[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
REVIEW OF THE COAST GUARD'S FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET REQUEST
=======================================================================
(119-42)
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 28, 2026
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
transportation
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
64-287 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington, Ranking Member
Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, Arkansas, Eleanor Holmes Norton,
Vice Chairman District of Columbia
Daniel Webster, Florida Jerrold Nadler, New York
Thomas Massie, Kentucky John Garamendi, California
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.,
Brian Babin, Texas Georgia
David Rouzer, North Carolina Andre Carson, Indiana
Mike Bost, Illinois Dina Titus, Nevada
Bruce Westerman, Arkansas Jared Huffman, California
Brian J. Mast, Florida Julia Brownley, California
Pete Stauber, Minnesota Frederica S. Wilson, Florida
Tim Burchett, Tennessee Mark DeSaulnier, California
Dusty Johnson, South Dakota Salud O. Carbajal, California
Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey Greg Stanton, Arizona
Troy E. Nehls, Texas Sharice Davids, Kansas
Tracey Mann, Kansas Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois
Burgess Owens, Utah Chris Pappas, New Hampshire
Eric Burlison, Missouri Seth Moulton, Massachusetts
Mike Collins, Georgia Marilyn Strickland, Washington
Mike Ezell, Mississippi Patrick Ryan, New York
Kevin Kiley, California Val T. Hoyle, Oregon
Vince Fong, California Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio,
Tony Wied, Wisconsin Vice Ranking Member
Tom Barrett, Michigan Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan
Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina
Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr., Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Robert Garcia, California
Jeff Hurd, Colorado Kristen McDonald Rivet, Michigan
Jefferson Shreve, Indiana Laura Friedman, California
Addison P. McDowell, North Carolina Laura Gillen, New York
David J. Taylor, Ohio Shomari Figures, Alabama
Brad Knott, North Carolina Maxwell Frost, Florida
Kimberlyn King-Hinds,
Northern Mariana Islands
Mike Kennedy, Utah
Robert F. Onder, Jr., Missouri
Jimmy Patronis, Florida
Clay Fuller, Georgia
------
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Mike Ezell, Mississippi, Chairman
Salud O. Carbajal, California, Ranking Member
Daniel Webster, Florida Chris Pappas, New Hampshire
Brian J. Mast, Florida Marilyn Strickland, Washington
Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan
Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska John Garamendi, California
Addison P. McDowell, North Carolina, Laura Gillen, New York,
Vice Chairman Vice Ranking Member
Jimmy Patronis, Florida Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio)
Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ v
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Hon. Mike Ezell, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Mississippi, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation, opening statement..................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 4
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 7
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Hon. Salud O. Carbajal, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Coast
Guard and Maritime Transportation, opening statement........... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 9
WITNESSES
Admiral Kevin E. Lunday, Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, oral
statement...................................................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Master Chief Phillip N. Waldron, Master Chief Petty Officer of
the Coast Guard, U.S. Coast Guard, oral statement \\... 14
APPENDIX
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to U.S. Coast Guard from
Hon. Marilyn Strickland........................................ 31
----------
\\ Master Chief Phillip N. Waldron did not submit a prepared
statement for the record.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
April 24, 2026
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER
TO: LMembers, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation
FROM: LStaff, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation
RE: LCoast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Subcommittee Hearing on ``Review of the Coast Guard's Fiscal
Year 2027 Budget Request''
_______________________________________________________________________
I. PURPOSE
The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will meet
on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. ET in 2167 Rayburn
House Office Building to receive testimony on the President's
Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 Budget Request for the United States
Coast Guard (Coast Guard). The Subcommittee will hear testimony
from the Commandant and Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast
Guard.
II. BACKGROUND
HISTORY OF THE COAST GUARD
The United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard or Service)
traces its roots to August 4, 1790, with the creation of the
Revenue Cutter Service.\1\ On January 28, 1915, Revenue Cutter
Service consolidated with the Lifesaving Service (established
in 1848) and formally became the Coast Guard.\2\ The Coast
Guard later assumed the duties of three other agencies: the
Lighthouse Service (established in 1789), the Steamboat
Inspection Service (established in 1838), and the Bureau of
Navigation (established in 1884).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Coast Guard, History Timeline, available at https://
www.history.uscg.mil/home/history-program/.
\2\ Id.
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Section 102 of title 14, United States Code, the
Coast Guard has primary responsibility to enforce or assist in
the enforcement of all applicable Federal laws on, under, and
over the high seas and waters subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States; to ensure the safety of life and property at
sea; to carry out domestic and international icebreaking
activities; and, as one of the six armed forces of the United
States, to maintain defense readiness to operate as a
specialized service in the Navy upon the declaration of war or
when the President directs.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 14 U.S.C. Sec. 102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard is directed by a Commandant appointed by
the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to a
four-year term.\5\ Admiral Kevin E. Lunday was sworn in as the
28th Commandant of the Coast Guard on January 15, 2026.\6\ The
Commandant selects a Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast
Guard, who is the principal advisor on enlisted personnel
matters. Master Chief Petty Officer Phillip N. Waldron assumed
the duties of the 15th Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast
Guard on July 25, 2025.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 14 U.S.C. Sec. 302.
\6\ Press Release, U.S. Coast Guard, Kevin E. Lunday is sworn in as
the 28th Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, (Jan. 15, 2026), available
at https://www.news.uscg.mil/Press-Releases/Article/4380094/kevin-e-
lunday-is-sworn-in-as-the-28th-commandant-of-the-us-coast-guard/.
\7\ U.S. Coast Guard, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast
Guard, available at https://www.uscg.mil/Leadership/Senior-Leadership/
MCPOCG/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPACTS OF COAST GUARD UNDERCAPITALIZATION
The Coast Guard has endured chronic undercapitalization for
decades--jeopardizing the Service's ability to carry out its
missions. Recognizing that many of its assets were nearing the
end of their service lives or were technologically
insufficient, in 2007, the Coast Guard approved a program of
record to modernize its surface, air, information technology
(IT), and shoreside infrastructure, which has subsequently been
updated.\8\ Unfortunately, many of these assets were then
operated well beyond their planned service life because funds
to carry out the recapitalization were neither requested by
successive Administrations or provided by successive
Congresses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-17-654T, Coast Guard
Recapitalization: Matching Needs and Continued Resources To Strain
Acquisition Efforts (2017), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/
690/685201.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Coast Guard has successfully undertaken some of
the steps outlined in its original recapitalization vision,
such as the procurement and deployment of the Fast Response
Cutter (FRC), programs such as the Offshore Patrol Cutters
(OPC), Polar Security Cutters (PSC), rotary wing aircraft and
shoreside infrastructure remain dangerously behind schedule due
to inadequate funding requests, and equally inadequate
appropriations. In the ensuing 19 years since 2007, additional
capital needs have arisen. These shortcomings have created
serious capability gaps in the ability of the Service to field
the assets needed to fulfill its mission demands.\9\ Most
alarmingly, as the Coast Guard has been forced to temporarily
place assets out of service as a consequence of underfunding,
lack of manpower, and deferred maintenance, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) found that Coast Guard operational
hours have fallen across all missions while costs have
increased.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id.
\10\ E-mail from GAO to H. Comm. on Trans. and Infrastructure Staff
(May 15, 2025) (on file with Comm.).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
LFigure 1: GAO Chart.\11\
\\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORCE DESIGN 2028
On April 3, 2025, then-Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem announced Force Design 2028 (FD
2028), the Trump Administration's vision for the future of the
Coast Guard.\12\ On May 21, 2025, the former Secretary provided
an Executive Report on Force Design 2028, which outlined the
goals of the initiative as: \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ U.S. Coast Guard, Coast Guard Force Design 2028, available at
https://www.mycg.uscg.mil/News/Article/4145599/coast-guard-force-
design-2028/.
\13\ U.S. Coast Guard, Force Design 2028 Executive Report (2025),
available at https://www.uscg.mil/leadership/Commandants-Initiatives/
ForceDesign2028/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) LEstablishing a Coast Guard Service Secretary that will
have authorities similar to those of the civilian leadership of
other military services. The position would report to the
Departmental Secretary and establish the strategic direction
for the Coast Guard.
2) LAgency reorganization that serves to streamline
processes, integrate capabilities and eliminate redundancies.
3) LInvesting in people, including modernizing the
workforce, building up the Coast Guard reserve and investing in
the Officer Corps.
4) LInvesting in technology to improve maritime
surveillance, replacing antiquated technology merchant mariners
rely on, and improving the Service's logistics and human
resources.
5) LImproving and streamlining acquisition processes to
improve efficiency and accountability.
In January 2026, the Secretary issued the Initial Update
for Force Design 2028. This report focused on the Coast Guard's
return on investment, immediate operational impact, the
remaking of the service, new capabilities and higher readiness
and the delivery of maritime power. The Coast Guard promulgated
that for the $12.1 billion it received for FY 2025, it offers
over $74 billion in value, or a return on investment of six
times the cost. Exercising its operational prowess, in FY 2025,
the Coast Guard seized 554,000 pounds of illegal narcotics,
interdicted or deterred 11,173 illegal aliens, saved 4,946
lives, and enabled the safe and secure movement of over 1.8
billion tons of cargo.
Force Design also brought the Robotics and Autonomous
Systems Program Executive Office online and created an Office
of Rapid Response and Prototyping (RAPTOR) to deliver rapid
technology solutions. It sought to enhance interoperability
with the Department of War by establishing a Deployable
Specialized Forces Command, with the goals of expanding
training, and enhancing maritime domain awareness.
III. FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET FOR THE COAST GUARD
On April 3, 2026, President Trump released a budget request
for Fiscal Year 2027 which proposed a total of $15.6 billion
for the United States Coast Guard, building on the $24.6
billion investment in the service provided through the One Big
Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (OBBBA). According to the Coast
Guard's FY 2027 Budget Congressional Justification, it would
fund the ``initial workforce transformation by putting the
service on a path to grow by 15,000 active duty members, invest
in new technology for maritime dominance, and overhaul support
systems'' to enable to Coast Guard to execute its statutory
missions.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Off. of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Off. of the President, Budget of
the United States Coast Guard, Fiscal Year 2027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT
The budget request includes $12.5 billion for operations
and support funding, a $2.1 billion increase from continuing
resolution funding in FY 2025 and FY 2026, for the operations,
pay, and benefits of both the Coast Guard and the Coast Guard
Reserve.\15\ $181 million dollars is provided for personnel,
operations, and maintenance funding for new aircraft, vessels,
and shoreside infrastructure, including four Arctic Security
Cutters (ASC), three Fast Response Cutters (FRC), four
Waterways Commerce Cutters (WCC), one HC-130J, and two C-39A
Long-Range Command and Control Aircraft (LRCCA). Shoreside
infrastructure projects include both newly acquired and
recapitalized facilities in Alaska, California, Florida,
Hawaii, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, South
Carolina, and Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROCUREMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND IMPROVEMENTS (PC&I)
The budget includes $1.2 billion to procure vessels,
aircraft, and shore infrastructure necessary for the Coast
Guard to conduct its missions. $578 million is allocated for
surface acquisitions, which will continue the Coast Guard's
largest fleet recapitalization since World War II.\16\ This
investment will include Stage 3 of the Offshore Patrol Cutter
(OPC) acquisition program, missionization of the USCGC Storis
icebreaker, and the construction of three Waterways Commerce
Cutters. A small investment is provided for the Service's
aviation capabilities, including one long-range unmanned aerial
system (UAS) and service life extension (SLEP) activities for
the MH-60T and HC-144 fleets. $356 million for shore
infrastructure is provided, which will help accelerate long
overdue infrastructure improvements as well as construction
projects necessary to begin homeporting the Coast Guard's
planned fleet of Arctic Security Cutters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Off. of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Off. of the President, Budget of
the United States Coast Guard, Fiscal Year 2027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the &I budget encompasses many necessary and
backlogged projects, the PC&I funding for FY 2027 was reduced
by $212 million, or 15 percent. This double-digit reduction
creates a challenge for the Service's ability to address the $7
billion-dollar backlog, as estimated by the Government
Accountability Office (GAO).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-25-108064, Coast Guard
Shore Infrastructure: Project Backlogs Reportedly Exceed $7 Billion
(2025), available at https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-108064
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
$6.7 million is provided for the continued evaluation of
mission capabilities, including unmanned systems, polar
operations, waterways management, environmental response,
operational performance improvements, data analytics, and
space-based operations.
