the readiness
    rates of the amphibious fleet? In your answer, please define how you
    describe readiness.
        Vice Admiral Pitts. On 12 June 2024, the Chief of Naval Operations
    and Commandant of the Marine Corps signed a Memorandum of Understanding
    (MOU) on Amphibious Warfare Ship Terms of Reference, demonstrating Navy
    and Marine Corps full alignment and commitment to amphibious ship
    readiness. The new terms of reference serve as supplemental guidance to
    existing readiness reporting criteria and will ensure consistency and
    uniformity in Navy and Marine Corps amphibious force planning,
    assessment, and operational mission execution. The MOU establishes two
    broad categories for amphibious ship readiness: (1) Available ships are
    capable of supporting operations and training, and (2) Not-Available
    ships are subcategorized as those entering emergent maintenance,
    planned CNO maintenance availabilities, newly delivered ships that are
    conducting post-delivery testing and trials, and ships conducting pre-
    decommissioning activities. The first semi-annual report to Congress on
    the operational status of the amphibious warfare fleet is currently
    being finalized and will include detailed data on the operational
    availability of amphibious ships. I will ensure your office receives a
    copy of the report when complete.
        While we have been able to deploy amphibious ships to meet global
    requirements, the Navy acknowledges that maintenance delays continue to
    be a challenge. Warships that are 30-plus years old routinely
    experience materiel and maintenance challenges, as recently occurred
    with USS Boxer. The Department of the Navy is committed to reducing
    maintenance delays and is heavily investing in maintenance and
    readiness in the Fiscal Year 2025 President's Budget, including
    amphibious ships.

        51. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts and General Heckl, do the
    Navy and Marine Corps align on training cycles to ensure marines can
    train on the ARG ships in a time that is meaningful prior to
    deployment?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The Navy and Marine Corps are committed to
    supporting each other for both unit level and integrated training
    before an ARG/MEU deployment and endeavor to align maintenance
    completions with Navy and Marine training cycle needs to do so to meet
    requisite certification requirements. To enhance that commitment, Navy
    is in coordination and discussion with the Marine Corps on Amphibious
    Warship (AWS) requirements to include but not limited to: total and
    projected operational availability (Ao), time of ships in training and
    deployment, and challenges the Navy and Marines face in force
    generation.
        General Heckl. Yes, the training cycles are designed to allow for
    both Services to train their forces independently before the ARG/MEU
    team begins training together for deployment. As long as the ship's
    maintenance schedules remain on-track and their day-to-day readiness
    remains in a Mission Capable status, the schedule supports the teams
    being prepared to train together during the Integrated Phase.
        The ARG and MEU will train together for approximately 126-days
    during the Integrated Phase, including the Warfare Commanders
    Conference and underway events PHIBRON / MEU Integration Training
    (PMINT), ARG / MEU Exercise (AMX), and Composite Training Unit Exercise
    (COMPTUEX).
        Before training with the MEU, the Amphibious Warships (AWS)
    complete Basic Phase Certification events (8168-days) and the Advanced
    Phase training (814-days). These training and certification events
    ensure the ships can execute necessary operations as independent ships
    and as an ARG.

        52. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts, how are you going to
    raise amphibious warship readiness rates so Marine Expeditionary Units
    can train on the amphibious ships before they deploy on them?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. We are committed to improving maintenance
    processes and reducing maintenance delays for surface ship operational
    readiness through a data driven approach. Days of Maintenance Delay
    (DoMD) in private shipyards peaked in fiscal year 2019 and has trended
    downward since then. From fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2023 the Navy
    reduced surface ship DoMD by 18 percent--from 3,456 days to 2,839
    days--and saw a slight improvement in on-time availability completion
    (from 36 percent in fiscal year 2022 to 41 percent in fiscal year
    2023). President's Budget 2025 will continue to improve shipyard
    performance and reduce DoMD, particularly for our amphibious fleet.
        Additionally, Navy is in coordination and discussion with the
    Marine Corps on Amphibious Warship requirements to include but not
    limited to: total and projected operational availability (Ao), time of
    ships in training and deployment, and challenges the Navy and Marines
    face in force generation.

