Senate Armed Services Committee holds hearing on Navy’s 2027 authorization request

[0:00] of only 10 to 12 medium vessels annually. [0:04] Our small and medium shipyards [0:07] need much higher demand than that. [0:10] I'm also puzzled by the department's failure [0:12] to request funding for the nuclear sea-launched [0:16] cruise missile program, [0:19] despite explicit statutory direction to do so [0:23] in last year's NDAA bill, [0:27] passed by the House, passed by the Senate, [0:30] signed by President Trump. [0:32] As I told the Secretary of Energy publicly last week, [0:37] this is simply a matter of complying with the law. [0:40] The United States cannot afford to forego [0:43] credible, flexible response options [0:46] while our adversaries' nuclear forces grow by the day. [0:53] Finally, we must address any move [0:54] to outsource shipbuilding to foreign countries, [0:57] whether modules or entire hulls. [1:00] I do not believe the American people [1:02] favor such an approach. [1:03] We've yet to see concrete details or proposals [1:07] for the NDAA, and time is running short. [1:10] I look forward to hearing from our witnesses [1:12] on these issues. [1:14] We must work together to grow the capacity [1:16] of our Navy and our industrial base [1:18] to deliver the best naval forces for the United States [1:21] in our increasingly contested world. [1:24] As I mentioned earlier, my colleague, the ranking member, [1:28] Senator Reed, has asked us to go ahead. [1:34] He will submit his opening statement for the record. [1:38] And we are now prepared to hear opening statements. [1:42] Secretary Cowell, you are recognized first. [1:45] Then let's take Admiral Caudill and then General Smith. [1:49] Mr. Secretary, you are recognized. [1:53] Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, distinguished members of the Senate Armed [1:56] Service Committee, thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. [2:00] America's sailors and Marines are currently on the front lines of freedom in operations [2:04] to protect our republic. [2:06] Lincoln and Bush carrier strike groups and Tripoli amphibious ready groups with the 31st Marine [2:10] Expeditionary Unit are in the Arabian Sea protecting merchant ships and stopping illicit [2:16] shipping by a terrorist regime. [2:19] Destroyers Arleigh Burke, Oscar Austin, Bulkley, and Gonzalez are protecting our allies in [2:24] Mediterranean against cruise missiles from Iran. [2:27] In the Caribbean, Iwo Jima-Arg-Mu is stopping narco terrorists from poisoning Americans with [2:32] illegal drugs. [2:34] In the Pacific, Voxer-Arg-Mu and Destroyer Squadron 7 are enforcing the freedom of navigation [2:39] in the South China Sea. [2:41] At home, we're preparing Macon Island, Arg-Mu, and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, a 49-year-old [2:47] nuclear-powered aircraft carrier for deployment. [2:50] On the southern border, our sailors and Marines stand watch tonight, saying, nothing will hurt [2:54] you, not on my watch. [2:56] For four weeks ago, I was tasked by President Trump to lead the United States Navy and the [3:00] United States Marine Corps. [3:02] My three priorities are to take care of our sailors and Marines, build ships, and protect [3:06] our homeland. [3:08] 120 years ago, the Great White Fleet extended America's reach across the globe. [3:12] We are currently at the forefront of history with a budget that will create the Golden [3:16] Fleet, which renews that maritime dominance. [3:19] We have the obligation to give our sailors and Marines the very best equipment to do their [3:23] jobs. [3:24] In our historic budget of $377.5 billion, we're adding 34 new ships and five unmanned ships. [3:31] In five years, we will add 122 manned and 63 unmanned ships. [3:37] We will add 123 new aircrafts and five unmanned ships as well. [3:43] We are funding the readiness of our fleet to 95%. [3:46] We're procuring exquisite munitions that will keep our forces outside the weapon engagement [3:50] zone while investing in research development for the fight of the future. [3:54] More importantly, we are increasing our service member pays, investing in family and unaccompanied [3:59] housing, child development centers so that our sailors and Marines have a safe, clean, and [4:04] comfortable place to live, and not have to worry about their families when deployed in [4:08] harm's way. [4:10] We have greatly exceeded recruiting and retention goals, and that is due solely to the shared [4:14] leadership of President Trump and Secretary Hegsa. [4:18] Two weeks ago, I was on board USS Gerald R. Ford, USS Winston Churchill, and USS Bainbridge, [4:23] as they're returning from the 11-month combat deployment in two theaters. [4:28] Do not believe the fake news that claims food shortages, backed up toilets, and low morale. [4:35] What I witnessed were motivated and professional young Americans pushing the boundaries of performance [4:41] for their country. [4:42] It is imperative that we pass this budget. [4:45] Ship construction and readiness