IV. RECONCILIATION INVESTMENTS
To reverse the trend of underinvestment and position the
Coast Guard for success in the future, the One Big Beautiful
Bill Act provided the Coast Guard with $24.59 billion to
recapitalize its surface, air and shoreside assets,
representing nearly 15 years' worth of annual procurement
funding--the largest investment in the Service's history.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025, Pub. L. No. 119-21, 129
Stat. 72.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of the $25 billion, $14.078 billion was provided to
recapitalize the Coast Guard cutter fleet. This includes $4.3
billion for Offshore Patrol Cutters (OPCs) and $1 billion for
Fast Response Cutters (FRCs). To support the Service's national
security measures to project sovereignty in the Arctic, the
measure provides another $4.3 billion for the Polar Security
Cutter and $3.5 billion for Arctic Security Cutters.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reconciliation measure also makes significant
investments in the Service's air assets. The measure provides
$1.142 billion for fixed wing assets, $2.283 billion for rotary
wing assets, and $266 million for long-range unmanned aircraft
systems.\20\ The fixed wing funding supported the acquisition
of new HC-130J aircraft. Funding for rotary wing assets is
intended to support fleet growth of the MH-60T program.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Id.
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Coast Guard requires substantial enhancements to its
shoreside infrastructure to facilitate new assets and more
complex mission sets. Currently, limitations in existing
physical infrastructure have hindered newer platforms from
utilizing the full scope of Coast Guard capabilities. Moreover,
due to years of underinvestment, the Coast Guard's shoreside
infrastructure is in a state of disrepair. As the GAO
estimated, it will cost at least $7 billion to address the
Service's backlog of shoreside projects, with half of the
Services' facilities beyond their intended service life.\22\
The number is likely higher, as the GAO's estimate does not
include 234 projects for which the Coast Guard has not
developed estimates. The Coast Guard notes that based on the
Service's $24 billion property portfolio, and accounting for
the poor conditions of current property, the Service requires
between $500 million to $1 billion annually to meet its
shoreside investment needs.\23\ This estimate is likely too
low, as the GAO also noted that cost estimates were not
adjusted for inflation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ GAO, GAO-25-107581, Coast Guard Shore Infrastructure: More
Than $7 Billion Reportedly Needed To Address Deteriorating Assets (Feb.
25, 2025).
\23\ Questions for the Record from Subcomm. Chairman Daniel Webster
to Vice Admiral Paul Thomas, Deputy Commandant for Mission Support,
United States Coast Guard (June 12, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address these capability gaps, the reconciliation
measure appropriates $4.379 billion for the design and
construction of necessary shoreside facilities, including
hangers and home ports to support air and surface assets for
which appropriations are provided in this bill.\24\ This
includes $2.729 billion for homeports for cutters and aircraft,
and $425 million for the recapitalization of barracks and a
multi-use training center at the Coast Guard's enlisted
bootcamp.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Committee Print 119-3, supra note 19.
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reconciliation measure also includes $2.2 billion to
improve the Coast Guard's aviation, cutter and shore facility
depot maintenance and cyber and command and control facilities,
and another $500 million acquisition of a floating drydock and
necessary dredging at the Coast Guard Yard in Baltimore,
Maryland. This will equip the yard with the capability to
handle the Service's Offshore Patrol Cutters and National
Security Cutters.
V. WITNESSES
LAdmiral Kevin E. Lunday, Commandant, United
States Coast Guard
LMaster Chief Petty Officer Phillip N. Waldron,
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard, United States
Coast Guard
Appendix I: Coast Guard FY 2024 Enacted to FY 2025 President's Budget
Request Comparison
(Dollars in Thousands)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's
FY 2024 FY 2025 Enacted FY 2027 FY 2027
Program Enacted \26\ \27\ Authorized Budget
Request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and Support (O&S)....................... $ 10,054,771 $ 10,415,271 $ $ 12,523,317
Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (MERHCF) $ 277,000 $ 290,093 $ $ 409,581
Procurement, Construction, and Improvements (PC&I). $ 1,413,950 $ 1,413,950 $ $ 1,201,670
Research and Development (R&D)..................... $ 7,476 $ 7,476 $ $ 6,763
Housing Fund....................................... $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ $ 4,000
------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Discretionary.......................... $ 11,753,197 $ 12,130,790 $ $ 14,145,331
------------------------------------------------------------
Retired Pay........................................ $ 1,147,244 $ 1,147,244 $ $ 1,213,135
State Boating Safety Grants........................ $ 144,340 $ 140,059 $ $ 149,913
Maritime Oil Spill Program......................... $ 101,000 $ 101,000 $ $ 101,000
General Gift Funds................................. $ 2,864 $ 2,864 $ $ 2,864
------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Mandatory.............................. $ 1,395,448 $ 1,395,167 $ $ 1,466,912
------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......................................... $ 13,148,645 $ 13,525,957 $ $ 15,614,243
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\\ \\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-42.
\27\ Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025,
Pub. L. No. 119-4.
REVIEW OF THE COAST GUARD'S FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET REQUEST
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2026
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m. in Room
2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Ezell (Chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Ezell. The Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
today's hearing and ask questions.
Without objection, so ordered.
As a reminder, if Members insert a document into the
record, please also email it to [email protected].
I now recognize myself for the purpose of an opening
statement for 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE EZELL OF MISSISSIPPI, CHAIRMAN,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Ezell. I would like to welcome our witnesses to this
morning's hearing on the fiscal year 2027 Coast Guard budget
general request.
Admiral Lunday, Commandant of the Coast Guard, and Master
Chief Phillip Waldron, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast
Guard, we are glad to have both of you here today. Thank you
very much, and all the other members that are here with us.
This budget request arrives at a momentous inflection point
for the Coast Guard. The Service has never been better
positioned to grow, and it has rarely been busier, more
effective, or more in demand. Even amid uncertainty regarding
pay, Coast Guard capabilities, commitment, and professionalism
have never been more evident.
The President's request of nearly $16 billion for the Coast
Guard in fiscal year 2027 reflects strong support for the
Service. The $2 billion increase in operations funding would
help deliver meaningful results in protecting our maritime
domain, enforcing U.S. laws, and safeguarding our resources.
However, it still falls short of what is needed to fully
operate and sustain the assets which will be acquired through
the historic $25 billion investment the Congress provided in
the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The reconciliation investment
was intended to reverse decades of underinvestment. At the
requested levels, the Coast Guard risks acquiring assets
without home ports, infrastructure, and support systems
required to operate them effectively.
The Coast Guard enjoys strong bipartisan goodwill in
Congress. Compliance with mandated oversight, however, is not
among them. Congress has a responsibility to ensure the
appropriated funds are used properly and effectively. When the
Coast Guard fails to meet statutory oversight requirements, it
undermines its credibility with those most committed to
supporting it.
Congress has mandated basic acquisition planning tools,
including regular quarterly briefings and 5-year capital
investment plans, to ensure visibility into long-term needs.
Yet the Coast Guard has consistently failed to meet these
statutory requirements.
This raises a fundamental concern: if the Coast Guard
cannot meet its oversight obligations, can it effectively
manage multiple large, complex, and costly acquisition
programs?
The Service now stands at a very decisive moment that is,
in many respects, an either/or proposition. Either the Coast
Guard successfully manages the acquisition and integration of
the new assets while growing the organization, or the historic
investment provided by Congress will fail to produce the
modern, capable Service the investment envisioned.
The central question is whether the Coast Guard can
successfully manage the acquisition, integration, and expansion
of these assets along with the infrastructure and personnel
required to sustain them. Growth is not simply a matter of
adding ships, aircraft, facilities, and personnel. It requires
a clear and disciplined understanding of how to sustain a
larger and more complex organization. Elements of this budget
request raise concerns about whether that balance has been
achieved. The addition of assets and personnel must occur in
tandem with the planning and funding of the foundational
support they require.
Admiral, you hold one of the most consequential roles in
Government today. On the one hand, you have the opportunity to
be the Commandant who leads the Coast Guard through a historic
transformation. With the right vision, planning, and
transparency, you can help shape a Service that is modern,
strategically aligned, and properly resourced for the missions
ahead. That would be a lasting legacy.
On the other hand, you risk being held accountable if the
Service fails to capitalize on this moment and continues to
struggle with execution and credibility. This is a defining
institutional crossroads.
I am confident that you have the leadership qualities
necessary to succeed, but success will require partnership with
Congress. Every member of this subcommittee stands ready to
support the Coast Guard's evolution. That support, however,
depends on the Service meeting its legal obligation to provide
timely, complete, and transparent information.
Goodwill and patience are not unlimited. I urge you to
accept the partnership this committee offers and to commit to
providing the information necessary to ensure that the Coast
Guard becomes the Service it can be and should be.
[Mr. Ezell's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Ezell of Mississippi, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
This budget request arrives at a momentous inflection point for the
Coast Guard. The Service has never been better positioned to grow, and
it has rarely been busier, more effective, or more in demand. Even amid
uncertainty regarding pay, Coast Guard capabilities, commitment, and
professionalism have never been more evident.
The President's request of nearly $16 billion for the Coast Guard
in fiscal year 2027 reflects strong support for the Service. The $2
billion increase in operations funding would help deliver meaningful
results in protecting our maritime domain, enforcing U.S. laws, and
safeguarding our resources.
However, it still falls short of what is needed to fully operate
and sustain the assets which will be acquired through the historic $25
billion investment the Congress provided in the One Big Beautiful Bill.
The reconciliation investment was intended to reverse decades of
underinvestment. At the requested levels, the Coast Guard risks
acquiring assets without homeports, infrastructure, and support systems
required to operate them effectively.
The Coast Guard enjoys strong bipartisan goodwill in Congress.
Compliance with mandated oversight, however, is not among them.
Congress has a responsibility to ensure that appropriated funds are
used properly and effectively. When the Coast Guard fails to meet
statutory oversight requirements, it undermines its credibility with
those most committed to supporting it.
Congress has mandated basic acquisition planning tools, including
regular quarterly briefings and Five-Year Capital Investment Plans, to
ensure visibility into long-term needs. Yet the Coast Guard has
consistently failed to meet these statutory requirements.
This raises a fundamental concern: if the Coast Guard cannot meet
its oversight obligations, can it effectively manage multiple large,
complex, and costly acquisition programs?
The Service now stands at a decisive moment. This is, in many
respects, an either-or proposition. Either the Coast Guard successfully
manages the acquisition and integration of new assets while growing the
organization, or the historic investment provided by Congress will fail
to produce the modern, capable Service the investment envisioned.
The central question is whether the Coast Guard can successfully
manage the acquisition, integration, and expansion of these assets,
along with the infrastructure and personnel required to sustain them.
Growth is not simply a matter of adding ships, aircraft, facilities,
and personnel. It requires a clear and disciplined understanding of how
to sustain a larger and more complex organization. Elements of this
budget request raise concerns about whether that balance has been
achieved.
The addition of assets and personnel must occur in tandem with the
planning and funding of the foundational support they require.
Admiral, you hold one of the most consequential roles in government
today. On the one hand, you have the opportunity to be the Commandant
who leads the Coast Guard through a historic transformation. With the
right vision, planning, and transparency, you can help shape a Service
that is modern, strategically aligned, and properly resourced for the
missions ahead. That would be a lasting legacy.
On the other hand, you risk being held accountable if the Service
fails to capitalize on this moment and continues to struggle with
execution and credibility. This is a defining institutional crossroads.
I am confident that you have the leadership qualities necessary to
succeed. But success will require partnership with Congress. Every
Member of this subcommittee stands ready to support the Coast Guard's
evolution. That support, however, depends on the Service meeting its
legal obligation to provide timely, complete, and transparent
information.
