Department of the Navy Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request

Hi.

Yes, sirs. Great. I love that. That's Josh's. I love his review. It's a great committee.

Alright, the committee will come to order. I wanna welcome our witnesses and thank them for their service to our nation. Uh, today we'll hear from the Department of the Navy regarding FY twenty-seven budget request. As a maritime nation, our national security requires strong and ready naval force with sufficient vessels and capabilities to deter our enemies. That's especially true now as the Navy is instrumental to the mission of combating narco-trafficking in the Western Hemisphere ensuring Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon, and safeguarding freedom of navigation around the globe. And of course we have to remain vigilant to the threat from China, whose maritime strength continues to grow. So it's critical that American priorities growing uh uh America prioritizes growing our fleet uh and doing that requires rebuilding our shipbuilding industry. Years of uncertainty and inconsistent demand from the government and the commercial sector have significantly weakened our maritime industrial base. That atrophy is apparent in both military and commercial ship building and the statistics are grim. China builds forty-seven percent of the world's ships. The US builds one tenth of one percent. This decline in our maritime industrial base is not surprising given how long we have been underfunding our national security. Defense spending has shrunk dramatically, both as a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of federal outlays. That res- that's resulted in a reduction in our shipbuilding capacity, our ability to scale our production, and our fleet readiness. To maintain deterrence and ensure maritime dominance, uh, we need a robust constellation of shipyards with modern infrastructure. It also demands a large, skilled workforce capable of meeting the increased demand for shipbuilding and repairing ships. The President's FY twenty-seven budget request of one point five trillion is crucial in reversing that decline. The Navy's top line of three hundred and seventy-seven bil point five billion provides the resources necessary to restore our shipbuilding capacity and re-establish our maritime deterrence. We began the work of revitalizing the ship y- shipbuilding uh last year via rec- reconciliation that legislation invested thirty-four billion dollars in and maritime industrial base to expand the size and enhance the capability of our naval fleet. We're starting to see the results of that funding and we'll be paying close attention to how the that investment is handled and how efficiently it's being spent. Last year we also made critical reforms to make the Pentagon a better customer for the defense industrial base. We created new accelerated requirements processes, that rapidly seek innovative private sector solutions. We cut red tape and enhance t- contracting flexibility, and we streamlined decision-making by centralizing acquisition programs under single portfolio acquisition executives. I'm pleased to see the progress the Navy is making on implementing these reforms. However, I remain concerned with the overall readiness of our naval fleet. If we are to strengthen our deterrence and protect our maritime interest, We need to prioritize the eighty percent surge-ready vision for the entire fleet, including our amphibious forces. Nearly half of the amphibious fleet is in unsatisfactory condition. As a result, we can no longer support heel-to-toe deployments of our marine expeditionary forces. I'm a strong supporter of a continuous three point O mu uh presence. Our amphibious forces are the bedrock of our rapid response force and essential uh for the projection power that we need. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on how we can work together to make sure these goals uh reach reality and give our sailors and marines the resources they need to defend our nation. With that I yield to my friend the Ranking Member h- for his opening statement.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman. I appreciate it. Thanks to our witnesses for being here today. I look forward to a very, very important discussion. I think the Chairman did a very good job of laying out the challenges that we face. Those challenges are not just um with the Navy and the Marine Corps in meeting our ship building but it is a pretty good example of the size and scope of the challenges we face in meeting our national security needs and dealing with the economic challenges that we face as a country certainly the ship building story that the chairman laid out is absolutely true we have fallen way behind the rest of the world and really struggled uh to figure out how to build the ships we need to build for our defense needs. We also have the the modernization challenges. We all know warfare has fundamentally changed. Uh, autonomous systems, AI are gonna be crucial to meeting our war fight fighting needs, as is our ability to build the munitions and equipment that we need at a far greater scale at a far more affordable pace. And and some progress has been made. I particularly wanna thank the Marine Corps. Um, I know Commandant Berger, who came before uh Commandant Smith, really took the lead in recognizing this. and and took a hell of a lot of heat for saying, " No, we have to change." He he made the changes. I think the Marine Corps has adapted to what the modern battlefield looks like. And also, you passed your audit, which makes everybody around you, yeah, three times, everyone around you jealous, but I think it should also make them aspirational, um, to do that as well. I also think on the Navy side, I've been particularly impressed with the workforce development. I've been up to Bath and I was just down at Newport News a few days ago. You know, three, four years ago, it really looked like, you know, we're just not gonna be able to find the workforce. And we still have a long way to go. We do not have enough enough people. But emphasizing training, bringing people into shipbuilding has made a difference. We have a much younger workforce now in the shipbuilding, and that certainly helps move move us forward. And also, as the chairman mentioned, our passage last year of acquisition reform to try to help the Pentagon get to the point where you can innovate faster at scale. is making a difference. We have a long way to go there as well. I will point out, however, I do disagree with the chairman one point, yes, we are way behind on shipbuilding, but it's not because we haven't spent enough money on defense. Where we are behind is on commercial shipbuilding, because we, well, we're behind on both, to be honest, but commercial shipbuilding is the main area because we were no longer competitive in that space. The economy changed. We cannot spend our way out of this problem. And that is my single biggest concern, We are still trying to imagine that we can do everything if we just spend enough money. That, I think, is a very unwise strategy. We have a debt pushing up close to forty trillion dollars. We continue to not be able to support any sort of revenue increases to pay for it. We're gonna have to get smarter. And I've used this quote in this room many, many times, so I apologize for repeating myself. But I think we are at that Winston Churchill point. Gentlemen, we're out of money. Now we have to think. The good news is we have really good options. We have very, very smart people. We have modern technology that can show us how to build the systems we need in a cheaper more affordable way, and put out a platform that enables us to achieve our objectives by taking advantage of having asymmetric advantages, and figuring out what weapon systems we can have that can meet our needs. That's the way we need to be thinking. And we've discussed this, but all of what I've just said The personification of the problem is the decision to go out and try to build a twenty two billion dollar battleship. I doubt seriously whether or not we can build that. I doubt even more seriously whether or not it is what we need at this point, when we need to be focusing on autonomous systems, on how we can do affordable solutions to what we face. If we continue to spend ourselves into oblivion, we will not accomplish the national security objectives that we desperately need. We also have partners and allies, can use. And here I know all of you have discussed, you agree with that. Uh, but let's look at that as a way to grow our ability. Um, South Korea, Japan, Norway, they are capable ship builders who, at least this morning, uh, were still our allies. Um, so we need to build on that, build the partners and allies that we can have to meet our needs. I still see a budget that I've been seeing here for twenty-five years, which is we have all these disastrous problems, let's just imagine that we'll have an infinite amount of uh amount of resources going forward and that's going to be our solution. That's not gonna get us there. Um we need to make cost-effective decisions to get us to the point where we need within a realistic budget framework. Uh with that I look forward to the discussion and I yield back.