were bill payers for Iraq and Afghanistan for 20 years. [4:50] While our industrial base atrophied, America's peer competitors grew stronger and threatened [4:54] our sovereignty. [4:55] Their 100-year plan has one goal, total global domination, but one thing stands their way, [5:01] and that is the United States of America. [5:03] The Navy and Marine Corps are America's 9-1-1 force, capable of being anywhere as a carrier [5:08] strike group or Marine Air Ground Task Force with overwhelming firepower, as we saw in absolute [5:14] resolve and epic fury. [5:16] A year ago, I testified in my confirmation before this body that it would create the most lethal [5:22] Navy and Marine Corps team the world has ever seen. [5:25] I will keep that promise, having worn the cloth of our nation for 32 years, most of which [5:29] was in combat. [5:31] I also do this because I will not allow my oldest son, who will be commissioned as a second lieutenant [5:35] of the United States Marine Corps in three days, to go to war the way I did, without the [5:41] equipment that we needed. [5:43] I will not allow this for any of America's sons and daughters. [5:46] They signed a blank check to this nation, up to and clean their lives, and we owe it to [5:50] them to do our due diligence to fund a historic budget that will care for them and their families [5:54] while giving them all the tools that they need. [5:57] I have seen firsthand what communism and authoritarian regimes have done to thriving nations. [6:04] Members of my family were murdered by communists. [6:07] In 1975, we had no flag to stand under or country to call our own, but the United States gave us [6:12] hope and a future. [6:14] I have dedicated my entire adult life to defend this nation under God, so that this would never [6:19] happen to my children, your children, or our grandchildren. [6:23] Thank you again, Chairman, for your time and this opportunity to testify before you. [6:27] I am ready to answer your question, sir. [6:30] Thank you, Secretary Cowell, and congratulations on your son. [6:34] I think I know where you will be three days from now. [6:37] And I am sure you are as proud of him as I was to see my son commissioned some years ago. [6:46] Admiral Caudill, your opening statement, sir. [6:47] Admiral Caudill, Good morning, Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Reed and distinguished members [6:53] of the committee. [6:54] Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to testify on the posture of the United States [6:59] Navy. [7:00] I am honored to be joined by Acting Secretary of the Navy, Hung Kao, and my good friend, [7:05] Eric General Smith. [7:07] We appreciate the committee's steadfast support for our sailors, Marines, civilian workforce, [7:13] and their families, as well as the resources you provide to defend our nation. [7:17] This past year, our Navy celebrated 250 years of American sea power. [7:23] Today our founding fathers would scarcely recognize the modern fleet, ballistic missile submarines [7:28] deterring strategic attack, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers projecting power across the globe, [7:34] and an all-domain naval force delivering precision, lethality at scale. [7:40] And while the platforms have changed, one truth has not. [7:43] The sailor remains our greatest competitive advantage and the heartbeat of our fleet. [7:48] This July, our nation's 250th birthday, our sailors will carry that legacy forward wherever [7:54] our nation requires presence, power, and resolve. [7:58] Since assuming the duties of the Chief of Naval Operations, I have been focused on one central [8:03] objective, ensuring the Navy never loses its differentiated value. [8:08] In February, we released the United States Navy Fighting Instructions, which is designed [8:12] to operationalize my priorities of foundry, fleet, and fight, and provide clear guidance [8:18] on how we will build, generate, and employ naval combat power for the conflicts we must be prepared [8:25] to win. [8:26] These instructions reflect a simple reality. [8:29] The Navy's value lies in our ability to generate decisive combat power from the sea with tailorable [8:35] formations, sustain them forward, and deliver lethal effects across every domain at the time [8:41] and place of our choosing globally. [8:44] Operation Epic Fury is proving in real-time what the Navy delivers – forward, persistent combat [8:50] power from the sea, sovereign options, independent of basing, survivable and resilient under pressure, [8:58] and able to strike decisively. [9:00] That is our differentiated value on full display. [9:03] To preserve that advantage, we're executing a head strategy to ensure the fleet we built [9:08] today is ready for the fight we face now and adaptable and scalable to the one we will [9:13] face tomorrow. [9:14] That strategy is realized through the Golden Fleet Initiative, a fleet design that blends high-end [9:20] combatants, integrates robotic and autonomous systems, and enables scalable formations to outpace [9:26] emerging threats. [9:28] This approach increases our ability to scale combat mass, distribute risk, and maintain [9:33] escalation dominance against the operational challenges our combatant commanders face globally. [9:39] It also requires integrating technologies like artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, [9:44] directed energy, and containerized systems as operational capabilities that expand our reach, [9:50] persistence, and lethality across our kill chains and kill webs. [9:55] Our FY27 budget request is strategy-driven and aligned to the Department of the Navy's priorities [10:00] and the objectives of the National Defense Strategy, leveraging the concepts outlined in the United [10:06] States Navy Fighting Instructions to ensure our investments directly strengthen the Foundry, [10:11] the Fleet, and the way we fight. [10:13] It reflects disciplined choices to ensure we, first, always field a credible and highly effective [10:20] sea-based strategic deterrent, and, second, we invest in the right capabilities that preserve [10:25] our warfighting advantage. [10:27] To do that, we focus on four priorities. [10:30] Sailors first. [10:31] Quality of service is not a luxury. [10:33] It underwrites combat readiness and must always be our first priority. [10:37] Second, the Foundry. [10:38] The Foundry is where combat power is forged, and we must not use it as a bill payer. [10:43] A hollow foundry results in a hollow navy. [10:47] Third, the Fleet. [10:48] The Fleet is our most flexible and decisive military instrument of national power. [10:53] Therefore, we must field the right mix of forces to realize the Golden Fleet's full potential [10:58] through a smart application of the head strategy. [11:01] And fourth, the Fight. [11:03] Winning will depend on the strength and adaptability of our kill chains and kill webs. [11:09] From robust counter-targeting to leveraging new stealth technologies to an abundance of longer-range [11:14] munitions to enhanced mission command. [11:17] We must integrate and synchronize our capabilities seamlessly with our Joint Force teammates, our [11:22] partners, and our allies. [11:24] It is the honor of my lifetime to serve as your Chief of Naval Operations. [11:29] With your continued partnership, we will ensure the United States Navy remains the most capable, [11:34] most ready, and most lethal maritime force in the world. [11:37] I look forward to your questions, sir. [11:39] Thank you. [11:40] Thank you very much for that statement. [11:41] General Smith, you are recognized, sir. [11:44] Well, good morning, Chairman Wicker. [11:46] Ladies and gentlemen, I'm honored to appear before you today alongside Acting Secretary Cowell [11:51] and Admiral Cottle to represent your Marine Corps. [11:55] I'd like to start by recognizing the significance of this year's President's budget. [11:59] It is a generational investment that supports the Marine Corps' top four focus areas. [12:05] One, restoring a 3.0 Amphibious Ready Group Marine Expeditionary Unit presence, two, setting [12:11] the theater, three, accelerating modernization and lethality, and four, building and sustaining [12:16] a lethal force. [12:19] Having a 3.0 Amphibious Ready Group Marine Expeditionary Unit presence is our North Star. [12:22] It's the thing that keeps me up at night. [12:25] It consists of three continuously forward deployed Amphibious Ready Group Marine Expeditionary [12:28] Unit teams, one sourced from the East Coast, one from the West Coast, and one forward deployed [12:33] from Okinawa, Japan, each embarked on three amphibious warships. [12:37] The ARG, the Amphibious Ready Group with Marine Expeditionary Units embarked, is the most [12:42] agile, versatile, and responsive formation of the joint force, hands down. [12:47] It's how our nation's leaders sustain forward posture, deter aggression, and respond to [12:51] crisis or conflict across the globe. [12:55] Today, we have a 3.0 Amphibious Ready Group Marine Expeditionary Unit presence, and its [12:59] strategic value is clear. [13:00] The 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit is combating narco-terrorism in the Caribbean, while the 31st [13:06] Marine Expeditionary Unit and the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit are providing operational [13:10] flexibility to maintain security and stability in the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific. [13:14] But this is not something we can sustain. [13:18] We need to enhance our amphibious warship readiness and increase the size of our amphibious force. [13:23] I want to extend my sincere appreciation to the Secretary of War, the Acting Secretary of [13:27] the Navy, and my shipmate, Darrell Caudill, for their unwavering support towards our shared [13:31] goal of restoring a 3.0 Amphibious Ready Group Marine Expeditionary Unit presence. [13:37] Our second focus area is setting the theater. [13:40] We are committed to protecting our interests, deterring adversaries, reassuring allies, and [13:46] creating a more agile and