Goodwill and patience are not unlimited. I urge you to accept the
partnership this committee offers and commit to providing the
information necessary to ensure that the Coast Guard becomes the
Service it can and should be.
Mr. Ezell. Admiral Lunday and Master Chief Waldron, thank
you for being here today, and I look forward to this
discussion.
I now recognize Ranking Member Carbajal for an opening
statement of 5 minutes.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Chairman Ezell. I will yield to
Ranking Member Larsen.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman is recognized.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING
MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair Ezell and
Ranking Member Carbajal. Thanks for calling this hearing today
and giving us a chance to review the Coast Guard's fiscal year
2027 budget request.
I want to welcome and thank Admiral Lunday and Master Chief
Waldron, as well, for being here today and for the meeting
yesterday.
Unfortunately, we are meeting today amid yet another lapse
of appropriations affecting the Coast Guard. We could pay
Coasties and provide immediate certainty and stability if we
were allowed to vote on the funding bill that already passed
the Senate unanimously.
Most importantly, though, I want the women and men in the
Coast Guard to know they deserve better from their Government.
For many years, the Coast Guard and senior leaders of the
Service have called for increased funding so the Coast Guard
can perform as the $20 billion agency that it should be.
Congress and the administration cannot keep asking more from
this Service without making these investments. Every day, the
women and men of the Coast Guard go out on their missions to
save lives, protect our maritime borders, and to keep commerce
flowing.
The administration's fiscal year 2027 budget request offers
significant promise in some areas, particularly in the
operations and support, or O&S, budget, which increases by 20
percent. Funding in this range will continue efforts to better
prepare the Coast Guard for its core missions and increase the
number of servicemembers. This will be necessary as the Coast
Guard reconstitutes the stations it downsized during COVID-era
recruitment gaps.
More funding for the Coast Guard means more lives saved,
safer maritime commerce, and more interdicted drugs. Despite
the misguided lethal actions taken by the Department of
Defense, this Coast Guard yet remains the most effective tool
to combat illicit maritime activity.
That said, the administration's procurements,
constructions, and investments, or PC&I, budget request fails
to meet the needs of the current Coast Guard, let alone one
with a growth goal of 15,000 personnel. So I am eager to
discuss the discrepancy between the two major funding pillars
and how Congress can fill the gap.
The Coast Guard received historic funding last year from
the reconciliation bill, and much of that funding was needed to
recapitalize assets well past their service life and push the
Service into the future with the acquisition of state-of-the-
art systems. However, this funding and the increases to O&S
will be meaningless if we are unable to support the new
personnel and assets with adequate homeporting piers,
workstations, housing, childcare, and healthcare facilities.
Supporting the Coast Guard must start with supporting the women
and men who serve.
This is one of my primary issues with the administration's
request. A 15-percent decrease in the PC&I funding simply does
not do the job. For example, $306 million of the $346 million
dedicated to shoreside infrastructure is slated to be spent in
Alaska for Arctic Security Cutter homeporting. That leaves $40
million left to attempt to address an over $7 billion backlog.
So I wholeheartedly support the funding and forward
thinking of the Service to tackle these projects, because they
are needed. However, existing sites like Base Seattle, Training
Center Cape May, and the Academy have infrastructure demands
that we should address now, and prioritize funding there. So I
look forward to hearing from both of you today on how the Coast
Guard views the prioritization of these projects.
Furthermore, as the Coast Guard begins to acquire and
reinvest in new or previously downgraded and shuttered
shoreside facilities, it must prioritize sites that enable it
to broaden the coverage of its search and rescue functions.
Reconstituting these stations will be a vital benefit as the
Coast Guard grows its personnel.
Finally, I want to draw attention to the recent changes to
the planned homeporting of assets at Coast Guard Base Seattle
raised in a news article in an April 11 story and recently
confirmed by Coast Guard documents. Initial project plans
included upgrades to the Seattle waterfront to homeport four
Offshore Patrol Cutters, but have now been scaled back to
accommodating ``up to four major cutters'' instead. So I do
want to hear more details from the Coast Guard about this
change and how the Coast Guard plans to prioritize the planning
and funding associated with Base Seattle homeporting.
And I would be remiss if I didn't mention the Coast Guard's
ongoing effort to address sexual assault and sexual harassment
in the Service. The Accountability and Transparency Review
initiated by the former Commandant steered the Coast Guard in
the right direction, and I am pleased that you are building on
that momentum. The committee will continue to conduct vigorous
oversight of the Service's actions to implement the ATR, and we
stand ready to help.
And with that, I yield back.
[Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen of Washington, Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chairman Ezell, for calling this hearing and for giving
us a chance to review how the Coast Guard's FY2027 budget request will
prepare the force for the future.
Welcome, and thank you, Admiral Lunday and Master Chief Waldron,
for being here today.
Unfortunately, we're meeting today amid yet another lapse of
appropriations affecting the Coast Guard. We could pay Coasties and
provide immediate certainty and stability if we were allowed to vote on
the funding bill that already passed the Senate unanimously.
For many years, Congress and the senior leaders of the Service have
called for increased funding so that the Coast Guard can perform as the
$20 billion dollar agency that it should be.
Congress and the administration cannot keep asking more from the
Service without making these investments.
Every day, the women and men of the Coast Guard go out on their
missions to save lives, protect our maritime borders and keep commerce
flowing.
The administration's FY2027 budget request offers significant
promise in some areas, particularly the Operations and Support (O&S)
budget, which is increased by 20 percent.
Funding in this range will continue efforts to better prepare the
Coast Guard for its core missions and increase the number of
servicemembers. This will be necessary as the Coast Guard reconstitutes
the stations it downsized during COVID-era recruitment gaps.
More funding for the Coast Guard means more lives saved, safer
maritime commerce and more interdicted drugs. Despite the misguided
lethal actions taken by the Department of Defense, the Coast Guard
remains the most effective tool to combat illicit maritime activity.
That said, the administration's Procurements, Construction, and
Investments (PC&I) budget request fails to meet the needs of the
current Coast Guard, let alone one with a growth goal of 15,000
personnel. I am eager to discuss this discrepancy between the two major
funding pillars and how Congress can fill the gap.
The Coast Guard received historic funding last year from the
reconciliation bill.
Much of that funding was needed to recapitalize assets well past
their service life and push the Service into the future with the
acquisition of state-of-the-art systems.
However, this funding, and the increases to O&S, will be
meaningless if we're unable to support the new personnel and assets
with adequate homeporting piers, workstations, housing, childcare and
healthcare facilities. Supporting the Coast Guard must start with
supporting the women and men who serve.
This is one of my primary issues with the administration's request.
A 15-percent decrease in funding simply won't do the job.
For example, $306 million of the $346 million dedicated to
shoreside infrastructure is slated to be spent in Alaska for Arctic
Security Cutter homeporting. That leaves only $40 million left to
attempt to address the over $7 billion backlog.
I wholeheartedly support the funding and forward thinking of the
Service to tackle these projects because they are needed. However,
existing sites like Base Seattle, Training Center Cape May and the
Coast Guard Academy have infrastructure demands that we should address
now--and prioritize funding there.
I look forward to hearing from you both today about how the Coast
Guard views the prioritization of these projects.
Furthermore, as the Coast Guard begins to acquire and reinvest in
new or previously downgraded and shuttered shoreside facilities, it
must prioritize sites that enable it to broaden the coverage of its
search and rescue functions. Reconstituting these stations will be a
vital benefit as the Coast Guard grows its personnel.
Finally, I want to draw attention to recent changes to the planned
homeporting of assets at Coast Guard Base Seattle raised in the Seattle
Times in an April 11th story and recently confirmed by Coast Guard
documents.
Initial project plans included upgrades to the Seattle waterfront
to homeport four Offshore Patrol Cutters but have now been scaled back
to accommodating ``up to four major cutters'' instead.
I want to hear more details from the Coast Guard about this change
and how the Coast Guard plans to prioritize the planning and funding
associated with Base Seattle homeporting.
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the Coast Guard's ongoing effort
to address sexual assault and sexual harassment in the Service.
The Accountability and Transparency Review initiated by the former
Commandant steered the Coast Guard in the right direction, and I'm glad
that you are building on that momentum. The committee will continue to
conduct vigorous oversight of the Service's actions on the ATR, and we
stand ready to help.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes
the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Sam Graves, for 5
minutes for an opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SAM GRAVES OF MISSOURI, CHAIRMAN,
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Chairman Ezell, and I also want to
thank our witnesses for being here today, and congratulate
Admiral Lunday on your confirmation to the Coast Guard as
Commandant. So, that's fantastic.
The committee stands ready to partner with you to ensure
that the Service has the resources needed to carry out your
mission and protect our Nation. I look forward to hearing what
the witnesses have to say today about the administration's
fiscal year 2027 budget request for the Coast Guard.
Admiral Lunday, before turning to the topic of the hearing,
I do want to take a moment to acknowledge the 50,000 men and
women serving in both military and civilian roles who are
continuing to carry out the critical Coast Guard mission,
despite the uncertainty over their next paycheck. We owe it to
our Coasties who continue to stand watch, and we owe it to them
to secure a deal to fund DHS, which the T&I Committee is
committed to doing.
Over the last year, I have been extremely proud of the
historic investment that this committee has made to rebuild our
Nation's Coast Guard. After years of inadequate funding, the
$25 billion provided in the reconciliation funding package is
going to enable the Service to build its fleet of surface, air,
and shoreside assets. Case in point: your new C-130s that will
be operating at Barbers Point, Hawaii, require larger hangars
to ensure that those assets are adequately maintained. I have
seen firsthand the inadequate storage space for these planes,
and I appreciate your continued effort to upgrade the
facilities for all of these assets.
And I want to emphasize that with the historic investments
this committee has provided comes a responsibility to ensure
that the money is spent wisely. And I would ask that the Coast
Guard remain committed to the production of acquisition
briefings and long-term planning documents that the committee
requires in order to conduct oversight.
Admiral Lunday, Master Chief Waldron, thank you again for
being here, and I look forward to your testimony, and I really
appreciate what you all are doing in some very, very trying
times. So thank you for your work, and thanks for being here.
With that, I yield back.
[Mr. Graves' prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sam Graves of Missouri, Chairman, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
I'd like to welcome our witnesses to the committee today and
congratulate you, Admiral Lunday, on your confirmation as Commandant.
The committee stands ready to partner with you to ensure the Service
has the resources needed to carry out your missions and protect our
nation. I look forward to hearing more about the administration's
fiscal year 2027 budget request for the Coast Guard from you both.
Admiral Lunday, before turning to the topic of this hearing, I want
to take a moment to acknowledge the 50,000 men and women serving in
both military and civilian roles who are continuing to carry out their
critical Coast Guard missions today, despite uncertainty over their
next paycheck. We owe it to our Coasties, who continue to stand watch,
to secure a deal to fund DHS, which the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee is committed to doing.
Over the last year, I have been extremely proud of the historic
investment this committee has made to rebuild our nation's Coast Guard.
After years of inadequate funding, the $25 billion provided in the
reconciliation funding package will enable the Service to rebuild its
fleet of surface, air, and shoreside assets. Case in point, your new C-
130s that will be operating at Barbers Point, Hawaii, require larger
hangars to ensure those assets can be maintained. I've seen firsthand
the inadequate storage space for these planes, and I appreciate your
continued efforts to upgrade the facilities for these assets.
I want to emphasize that with the historic investments this
committee has provided comes a responsibility to ensure the money is
spent wisely. I would ask that the Coast Guard remain committed to the
production of acquisition briefings and long-term planning documents
that this committee requires in order to conduct oversight.
Admiral Lunday and Master Chief Waldron, thank you again for being
here.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes
Mr. Carbajal for his 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SALUD O. CARBAJAL OF CALIFORNIA,
RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME
TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Chairman Ezell, and thank you to
the witnesses for being here today.
Welcome, Admiral Lunday and Master Chief Waldron.
