Navy Posture: FY 2027 Defense Authorization and Future Years Defense Program

we give it the one minute warning This morning the committee meets to receive testimony on the posture of the Department of the Navy. I want to thank our witnesses, Acting Secretary of the Navy, Hong Kau, chief of naval operations admiral uh darryl carl and uh commandant of the marine corps general eric smith for being here uh and for their distinguished service and also for their testimony earlier early in a classified uh session i wanna begin by applauding president trump's fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget request it proposes sixty five billion dollars for ship building to buy eighteen battle force ships and sixteen support vessels. It builds directly on last year's substantial increase, including the funding from last year's reconciliation law, which jumps started procurement for support ships and unmanned naval vessels. Previous shipbuilding plans were not based on realistic assumptions about industrial base growth and cost reductions. Those plans assumed a world at peace. not one that demands active deterrence. Um, the can was kicked down the road instead of investing in American shipyards and workers. The statute, the new statute requires a three, uh, well, let me put this, uh, for, uh, for over a decade, the statute has required a three hundred fifty-five ship fleet. This is the law, signed by the President of the United States. But no plan over the last decade succeeded, even though they promised to build a navy with more than three hundred ships. Today we sit at just two hundred ninety-one ships in our fleet. This budget changes that trajectory. Over the next five years it plans more than fifty billion dollars annually for battle force ships. A welcome change from the roughly thirty billion dollars we saw in past requests. Fifty billion versus thirty billion. Congress has had to add funding every year since twenty thirteen to make up for inadequate shipbuilding requests. I'm pleased that we may finally enter a period where the budget is adequate and realistic. This is the kind of leadership our Navy and our Industrial Base need. So, thank you and congratulations. However, I must note some concerns. Current requirements dictate that we need the continuous presence of three amphibious readiness groups. Each should be built around a simple formation, one large deck amphibious warfare ship and two small deck ones. This plan does all it can over the next five years, but still leaves the fleet stuck around thirty-one amphibious ships. This still leaves us approximately nine ships short of the three amphibious readiness group requirement. Um, I'm also troubled about the reduction to just one destroyer per year. The reduction is coming just as we will begin retiring large surface combatants. Uh, maybe I should say the reduction would come if that stays the case. Uh, just as we begin retiring large surface combatants, which we will do at an average rate of more than three per year over the coming decade. That math doesn't add up. The risk to our fleet is simply too high. Regarding unmanned systems, the Navy's commitment is equally inadequate. Congress invested five billion dollars in unmanned maritime systems in last year's defense reconciliation bill. In this shipbuilding plan, we see a desire to build unmanned vessels at sca- unmanned surface vessels at scale. However, we see zero funding for small vessels and the procurement of only ten to twelve medium vessels annually. Our small and medium medium shipyards need much higher demand than that. Um, I'm also puzzled by the department's failure to request funding for the nuclear sea-launched cruise missile program. Despite explicit statutory direction to do so in last year's NDAIA bill. Passed by the House, passed by the Senate, signed by President Trump. Uh, as I told the secretary of energy, uh, publicly last week, this is simply a matter of complying with the law. The United States cannot afford to forego credible, flexible response options while our adversaries, nuclear forces, grow by the day. Finally, we must address any move to outsource shipbuilding to foreign countries, whether modules or entire hulls. I do not believe the American people favor such an approach. We've yet to see concrete details or proposals for the NDAIA, and time is running short. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on these issues. We must work together to grow the capacity of our Navy and our industrial base to deliver the best naval forces for the United States in our increasingly contested world. As I mentioned earlier, um, my colleague, the ranking member, Senator Reid, has um asked us to go ahead. He will submit his opening statement for the record. And we are now prepared to hear opening statements. Secretary Cowell, you are recognized first, then let's take Admiral Caudill and then General Smith. Mister Secretary, you are recognized.

Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Representative Reid, distinguished members of the Senate Armed Service Committee. Thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. America's 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 ready groups with the thirty-first marine expeditionary unit are in the Arabian Sea, protecting merchant ships and stopping illicit shipping from by a terrorist regime. Destroyers Arleigh Burke, Oscar Austin, Bulkley and Gonzalez are protecting our allies in Mediterranean against cruise missiles from Iran. In the Caribbean, Iwo Jima ARC-MU is stopping narco terrorists from poisoning Americans with illegal drugs. In the Pacific, Boxer ARC-MU and Destroyer Squadron seven are enforcing the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. At home, we're preparing Macon Island, ARC-MU and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, a forty nine year old nuclear powered aircraft carrier for deployment. On the southern border, our sailors and marines stand watch tonight, saying nothing will hurt you, not on my watch. For four weeks 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 our sailors and 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 are 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 and five unmanned ships. In five years we will add a hundred and twenty-two manned and sixty-three unmanned ships. We will add a hundred and twenty-three new aircrafts and five unmanned ships as well. We are funding the readiness of our fleet to ninety five percent. We're procuring exquisite munitions that will keep our forces outside the weapon 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, child development centers that so there are sailors and marines have a safe, clean and comfortable place to live, and not have to worry about their families when 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. Two weeks ago I was on board USS Gerald R. Ford, USS Winston Churchill, and USS Bainbridge, as they're returning from the eleven month combat deployment in two theaters. Do not believe the fake news that claims food shortages, backed up toilets and low morale. What I witnessed were motivated and professional young Americans 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, peer competitors grew stronger and threatened our sovereignty. Their hundred year plan has one goal, total global domination. But one thing stands in their way, and that is the United States of America. The Navy and Marine Corps are America's nine one one force, capable of being anywhere as a carrier 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 before this body, that it would create the most lethal Navy 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 was in combat. I also do this because I will not allow my oldest son, who will be commissioned as a second lieutenant of the United States Marine Corps in three days, 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 and daughters. They signed a blank check to this nation, up to include their lives, and we owe to them to do our due diligence to fund a historic budget that will care for them and their families while giving them all the tools that they need. I have seen firsthand what communism and authoritarian regimes have done to thriving nations. Members of my family were mur- murdered by communists. In nineteen seventy five, we had no flag to stand under or country to call our own, but the United States gave us hope and a future. I've dedicated my entire adult life to defend this nation under God. so that this would never happen, my children, your children, or our grandchildren. Thank you again, Chairman, for your time and uh this opportunity to testify before you. I'm ready to answer your question, sir.

Uh, thank you, Secretary Cowell, and congratulations um on your son. I think I'll know where you'll be three days from now. And um I'm sure you are as proud of him as as I was to see my son commissioned some years ago. Uh, Admiral Cuddle, your opening statement, sir.

Good morning, uh, Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Reid 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, Hung Kow, and my good friend, Eric General Smith. We appreciate the committee's steadfast support for our sailors, Marines, civilian workforce, and their families as well as the resources you provide to defend our nation. This past year our Navy celebrated two hundred and fifty years of American seapower. 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 greatest competitive advantage and the heartbeat of our fleet. This July, 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 operate operationalize my priorities of foundry, fleet, and fight, and provide clear guidance on how we will build, generate, and employ naval 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 proving 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're executing a head strategy to ensure the fleet we build today is ready to, 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 manufacturing, directed energy, and containerized systems as operational capabilities that expand our reach, persistence, and lethality across our kill chains and kill webs. Our FOI twenty-seven budget request is strategy driven, and 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. 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 foundly foundry results in a hollow navy. Third, the fleet. The fleet is our most flexible and decisive military instrument of national power. Therefore, we must feel the right mix of forces to realize the Golden 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 the honor of my lifetime to serve as your Chief of Naval Operations. 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. I look forward to your questions, sir. Thank you.

Thank you very much for that statement. General Smith, you are recognized, sir.