Uh thank you, ranking member, now I'll introduce our witnesses, uh the Honorable Hung Cao is the Acting Secretary of the Navy. Admiral Darryl Cottle is the Chief of Naval Operations and General Eric Smith is the Commandant of the Marine Corps. Welcome our witnesses. Secretary Cowell, we'll start with you. You're recognized.

Thank you, Chairman Rogers. Uh, Ranking Member Smith, distinguished ladies and gentlemen of the Health Service Committee, thank you for allowing me to testify to you uh this morning. America's sailors and marines are currently on the front lines of freedom, in operations to protect our republic. Lincoln and Bush.

Uh, I I think you n- your microphone's not on or you need to pull it closer.

All right. Let me try. Can can we reset the time then, sir? No. We're we're good, sir.

Uh

Uh, American sailors and marines are currently on the front lines of freedom, in operations to protect our republic. Lincoln and Bush carrier strike groups and Tripoli amphibious raiding group with the thirty-first marine expeditionary unit, are the Arabian Sea, protecting merchant ships and stopping illicit shipping by a terrorist regime. Destroyers Arleigh Burke, Bolkalee, Oscar Austin and Gonzales are protecting our allies in Mediterranean against cruise missile attacks from Iran. In the Caribbean, Iwo Jima, Argnu, is stopping narco-terrorists from poisoning our Americans with illegal drugs. In the Pacific, Boxer Argnu and Destroyer Striders-seven are enforcing their freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. At home, we're preparing Macon Island Argnu, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, a forty-nine year old nuclear-powered aircraft carrier for deployment. On our southern border, our sailors and marines stand watch tonight, saying, " Nothing will hurt you, not on my watch." Three weeks and about seventeen hours ago, I was tasked by President Trump to lead the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps. My three priorities are to take care of sailors, marines, build ships, and protect our homeland. A hundred and twenty years ago, the great white fleet extended America's reach across the globe. We're currently at the forefront of history with a budget that will create the golden fleet which renews that maritime dominance. We have the obligation to give our sailors and marines the very best equipment to do their jobs. In our historic budget of three hundred seventy-seven point five billion dollars, we're adding thirty-four new ships varying from small to large combatants, a hundred and twenty-three new aircrafts, along with five unmanned ships. In five years, we will add a hundred and twenty-two manned and sixty-three unmanned ships. We are funding our readiness of our fleet to ninety-five percent. We are procuring exquisite munitions that will keep our forces outside the weapons engagement zone while investing in research development for the fight of the future. More importantly, we are increasing our service member pays, investing in family and unaccompanied housing, childhood development centers so that our sailors and marines have safe, clean, and comfortable places to live and not have to worry about their families when they're deployed in harm's way. We have greatly exceeded recruiting and retention goals. And that is due solely to the sheer leadership of President Trump and Secretary Hegstaff. Last week, I was on board USS Gerald R. Ford, USS Winston Churchill, and USS Bainbridge as they return from an eleven month combat deployment in two theaters. Do not believe the fake news that claims food shortages, backed up toilets, and low low morale. What I witnessed were motivated and professional young sailors pushing the boundaries of performance for their country. It is imperative that we pass this budget. Ship construction and readiness were bill pairs for Iraq and Afghanistan for twenty years. While our industrial base atrophied, American pair competitors grew stronger and threatened our sovereignty. Their hundred year plan had one goal, total global domination. But only one thing stands in their way, the United States of America. The Navy and Marine Corps are America's nine one one force. capable of being anywhere as a carry strike group or Marine Air Ground Task Force with overwhelming firepower as we saw in absolute resolve and epic fury. A year ago I testified in my confirmation hearing that I would create the most lethal Navy and Marine Corps team the world has ever seen. I will keep that promise, having worn the cloth of our nation for thirty-two years, most of which w- was in combat. I do this also because I will not allow my oldest son, who will be commissioned a week from tomorrow as the second lieutenant of the United States Marine Corps to go to war the way I did without the equipment that we needed. I will not allow this for any of America's sons or daughters. They signed a blank check to this nation up to and to clean their lives. And we owe it to them to do our due diligence to fund this historic budget that will care for them and their families while giving them the tools to answer the call. I've seen firsthand what communism and humanitarian regimes have done to thriving nations. Members of my family were murdered by communists. In nineteen seventy five we had no place to go. We had no flag to stand under or country call our own. But this place called United States gave us hope and a home and a future. I've dedicated my entire adult life to defend this nation under God, so that this would never happen to my children, your children, or our grandchildren. Thank you again for this opportunity to testify before you. Before I end though, uh this is uh Admiral Ben-Ghez, my uh Chief of Legislative Affairs last uh hearing before you. And I wanted to thank him for his service. And uh thank you for your time, Chairman, again, I know your time's very important. If you wanna cut this down to less than five hours, we're I think we're we're ready to support you. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Uh and I'm I'm proud that you have a very strong voice and I apologize that we're having audio problems with your microphone. Uh, we're we're working on that. Uh, Admiral Cottle, you're recognized.

Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, and distinguished members of the committee, good morning and thank you for the opportunity to testify on the posture of the United States Navy. I'm honored to be joined by Acting Secretary of the Navy, Cal, and my good friend, General Eric Smith. We appreciate the committee's steadfast support for our sailors, our Marines, our civilian workforce, and their families as well. for the resources you provide to defend our nation. This past year, our Navy celebrated two hundred and fifty years of American sea power. Today, our founding fathers would scarcely recognize the modern fleet, ballistic missile submarines deterring strategic attack, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers projecting power across the globe, and an all-domain naval force delivering precision lethality at scale. And while the platforms have changed, one truth has not. The Sailor remains our most and greatest competitive advantage and the heartbeat of our fleet. This July, on our nation's two hundred and fiftieth birthday, our sailors will carry that legacy forward wherever our nation requires presence, power and resolve. Since assuming the duties of the Chief of Naval Operations, I have been focused on one central objective, ensuring the Navy never loses, its differentiated value. In February, we released the United States Navy fighting instructions, which is designed to operationalize my priorities of foundry, fleet, and the way we fight, and provide clear guidance on how we will build, generate, and employ Navy combat power for the conflicts we must be prepared to win. These instructions reflect a simple reality. The Navy's value lies in our ability to generate decisive combat power from the sea, with tailorable formations, sustain them forward, and deliver lethal effects across every domain at the time and place of our choosing globally. Operation Epic Fury is providing in real time what the Navy delivers, forward, persistent combat power from the sea, sovereign options, independent of basing, survivable and resilient under pressure, and able to strike decisively. That is our differentiated value on full display. To preserve that advantage, we are executing a hedge strategy to ensure the fleet we'll build today, it's ready for the fight we face now and adaptable and scalable to the one we will face tomorrow. That strategy is realized through the Golden Fleet initiative, a fleet design that blends high and lower-end combatants, integrates robotic and autonomous systems, and enables scalable formations to outpace emerging threats. This approach increases our ability to scale combat mass, distribute risk, and maintain escalation dominance against the operational challenges our combatant commanders face globally. It also requires integrating technologies like artificial intelligence advanced advanced manufacturing directed energy, and containerized systems as operational capabilities that expand our reach, persistence, and lethality across our kill chains and kill hubs. Our FY twenty-seven budget request is strategy driven. It's aligned to the Department of the Navy's priorities and the objectives of the national defense strategy, leveraging the concepts outlined in the United States Navy fighting instructions to ensure our investments directly strengthen the foundry, the fleet, and the way we fight. It reflects disciplined choices to ensure we first always field a credible and highly effective sea-based strategic deterrent. And second, we invest in the right capabilities that preserve our war-fighting advantage. To do that, we focus on four priorities. First, sailors first. Quality of service is not a luxury. It underwrites combat readiness and must always be our first priority. Second, the foundry. The foundry is where combat power is forged and we must not use it as a bill payer. A hollow foundry results in a hollow navy. Third, the fleet. Our fleet is the most decisive and flexible military instrument of national power. Therefore, we must feel the right mix of forces to realize the goal. fleet's full potential through a smart application of the head strategy. And fourth, the fight. Winning will depend on the strength and adaptability of our kill chains and kill webs. From robust counter-targeting, to leveraging new stealth technologies, to an abundance of longer range munitions, to enhanced mission command. We must integrate and synchronize our capabilities seamlessly with our joint force teammates, our partners, and our allies. It is truly the honor of my life to serve as your Chief of Naval With your continued partnership, we will ensure the United States Navy remains the most capable, most ready, and most lethal maritime force in the world. And I look forward to your questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Admiral. Uh, General Smith, you're recognized.