Unfortunately, we are holding today's hearing while the men
and women serving in the Coast Guard are facing financial
uncertainty. While I know that my Republican colleagues and I
disagree about the direction of ICE and CBP, I hope we agree
about the value of the Coast Guard. I urge my colleagues to
support the bipartisan funding bill passed unanimously by the
Senate that would provide financial certainty to the Coast
Guard servicemembers.
Last year, when we held this hearing, the Coast Guard was
in the middle of great change across the board. The Service was
about to receive historic funding in reconciliation, and Coast
Guard leaders were championing Servicewide changes that were
included in Force Design 28, even though that plan was, and
still is, a relative mystery.
I may not have agreed with the former Secretary much, but
she was right when she said that the Coast Guard has been
neglected and underresourced for far too long. Unfortunately,
here we are, a year later, and when I look at the budget, I
remain just as concerned.
Overall, Coast Guard funding in the budget request
increased by 15 percent, which is great news. With the
increasing demands being placed on the Coast Guard, it is
appropriate that the budget allows for significant growth among
servicemembers. This funding increase is truly overdue, and
more than deserved. More Coast Guard is something everyone on
this committee supports.
Unfortunately, the budget takes a big step backward on
recapitalizing the Coast Guard's shoreside infrastructure,
reducing the PC&I funding by 15 percent. Reconciliation funding
becomes meaningless if it is not met with strong regular
appropriations.
The Government Accountability Office issued a report last
year that found the Coast Guard's $7 billion estimate for the
shoreside infrastructure backlog is actually much higher, due
to over 200 projects lacking cost estimates.
A reduction at this stage is completely irresponsible and
unacceptable.
Budgets show priorities. This President's budget is a
reflection of his values.
At some point, we must get past the awe of reconciliation
and recognize that, just like a ship takes years to build and
requires regular maintenance, so do buildings, so do piers, so
do homes, so do childcare facilities.
This is a people issue. I met a lot of servicemembers and
can say without hesitation, they deserve better. I am hopeful
that with some of the recent programmatic and procurement
changes, we will be able to see effective management and better
contracting decisions. I look forward to hearing about these
changes and improvements in today's hearing.
If the Coast Guard expects to grow the Service by 15,000
members, it must continue to advocate for consistency in
funding and must focus on managing this recapitalization effort
judiciously. Congress has the opportunity to right this ship,
and I look forward to talking to our witnesses about the needs
of our future Coast Guard.
With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
[Mr. Carbajal's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Salud O. Carbajal of California, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Good morning, and thank you, Chairman Ezell, for calling today's
hearing.
Welcome, Admiral Lunday and Master Chief Waldron, it is great to
have you both here today.
Unfortunately, we're holding today's hearing while the men and
women serving in the Coast Guard are facing financial uncertainty.
While I knew that my Republican colleagues and I disagreed about
the direction of ICE and CBP, I hope we agree about the value of the
Coast Guard. I urge my colleagues to support the funding bill passed
unanimously by the Senate that would provide financial certainty to
Coast Guard servicemembers.
Last year, when we held this hearing, the Coast Guard was in the
middle of great change across the board.
The Service was about to receive historic funding in
reconciliation, and Coast Guard leaders were championing Servicewide
changes that were included in Force Design 28, even though that plan
was, and still is, a relative mystery.
I may not have agreed with the former Secretary much, but she was
right when she said that the Coast Guard has been neglected and
underresourced for far too long. Unfortunately, here we are a year
later, and when I look at the budget, I remain just as concerned.
Overall, Coast Guard funding in the budget request increased by 15
percent, which is great news. With the increasing demands being placed
on the Coast Guard, it is appropriate that the budget allows for
significant growth among servicemembers. This funding increase truly is
long overdue and more than deserved. More Coast Guard is something
everyone on this committee supports.
Unfortunately, the budget takes a big step backward on
recapitalizing the Coast Guard's shoreside infrastructure by reducing
the PC&I funding by 15 percent. Reconciliation funding becomes
meaningless if it's not met with strong regular appropriations.
The Government Accountability Office issued a report last year that
found the Coast Guard's $7 billion estimate for the shoreside
infrastructure backlog is actually much higher, due to over 200
projects lacking cost estimates.
A reduction at this stage is completely irresponsible and
unacceptable.
Budgets show priorities. This President's budget is a reflection of
his values.
At some point, we must get past the awe of reconciliation and
recognize that, just like a ship takes years to build and requires
regular maintenance, so do buildings. So do piers. So do homes. So do
childcare facilities.
This is a people issue. I've met a lot of servicemembers and can
say, without hesitation, they deserve better.
I am hopeful that with some of the recent programmatic and
procurement changes, we will begin to see effective project management
and better contracting decisions. I look forward to hearing about these
changes and improvements in today's hearing.
If the Coast Guard expects to grow the Service by 15,000 members,
it must continue to advocate for consistency in funding and must focus
on managing this recapitalization effort judiciously.
Congress has the opportunity to right the ship, and I look forward
to talking to our witnesses about the needs of our future Coast Guard.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Admiral
Lunday for his 5-minute opening statement.
TESTIMONY OF ADMIRAL KEVIN E. LUNDAY, COMMANDANT, U.S. COAST
GUARD; AND MASTER CHIEF PHILLIP N. WALDRON, MASTER CHIEF PETTY
OFFICER OF THE COAST GUARD, U.S. COAST GUARD
TESTIMONY OF ADMIRAL KEVIN E. LUNDAY, COMMANDANT, U.S. COAST
GUARD
Admiral Lunday. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Graves,
Chairman Ezell, Ranking Member Larsen, Ranking Member Carbajal,
and distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the
opportunity for both of us to testify today on behalf of the
dedicated men and women of the United States Coast Guard.
Mr. Chairman, I ask that my written testimony be entered
into the record.
Mr. Ezell. Without objection.
Admiral Lunday. The Coast Guard is a vital instrument of
national power that provides unprecedented value to the
American people. We save lives. We control, secure, and defend
the U.S. border and maritime approaches. We facilitate commerce
that is vital to U.S. economic prosperity. And we respond to
crises or contingencies that come without warning. The American
people depend on us, and we provide them a remarkable return on
that investment, and we need that investment right now.
Now, this hearing is about the fiscal year 2027 budget, but
as you have already discussed in your opening statements, the
reality today is the Coast Guard is operating in a crisis: day
74 of a DHS lapse in appropriations. This is needlessly harming
our people and hollowing out our readiness. Over 6,000 Coast
Guard units and homes are at risk of shutoff of electricity,
water, and other utilities, and we have already suffered some
shutoffs in the last week. Each day, we are begging frustrated
service providers to keep that power and water going, and we
are destroying the trust of the local businesses, many of them
small businesses, that are providing those critical services.
We have a massive growing backlog, over 18,000 U.S.
merchant mariner credentials, that are slowing progress at a
time where the Nation is trying to rebuild our maritime might.
And it has also paralyzed our process to suspend or revoke the
mariner credentials of U.S. mariners who engage in sexual
assault.
My greatest concern is the toll this is taking on our
people and their families, the severe hardship and uncertainty,
not knowing whether they will be paid after this week. Because
of this lapse, thousands of military personnel are starting
their summer transfers, but they can't get their advanced
allowances, meaning they have to put significant debt on credit
cards, deplete personal savings, or take out loans they can't
afford. They are delaying major family expenses because of the
uncertainty about pay, some even deferring on medical
treatments, not sure whether they can manage the co-pay for
insurance. For our civilians, the financial hardship of their
going without 2 months of pay has left them feeling betrayed.
We thank the President for his bold, decisive action
several weeks ago to ensure all of our people were paid despite
the lapse, and the Secretary's leadership and tenacity to fight
for DHS funding.
This committee knows us, knows the Coast Guard. You have
always supported the Coast Guard and our people, and we ask for
your continued strongest advocacy across Capitol Hill now for
Congress to fund DHS and the Coast Guard and this lapse, and
pay our people and to never let this happen again.
Now on to 2027. With strong support from this Congress and
a $25 billion capital investment last year on new cutters,
aircraft, shore facilities, and technology, the Coast Guard is
undergoing a historic modernization. But buying new assets to
recapitalize the fleet is only a downpayment. As I have
testified before, we are a $20 billion Coast Guard that is not
funded at that level. We need higher, top-line growth and
annual appropriations to conduct missions that meet the needs
of the American people.
The President's fiscal year 2027 budget request
significantly advances the Service in that direction, focused
on three priorities.
First, rebuilding readiness to our people. Our Service
readiness starts with the readiness of every Coast Guard man
and woman and their families. They are our greatest treasure,
and we must provide them with quality housing, childcare, and
support systems they need. The 2027 budget prioritizes them by
funding a military pay raise, with a targeted increase for
junior personnel, providing them childcare subsidies on par
with the other military services, and expanding Coast Guard
medical and training support to give them what they need.
Second, growing the workforce. To meet escalating global
demands, the Coast Guard needs to grow by 15,000. In 2025, we
achieved record recruiting results, the greatest since 1991.
This budget request builds on that success, requesting 5,768
new positions to expand recruiting capacity, stand up new
operating forces, and crew our new assets.
And finally, expanding our capabilities and infrastructure.
This budget initiates the third stage of the Offshore Patrol
Cutter acquisition, the backbone of our fleet. It also funds
required shore infrastructure for new assets, including the
first two Arctic Security Cutters which will be homeported in
the State of Alaska.
By ending the current lapse in appropriations and
supporting the President's fiscal year 2027 budget request, you
will secure Coast Guard mission success well into the future.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[Admiral Lunday's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Admiral Kevin E. Lunday, Commandant,
U.S. Coast Guard
Chairman Ezell, Ranking Member Carbajal, and distinguished Members
of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the
President's Fiscal Year 2027 Budget and the historic results the Coast
Guard is delivering for the American people.
The Coast Guard is a vital instrument of national power. We save
lives. We control, secure, and defend the U.S. border and maritime
approaches; facilitate the safe and secure flow of maritime commerce
that is vital to our economic prosperity and strategic mobility; and
respond to crises and contingencies. As a key member of both the
Department of Homeland Security and the Joint Force, every mission we
execute delivers proven value to our Nation. The American people depend
on the Coast Guard, and we provide a remarkable return on their
investment.
The Coast Guard is in greater demand now more than ever before. We
are at the forefront of advancing U.S. national strategies in an era of
persistent Great Power competition. To win, we must modernize and
innovate. The President's National Security Strategy calls for a more
robust Coast Guard presence to control vital sea lanes, combat illegal
migration, and disrupt drug trafficking. The Coast Guard also directly
advances the National Defense Strategy by defending the Homeland and
deterring threats in the Indo-Pacific. Furthermore, we have a central
role in restoring America's maritime dominance by increasing our
presence in the Arctic, expanding our icebreaking capabilities, and
rebuilding our maritime industrial base.
Under the leadership of President Trump, the Department of Homeland
Security, and with the support of Congress, the Coast Guard is emerging
from a decades-long readiness crisis. A landmark $24.6 billion capital
investment from the Working Families Tax Cut Act is fueling the most
significant modernization in a century, transforming our Service into a
more agile, capable, and responsive force equipped to confront the
challenges and risks in this era of competition. However, this historic
investment is only a start. To complete this transformation, we require
consistent, predictable annual top-line growth. The Fiscal Year 2027
Budget is the next critical step to support our people, grow our
workforce, and expand our capabilities.
A Clear Return on Investment
In 2025, the Coast Guard demonstrated its extraordinary value as we
fought to protect our Nation. We seized a record-breaking 511,000
pounds of cocaine, preventing over 193 million lethal doses from
reaching our communities and averting an estimated $2.3 billion in
related healthcare costs. Our search and rescue operations saved 5,220
lives and assisted over 19,000 people.
We launched three major operations to secure our borders:
Operation Border Trident: Achieved operational control of
the California coastal region, increasing interdictions by 44% over
2024.
Operation Pacific Viper: Seized over 200,000 pounds of
narcotics in the Eastern Pacific.
Operation River Wall: Secured 260 miles of the Rio Grande
River.