Well, good morning, Chairman Wicker. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm honored to appear before you today alongside Acting Secretary Cowell and Admiral Caudill to r- 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. Two, setting the theater. Three, accelerating modernization and lethality, and four, building and sustaining a lethal force. Restoring a three point zero amphibious ready group marine expeditionary unit presence is our North Star. It's the thing that keeps me up at night. It consists of three continuously forward deployed amphibious ready group marine expeditionary unit teams. One sourced from the east coast, one from the west coast, and one forward deployed from Okinawa, Japan. Each embarked on three amphibious warships. The ARG, the amphibious ready group, with marine expeditionary units embarked, is the most agile, versatile, and responsive formation of the joint force, hands down. It's how our nation's leaders sustain forward posture, deter aggression, and respond to crisis or conflict across the globe. Today we have a three point O amphibious ready group marine expeditionary unit presence and its strategic value is clear. The twenty-second marine expeditionary unit 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 are committed to project to protecting 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 lateral mobility, pre-positioning equipment and supplies, and digital manufacturing and additive manufacturing, and enhanced installation resilience. We're re- uh we're refining our approach to logistics, prioritizing resilience, speed, and adaptability to generate and sustain 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 our Marines are more lethal, survivable, and resilient. And finally, we are building and sustaining a lethal force. The quality of life of Marines and their families directly impacts readiness, retention, and lethality. We're 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 our national defense who will be retiring. On behalf of all Marines, we thank you. 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 very best in the next chapter of your service. I'd like to close by stating your Marines are ready. Your 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 in contested environments. to deter, deny, and defeat adversaries. Thank you again for your trust and support, and I look forward to your questions.

Secretary Cal, I'm sure you're um uh very proud and and pleased to to be supported by the gentlemen on your right and left. Uh, General Smith, you mentioned the three point O. Uh, we're we're not gonna be able to sustain that, are we?

Sure, we will not.

And I and so how soon will we be able to rectify that um shortage.

Well, sir, that's gonna take uh years of steady predictable funding from this body, uh from the Congress, to make sure that we have a sufficient amphibious force to meet a three point O.

Can you be more specific though?

Well, sir, what we have now is thirty one.

Because uh we we want you to tell to tell us what you need.

Yes, sir, we have thirty one amphibs now. We think the number is closer to forty.

OK. Well uh well again uh thank you for um identifying that and um and um just be aware that we wanna help. Now um on let's talk about unmanned systems and I'll move to you Admiral and then maybe back to the General. Um the reconciliation bill last year invested five billion dollars to unmanned systems for the Navy. It created two point one billion for medium unmanned surface vehicles and one point five billion for small unmanned surface vehicles. Um, the FYI twenty-seven shipbuilding plan said the Navy is " aggressively pursuing" these unmanned systems and has " committed to build at scale". However, the budget has no funding for small USVs and procures between ten and twelve manned USVs annually in future years at a cost of six hundred to eight hundred million dollars. Um, so, um is there a gap between rhetoric for unmanned systems and the budget, Admiral?

So we uh, I don't think so. You know, if you look back um, FY twenty five, uh, based on my notes here, we're talking about we bought about three hundred and sixty small unmanned surface And then in FY twenty-six, uh, we had about, um, uh, about three times that that we bought, and then we dropped that back down in FY twenty-seven, and and have, I think, in a smart way prioritized, uh, a significant amount of effort and funding toward our medium unmanned surface vessel. Uh, from the Navy perspective, um, they take longer, they're significant, I can put payloads on it and we're all head-flank on building those containerized payloads. Those range from deception to fires to drone swarms to uh total ray systems. And so in the balance of what we're doing in the unmanned space between UUVs, UA, UASs and USVs, I think we've looked hard at that balance and tried to get that right. Um, can additional funding uh do more in these small kind of uh surface attack vessels? Sure, it could. Uh, but as you know, we discussed a bit in the classified session, uh, the concept of deployment there is still under development. And how we actually go bring that capability to bear is something I'm going to look at.