Well, good morning. Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, ladies and gentlemen. I'm honored to appear before you today alongside Acting Secretary Cow and Admiral Cottle to represent your Marine Corps. I'd like to start by recognizing the significance of this year's President's budget. It is a generational investment that supports the Marine Corps' top four focus areas. One, restoring a three point zero amphibious ready group Marine Expeditionary Unit presence. One our new off the east coast, one off the west coast, and the thirty-first Marine Expeditionary Unit episodically deployed out of Okinawa, Japan. Two, setting the theater. Three, accelerating modernization and lethality and four, building and sustaining a lethal force. Restoring a three point O amphibious ready group marine expeditionary unit presence is the Marine Corps' North Star. It consists of three continuously forward deployed amphibious ready group marine expeditionary unit teams. Again, one source from the east coast, one from the west coast, and one episodically deployed out of Okinawa, Japan. Each embarked on three amphibious warships, one big deck and two small boys. The amphibious ready group, or ARG, with the marine expeditionary unit is the most agile, personal and responsive formation of the joint force, hands down. It is how our nation's leaders sustain forward posture, deter aggression, and respond to crisis or conflict across the entire globe. Today we have three point O amphibious ready group Marine Expeditionary Unit presence. It is a strategic value, and that strategic value is clear. The twenty-second Mew is combating narco-terrorism in the Caribbean, while the thirty-first Marine Expeditionary Unit and the eleventh Marine Expeditionary Unit are providing operational flexibility to maintain security and stability in the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific. But this is not something we can sustain. We need to enhance our amphibious warship readiness and increase the size of our amphibious force. I want to extend my sincere appreciation to the Secretary of War, the Acting Secretary of the Navy, and my shipmate, Darrell Cottle, for their unwavering support towards our shared goal of restoring a three point O amphibious ready group marine expeditionary unit presence. Our second focus area is setting the theater. We're committed to protecting our interests, deterring adversaries, reassuring allies, and creating a more agile and resilient global sustainment network, one that seamlessly integrates with the joint force. To achieve this, we're ensuring an optimized forced posture, while also investing in littoral mobility, pre-positioned equipment and supplies, digital manufacturing, and enhanced installation resilience. We're refining our approach to logistics. prioritizing resilience, speed, and adaptability to generate and sustain our forces. Our third area of focus is accelerating modernization and lethality. Force design underpins everything that we do. We remain committed to modernizing everything from our Marine Expeditionary units to our Marine Expeditionary forces, focusing on precision fires, air defense, unmanned systems, resilient command and control, and electromagnetic warfare. We're gaining momentum, but we have to accelerate to ensure that our Marines are most lethal, survivable, and resilient the day before a conflict starts. And finally, we're building and sustaining a lethal force. The quality of life of Marines and their families directly impacts readiness, retention, and lethality. We are deliberately investing in Marines and their families to improve living conditions, institutionalize Marine Corps total fitness, and ensure support for family resources. Before I close, I want to take a moment to recognize the members of this committee and other committees with jurisdiction over the national defense who will be retiring. On behalf of all Marines, thank you for your service to this nation, we know it, uh it comes at great personal cost. Thank you for your leadership, but most of all for your partnership. Your constant and steadfast support has ensured the readiness of your Marine Corps. We wish you the best in the next chapter of your service, as we say, fair winds and following seas. I'd like to close by stating that your Marines are ready. The Marine Corps is a globally responsive, lethal, combined arms naval expeditionary force that is capable of projecting power from sea to land and from land to sea and to maneuver across multiple domains and contested environments to deter deny and defeat our adversaries. Thank you again for your trust and support, and I look forward to your questions.