Last summer, we commissioned the Cutter Storis, our first new
icebreaker in over 25 years. In a clear demonstration of our resolve,
Cutters Storis, Healy, and Waesche intercepted and chased away five
Chinese research vessels operating over the U.S. extended continental
shelf in the Arctic. Simultaneously, we facilitated a 13 percent
increase in maritime commerce, ensuring the safe movement of 1.8
billion tons of cargo. From conducting high-profile boardings of
illicit oil tankers to ensuring the security of our ports, the men and
women of the Coast Guard execute our missions with unmatched
excellence. In these dangerous and unforgiving environments, we lead
our crews to conduct disciplined operations to get the mission done and
safely return.
These successes were achieved by a force that in recent years has
been stretched to its breaking point. To sustain this performance--and
to meet the growing threats to our Nation--we must increase the
investment in our readiness, workforce, and capabilities now.
Rebuilding the Readiness of the Service
Service readiness starts with the readiness of every Coast Guard
man and woman, and their families. Upon that cornerstone we build the
readiness of our crews and the entire force. Our people are our
greatest treasure, and we must provide them with quality housing,
childcare, medical services, and support systems they deserve.
The Fiscal Year 2027 Budget prioritizes these investments. It funds
a pay raise for military Service members, with a targeted increase for
our most junior members. It expands childcare services, funding a $35
million increase in subsidies to finally provide our members parity
with their Department of War counterparts, and staffs two new Child
Development Centers. Furthermore, we will strategically expand medical
and logistics support at 35 Sectors, 24 Air Stations, and 22 Bases to
ensure our people and assets are always ready. To enhance mission
readiness, the budget allocates $124 million to address maintenance
backlogs and provides critical parts to sustain current operations.
Growing our Workforce
To restore readiness and outpace our adversaries, the Coast Guard
must grow by at least 15,000 military members. In 2025, we achieved our
best recruiting gains since 1991, and our successes continue. The
Fiscal Year 2027 budget builds on this momentum, requesting an increase
of 5,768 positions, including $136 million and over 700 positions
dedicated to expanding recruiting and training capacity.
To support national strategies, the budget adds 2,676 positions to
bolster our frontline operators. We will establish two new Cyber
Protection Teams to safeguard our Nation's critical maritime
infrastructure and expand our new Robotics Mission Specialist rating by
284 positions. Additionally, we will begin to crew the assets funded by
the Working Families Tax Cut Act, allocating 864 positions for new
assets, including Arctic Security Cutters arriving in 2028.
Expanding our Capabilities
To navigate the Service into the future, we must equip our people
with modern, capable assets. The Fiscal Year 2027 budget continues and
expands on recent capital investments, including $204 million to
initiate the third stage of the Offshore Patrol Cutter acquisition--the
future backbone of our surface fleet.
However, acquiring assets is only the beginning. The nearly 100 new
assets funded by reconciliation require homeports, hangars, and
infrastructure. This budget funds the necessary planning and design of
these facilities and provides $306 million to begin constructing the
infrastructure for the first two Arctic Security Cutter homeports.
To enhance maritime dominance, we are embracing innovation. The
budget invests $221 million in unmanned systems and counter-unmanned
systems to provide persistent airborne and surface surveillance and
reconnaissance. Additionally, it funds $50 million to deploy Coastal
Sentinel--a suite of advanced sensors, networked communications, and
analytic tools to defend the U.S. border and maritime approaches.
Pairing our recapitalized fleet with these advanced capabilities will
maximize our operational effectiveness.
The Way Forward: Securing America's Future
Looking to the horizon, we are filled with certain hope. If our
distinguished history proves one thing, it is this: with a ready Coast
Guard crew and the strong support of the American people, there is
nothing we cannot accomplish. With your continued support, and with the
funding requested in the Fiscal Year 2027 Budget, we will ensure
enduring Coast Guard mission success for decades to come.
Semper Paratus.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Admiral.
Master Chief, would you like to make an opening statement?
TESTIMONY OF MASTER CHIEF PHILLIP N. WALDRON, MASTER CHIEF
PETTY OFFICER OF THE COAST GUARD, U.S. COAST GUARD
Master Chief Waldron. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good
morning, Chairman Graves, Chairman Ezell, Ranking Member
Larsen, Ranking Member Carbajal, and distinguished members of
the subcommittee. Thank you all for the opportunity to testify
today on behalf of the dedicated men of the United States Coast
Guard. My name is Phil Waldron. I am a second-generation
coastguardsman and, to me, the Coast Guard is a family
business. This is the only job that I ever wanted to do, and I
am proud to serve not only as the 15th Master Chief Petty
Officer of the Coast Guard, but I am humbled every day to get
to put on the same uniform as the men and women who I
personally consider heroes.
Today's hearing is focused on the fiscal year 2027 budget
request, but my most sacred duty is to our workforce, and I owe
it to them to speak plainly about their reality from the deck
plates.
Our total workforce has spent a majority of this fiscal
year operating under uncertainty, fear, and anger caused by a
lapse in appropriations. The dangerous missions that our folks
conduct every day, from hoisting survivors from freezing water
to stopping smuggling vessels at night, requires their complete
and total focus. That focus is dangerously fractured when they
are worried about paying their rent or supporting their
families.
You are this Service's greatest advocates, and I cannot
stress enough the urgency for Congress to end this lapse and
fully fund the U.S. Coast Guard.
Every day, the Coast Guard men and women put their lives on
the line to protect, defend, and save. That work is performed
by our total workforce: our Active Duty and Reserve members,
our dedicated civilian employees, our auxiliary, and our
families who provide the vital support that our people rely on.
Looking to the future, the Coast Guard is underway with our
most substantial transformation since World War II. We are
acquiring new assets and expanding our missions. But we are not
forgetting our roots, and we know that new steel means nothing
without supported, highly trained crews. The fiscal year 2027
budget request is fundamentally an investment in those crews.
It targets three critical areas for our workforce.
First, individual and family readiness. Our servicemembers
and their families are integral parts of the communities where
they serve. This budget requests $53 million to expand medical
care and personnel support at our bases and air stations.
Crucially, it also requests $39 million to staff two new child
development centers and finally bring our workforce closer to
the childcare parity they deserve alongside their Department of
War counterparts.
Second, sustaining our recruiting momentum. In 2025, we saw
our greatest recruiting successes in decades. To keep that
momentum and grow our force, this budget invests $63 million to
add more than 300 positions to our talent acquisition workforce
and open new recruiting offices across the country.
Third, modernizing our training pipeline. When we bring in
thousands of new recruits, we must get them trained and out to
the fleet efficiently. This budget requests $73 million to
increase capacity across our training system. This will
alleviate the immense strain on our training centers which are
currently operating above maximum capacity, and get our most
junior members into their technical schools at a much faster
pace.
To keep pace with the growing demands placed on the Coast
Guard, we need your support for timely, stable, consistent
annual top-line growth. Funding the Coast Guard below this
request jeopardizes the long-term readiness of the Service,
putting American lives, national security, and economic
prosperity at risk.
I am humbled to have the privilege to serve with and
represent our total workforce. And by enacting an appropriation
for fiscal year 2026 and supporting the fiscal year 2027
budget, now is the time to move the U.S. Coast Guard forward.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[Master Chief Waldron did not submit a prepared statement.]
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields.
Briefly, I will take a moment to explain the lighting
system to our witnesses. There are three lights in front of
you. Green means go, yellow means you are running out of time,
and red means put on the brakes.
I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements
be included in the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided
answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in
writing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open
for 15 additional days for additional comments and information
submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in the record
of today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
As your written testimony has been made part of the record,
the committee asks that you limit your oral remarks to 5
minutes.
[Pause.]
Mr. Ezell. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Admiral Lunday, thank you again for being here today. Last
year's reconciliation package provided the Coast Guard with a
historic investment of nearly $25 billion to procure an
estimated 17 new icebreakers, 21 new cutters, over 40
helicopters, and six C-130J aircraft while modernizing shore
infrastructure and maritime surveillance systems. For these
assets to serve our vital national security missions and ensure
safe commerce, the Coast Guard will need more infrastructure,
housing, training, and people. Can you explain how your fiscal
2027 budget supports these goals?
Admiral Lunday. I thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
One of the things that I am most proud about the
President's strong support is it continues his focus as being
an advocate for renewal of our Coast Guard, and along with the
strong support of OMB and the Department of Homeland Security.
This is reflected in, clearly, the historic investment that
Congress also supported, but also now and will be supported
with the President's budget request for 2027. It reflects a
significant increase in our operating funds to grow the
workforce we will need to crew and support all of the assets
that the renewal in the Working Families Tax Cut Act is going
to bring us.
And so the budget request will bring 5,768 new people. So,
for example, Mr. Chairman, of the 11 icebreakers, which are our
top priority, the Arctic Security Cutters for the Nation, that
requires 1,300 Coast Guard men and women just to crew, operate,
and maintain those 11 Arctic Security Cutters. And then we have
additional people we need to recruit that workforce, and then
also to support them and take care of them. And so the budget
request has a significant increase, almost $2 billion in O&S
increase over the $25 billion CR amount, is necessary for us to
grow the workforce at the pace we need.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you. Going forward, what is your plan to
request the resources that the Service requires in order to
sustain its operations over the long term and fulfill the
President's vision of a recapitalized Coast Guard?
Admiral Lunday. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The strength of the President's budget request in 2027
reflects our most immediate needs. But beyond the top line, we
look forward to providing the committee and Congress with the
unfunded priority list that reflects additional needs the
Service has as we grow toward that $20 billion Coast Guard that
the Nation and the American people demand we provide the
services at.
Mr. Ezell. Air and surface autonomous assets have the
ability to serve as a multiforce multiplier to support the
Service's ability to execute search and rescue missions and
confront drug and human traffickers. The reconciliation
legislation provided significant support for such systems. Can
you speak a little bit of how the President's budget continues
to support that?
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir. So the President's budget request
includes $69 million for additional long-range unmanned aerial
systems. This is on top of the significant investment in the
Working Families Tax Cut Act for UAS.
The UAS that we operate--and it spans a range from short-
range, medium-range and long-range, and the 2027 budget request
is for additional long-range UAS--that is proving to be game-
changing technology that is enabling our crewed cutters and
aircraft to be much more effective, from search and rescue to
countering cartels by stopping the flow of illegal and
dangerous drugs toward the United States and our communities.
What we have proven with our mission success over the last
15-plus months is that, when it matters, the Coast Guard
delivers. And so the investments in uncrewed systems are vital
to our ability to continue to deliver those mission results.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, and just tell me a little bit how
important these systems are for your capability and your
growth.
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir. And so those systems are vital
because they enable us, as a force multiplier.
So one example, Mr. Chairman, the Coast Guard cutter Stone,
one of our National Security Cutters, in the fall was in the
Eastern Pacific under Operation Pacific Viper, countering
cartels that are moving cocaine at bulk, and we are operating
under maritime law enforcement authority. Using onboard UAS,
they were able to prosecute and take down, seize, and detain
the individuals aboard four separate go-fast vessels loaded
with cocaine. Record breaking. We have never done four at once,
until about 3 weeks later when another National Security
Cutter, the James, did exactly the same thing.
And so we are breaking our own records with this new,
unmatched technology that we are bringing to bear.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, and I yield back my time, and I now
recognize Mr. Carbajal.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Chairman Ezell. I will yield to
committee Ranking Member Larsen.
Mr. Ezell. Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair, and thank you,
Ranking Member.
Master Chief Waldron, thanks for being here today. We talk
about recruitment and we have talked about recruitment numbers
today, as well, and we had a chance to talk about that and how
the Coast Guard is exceeding last year's recruiting goals, but
we haven't talked about retention, both from the enlisted as
well as the officer corps. And while each segment has its
differences, there are things that are consistent: healthcare,
housing, medical, childcare.
So there has been a recent spike in officer retirements.
What are you seeing on the enlisted side?
Master Chief Waldron. Thank you, sir.
On the enlisted side, we are not seeing the spikes that we
have seen on the officer corps. In fact, our retention has
remained relatively stable as of late.