        53. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, how has amphibious ship
    readiness impacted the Marine Corps' ability to train as an ARG-MEU
    team?
        General Heckl. During the 2023 Amphibious Readiness Review
    conducted with the Navy, we discovered 82 occasions in which amphibious
    warfare ship (AWS) readiness impacted the Navy and Marine Corps'
    ability to conduct training and operations over a 2-year period. The
    approximately 126-days of training as a combined ARG/MEU requires that
    all three ships be certified before the collective work-up period
    begins and remain ready for all underway training. Recently, combined
    ARG/MEU training has been impacted by the readiness of the AWS fleet
    due to planned maintenance and emergent maintenance casualties.
        For example, the WASP ARG experienced multiple maintenance issues
    in preparation for deployment, impacting the 24th MEU landing force.
    USS Oak Hill (LSD-51) was unable to participate in most of the PHIBRON/
    MEU Integration (PMINT) at sea period due to a significant deficiency
    (CAT4 CASREP) in the navigation system. Additionally, USS Wasp (LHD-1)
    experienced casualties to the steam plant that required emergent pier
    side maintenance, prohibiting its participation in PMINT and forcing
    the ARG/MEU to combine two at sea periods into one.
        Low readiness of AWS continues to condense multiple MEU Mission
    Essential Task events into single underway periods, resulting in
    reduction of integration and training repetitions; specifically, those
    tied to well-deck and flight-deck operations. Compounding these
    impacts, lack and/or loss of available AWS degrades operational
    readiness (proficiency and safety) and impacts certification and
    deployment timelines. To confront these readiness challenges, the
    Marine Corps and Navy established a Joint Integrated Planning Team to
    address AWS readiness, including the identification of all amphibious
    training requirements and associated ship requirements. This, when
    combined with the newly signed terms of reference, will ensure the Navy
    establishes clearly defined AWS readiness goals that enable our ARG/
    MEUs to remain the Nation's premier crisis response force.

        54. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and General Heckl, the
    Landing Craft Utility (LCU-1700) contract was signed in 2018 and no
    vessel has been produced. Why is this shipbuilding program delayed?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy awarded the Detail Design and
    Construction contract to Swiftships, LLC, Morgan City, LA (Small
    Business Set Aside) in March 2018. Swiftships was under contract for 12
    craft, with options for up to 32 craft. Swiftships faced challenges in
    completing the design, procuring material, completing test procedures,
    developing sustainment products, and maintaining the requisite labor
    resources to complete craft construction by the original contract
    delivery dates. To simplify the contract and settle claims submitted by
    Swiftships, a consolidated settlement was reached in September 2022 to
    descope the contract, increase unit cost, re-baseline delivery dates,
    and remove all remaining options. Despite a re-baselined contract,
    Swiftships failed to make meaningful progress post settlement as it
    continued to struggle with the same issues experienced prior to the
    settlement. Estimates at completion continued to grow throughout Fiscal
    Year 2023 in excess of new contract targets and projected delivery
    dates continued to extend well beyond the contractually required
    delivery dates. The contractor failed to meet the contractual delivery
    dates and, in response to a Contracting Officer's Show Cause Notice,
    did not present any excusable basis for its failure to perform. The
    Navy ultimately was forced to terminate the contract with Swiftships in
    February 2024.
        To recover this craft acquisition, the Navy awarded a Detail Design
    and Construction contract to Austal USA, Mobile, AL, for three craft
    and options for nine additional craft in September 2023. The lead craft
    is scheduled for delivery in June 2025, the second craft in March 2026,
    and the third craft in July 2026.
        General Heckl. The original shipyard experienced challenges in
    design, safety, craftsmanship, and material. To simplify the contract
    and provide relief from inflation and labor challenges, a consolidated
    settlement was reached in September 2022 to descope the contract from
    12 to 7 craft, increase unit cost, re-baseline delivery dates, and
    remove all remaining options. In January 2024, the Government issued a
    stop work in support of ongoing discussions between the Navy and
    Swiftships to reach a mutually agreeable settlement. By issuing a stop
    work order, Swiftships was protected and prohibited from incurring
    additional costs under the contract. Navy issued Notification of
    Termination for Default February 20, 2024.