Thank you, General. I recognize myself for questions first. Uh, we all know that a continuous strong demand signal is critical to getting our shipbuilding uh industrial base back on a healthy footing. Mr. Secretary, can you tell us how you're ensuring that fleet uh requirements and fleet uh um and the acceleration of production rates is happening in the shipbuilding industry?

Mr. Chairman, we have we have many levers we're pulling. Obviously the PSYUP program allows us to uh invest into our industrial base. Uh we we have for for example for submarine building, a a very talented officer, uh Vice Admiral Rob Goucher who I've known for thirty six years who is leading and basically moving the submarine construction to the left. But again, we we need to explore every single avenue of ship construction in this country. W- it's not just about warships. Right now there's only a hundred and eighty eight flagged US merchant ships and a hundred and five military seal of command ships. Whereas the Chinese have eleven thousand ships. We are a maritime nation, bordering both the Pacific and the the Atlantic,

Uh-huh.

and we depend on that that maritime dominance to to for trade and for the good of our nation as well. And so this, if we pull all the levers, we're looking at five hundred forty thousand jobs in the United States for ship building alone and that's for every single one of your districts. This is why we need to to to fund this bill, sir, so we can get ship building going and get this nation going.

Um, Admiral Cottle, um, what operational impacts will you feel if Congress doesn't pass supplemental funding? And when do you think you'll start feeling those impacts?

Sir, um, as you know, the FY twenty-six budget didn't bake in epic fury. And, uh, and we're, you know, the Navy, if you see any news channel and you look at the graphic there, you see a large Navy force in the Middle East. So we're burning bright, and, uh, that's what Navies do. And uh we're built that way, but it does come at costs and it comes at operational costs. Things like fuel costs, operating hours, air, you know, uh uh training air frames, uh and all the sorts of incremental things, munitions, that you actually expend during wartime. And so uh without supplemental funding, I do fear that I'll have to start making decisions in the July time frame on how I do fourth generation. That could make differences between how I do uh exercises, how I do do routine operations in order to make sure that I do not, you know, have the funds necessary to continue the war effort, uh, for Epic Fury. A bigger piece, too, that I would tell you is is in people. You know, I I'm incurring additional costs in the manpower accounts as well. And so, uh, without additional funding, I'm gonna end up having to hold on station a number between twelve and fifteen thousand newest sessions that I'm trying to push through. So my record recruiting is gonna be thwarted without additional funding. to PCS those individuals from boot camp and to pay enlistment and re-enlistment bonuses. So those efforts could be challenged if I don't get additional supplemental funding, sir.

On another point, Admiral, uh what steps have you taken uh fleet-wide to improve your maintenance outcomes and improve your readiness rates?