You say we're not ready. We're not ready to use that many small SUVs, US

Well, we are, we are always ready to launch them, and we are ready for them to go do their thing within the range that they would do that in, which is, you know, in the sustainment of how long they last at sea. But in the concept of employment against high-end threats, our ability to actually have those staged and ready to be uh brought to bear from good solid concepts of deployment employment and operations uh we need more work to do there and so that's a command and control and how we build that out you know, we have just stood up our USV RONs, we're just deploying our first MUSV with the Theodore Roosevelt strike group, so in the ability to actually do this the way we do it in the Navy, in an effective and sustained way, we are still early in that stage,

OK, let me let me move to General Smith.

sir.

What what's the Marine Corps planning to do with unmanned systems?

Sir, we're primarily focused on small unmanned systems, small drones, swarming drones, using them as munitions as an extender of our infantry battalions' range. So what we're looking at is uh with a small UAS having hand-thrown or man-portable drones that can be used again as a munition so that I can extend the lethality and range of our infantry battalions. that's our primary focus on our unmanned systems.

are there enough uh in the pipeline on the way for you at the moment

there there are not sir we can't go fast enough we've gotta make sure that we don't get uh get tied down to one manufacturer that we they were able to procure them from across the spectrum cause there are multiple companies who make a one-way attack drone

what needs to happen what needs to happen

well sir frankly we just have to get them get the budget uh that we need to to procure them and then go out and procure them uh, without having all the red tape that we we have had in the past, we don't have now, to get after procuring from multiple vendors without getting quote vendor lock.

OK, we're we're gonna need you to amplify that in in um your response to um to um written questions. But thank you both,

Sure.

and appreciate your service, and to read you are recognized. Welcome back.

Well, thank you. Thank you very much, uh, Mister Chairman, and uh, gentlemen, thank you for your testimony and also for your service. to the nation in many different capacities um secondary cow uh the latest update we received from the navy um about two weeks ago is that the contract negotiations for the virginia block six boats for fy twenty five to twenty nine ten boats and for the columbia built two boats uh from fy twenty six to thirty five votes are very close to being finalized uh what is the status of this contract when will they be completed do you have an idea

thank you for the question we're uh we're we're trying to accelerate the blockbys and and also accelerate the uh actual production of the submarines as well that's why vice admiral gaucher uh has been in charge of the derpam so everything's aligned underneath him he has all the authorities and everything he needs in order to make these things happen and move the uh and accelerate the production to the left and i'll turn over to i don't know kodal to kind of tell you what what our plan is for the uh uh a session of these

thank you mr. director

well sir i'll just tell you we need to get the contract done um but we wanna make sure it's uh you know um has what's baked into it the lessons we've learned on poor contracting strategies uh that we've not always been in the right position to have the right uh oversight and the right incentives and the right mechanisms to ensure we get them delivered on time. So there is been a thoughtful approach by the the the Secretary of War's team and, and the Navy team here, under the PAE structure to actually get that right. Uh, I expected any time, I can't give you exact time, but it it will be made. And we're just making sure that we get that contract language correct, sir.

Well, I appreciate that. Uh, I had a opportunity to go up to Ponce de Pointe and I believe it's retired Avram McKee, who is there. And he's doing a very good job. Uh, but the sooner we get the contract in, then the sooner the company can just keep proceeding ahead much more rapidly than before. Um,

Well, sir,

they

I would just add, I mean, not to, I don't wanna take me more of your time, but it does add to our, you know, our ability to actually execute our budget that we have from FY twenty-six and the one big beautiful bill as well.

No.

So it's tied to that. So we're, we are trying to get that done so that we have high execution numbers on both of those.

Thank you, sir. Uh, Another issue, uh, Mr. Secretary, for the Industrial Base program, that's the, uh, the supply chain, uh, workers, all those things, uh, the Navy's budget request is for seven hundred and eighty-eight million dollars for the submarine industrial base in the discretionary category, which we will, uh, look at, but another two hundred and five million in the mandatory reconciliation column. And, um, there's always an issue whether or not reconciliation will become reality. And what would happen to you if that two hundred five million was not available?