        55. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, when will the LCU-1700's enter
    the fleet?
        General Heckl. In September 2023 the Navy awarded a $91.5M Detail
    Design & Construction (DD&C) contract to Austal USA, Mobile, AL for
    three craft and future option for nine additional craft through fiscal
    year 2027. Austal completed Production Readiness Review (Feb 2024) and
    started construction on the lead craft in April 24. The lead craft
    delivers in June 2025.

        56. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, with the delay in the Landing
    Ship Medium (LSM) program necessitating a bridging solution, how does
    the LCU-1700 delay impact the Marine Corps mobility bridging solution?
        General Heckl. LCU 1700 delays will not impact the LMBS. However,
    the Navy and Marine Corps team are pursuing resources in the budget to
    maintain and further extend the service life of the current LCU 1610
    fleet. The current LMBS investment strategy includes two LCU 1610 class
    vessels and other experimental craft to provide littoral maneuver to
    the Stand-in Force.

        57. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and General Heckl, could a
    Japanese or South Korean yard build the existing LSM design by 2027?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy will adopt a best practice approach in
    support of LSM program execution by ensuring design maturity prior to
    start of ship construction. The LSM program has issued a Detail Design
    and Construction Request for Proposals. Industry responses are due
    Q4FY24 which support the Navy/Marine Corps plan to procure the first
    LSM in fiscal year 2025. It is highly unlikely that the LSM design will
    be mature enough for any yard beyond the lead construction yard to
    build the existing design by 2027.
        General Heckl. With LSM proposals recently received from industry
    and currently under evaluation, we expect to have an award in fiscal
    year 2025 for construction, which supports our intentions to support
    the American industrial base. In addition, statutory limitations would
    preclude construction in those countries. Industry responses are due
    June 2024, and the Navy/Marine Corps team intends to procure the first
    LSM in fiscal year 2025. To assist the Department of Defense, the
    Maritime Administration may utilize existing authorities and programs
    or support new programs to provide vessels for ``defense sealift
    functions for which other sealift assets are not reasonably available
    as outlined in 46 U.S.C. Sec.  57100(b)(2)(B).

        58. Senator Sullivan. Secretary Guertin and General Heckl, could a
    Japanese or South Korean yard build a scaled-down LSM design by 2027?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy will adopt a best practice approach in
    support of LSM program execution by ensuring design maturity prior to
    start of ship construction. The LSM program has issued a Detail Design
    and Construction Request for Proposals. Industry responses are due
    Q4FY24 which support the Navy/Marine Corps plan to procure the first
    LSM in fiscal year 2025. It is unlikely that the LSM design or a scaled
    down version of the design will be mature enough for any yard to build
    by 2027.
        General Heckl. Similar to the previous question, statutory
    limitations would preclude construction in those countries. Industry
    responses were received in June 2024 with the intent to achieve a
    purpose-built ship to meet the warfighter requirements as assessed by
    the analysis of alternatives to procure the first LSM in fiscal year
    2025. In addition, a ``scaled down'' version would likely be limited
    just as each of the planned littoral maneuver bridging solutions (LMBS)
    are individually. The LMBS provides interim ``aggregate'' capabilities
    to the SIF, but cannot meet the effectiveness and efficiency required
    as an independent deployer.