I would be remiss to not point out that, as we continue in
a lapse, there is a lot of conversation amongst the crew that
they wonder, is this the job that I want to continue doing
whenever I am not certain that I am going to continue getting
paid? But as it stands right now, sir, our retention is
relatively stable across the enlisted side.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. So that aside, even though it is
a reality, set that aside for a moment. What do we need to
ensure is happening so you can maintain that consistent
retention?
Master Chief Waldron. Sir, as the Commandant stated a few
minutes ago whenever he said that the readiness of the Service
begins with the individual, readiness of our members and their
families, that is the side that I remain squarely focused on
there.
And so when we talk about the medical side of the house
there, quite frankly, we have struggled with medical care for
our folks and their families over time. A lot of that is just
simply due to the size of our medical force. For comparison, in
the U.S. Navy, the hospital corpsman rating is the largest
rating in the Navy, whereas in the Coast Guard, we have right
now 732 health services technicians. In this budget is the
provisions to increase our medical force by 400 personnel so
that we can more adequately care for our own people.
When you speak to the childcare side of the things there,
our larger bases, it is a little bit easier than some of our
more disparate areas there, but that is why we built in the
inclusion of two new childcare facilities, child development
centers in Mobile, Alabama, and Elizabeth City, North Carolina.
For our folks that are located in the more remote areas
there, we lean heavily upon the local community there and so
there is provisions in there for making sure that we can
adequately subsidize their childcare.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Okay. Admiral, can you talk a
little bit about this relationship between the Service
surpassing its recruiting goals, the timeline to reconstitute
stations that were closed or downgraded, and the PC&I budget
for shoreside infrastructure for buildings? Because we need to
be sure that all those match, as you are bringing people back
and recruiting, you have places to put them and the places they
are going are actually ready to receive them.
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir.
So as you mentioned, in 2023, we began to change the force
posture, reduce the force posture at many of our small-boat
stations throughout the United States, particularly in the
Great Lakes, New England, and mid-Atlantic because we were 10
percent short in our enlisted workforce. With significant
investments in recruiting and strong support from Congress, we
have made significant progress. We are now at 97 percent of our
strength, and now are poised to build on that momentum and grow
the additional over 5,700 people supported by the President's
budget.
These small-boat stations and other stations that you
described, we never intended to close them, and we are not
going to close them. In fact, I have directed both of our
senior operational commanders in the two areas to come back and
provide me directions on how to begin to restore those force
posture at those stations.
I know we have heard from our members and members of this
committee, certainly, that they have the strongest support for
the Coast Guard crews that work and live in their local
communities. We could not ask for greater support from the
American people, and so we have begun a process to restore that
force posture. And this request in the President's budget
includes that of the over 5,700, 3,500 of those personnel will
be spread out, distributed to stations, bases, air stations to
be able to restore a workforce that has been stretched thin
over the past several decades from underinvestment.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. All right. Well, we will get some
more followup on that. I appreciate it.
And I yield back. I yield back to the chair.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes
Mr. Webster for his 5 minutes of questions.
Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate it.
And Admiral Lunday, Master Chief Waldron, I appreciate your
testimonies: heartfelt and to the point, not pressed, just
there and stating the facts. The fact is you are not getting
paid. And after this week, the money that was sort of added in
on the side is going away. So anyway, I thought about how just
the things you have said state the point, and I appreciate it.
Thank you for what you have done, thank you for what you are
doing, thank you for your members of your team and for all the
Coast Guard members. Thank you for everything you have done.
So it is my understanding from the White House that the
redirected funds for DHS will run out some time this week, and
the salaries will run out also. So, Admiral Lunday, can you
share with the committee the impact of not having the current
funding would be on Coast Guard men and women?
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir. So there is an immediate impact
that I described in the opening about not being certain about
their pay, but I think the greatest feeling is that--and the
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard spoke to this
very powerfully--they have stepped forward to serve their
country. Our Coast Guard men and women serve in a dangerous and
unforgiving maritime environment, often against those who would
do them harm. They are frequently cold, wet, and tired, those
out at the tactical edge, but they have given of themselves to
step forward and do this, taking an oath. And they simply
expect that, in response, they are going to be supported for
the sacrifice that they are giving because--and again, we are
the only armed service, the only military service that is not
within the Department of War, and so the only military service
that is not being funded.
My concern, sir, is that they will begin to lose heart, and
they have not yet. They are still getting the mission done, but
they expect that they will be supported, rightfully so, that
they are doing their part and that we will do our part as
leaders to give them the support that they need, including pay
so they can take care of their families.
Mr. Webster of Florida. Master Chief, do you have anything
to add to that?
Master Chief Waldron. Thank you, sir. If I may, I would
like to take a moment and also focus on our civilian workforce.
The week before last, I spent the week in southeast Alaska.
And while I was traveling around, I met with our civilians at
Base Ketchikan. One of the gentleman that was in the room there
that I spoke with was telling me about how about a week before
the Executive order came out to pay all of them, he had to sell
his own vehicle just to make his rent payment. And this is a
man that is still showing up to work every day and working at
the base that is kind of our functional equivalent to a west
coast shipyard. Without that staff of folks there, we wouldn't
be repairing our ships on the west coast right now. And he just
sold his own vehicle just so that he could pay his rent and
continue coming to work. Sir, that is the impact that it is
having on our civilian side.
On our Active Duty and Reserve side, I am just as
concerned. With our civilians, though, they are the backbone
that often gets--their value gets understated, and I would not
feel right walking out of here without pointing out the impact
that it is having to them, as well, sir.
Mr. Webster of Florida. Yes, so Commandant, can you explain
or speak to the purpose of increased growth?
Admiral Lunday. I am sorry, the purpose of increased----
Mr. Webster of Florida. Growth.
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir, and so we have seen this historic
investment, the $25 billion last year. It buys new cutters,
aircrafts, shore infrastructure, and technology. Now we need
the people to be able to crew these assets. I mean, these
assets are amazing and the Arctic Security Cutters that the
President announced last October that we are building and will
be the first assets we deliver in 2028 to meet the President's
requirement, they don't become Coast Guard cutters because we
paint them with a stripe and put ``Coast Guard'' on the side.
They only become cutters when we breathe life into them with
the amazing Coast Guard men and women that are the best from
across our Nation that we train and develop into professionals,
starting at Cape May and then at future training centers,
places like the new training center at Birmingham-Southern.
That is what makes it special.
So this personnel growth is significant because it enables
us to crew the assets and give our people the support and
services they need to be successful.
Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you very much.
I yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes
Mr. Carbajal.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Master Chief Waldron, servicemembers continue to be my top
priority. When I talk to Coasties, I usually ask what concerns
they have. A majority of the responses are somehow related to
housing, and the other issue is healthcare access. How
important is safe and affordable housing to servicemembers?
Master Chief Waldron. Thank you, sir.
As we were saying a little bit ago, how the Service
readiness begins with the individual readiness of the
crewmembers and their families, I think that we can't overstate
how important it is that we focus on the little things that
don't relate directly to the job, because as we can remove
those from their list of concerns, they can focus more squarely
on doing their jobs.
Housing is always at the top of that list there, sir. And
depending on where in the Nation our folks are serving at, that
may be a combination of Coast Guard-owned housing, Coast Guard-
leased housing, or out on the economy. When we focus on Coast
Guard-owned housing, we are growing that, and we need to
continue growing that, sir. The predictability and the
stability that comes with owning our own inventory of housing,
it is absolutely paramount.
Beyond that, whenever we look at Coast Guard-leased
housing, that also alleviates the concerns from those folks and
allows them to more efficiently do their jobs.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. In that same vein, we know the
Coast Guard has conducted housing studies in concert with the
Department of Defense. However, sometimes the outcomes have had
the opposite effect of lowering housing subsidies, rather than
raising them. How is the Coast Guard advocating for
commensurate housing subsidies to guarantee that Coasties can
afford to live in some of the highest cost living areas in the
country?
Master Chief Waldron. Sir, when it comes to the housing
allowance, that is one that we are tied to the Department of
War on, and so I very frequently interact with the other
services' senior enlisted advisors, and that is a topic that we
need to take a joint effort into, making sure that we can
address it with parity.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I will be visiting Coasties
housing in Santa Barbara in the next week or so. If you don't
know, you might want to connect with your people, because I am
going to be going and visiting the areas that were greatly
dilapidated over the years, and that you have been doing some
work on as a result of my office's inquiries.
Admiral Lunday, while I am glad that the Coast Guard is
investing in housing in Santa Barbara, I am concerned that the
shoreside infrastructure account in the President's budget is
wholly inadequate. Given that the shoreside infrastructure
backlog is over $7 billion and growing daily, what is your plan
to ensure safe, affordable housing for servicemembers?
Admiral Lunday. Sir, thank you for the question and the
stressed importance on housing. We have been making investments
in housing, and we have been providing, in terms of Coast
Guard-owned housing, providing the highest quality housing that
our members deserve, and a great example of that is in places
like Kodiak, Alaska, where last August, the Master Chief Petty
Officer of the Coast Guard and I, along with the Deputy
Secretary of Homeland Security, opened that new section of
housing.
We need to continue to build housing in the areas where our
Coast Guard people need it, especially where housing is not
available on the economy. And so we look forward to continued
investment both within the President's budget request, but
then, in addition to that, as will be reflected on continued
unfunded priorities not only for fiscal year 2026, but we look
forward to delivering the unfunded priority list for fiscal
year 2027.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Admiral Lunday, for the Coast
Guard, readiness often depends on regular dredging. In Santa
Barbara and Morro Bay, we are at risk of a serious impact on
Coast Guard missions if the channel is not dredged. How is the
Coast Guard working with the Army Corps of Engineers to ensure
mission readiness in Santa Barbara and elsewhere across the
country like the Coast Guard Yard?
Admiral Lunday. Ranking Member, thank you for your advocacy
and the support of this committee for the $6 million for the
necessary dredging in Santa Barbara, which I understand was
recently completed under the direction of the Corps of
Engineers. We work closely with the Corps to address those
needs. But in Santa Barbara specifically, we really needed the
support there, because the 87-foot patrol boat was having
difficulty before the dredging getting underway. So thank you
for the support to be able to get that done.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I also wanted to draw that to your
attention, because as was the case in fiscal year 2026, for
fiscal year 2027, the President did not include funding for the
Santa Barbara Harbor again. So we are going to have to continue
to work together as we did in 2026 to make sure that the
funding is there for the dredging so that the Coast Guard could
continue performing its missions there.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes
Mr. McDowell for 5 minutes for questions.
Mr. McDowell. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Admiral
and Master Chief, for being with us today.
And as I sit here, I have become incredibly angry, because
we have a job to do, and part of that job is to give you all
the funding that you need. And every time that that has come up
for me to vote for it, I have done that, because I think it is
important, the job that you are doing, that we fund you.
So I am not going to spend my entire time debating why or
why not that my colleagues and the Senate have not passed this
appropriations bill, but I do have one question: Who in this
room, just by raise of hands, who is Active Duty in the Coast
Guard?
[Show of hands.]
And how many of you all are married?
[Show of hands.]
How many of you have children?
[Show of hands.]
That's who we are not paying: their kids, their spouse, and
them. That is who is not getting paid. We have to do our job.
This is--it is ridiculous to me.
Admiral, last month, Admiral Allan was here, and he
testified that the Coast Guard currently has three cyber teams
to respond to attacks against our maritime transportation
system, but that the Coast Guard really needed six. How does
this budget address the Coast Guard's expanding
responsibilities in cyberspace?
Admiral Lunday. Congressman, thank you for the question.
Our cyber capabilities, these cyber protection teams, which
really are part of the maneuver forces in cyberspace and
operational domain, are vital to our mission success. And I was
proud to command Cyber Command when we stood up the first one
about a decade ago.
