[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]