Well, I think the secretary landed most of it. You know, this has been a a full-core press effort to expand our maritime industrial base and certainly the submarine industrial base. I think the acquisition reform is putting with the DERPAM and and other PAE structural changes to put more accountability, accountability at our supervisors of ship buildings to be more intrusive, oversight while construction's going on. The idea of developing, no kidding, getting the US to, no kidding, build ships through a modular distributed type of uh framework, we're doing that to some extent with Virginia class and Arleigh Burke, but we need to expand that. We need better integration of artificial intelligence. We need better integration of robotics to do more welds robotically for higher output and repr uh reproducing higher quality. We got workforce talent management going on across the country, but uh we need more of that as well to make sure we recruit and retain and lower the attrition of our key workforce. And that's not just, you know, kind of wage grade and vocational. This is middle level engineer management's coming out of engineering STEM schools that I desperately need for pro- for doing the planning and oversight of the work. And then, uh, I'd say that's a, uh, I'd say most of the things we got going on, sir.

Great. With that, I yield to the ranking member.

Thank you very much. Building off the theme of the opening statement in terms of, you know, how can we get to more cost-effective solutions, I've been very impressed by the fact that when it comes like shooting down drones, we've invented some new systems. We were shooting them down with two, three million dollar missiles, um, L three Harris has come up with the the Vampire system, this thirty thousand dollars a shot, very effective. Another private company came up with Mirops. By the way, I think Vampire is a much better name than Mirops if you're gonna name a system just for those paying attention to those things. Fifteen thousand dollars a shot, and it was all about figuring out, OK, we have our needs, how do we meet them in a very cost-effective way? What is the equivalent in the Navy and Marine Corps in terms of how you're thinking about meeting your needs? in a more cost-effective way, and that's one of the many things that troubles me again about the battleship. We look at new technology, new ways to deal things, all these demands, asymmetric advantages, and we come up with say, you know what, we're gonna go with a massive twenty-two billion dollar solution. That seems to be the exact opposite of taking advantage of modern technology to meet your needs in a more cost-effective way. So how are you all thinking about options equivalent to, instead of two million, we're gonna do thirty thousand and achieve the same objective and using new technology to get there.

I can remember you're absolutely right, sir. I mean, we're when we're launching an SM two missile that costs two and a quarter million dollars per shot, to take down a thousand dollar drone, it it's ridiculous. And that's why electronic warfare is so important. I mean, we need to cover everything from thirty megahertz to eight gigahertz, with no band breaks in between, but also we need static radar to look at it, but also gimbals because a lot of their cross-section, the radar cross-sections of these drones look very similar to our aircrafts as well. So, there's many options out there and you you mentioned like a large ship, well there's as far as I was in the navy even all the way back to two thousand eleven when I worked in N ninety six the surface warfare division, we had a requirement for a large combatant, it's called C G X at the time because our

We got a lot of requirements, Mr. Secretary.

Yes sir.

One of the things that I would suggest that we're gonna need to do is get out of the requirements-based approach I mean so much that goes on at the Pentagon and I think the chairman agrees, is we all sit around and come up with requirements, OK, and there's gosh, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of pages of them. Let's focus on what actually needs to be done and say, well, we got a requirement for it, um, we gotta think through it a little bit more than that. Sorry to interrupt, just had to make that point. Go, go ahead.

Thank you for that. Uh, do I can remember again, there's I I I I pay bills at home and there's, you know, the kids need braces they need everything and that's we have to balance all those things but again with the the battleship the problem is that your your d d g s are so decked out right now the pinkney uss pinkney is the only ship in our fleet that has a slick thirty two victor seven for electronic warfare and and i mean i i told you yesterday i mean it looks like a big chipmunk with a mouthful of nuts right now because it's it's so uh burden and that's why we need a large combatant that has all electronic warfare as well as two hundred v l s cells including conventional prompt strike. Imagine a missile that can go from here to the the uh West Coast in sixteen minutes, uh that the enemy can't stop, and this is what's gonna deter the enemy. Uh meanwhile we need to also invest into our our shipyards, we need to invest into our electronic warfare, and as well as our sailors and marines as well, and this is why it the the job of balancing the budget is so difficult and uh,

Sure, well

again I I wanna read I'm sorry, sorry, go ahead.