So the President's 2027 budget advances our capability in a
significant way. It will fund the buildout of two additional
cyber protection teams. When complete, that will bring us to
five Active Duty cyber protection teams and then a Reserve
cyber protection team. Although they focus and they do defend
our network, their primary focus is on defending U.S. maritime
critical infrastructure and then other critical infrastructure
against threats from China, Iran, North Korea, and other malign
actors that are attempting to hold our infrastructure at risk.
But with the strong support of the work of the Coast Guard, in
conjunction with CISA and U.S. Cyber Command, we will ensure
that the U.S. cannot be held at risk by adversaries.
Mr. McDowell. In your written testimony, you discussed an
incident in which three of our Coast Guard cutters chased away
some Chinese vessels that were operating near the U.S. extended
Continental Shelf in the Arctic. How often is the Coast Guard
confronting Chinese or Russian vessels in the Arctic?
Admiral Lunday. It is a common occurrence, sir. Last year,
these five were hovering and conducting research, and then we
expect also illicit activity that threatened U.S. sovereignty
just outside our 200-mile limit of the exclusive economic zone,
so----
Mr. McDowell [interrupting]. Do you know what they were
researching?
Admiral Lunday. Sir, I would like to be able to follow up
with you in a closed session so we can provide more detail at
the classified level.
Mr. McDowell. Okay. Does this budget adequately lend
additional resources for Arctic security?
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir, it does. So first of all, it
provides the $306 million for homeporting of the first two
Arctic Security Cutters that will be delivered by the end of
2028 to meet the President's direction, and they will be
homeported in Alaska, in the Arctic.
And then it will also fund additional missionization of the
commercial icebreaker Storis, which we commissioned last
August, and it immediately went up and it was one of the three
that chased those five Chinese research vessels out.
Mr. McDowell. How has the Storis increased our capability
to confront these Chinese and Russian vessels?
Admiral Lunday. Well, sir, most immediately, before the
Storis was added to the fleet, we only had two polar
icebreakers: the heavy, the Polar Star that went south to the
South Pole for the breakout and resupply there, and then Healy,
which would go north to the Arctic. So by adding Storis, we
immediately doubled our Arctic polar icebreaker capability.
Mr. McDowell. I think I know the answer to this, but do we
have enough icebreakers in the fleet to confront every
incursion on the extended Continental Shelf?
Admiral Lunday. No, Congressman, we don't, and the
President clearly recognized that when he made the announcement
on the 8th of October that we were going to build out 11 Arctic
Security Cutters to build out the fleet of icebreakers for the
United States, because the Coast Guard is the only part of
Government that operates those icebreakers to assure the
protection of our northern border and approaches and advance
U.S. sovereignty and interests in the Arctic.
Mr. McDowell. So for my constituents that live a
significant distance away from the Arctic shelf, why should
those Americans care if the Chinese and the Russians are
messing around up there? What is the significance of that?
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir. Well, thank you for that, because
I think it is important that every American knows that Arctic
security is national security. When our sovereignty and the
approaches to our border are challenged anywhere the United
States exists, it is a challenge everywhere. And so we need to
push back on the activities by China, Russia, and others that
would seek to undermine U.S. sovereignty and challenge our
border, just as we do from any other threats to our border and
our U.S. sovereignty.
Mr. McDowell. Thank you all.
Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields.
Mr. Garamendi.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Admiral Lunday and Mr. Waldron.
First of all, Admiral Lunday, thank you for the
conversation we had concerning Mare Island and the Polar Star.
We understand the decision you made and fully support it. But
tomorrow is coming, and I look forward to further conversations
about the Coast Guard operating at Mare Island when Mare Island
is operating.
But let me move to a subject that we have been working on
for a long, long time, and that is the total funding of the
Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security. You have
mentioned this several times. I don't think there is a Democrat
in the House of Representatives that understands what it is
that the Republicans are trying to do, not funding the
operations in the Department of Homeland Security, but at the
same time, providing an additional $70 billion on top of the
previous $70 billion for ICE and Customs and Border Protection.
It makes no sense to me, and I believe it makes no sense to
the general public, and you have certainly talked about it
several times here, about the problem that it presents to you,
to your personnel, and to your operations.
So I would hope that perhaps this week the Republicans
would finally get their act together and decide to fully fund
the Department of Homeland Security and simultaneously provide
the necessary requirements that ICE and the Customs and Border
Protection operate as a legitimate police force, rather than
some sort of out-of-order operation as they have in the past.
Much to be done. Maybe this week, since there is another
deadline, that will happen.
I do want to focus on something this committee has worked
on, it seems, forever, and for all of us, well over a decade,
and that is the construction of the new icebreakers. I want you
to bring us up to date on ICE Pact, on the contract with
Finland for two icebreakers, and then three additional
icebreakers.
My concern has always been that we make it in America. It
was obvious, from the previous failed efforts by the Coast
Guard to build icebreakers, that the Coast Guard and the
American maritime industry was not capable, and therefore ICE
Pact came into existence and the two Finnish icebreakers that
will be in the American fleet. Please bring us up to date on
where this is.
Admiral Lunday. Thank you, Congressman.
The icebreaker programs are the top priority, and the
Arctic Security Program is our highest acquisition priority,
because it is the President's priority. As you know, sir, the
President announced the 8th of October the construction of 11
Arctic Security Cutters and used his authority to begin that
construction using the ICE Pact framework with Canada, the
U.S., and Finland in shipyards in Finland, with proven designs
and proven shipbuilding know-how there, working as part of a
consortium with U.S. companies so we could onshore the
remaining construction, so starting with four overseas and then
the remaining seven built in the United States in shipyards
along the U.S. gulf coast by American workers.
So right away, we moved quickly to award three contracts
over the following months that will enable us to begin moving
forward, and that work has already begun to build out those
Arctic Security Cutters, to deliver the first ones in 2028.
That will also include, under one of the consortiums, the
building and the operation of a new shipyard in Texas, which we
are also excited about, because it expands the defense
industrial base for the United States.
Mr. Garamendi. I would like to go into more detail on that.
Before I do, I am sure you are aware of the SHIPS Act, which
members of this committee and the Senate have been pushing
along. How does this program that you have laid out fit with
the program that we have on the SHIPS Act? Will you be able to
utilize the SHIPS Act money to build facilities that are
necessary, ports and the like?
Admiral Lunday. Sir, we look forward to the support
possible from the SHIPS Act to continue to advance this
program, as well as our Polar Security Cutter program, the
heavy icebreaker program, which we funded, which is a three-
ship program, and two are fully funded and the third is
partially funded. We are making strong progress on that first
Polar Security Cutter to deliver it by 2029.
Mr. Garamendi. You said a moment ago that there are four
icebreakers that will be foreign-built and the remainder
American-built. I understood previously there were only two
that were going to be built in Finland.
Admiral Lunday. Sir, the previous testimony may have been
when we had only awarded the first of the three contracts we
have awarded. The President, based on his statutory authority,
made a finding that in the interests of national defense--and
this was announced in his announcement on the 8th of October--
that we needed to begin by leveraging the overseas capability
and proven shipbuilding in Finland so we could onshore more
work back into the U.S. and rebuild our defense industrial
base, and that is exactly what we are doing, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. My time has expired, but I would like to
explore with you the additional foreign-built icebreakers. But
I will, at that, yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. I now recognize myself for
a second round of questioning.
Oh, I am so sorry. Go right ahead, Ms. Gillen.
Ms. Gillen. That is okay. Thank you, Chairman.
Admiral and Master Chief, as I mentioned to you earlier, I
am proud to represent the extraordinary men and women of Coast
Guard Station Jones Beach in the Fourth Congressional District
of New York.
[Slide shown.]
Ms. Gillen. The folks who my legislative assistant has
kindly put up here for you to see are devoted to essential
search and rescue and law enforcement missions across the South
Shore of Long Island and are a crucial part of Coast Guard
Sector Long Island Sound.
Under Coast Guard's fiscal year 2024 force realignment
initiative, Station Jones Beach was one of 19 stations which
the Coast Guard adjusted to a new operational status, part of a
broader reduction in the presence and capabilities devoted to
Long Island including the closure of the East Moriches Station
and the removal of an 87-foot Coast Guard cutter from Montauk
and from our region. I am deeply concerned about the impact of
those changes.
And we spoke about this last year, Admiral, when you
appeared before this committee, and you expressed your
commitment to continue to prioritize the safety of Long Island
boaters and that you would evaluate this situation as the Coast
Guard's workforce recovers. As we discussed today, there has
been the strongest recruiting year ever in more than 30 years,
actually, for year 2025, and the Coast Guard has now received
billions of dollars in needed investments. And I am asking you,
Admiral and Master Chief, will you consider restoring station
capability at Station Jones Beach?
Admiral Lunday. Thank you, Congresswoman.
We certainly are looking at that. I mentioned that I had
tasked our area commanders--and in the Atlantic area that is
Vice Admiral Jo-Ann Burdian--to provide me recommendations on
where to begin to do that restoration based on operational
priorities. And so Jones Beach will be one of the stations we
are looking at.
The President's 2027 budget request, the strength of that
is that, if fully funded, it will put 877 Coast Guard men and
women out at those small-boat stations specifically. And so we
have a plan to be able to move, if supported in the 2027
request, to move people out to those stations, and that will
help us restore the operating posture.
And so I look forward to getting back to you as I hear from
Admiral Burdian on the station priorities, including the
prioritization of Jones Beach.
Ms. Gillen. Well, thank you, and I hope you prioritize Long
Island.
How will the added investment in the Coast Guard's boat
safety program lead to a reduction in boating deaths?
And what else do you need from Congress to make sure we see
that through?
Admiral Lunday. Well, the boating safety programs are
important, because the best search and rescue case is the one
we prevent from happening. And so through the work of our
active force and also our very strong Coast Guard Auxiliary,
our auxiliary volunteers, we have a very robust program working
with the States to improve boating safety.
Beyond that, at the commercial level, making sure that our
merchant vessels, U.S. shipping, and then foreign-flagged
vessels that operate in our ports, are safe and secure is also
a priority. So the 2027 budget request would field an
additional 227 marine inspectors and marine science technicians
to be able to ensure the safety of the commercial fleet, as
well, and that is an important part of the 2027 request.
Ms. Gillen. Thank you. Thank you, Admiral.
In February of last year, the GAO reported that it will
cost at least $7 billion to address the Coast Guard's backlog
of shoreside projects, with half of the Service's facilities
beyond their intended service life. I am glad that the Coast
Guard has undertaken Operation Restore Habitability as part of
Force Design 2028. This long-term project will help the Coast
Guard update and improve damaged or outdated infrastructure at
stations and facilities across our country. We have heard
specific concerns about aging infrastructure at stations like
Jones Beach, and I am glad that they were at least able to so
far upgrade their front gate as part of Operation Restore
Habitability.
Master Chief Waldron, how is the Coast Guard prioritizing
projects across the country, and what additional resources or
authorities are you seeking from Congress to accelerate these
improvements?
Master Chief Waldron. Thank you, ma'am, for bringing up
Operation Restore Habitability. That is one that personally I
am very proud of, because we took a different approach whenever
we came up with the project.
What we did was, recognizing that oftentimes many of our
shoreside infrastructure disparities simply were because it is
a very cumbersome process when we looked at the large-scale
projects and the timeliness or lack thereof involved in that,
really, what that ended up looking like was a lot of our
smaller scale projects kind of started to follow the same track
there.
So what we did was instead, we charged our chief petty
officers throughout the Service with recognizing what projects
can we take care of very quickly that are of a smaller scale,
and not just burden the crew with doing it themselves.
Oftentimes in the past we would have had the crewmembers at
that station doing repairs to their own unit there. And to me,
that came at the expense of spending time on the water, doing
and training what they are actually supposed to be doing. And
so we sent teams around of senior enlisted leaders to recognize
these projects and attack them, in almost an immediate nature.
You mentioned Jones Beach. I agree with you. I am ecstatic
to see that they got the front gate fixed very rapidly. I was
there not a month ago, and both Jones Beach and their
neighboring station, Fire Island, had a very similar issue.
Both have since been resolved. And it just highlighted that, by
having the chiefs lead the way and recognize this is what we
need at our unit right now, we are able to do it much faster.