Thank you again for that question, uh, ranking member. This is why we need the whole bill. We need one point five trillion dollars for the, uh, the Department of War, but also the the hundred seven hundred thirty three point five billion dollars for United States uh the Department of the Navy because we just can't I mean, you we're Proact, we're prioritizing everything right now. And everything is a priority because we we need unmanned s- uh systems, we need submarines, we need ships, we need we now need auxiliary ships, we also need quality life for our s- sailors and marines. And this is why we need this whole bill. So, uh, whether you pay it as one bill or or or two separate bills to to us, it's a we're agnostic to it. We just need to move forward, Senator.

I I know you're agnostic, you want the money, but uh uh I would kinda rate the possibility of getting the President's budget in some form through is higher than a uh uh of another reconciliation bill, and you might have to plan for uh accommodating that situation, alright, it'd be worthwhile to do so. Um, fleet readiness, Admiral Cordell, we talked about this in the closed session, but here in this open session uh you always can do something to improve readiness, even in the calmest of moments, this is not one of them, so can you give us an idea of the readiness steps you're taking uh now?

Well, sir, you know, readiness we look at across a typical acronym PESTO, which is people, equipment, our supply and sustainment, our training, and our ordinance. And uh this budget funds our readiness accounts to ninety-five percent. That is incredible for a service chief. You know, I had to work very hard to figure out the puts and takes to get to that level, even though I love readiness. So this is ship operating calls, ship depot, our air operations, our sparing, our paying our manpower bills, of course, and our ordinance. And so, uh, I think this budget goes a long way. It's generational in what it's trying to do to ensure we don't have a hollow navy we have a ready navy. And so there's been all types, you know, there's all types of initiatives that we have from record recruiting, to works we're doing with our vendors to ensure we improve in ordinance production to our fourth generation models to ensure they're actually delivering the the navy we can give our combined commanders. So there's a lot in your question, but I'm in, I'm very happy with the levels that we have baked into this budget, sir.

Very good. General Spitz, I'll catch you on the second round, sir. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Reade. Senator Fischer.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh, Secretary Cowell, I agree with the Chairman's opening comments. I was disappointed to see that the FY twenty-seven budget did not include funding for a slick amend. Our adversaries are not hesitating to their nuclear arsenals. The Navy must prioritize like a man appropriately so that you can meet the statutory deployment date of twenty thirty-two and I am hopeful that this will be corrected. Adam or Admiral, I have an Adam at home. Admiral, uh how is the Navy working to accelerate delivery of the Columbia class submarine program?

Well, um, ma'am, first, unslick a ma'am, if I could, can I give you uh one sentence on that?

Sure.

You know, we all looked hard at this with Johnny Wolf cuz I knew this would come up, and Emerald Wolf. And um, he has assured me that the money and the one big beautiful bill and the FY twenty-six budget, two billion dollars is the right amount of money that we have currently that can be executed with fiscal responsibility. So he is, I think FY twenty-eight you'll see an additional ask. But in the phasing of that money,

My

that is what he thinks needs to be spent.

Admiral, my concern with that is, um, not on, not on your part. And it's not on Admiral Wolf's part either. It is on the part of Congress, where we seem, uh, bound and determined, uh, to move forward with continuing resolutions, which you and I both know is to the detriment of, of the defense of this country. And if - if the money is not put in a budget request and is not part of the appropriations process, you're behind the eight ball to begin with. You're behind that and not able to meet what is, uh, required of you when it comes to slick amend. I wanna make sure that the funding will be there no matter how this Congress may act, and and enable the department and the department of navy to be able to meet their obligations under the law and for the defense of this country to give our combatant commanders uh the opportunity to present the president with the options that he needs that is why i am requesting that is am i gonna be docked for all that time i just took

sure Senator, we're we're we're we're on the we're on the same page.

Admiral. I I know we are.

Yeah, I I want I mean, we want to deliver this.

We just just

So I just

And I know you I know you do, but I'm looking at the realities I face,

OK.

uh, in the political world and what happens here in Congress. So tell me, uh, what's happening with the Columbia class.