        59. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, what is the impact of low
    readiness of Expeditionary Fast Transports (EPF) and LCU fleets to the
    Marine Littoral Regiments?
        General Heckl. Surface mobility is a critical gap in strategic
    power projection, operational-level force closure and, in the case of
    EPFs and LCUs, the tactical maritime maneuver required to execute
    nearly all the various capabilities associated with Marine Corps
    modernization. Several platforms comprise the Littoral Maneuver
    Bridging Solution (LMBS), which is intended to close this gap for the
    MLRs until the Landing Ship Medium (LSM) is sufficiently fielded.
    Outside of our single contracted Stern Landing Vessel (SLV) and several
    yet-to-be fielded prototype platforms, our MLRs are heavily reliant on
    existing platforms such as the EPFs and LCU 1610's. Until LSM, the
    spectrum of platforms that comprise LMBS complement each other to cover
    various operational requirements. While EPFs can be used for intra-
    theater mobility, LCUs provide tactical maneuver. Unfortunately,
    resource and manning decisions require the very limited number of aging
    LCU-1610's to be prioritized to our deploying Marine Expeditionary
    Units (MEUs), and challenges with civilian mariners has delayed support
    from even a single EPF. In short, unless these readiness issues are
    addressed, there is no clear solution to support MLR surface mobility
    in any sufficient capacity until the 2030s.

        60. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, the Landing Ship Medium (LSM)
    program will not provide even a single Marine Littoral Regiment with
    operational sealift within a decade. The original vision for Landing
    Ship Medium was a risk-worthy ship that could be produced in quantity
    at no more than $130 million. Why is the 80 percent solution not good
    enough?
        General Heckl. The analysis of alternatives, which completed in
    fiscal year 2023, evaluated several existing ships and determined that
    none were adequate to meet the requirements to sufficiently support the
    maneuver and mobility of Naval Expeditionary Forces in execution of
    LOCE, DMO, and EABO. The AoA recommended a purpose-built shore-to-shore
    intra-theater vessel to support Stand-in Forces aligned with Force
    Design 2030. In the interim, the Navy and Marine Corps will employ a
    littoral maneuver bridging solution, comprised of various vessels in
    existence today, to partially support the LSM capability requirement.

        61. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, if the Landing Ship Medium
    actually costs closer to $460 million, almost double what the Navy
    initially estimated, and delivers three or more years late, how would
    you re-evaluate your requirements for that ship?
        General Heckl. Industry responses received in June 2024 are
    currently being assessed for accuracy and completeness. We will know
    more once submissions are reviewed. However, the USMC requirements have
    been developed to accomplish a specific mission. Cost is a
    consideration, but we must not accept anything less capable than what
    our warfighters require to set conditions and provide necessary
    mobility and sustainment to win a high-end fight.

        62. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, could you accept an intra-
    theater lift vessel that was less capable than the LSM in its current
    form but available sooner?
        General Heckl. The LMBS is aimed at doing just that in the near-
    term, but none of those solutions meet the full requirement,
    necessitating a mix due to limitations in capacity and capability of
    each. As the AoA evaluated all of these solutions and more, the
    recommendation was that the purpose-built LSM is required.

        63. General Heckl, if the Landing Ship Medium program was
    unaffordable, could the marines operate by scaling up mature bridging
    solutions?
        General Heckl. The viable options of LMBS, and others currently
    being suggested, are stopgap measures with their own limitations that
    would neither be cost-effective nor viable in the long term due to
    service life. None have the capacity for expansion that could meet the
    embarked force berthing, cargo square footage, and fuel capacity
    requirements, while maintaining viable trim, stress, and stability of
    the vessels, regardless of cost. Furthermore, many of the vessels
    included in the LMBS are aging and past their intended service life.