Yeah, one other que- question on that um There are a lot of different companies now making autonomous ships. They're really, it in and yes the autonomous aspect is important, but they're also looking at new ways to do ship building in general. Um, how can we do it more rapidly, uh, more cost effectively. They seem to have made a lot of progress. What are the principal lessons that have been learned from that that regardless of what we're building, whether it's a battleship, an aircraft carrier, or something smaller, that we could do it more quickly and more cost effectively? Do you, and I Both Admiral and the Secretary, if you can either one, yeah.

Well, again, uh I'll turn uh Admiral Cottle in a second,

Sure.

but it's just about uh using AI so we can uh streamline our processes as well as adding for manufacturing but uh Admiral Cottle?

You know, sir, I would say when we were upside down as the Secretary's talking about on on kills, you know, cost per kill with SM two, SM six, we filled it and and rallied very quickly during Red Sea operations Rough Rider to actually get on board our strike groups Roadrunner, Coyote, and Hellfire instantiations of that to really turn that very quickly. That took collaboration from our Surface Warfare and Mine Development Center, from Surfland, from Dahlgren, and of course NAVWAR to get those TTPs, bake that in, get it certified, and every striker has deployed with that. It's much more effective and that learning happened very quickly.

Yeah.

Directed energy of course is part of that electronic warfare. Some of the things that, you know, in the in the

I'm out of Time. I apologize for that.

Sure.

I don't I don't want to take too much time. But those are exactly the types of answers that I think we need more of. I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Mr. Turner is recognized.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Secretary, I am the co-chair of of your I am the I am the co-chair of the Congressional Military Sexual Assault Prevention caucus. Several of us have received information of a change in the Navy policy concerning how investigations of reports of sexual harassment are handled. um, I'm going to submit to you, uh, a letter requesting, uh, written answers to concerns about, uh, those changes. I ask unanimous consent to,

Yeah, good.

uh, submit this for the record and then,

Bad objection.

thank you, and then ask for your, uh, written, uh, responses to those. Um, Mister Secretary, uh, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base is in my district and it is home to the seven eleventh Human Performance Wing. It is also home to the Naval Medical Research Unit Dayton. Uh, it is the site whi- as where those two come together as a joint center of excellence for aerospace medical research that was established in two thousand and five. It's a place where the um, Air Force and the Navy are supposed to come together, uh, conducting aerospace medicine research for the purposes of advancing human performance in aerospace. Unfortunately, the Naval Medical Research Unit in Dayton has been neglected in twenty Twenty-two, a study for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers identified that this medical unit was in desperate need of just basic maintenance, um, and, uh, it continues to struggle for funding in basic infrastructure improvements. As a result of that, I put a request in the, in last year's NDAA, uh, for the Navy to respond to how is the Navy going to respond to this report from twenty-two that has yet to be, um, answered. That report in the NDAA had a deadline of of this year of March thirty-first, which was missed this year. Uh, so the Navy hasn't even responded to the request to respond to the lack of responding to the Army Corps of Engineers' response which was twenty, twenty-two. Um, we're missing the opportunity for the, uh, Navy and the Air Force to work together in aerospace medicine research which again is supposed to advance human performance in in aerospace. But secretary I'd ask you are you aware of this missed opportunity and um you know, can we remedy this this opportunity so that we can advance obviously this this incredible opportunity to advance human performance in aerospace?

Congressman, uh I apologize, I I was not aware of this, but you know this is the problem when we have a lot of these uh you know units attached to Air Force bases I had the problem in Tinker Air Force Base too where we had a large number of suicides and that, I've I've gone there personally and I've I've uh made a lot of headway in order to to curtail the suicide rates at Tinker Air Force Base, but for for Wright Patterson Air Force Base, human performance is so important. We have to treat every na- uh sailor and marine like a weapon systems. We need to take care of them. That's whether it's through human performance or or medical treatment or even mental health we will do that so uh you have my word that I will uh not only look at into this, respond quickly, but also come come visit you, sir. And in response to your the uh sexual assault um and sexual harassment, we we are we are gonna investigate every single issue with with uh license and and or trained uh investigators, and we will respond to that that request as well. And uh again, I I have five children, three daughters, I will not allow this to happen.

I look forward to your response to both. Thank you.