Well, Columbia, you know, currently eighteen months off plan and, uh, working hard to get it delivered in twenty eight. Uh, that's our goal, of course, as we've talked about before, under, you know, new leadership. on how we're putting heat and light on that project is with Admiral Goucher, through Director of Submarine Programs, dual-handed as the Derprim to the Under Secretary and the PAE under Secretary Cowell. So, uh, leadership matters there, but also production matters. And and so, as you know, a visit up at Quonset Point, of course, Electra Boat, where all the super modules are now in place. Uh, and so we're now in the final stages of putting those super modules together. And so we're trying to knock down barriers that have historically prevented us from getting that done. Some things on new technologies that we're bringing to bear of how we're actually doing nondestructive testing in the off hours, how we're bringing in more robotic welding, how we're improving artificial intelligence utilization to improve workflows and and management of of actual technical work documents. So there's a lot going on up at EB. Hiring is is a big initiative to make sure the workforce is in place and the development of that workforce. to make sure we have no chinks in the armor to keeping those shifts rolling as we move forward on that delivery timeline.

It's good to hear. Uh, can you give me an update on the Navy's efforts to extend the holes of some of the Ohio class submarines, uh, especially given the delays we're seeing with the Columbia?

Uh, I can. Uh, you know, what we're gonna do is, you know, we were looking at, uh, you know, there's a number like between four and five of these PIRAS, we call them, these post, you know, inactivation restricted availabilities. And now the plan's changed a bit and we're gonna do one for sure. And we have confidence now because of the work we've done to look hard at the Ohio class, that what we will learn during that one will allow us to target the any additional ones we need to do without necessarily having to do the PIRA. So we're gonna utilize the one to learn from that and then scale that across the number we need to make sure we have a clean make before break transition between Ohio and Columbia.

Thank you. Thank you, Mister Chairman.

Um, yes. Uh, thank you very much, Senator Kaine.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. First, Secretary Cowell, I wanna also congratulate you on your son's commissioning. That's a, that's a great story. You yourself are a great American story. I appreciate your presence here today. Um, I wanna start with a, I, I woke up, uh, about a month ago to one of the press conferences of Secretary Hegseth and, and, uh, uh, Admiral Kane. general kane and general kane said the following i perked right up when we talk about an american destroyer it's important that you and the american people understand their capabilities an arleigh bert class destroyers are the backbone of the united states surface fleet and this chart really illustrates that if you could raise it up a little bit when the fire bell rang in the middle east it was the destroyers that answered the call that are there there are eleven now in in the uh uh vicinity of iran also in the med also in the pacific uh it it's one of the most uh it is the backbone of the fleet in fact i i don't have to assert that that's what general kane said uh these ships are armed to the teeth this is a general kane again with surface air missiles missiles land attack cruise missiles anti-ship anti-ship missiles any submarine rockets torpedoes five inch guns extending the reach and capability of each and every one of these destroyers What puzzles me is that the budget that's been submitted only requests one. And uh I I I just I I don't really understand that. Uh, particularly as as chairman pointed out, there are gonna be retirements coming in in in the in the future. So we're not even if if there are three retirements and we're only building one a year, that's uh that's we're we're going into the hole. Um. Every hearing we've had in this committee for the past i don't know six months has talked about rebuilding the industrial base the only way to rebuild the industrial base is with consistent demand signals you can't expect our private sector industrial base to make significant investments if they don't know where the next project is coming from or if they're gonna run out of work in a year or two and that's the situation that comes so i hope you will reconsider the request for only one destroyer as we've been doing it over the years it's been three one year two the next three the next and two after that uh and i i hope that we can return to the this is the year that should be three rather than one so mr. secretary i hope you'll look carefully at that because we're talking about the backbone of the navy here and uh these these shipyards and admiral call you've been to bath i thank you for doing that they can't turn off their workforce and back on again if welders leave they're gone And so we have to maintain a consistent work level. Uh, and one another term for a backlog is a consistent demand signal. And, uh, Mister Secretary, I hope you'll take some cognizance of that.