        64. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts and General Heckl, what
    options is the Navy-Marine Corps team exploring to scale up bridging
    solutions for the LSM?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. Initial inventory requirement is planned for 18
    Medium Landing Ships (LSMs), with the understanding that through
    experimentation and operational maturation, the objective force is 35
    LSMs based on the concept of operations to provide littoral maneuver
    for three Marine Regiments. The Marine Corps supports President's
    Budget 2025 that initiates procurement of the first LSM in fiscal year
    2025 and eight total over the FYDP, maintaining a procurement schedule
    of 1/1/2/2/2. Maintaining the current procurement profile is critical
    for delivering the late to need platform necessary to fill the void in
    current littoral mobility. The USN and USMC support scaling up
    production to meet the need if budgets support, providing additional
    investment in the shipbuilding industrial base.
        Due to the urgency of this void, the Navy and Marine Corps have
    developed a Littoral Maneuver Bridging Solution (LMBS) as a phased
    approach to add operational mobility and tactical maneuver capacity for
    elements of the Stand-In Force (SIF) until LSM are available to support
    one Marine Littoral Regiment in the early 2030s. The purpose of LMBS is
    to provide forward capacity now in direct support to SIF task organized
    units of action with limited intra-theater mobility, tactical maneuver,
    and sustainment. This effort is not to negate the late-to-need of the
    LSM; this effort is to leverage what exists already, even if limited,
    and experiment with chartered vessels to develop procedures for SIF
    formations and future LSM employment as well as inform US Navy on
    lessons learned from experimentation.
        The approved LMBS is four expeditionary fast transports (T-EPF) and
    two landing craft utility (LCU) and experimentation craft such as the
    four Marine Corps-funded charters and the two planned Ancillary Surface
    Craft (ASC).

          T-EPF will be used in support of intra-theater
    operational mobility, and pier-to-pier support of units conducting
    Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO) in an archipelagic
    environment.

          LCU will be used in exercises for tactical maneuver of
    smaller units and sustainment.

          Experimental chartered vessels will be used to support
    21st century beaching operations in support of exercises and
    experimentation, adding needed littoral mobility capacity in the Indo-
    Pacific region. These chartered vessels will also assist in the
    refinement of tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) in support of
    EABO. The TTP development with these chartered vessels serving as
    surrogates for the Medium Landing Ship (LSM) is needed now as the LSM
    program continues along the procurement path and remains late-to-need.

          ASC will be used for experimentation to provide enhanced
    maneuver, littoral mobility, and sustainment to/from expeditionary
    advance bases (EABs) and potentially Advanced Naval Bases (ANBs) within
    the archipelagos.

        The capacity and capability of LMBS does not match or fulfill the
    requirements and capability of the LSM program once all vessels are
    delivered.
        General Heckl. Initial inventory requirement is planned for 18
    Medium Landing Ships (LSMs), with the understanding that through
    experimentation and operational maturation, the objective force is 35
    LSMs based on the concept of operations to provide littoral maneuver
    for three Marine Regiments. The Marine Corps supports President's
    Budget 2025 that initiates procurement of the first LSM in fiscal year
    2025 and eight total over the FYDP, maintaining a procurement schedule
    of 1/1/2/2/2. Maintaining the current procurement profile is critical
    for delivering the late to need platform necessary to fill the void in
    current littoral mobility. The USN and USMC support scaling up
    production to meet the need if budgets support, providing additional
    investment in the shipbuilding industrial base.
        Due to the urgency of this void, the Navy and Marine Corps have
    developed a Littoral Maneuver Bridging Solution (LMBS) as a phased
    approach to add operational mobility and tactical maneuver capacity for
    elements of the SIF until LSM are available to support one Marine
    Regiment in the early 2030s. The purpose of LMBS is to provide forward
    capacity now in direct support to Stand-in Force task organized units
    of action with limited intra-theater mobility, tactical maneuver, and
    sustainment. This effort is not to negate the late-to-need of the LSM;
    this effort is to leverage what exists already, even if limited, and
    experiment with chartered vessels to develop procedures for SIF
    formations and future LSM employment as well as inform US Navy on
    lessons learned from experimentation.
        The approved LMBS is four expeditionary fast transports (T-EPF) and
    two landing craft utility (LCU) and experimentation craft such as the
    four Marine Corps-funded charters and the two planned Ancillary Surface
    Craft (ASC).