Uh, gentleman from California, Mister Garamendi.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, Mister Chairman, uh, you and uh, ranking member Smith, as well as the secretary, uh, spoke to the issue of the commercial, uh, fleet that America does not have. Uh, draw to your attention there is a piece of legislation called the Ships Act that deals directly with that. Uh, I bring that to the attention of the committee and perhaps could be an integral part of our work as we form up the uh NDAA. Um rather important in meeting all of the requirements that we have. So I'll let it go at that. Thank you for bringing the issue up and I'll drive it forward. Um I have uh two questions here uh Admiral Cottle. The west coast of the United States, I believe borders on the Pacific. The Pacific is going to be, has been and will continue to be a major theater with enormous um, challenges. Do we have sufficient facilities on the west coast of the United States to meet the needs of the Navy as it looks to its larger fleet and to the challenges of the Pacific?

Uh, Congressman, uh, we do not have sufficient facilities in general, and I would argue that we do not have sufficient on the west coast. As our theater of importance and our priority of how we've split the the Navy, our sixty forty split predicates that to prevent transits through the Panama Canal or other ways we get around to the east coast, the more options I have as the CNO for parishes without those transits to east coast public yards the way I can, you know, have to fair share those yards and keep them level loaded, improves quality of life for people if they can stay on the coast and not such large, uh, PCS moves, and just improves combat and damage control that I can do when I actually need a repair, and in that capacity. So we are tasked in this budget to go look hard at a fifth shipyard. And that n- that study is, you know, we will take a lot of time and understand that very clearly where to lay down that capacity but I would to your answer your question bluntly no, I do not have sufficient capacity.

I look forward to working with you on uh developing opportunities on the West Coast for the uh need of the Navy for its ship repair and perhaps also for the uh uh development of additional Fleet. Uh, I wanna go to General Smith. Uh, you spoke in your um opening testimony about the uh amphibious ready groups and the MEU's. What do you need to carry out your plan? Do you have sufficient ships, amphibs, large and not so large? Uh, and what is the plan to develop? What is your plan and what is your need to develop the necessary fleet for the Marine Corps.

Well, sir, thanks for that question. So our requirement is a three point zero R mu, again, one off the east coast, one off the west coast, and one episodically deployed out of Okinawa, Japan. We're currently required to have a minimum of thirty-one amphibious warfare ships, but that was predicated on eighty percent readiness, and we're we're well short of eighty percent readiness uh in in the amphib fleet, we're closer to uh to fifty percent, so we're gonna need more ships. Um, I I defer to my shipmate, Darrell Cottle, on on exactly how many ships are gonna be required to maintain that three point O RGME presence. But my requirement is a three point O RGME presence regardless of the number of ships that are available.

So those would be the large amphibs and the medium?

Yes, sir. L LHAs, LHDs, and then LP LPDs.

Uh, is are they presently in the planning that the Navy is putting forth?

Again, I will I will defer to uh to the secretary and to the CNO on that,

Well then, let's move to the secretary.

sir.

Sir, yes, well, sir, I was just gonna tell you, we have an LHN, LPD and and LSMs in the budget. Yeah.

So both of the all three of those ships are in the budget, have sufficient number to meet the needs of the Marine Corps?

Yes, Congress. Yes, Congress.

Very good. Um, with that I will uh yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Gentlemen, yield's back, chair and I recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Whitman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank our witnesses for joining us today, Secretary Cowell, Admiral Caudill, General Smith. Thanks so much for the incredible job that you do. Secretary Cowell, I want to start with you. Uh, yesterday at the House subcommittee on appropriations for defense, you talked about nuclear power generation, specifically onshore nuclear power generation. We all know our nuclear navy is is the best ever in the history of humankind and how it utilizes nuclear energy to power our ships, that's seventy years of record with naval reactors, is beyond uh beyond reproach. What I wanna look at is how are we taking that technology and then applying it in different ways. And I got language in last year's National Defense Authorization Act that directed pilot projects on Navy bases to actually do onshore nuclear power generation with small modular reactors and to do that in a way where we can pair that with data centers. Listen, the the future of what we need to make sure we win the race in AI is gonna center around data you wanna have your power generation sources close to where your data centers are the power demand there's a need for the military for for that power generation to have organic capabilities on a base to make sure we're not at peril with the the larger grid if somebody tries to take it out and then making sure we have our own organic capability with the data that we need for that all those things make sense they're also in align with what's happening uh externally with other efforts to generate more power uh to to uh respond to this nation's increased energy needs and making sure that we're doing data center development in a very responsible way and I argue the nation and the navy and the military benefits from that give me your perspective on how you think we can aggressively pursue this to as quickly as we can get these SMRs permitted and under construction on navy bases how we can look for partners in the data data center realm to put those on military bases or on Navy bases and how you would look at executing that.