Senator, thank you for the question. And again, I I I I'm with you. This is the backbone of, uh, the US fleet and they it's the workhorse. But the fact is right now we have eighty ships on contract, uh, uh, throughout the various yards, uh, fifty-nine in construction, and bath alone, sir, is uh there's eleven destroyers that are on contract for bath alone and seven are in construction we haven't even begun cutting metal for for the the other four i'm just uh we're trying to allow for the industrial base to catch up but i i would love to put ten destroyers in there in the budget but the fact is that uh i need for this industrial base to catch up senator

well and and i agree with you and but one way to do that is to provide the demand signal so that uh the the the the shipyards can make the additional capital investments along with the navy in order to increase productivity and that's happening at bath i i'm there very frequently but i think that's uh uh uh i think we agree on that now the second part of this is there's talk uh uh around this budget about building ships and even destroyers in japan and korea that's the worst idea since the red sox traded babe ruth to the yankees

mmm

i mean it just doesn't make sense to be handing over that level of technology uh even in even to our allies and i have two reports i wanna submit for the record both about substantial even higher backlogs in japan and korea in shipyards so mr. chairman i'd like to the permission to put these reports in the record

is is there objection without objection and and uh also let's put you the chart uh which you just um referred to in the record also is there objection Without objection, that's done.

I mean, the the idea of building ships, building naval ships in a in a foreign shipyard, uh, I just don't understand. Admiral, every stitch of clothing you have on is required to be made in the USA, under the Barry Amendment. If we require our sailors to wear shirts made in the USA, but their ships can be made abroad, that just doesn't make sense to me. So, I hope we can revisit this terrible idea of talking about building naval vessels abroad, both from a national security point of view but also rebuilding the industrial base means providing the the demand signal that will allow our industrial base to reconstitute itself and to meet the demand that we're we're placing on it so uh i i appreciate your your your work on this uh admiral i certainly appreciate you saw those incredible men and women at bath that are doing i think building the most complex product in america uh and uh we want to strengthen their ability to do that, their productivity, and that's happening. So, thank you, Mister Chairman. I appreciate the time.

Um, thank you for those comments, Senator King, Senator Budd.

Thank you, Chairman. Uh, thank you all for being here. Thank you for your service and that of your teams behind you. Uh, Admiral Caudal, it's uh great to see another North Carolinian North Forsyth High School, if I believe is correct. Um. So, a question for both uh you, Admiral Caudal and uh General Smith as well. Uh. So I visited DARPA last week and I learned about their artificial blood program. So what's the Navy doing to have enough blood on hand in the event of a large scale uh operation or combat operations in the Pacific? We'll start with you, Admiral. Sir, I I just visited DARPA m- myself not too long ago and got the prob- maybe the same brief that you got on the initiatives there. This is FS uh HARP uh this type of uh synthetic blood and synthetic platelets that they're working on. That is the keys to the kingdom on battlefield, you know, survivability, ensuring we can meet the golden hour across the vast Indo-Pacific. So synthetic blood products is something I'm very interested in. I don't think we have got it to a place in the uh from a perspective of fielding it where we should be. I know Bumet has worked on this, probably not with enough energy and effort. Uh, I know personally now the Director of Health Agency, Department of Health Agency. Um, Darren Veid knows about this program and knows how important it is. So you have my commitment to look at this, and along with my my good shipmate here, Eric Smith, cuz it's important to keeping his Marines alive as well, sir. Thank you for that, Admiral. Uh, General, that uh same question, but also are there any se- any policy or resurs- re- resourcing challenges that I can help with?

Well, sir, on the on the room temperature blood products, that's the holy grail of battlefield medicine. Uh, you know, when I was shot in two thousand four, I bled, I I came close to bleeding out. Um, I was fortunate to be medevaced to a hospital in Baghdad and and had five units of blood pumped into me. Um, but had I had the ability to to do room temperature blood products on the battlefield, I would have been in much better shape. I'm still here, but but that is the holy grail of battlefield medicine.