          T-EPF will be used in support of intra-theater
    operational mobility, and pier-to-pier support of units conducting
    Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO) in an archipelagic
    environment.

          LCU will be used in exercises for tactical maneuver of
    smaller units and sustainment.

          Experimental chartered vessels will be used to support
    21st century beaching operations in support of exercises and
    experimentation, adding needed littoral mobility capacity in the Indo-
    Pacific region. These chartered vessels will also assist in the
    refinement of tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) in support of
    EABO. The TTP development with these chartered vessels serving as
    surrogates for the Medium Landing Ship (LSM) is needed now as the LSM
    program continues along the procurement path and remains late-to-need.

          ASC will be used for experimentation to provide enhanced
    maneuver, littoral mobility, and sustainment to/from expeditionary
    advance bases (EABs) and potentially Advanced Naval Bases (ANBs) within
    the archipelagos.

          In addition to the LMBS, six Army LCU-2000's were made
    available for purchase in March 2024 following Army divestment
    interest, priced at $2.5 million per vessel with an offer to hold them
    until the end of June. This opportunity aims to enhance littoral
    maneuver and sustainment for the SIF until the arrival of LSMs.
        The capacity and capability of LMBS does not match or fulfill the
    requirements and capability of the LSM program once all vessels are
    delivered.

          Although the LMBS addresses some current operational
    gaps, existing platforms such as T-EPFs require both port services and
    exceptional sea states.

          Current and future manpower shortfalls within Naval Beach
    Groups and Military Sealift Command, limit number of available LCUs and
    T-EPFs needed to support operational requirements.

          Along with the operational demand comes a training
    requirement to properly employ the LMBS in a real-world contingency.

        65. Senator Sullivan. Vice Admiral Pitts and General Heckl, will
    the Navy keep additional EPFs in the fleet to ensure MLR mobility?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The June 2023 Battle Force Ship Assessment and
    Requirement (BFSAR) report identified the Navy's requirement for EPF's
    as eight ships. The Navy is maintaining four additional ships for a
    total of 12 to support Marine Corps requirements as a Littoral Marine
    Bridging Solution in advance of delivery the LSM.
        General Heckl. Although multiple EFPs have been funded to provide
    direct support to the MLRs, manning challenges have delayed their
    ability to do so. The Service requires time-now solutions to support
    the Joint Force with new combat formations as part of our force design
    modernization efforts.

                               force design 2030

        66. Senator Sullivan. General Heckl, HMLA-269 was deactivated as
    part of the original Force Design plan and was reactivated as the
    Marine Corps recalibrated how it was implementing Force Design. What
    other refinement is happening as part of the ``Force Design Campaign of
    Learning''?
        General Heckl.
          HMH: east coast Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron numbers
    will increase from 1x 1.0 squadron to 2x 0.75 squadrons.

          HMLA: east coast Marine Light Attack Squadron numbers
    will increase from 1x 1.0 squadron to 2x 0.75 squadrons.

          Infantry Battalion: IBX30 iterative experimentation has
    resulted in an 811x Marine sized battalion force structure.

          Artillery: Initial actions had M777 battery reduction to
    7x batteries of 6x tubes; however, current initiatives are planned for
    10-12x batteries of 8x tubes.