Ms. Gillen. Thank you.
My time is up, and I yield back.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you. I have just a few more questions here
I just want to get in.
Master Chief, the fiscal year 2027 budget request allows
for a $2 billion increase in operations and support funding.
This means that the Coast Guard can bring on additional
civilian Active Duty and Reserve personnel. Does the training
center at Cape May have the capability to train those
individuals on a timeline that this increase will demand?
Master Chief Waldron. Sir, I do believe that Cape May can
handle it. Cape May has proven time and again that whatever the
call may be, they have always arisen to the challenge there.
And with Cape May being the home of our enlisted corps--and we
have no reason to ever alter from that there--I also recognize
that we do put a strain on them quite frequently.
And having served as a company commander--or a drill
instructor, for lack of a better term--in Cape May there
before, I acutely recognize that the goals of basic training
are to develop smartly disciplined, physically fit, basically
trained Coast Guard men and women. And so that is something
that we can accomplish anywhere. So even while Cape May is
undergoing significant reinvestment, and that will put a strain
on it, I think we can absolutely figure out how to make that
happen, sir.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you very much. I am kind of--I would like
to get a little information about the secondary training center
in Alabama that was recently, I don't know, purchased or leased
or whatever it is. Could you tell me a little bit about that
place, and how long is it going to take to get it up and
running until we can get some recruits in there to train?
Master Chief Waldron. Yes, sir. So the whole purpose behind
Training Center Birmingham-Southern was that, looking across
the Service in all the different elements of training, we
recognized that we had a shortage of available training space,
and that is across both basic training up through technical
training schools. And so by purchasing the new training center
there, we are able to grow and meet the demand for what
training we are going to actually provide.
The overall vision for Birmingham-Southern is that it
become the enlisted leadership center of excellence. And so
what that will look like as far as which school is going to be
located where between our existing training centers and what we
can accomplish at Birmingham-Southern, we are still sorting
that out and working on it, sir. But in the end, what it does
is it allows us to provide the training we need for the total
workforce at speed and scale.
Mr. Ezell. Do you know how long it is going to be before it
is opened?
Master Chief Waldron. Sir, we will be hosting the courses
at Training Center Birmingham-Southern within calendar year
2026.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you.
I yield back. Mr. Carbajal.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Master Chief Waldron, another issue, as I mentioned
earlier, that frequently arises when I talk to servicemembers
is mental health--and mental health access, to be exact. I am
concerned that the Service is not currently equipped to
appropriately address this challenge. I appreciate the Coast
Guard's effort to provide more embedded mental health
professionals, but what is the Service's ultimate goal to
ensuring universal access to mental healthcare?
Master Chief Waldron. Sir, I share the same concern when it
comes to mental healthcare, and we have taken several different
approaches to furthering where we stand with that.
For one, included in the budget request this year is the
inclusion of numerous more mental health providers into the
budget. But additionally, from the vantage point of getting
where we need to be, the Commandant has required all flag
officers and senior officers to attend the 2-day Applied
Suicide Intervention Skills Training. And then, from the chief
petty officer side, that is also a requirement in my Master
Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard standing orders, that
all chief petty officers going through initiation will attend
either ASIST or the suicide awareness for everyone for our
training.
Mental health is something that is also very, very
frequently tied to physical readiness, and I don't think that
the two can be separated. That is one of the main reasons why
we are also so heavily investing into what we know as the
physical readiness program is because physical readiness
includes mental readiness.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. As you can see from my questions
today and in previous hearings, it's one thing to have state-
of-the-art equipment, ships, and all the lethal weapons we
need, but it's important to also make sure that our Coasties
are taken care of. At the end of the day, that's what makes the
Coast Guard, is the people. And if our Coasties and their
families don't have the support, the resources they need to
have a high quality of life, it's going to impact our
readiness.
So you are going to always see me continue to advocate for
a balance of our resources, for our equipment, our ships, and
our lethality of weapons. But to balance that with making sure
that our servicemembers, every day, they and their families are
being taken care of. And I sure hope that is top of mind every
day when you look at all the missions that we need to plan for.
With that, Mr. Chair, I will yield back.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields. Mr. Garamendi, do you have
a question?
Mr. Garamendi. I do, sir.
Mr. Ezell. Go ahead.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you.
Admiral Lunday, you surprised me when you said that there
are going to be four foreign-built icebreakers. I was
previously under the, I guess, assumption that there would be
only two. Could you describe the other two, and where the
authority came for the construction of those additional two
foreign-built icebreakers?
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir. We are executing the President's
direction announced on the 8th of October. And so what that
entails, in terms of building out the 11, is the award to 2
consortiums, contracts to 2 consortiums. Each will begin to
build the icebreakers in shipyards in Finland. The first is in
Rauma Shipyard, the second in Helsinki, with each of those
consortiums building two over in Finland, a total of four. The
remaining seven, those consortiums will build in the United
States.
The first contract to already be building those seven in
the United States has already been awarded. That was one of the
three that we awarded to Bollinger, which is part of the
consortium. So that has always been the plan, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. No, I don't believe it is always been the
plan. It has always been the plan to build America. And because
of the failure of the Coast Guard to be able to produce, we
then moved with ICE Pact to bring the Finns in with their
expertise and knowledge. But to my knowledge, it was only two.
I am curious as to where the authority for the additional two
has come from. If it is only from the President, I am not sure
that is satisfactory authority. I would like the committee to
look into that.
I earlier, in my earlier question, raised the SHIPS Act,
which is specifically designed to rebuild the American maritime
industry, and specifically the ability to build ships in
America and to rebuild our ports. It seems to me the Coast
Guard is going exactly the wrong direction here by outsourcing
the construction of additional icebreakers. I am curious about
the authority. I would appreciate it if you would deliver it to
me and perhaps to the committee, the specific authority that
you believe you have to build additional foreign icebreakers.
The Build American, Buy American law remains in place.
There was a waiver in that process. So if you would like to
comment now, please do. Otherwise, deliver specific information
as to where the authority came from for the additional foreign-
built icebreakers.
Admiral Lunday. Sir, the Coast Guard has no independent
authority to build U.S. Coast Guard cutters overseas. We are
executing the President's direction under the President's
authority and finding, and so that is how we are proceeding,
sir, and----
Mr. Garamendi [interrupting]. Well, therein--excuse me--
therein lies a major challenge for our democracy. The President
seems to operate as though he were king, and does whatever he
wants to do including waiving or ignoring American law that is
make it in America. And this needs to be fully understood here.
To contract and build and to find the appropriations for these
additional foreign-built icebreakers seems to be contrary to
the law, and contrary to the underlying SHIPS Act and, in fact,
the President's Maritime Action Plan that he put forward.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I think we need to explore this
fully and determine where the authority lies, where the
appropriation lies for the construction of foreign-built
icebreakers beyond the two which I believe have been
authorized.
With that, I yield back.
Admiral Lunday. Sir, if I may, just--yes, sir. The
President has statutory authority, and he has used that
authority under the law, and we are following the President's
direction to implement it. I look forward to briefing you in
detail on that, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. If you would please do so, and we will
explore the actual laws and the President's authority.
So once again, a major policy issue here, a major
constitutional issue as to who has the authority here. With
that, we have got another challenge. Thank you.
Mr. Ezell. The gentleman yields.
Thank you. You have done a great job today, and I really
appreciate it.
I just want to put to bed one rumor that we keep hearing
floating around that the Chinese are putting an engine in one
of the finished ships. Can we put that rumor to bed today?
Admiral Lunday. Yes, sir. I have not heard that rumor, and
I am not aware of that. I will make sure that is not the case,
but I haven't heard that rumor, sir. Thank you for surfacing
that so I can knock it down.
Mr. Ezell. A lot of rumors go around here.
You have done a great job today. I am very much
appreciative of you being here, and I know I have full
confidence in what you are doing and where we are going with
the Coast Guard.
Does anybody else have anything else?
Seeing none, this committee stands in adjournment.
[Whereupon, at 11:16 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix
----------
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to U.S. Coast Guard from Hon.
Marilyn Strickland
Question 1. I recognize the importance of distributed shipbuilding
to meet our national security needs in the Arctic as the domestic
maritime industrial base builds additional capacity. At the same time,
we must take steps now to ensure that the U.S. maritime sector can
deliver the remaining ships when those responsibilities are eventually
on-shored from Finnish shipyards. What actions is the Coast Guard
taking to help position U.S. shipyards to assume full production of the
remaining Arctic Security Cutters?
Answer. In October 2025, the President signed a Presidential
Memorandum which determined that it is in the national security
interest of the U.S. to construct up to four Arctic Security Cutters
(ASCs) abroad. The White House subsequently announced a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with the Republic of Finland to build up to four
ASCs in Finland, and then leverage that expertise to construct seven
additional ASCs in shipyards in the United States. The Coast Guard has
three contracts for the construction of eleven ASCs with Rauma Marine
Constructions, Bollinger Shipyards L.L.C., and Davie Defense Inc.
Rauma Marine Constructions will build two ASCs in Finland, and
Bollinger Shipyards will build four in the U.S. at their Houma,
Louisiana, shipyard. Under their respective contracts, Bollinger
Shipyards and Rauma Marine Constructions are each constructing pilot
modules to establish a common understanding of best practices,
supporting the transition from engineering to production of ASCs, and
strengthening the domestic capability and expertise for domestic ASC
construction.
Davie Defense Inc. will build five ASCs; two in Finland at a
partner shipyard in Helsinki, and three in the United States. Davie
Defense recently acquired Gulf Copper Shipyard in Galveston, Texas, and
announced plans modernize the shipyard, calling it an ``American
icebreaker factory.'' Under a shared parent company, the Finnish and
U.S-based shipyards can exchange information and experience, bolstering
and expanding domestic shipbuilding capability.
Under these three contracts, counterparts from the partnering
domestic shipyards will be onsite in the Finnish shipyards to learn
from the production lines for the initial vessels, ahead of onshoring
production in the U.S.
Question 2. I represent the South Puget Sound of Washington state,
where our maritime industry supports nearly 175,000 jobs and generates
$14.4 billion in direct and indirect labor income. In September, a
state-of-the-art maritime CTE center in Tacoma will welcome its
inaugural class of high school students, giving them the opportunity to
earn the credentials and skills they need to compete and be a part of
America's shipbuilding renaissance.
Yet, there are concerns that these critical workforce investments
may not translate into good-paying jobs in Coast Guard shipbuilding. An
April 2026 GAO report on the state of Coast Guard shipbuilding programs
cited a case in which a Coast Guard shipyard lost skilled workers to a
nearby Navy shipyard offering higher wages.
I know that there are a lot of factors and players involved in
ensuring fair wages for shipyard workers, but acquisition strategy and
other contracting levers within the Coast Guard's control do have an
impact on the maritime manufacturing market and workers.
What actions is the Coast Guard taking to support competitive wages
and retain skilled workers building Coast Guard assets, whether at
Coast Guard-operated or private shipyards?
Answer. The Coast Guard recognizes that competitive wages and
workforce retention are critical to sustaining a strong shipbuilding
sector and ensuring the successful delivery of Coast Guard assets.
To help address these challenges, the Coast Guard takes into
account multiple factors:
Acquisition Strategy and Contracting Incentives: The Coast Guard
reviews and refines its acquisition strategies to encourage contractors
to offer competitive wages. This can include incorporating labor
standards and wage requirements into contracts, where appropriate, to
help ensure that shipyard workers are compensated fairly. The Coast
Guard considers other contracting levers, such as incentives for
workforce development and retention, in its shipbuilding contracts.
These measures are designed to help contractors attract and retain
skilled workers, thereby supporting the stability and quality of the
workforce.
Monitoring and Reporting: The Coast Guard monitors shipyard
workforce trends and compensation levels, both at the Coast Guard Yard,
and in commercial shipyards to inform future acquisition and
contracting decisions.
While many factors influence wage levels and workforce retention,
the Coast Guard appreciates that its contracting authority and
partnerships can help contribute to a competitive and sustainable
maritime workforce.
[all]