          Further refinements will be published later this year at
    the completion of the Campaign of Learning Audit Group (COLAG).
    Currently, COLAG 2024 outputs are being assessed by the DOTMLPF-C
    Working Group to determine supportability and associated risk(s). The
    initiatives under assessment span across the total force and aim to
    balance readiness with modernization.
                                   __________

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Eric Schmitt
                            strike fighter inventory

        67. Senator Schmitt. Vice Admiral Pitts, can you discuss whether
    the naval strike fighter inventory and readiness is sufficient to meet
    operational needs?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. Based on the currently funded and budgeted
    production and technology refresh/advancement ramps for F-35C, new
    procurement F/A-18E/F aircraft delivering through fiscal year 2027, and
    Service Life Modification (SLM) funding for F/A-18E/F, the Navy has
    sufficient strike fighter capacity to meet operational deployments
    through the FYDP. However, the Navy's carrier air wing composition
    roadmap for fourth & fifth generation strike fighter integration is
    challenged by delays to F-35C Technological Refresh Three (TR3) and
    future F-35C Block IV capability deliveries. Perturbation in SLM
    quantities in combination with potential further F-35C TR3 delays poses
    additional risk to the Navy's carrier air wing composition roadmap.
    Currently, the Navy's strike fighter aircraft are meeting readiness
    metrics for operational squadrons as set forth by the Commander, Naval
    Air Forces (CNAF).

                                f/a-18 unit cost

        68. Senator Schmitt. Mr. Guertin, can you tell us what the unit
    price increase on F/A-18s will be compared to the original proposal
    back in 2022? How many fewer are we getting?
        Secretary Guertin. Boeing's December 12, 2022 original proposal was
    only for the fiscal year 2022 F/A-18F 12 (12) aircraft at $65.7M per
    unit cost and was conditioned upon the Navy awarding an Undefinitized
    Contract Action prior to December 31, 2022. Many of the proposal
    elements were incomplete and lacked supporting data. The proposed value
    represented a ?34 percent increase from the Lot 45 F/A-18F unit price
    of $49M and did not include the Technical Data Package (TDP). At that
    time, the proposed value was ?$115M more than what was appropriated by
    Congress and would have resulted in a potential shortage of two (2)
    aircraft.
        In order to achieve pricing efficiencies, the Navy issued a revised
    Request for Proposal (RFP) after Congress appropriated the fiscal year
    2023 eight (8) additional aircraft budget, requesting pricing for 20
    (20) aircraft on January 17, 2023.
        Boeing provided their repriced proposal on August 18, 2023 at an
    average unit price of $104.03M per aircraft, and the proposal still did
    not include the TDP. The TDP proposal was received on December 15,
    2023.
        The Navy was ultimately able to negotiate a unit price of $76.9M
    for 17 (17) aircraft resulting in three (3) fewer aircraft than
    authorized, and approximately five (5) greater than would have been
    affordable at Boeing's August 2023 proposed price of $104.03M. There
    are too many differences in the baselines of the 2022 proposal and
    final agreement to make a logical comparison of unit cost, most notably
    quantity and inclusion of the TDP.

                             f/a-18 technical data

        69. Senator Schmitt. Mr. Guertin, what is the lifecycle cost
    savings from your acquisition of technical data?
        Secretary Guertin. Having the technical data necessary offers the
    Navy numerous opportunities for significant cost reductions and
    strategic cost management. This data enables the Navy to optimize the
    following:
          Set up additional Intermediate Level

          Maintenance capabilities (contested logistics impact)

          Effectively develop and implement reliability solutions

          Effectively manage obsolescence

          Effectively develop depot solutions in accordance with
    title 10

          Maintain readiness and safety

          Inform additional organic support decisions

          Inform modification decisions

          Perform organic upgrades and technology insertion

          Inform engineering investigations/troubleshooting

          Perform limited organic manufacturing

          Provide potential cost savings (affordability
    initiatives) in obsolescence mitigation and redesign efforts

          Obtain the rights in data through data delivery

          Increase competition for configuration items without data
    rights restrictions

        Currently, it is not possible to precisely quantify lifecycle cost
    savings, but ownership and direct access to the platform's technical
    data supports better decisionmaking for future acquisitions, aircraft
    modifications and sustainment. By leveraging these advantages, the Navy
    anticipates being able to achieve substantial cost savings and
    increased operational readiness. As opportunities are identified, cost
    savings will be captured and documented.

        70. Senator Schmitt. Mr. Guertin, what proportion of the F/A-18
    technical data is held by suppliers rather than the prime?
        Secretary Guertin. The F/A-18E/F and EA-18G technical data being
    procured initially is Boeing structural and primary infrastructure data
    including Northrop Grumman model data, tooling, support equipment,
    special test equipment, special packaging instructions, and limited
    supplier data Boeing has authority to deliver. This technical data
    package from the prime provides critical and necessary data required
    for long term sustainment of the platform. The technical data held by
    sub-tier suppliers is largely the aircraft subsystems, i.e. avionics
    and mission systems boxes and assemblies. Boeing has not provided the
    Navy with the sub-tier supplier proposal as of yet.

        71. Senator Schmitt. Mr. Guertin, how will you procure that
    information?
        Secretary Guertin. The technical data for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G
    is being procured as part of the Lot 46/47 aircraft procurement on the
    Multi-Year IV production contract, N00019-18-C-1046. The Navy is also
    pursuing options to acquire the sub-tier supplier data. Boeing has not
    provided the Navy with the Supplier proposal as of yet.

        72. Senator Schmitt. Mr. Guertin, what other programs are you
    taking this approach of withholding contract awards to obtain technical
    data?
        Secretary Guertin. For all Navy and Marine Corps investment
    programs, we recognize the significant value in obtaining technical
    data from our industry partners in order to sustain programs throughout
    their lifecycle and support reprocurement where appropriate. We
    therefore carefully develop our contract award strategies to obtain
    this data to the greatest extent possible.

                                 mq-25 stingray

        73. Senator Schmitt. Vice Admiral Pitts, can you talk a little
    about the importance of the MQ-25 Stingray to the US Military's future
    force projection efforts?
        Vice Admiral Pitts. The MQ-25 significantly improves the US
    Military's future force projection effort by increasing the strike
    range, operational capability, and lethality of the Carrier Air Wing.
    MQ-25 will provide organic mission, and recovery aerial refueling, to
    Air Wing assets while also providing an Intelligence, Surveillance, and
    Reconnaissance (ISR) capability to the Carrier Strike Group. Most
    importantly, fielding MQ-25 will relieve F/A-18E/Fs from recovery
    tanking duties, expanding strike fighter capacity/capability by
    enabling increased fifth & sixth generation CVW aircraft ratios.
        The MQ-25 and MD-5 ground control station in the CVN Unmanned
    Aviation Warfare Center (UAWC) are the ``pathfinders'' to the Air Wing
    of the Future to establish the foundation for carrier strike group
    integrated unmanned autonomous operations.

                 next-generation nickel zinc submarine battery

        74. Senator Schmitt. Mr. Guertin, the Committee included a
    provision in the Fiscal Year 2024 NDAA requiring the Navy to provide a
    report on the industrialization efforts and investments it is making
    into the Navy's next generation Nickel Zinc submarine battery. The
    recent supplemental appropriations request that was approved asked for
    approximately $3 billion dollars for investments in the submarine
    industrial base. Out of the recently approved AUKUS SIB funds and in
    the fiscal year 2025 Navy budget request, can you please tell me what
    the investments are specifically planned for Nickel Zinc submarine
    battery manufacturability to ensure the Virginia-class submarines are
    delivered on time?
        Secretary Guertin. The Navy is committed to investment in Nickel
    Zinc battery technology. There is funding allocated in the fiscal year
    2024 supplemental appropriations and in the fiscal year 2025 budget
    request associated with scaling up of the Nickel Zinc battery
    manufacturing infrastructure. These investments will secure domestic
    sources, provide a viable alternative to current power sources and
    offer an environmentally friendly and safer energy storage solution.

                                     [all]