resilient global sustainment network, one that seamlessly integrates [13:53] with the joint force. [13:54] To achieve this, we are ensuring an optimized force posture while also investing in littoral [14:00] mobility, prepositioning equipment and supplies, and digital manufacturing and additive manufacturing, [14:07] and enhanced installation resilience. [14:11] We are refining our approach to logistics, prioritizing resilience, speed, and adaptability [14:16] to generate and sustain forces. [14:19] Our third area of focus is accelerating modernization and lethality. [14:23] Force design underpins everything that we do. [14:26] We remain committed to modernizing everything from our Marine Expeditionary Units to our Marine [14:30] Expeditionary Forces, focusing on precision fires, air defense, unmanned systems, resilient [14:37] command and control, and electromagnetic warfare. [14:39] We are gaining momentum, but we have to accelerate to ensure our Marines are more lethal, survivable, [14:45] and resilient. [14:46] And finally, we are building and sustaining a lethal force. [14:50] The quality of life of Marines and their families directly impacts readiness, retention, and lethality. [14:56] We are deliberately investing in Marines and their families to improve living conditions, institutionalize [15:01] Marine Corps total fitness, and ensure support for family resources. [15:06] Before I close, I want to take a moment to recognize the members of this committee and other committees [15:10] with jurisdiction over our national defense who will be retiring. [15:13] On behalf of all Marines, we thank you. [15:16] Thank you for your leadership, but most of all for your partnership. [15:19] Your constant and steadfast support has ensured the readiness of your Marine Corps. [15:24] We wish you the very best in the next chapter of your service. [15:27] I'd like to close by stating your Marines are ready. [15:31] Your Corps is a globally responsive, lethal, combined arms, naval expeditionary force that [15:36] is capable of projecting power from sea to land and from land to sea, and to maneuver across [15:42] multiple domains in contested environments to deter, deny, and defeat adversaries. [15:48] Thank you again for your trust and support, and I look forward to your questions. [15:51] Secretary Cowell, I'm sure you're very proud and pleased to be supported by the gentleman [16:02] on your right and left. [16:04] General Smith, you mentioned the 3.0. [16:06] We're not going to be able to sustain that, are we? [16:10] Sir, we will not. [16:12] And so how soon will we be able to rectify that shortage? [16:19] Well, sir, that's going to take years of steady, predictable funding from this body, from the [16:24] Congress, to make sure that we have a sufficient amphibious force to meet a 3.0. [16:28] Can you be more specific, though? [16:30] Well, sir, what we have now is 31— [16:32] Because, sir, we want you to tell us what you need. [16:34] Yes, sir, we have 31 amphibs now. [16:36] We think the number is closer to 40. [16:38] Okay. [16:41] Well, again, thank you for identifying that and just be aware that we want to help. [16:49] Now, let's talk about unmanned systems, and I'll move to you, Admiral, and then maybe back [16:55] to the General. [16:57] The Reconciliation Bill last year invested $5 billion to unmanned systems for the Navy, [17:03] including $2.1 billion for medium unmanned surface vehicles and $1.5 billion for small unmanned [17:12] surface vehicles. [17:15] The FY27 shipbuilding plan said the Navy is, quote, aggressively pursuing, unquote, these [17:22] unmanned systems and has, quote, committed to build at scale, unquote. [17:27] However, the budget has no funding for small USVs and procures between 10 and 12 manned [17:35] USVs annually in future years at a cost of $600 to $800 million. [17:43] So is there a gap between rhetoric for unmanned systems and the budget, Admiral? [17:52] Sir, I don't think so. [17:57] You know, if you look back, FY25, based on my notes here, we're talking about we bought [18:04] about 360 small unmanned surfaces, and then in FY26, we had about three times that that [18:16] we bought, and then we dropped that back down in FY27 and have, I think in a smart way, prioritized [18:23] a significant amount of effort and funding toward our medium unmanned surface vessel. [18:29] From the Navy perspective, they take longer. [18:33] They're significant. [18:34] I can put containerized payloads on it, and we're all a head flank on building those containerized [18:38] payloads. [18:40] Those range from deception to fires to drone swarms to tote array systems. [18:46] And so in the balance of what we're doing in the unmanned space between UUVs, UASs, and [18:52] SUVs, I think we've looked hard at that balance and tried to get that right. [18:57] Can additional funding do more in these small kind of surface attack vessels? [19:03] Sure, it could. [19:05] But as we discussed a bit in the classified session, the concept of deployment there is [19:10] still under development. [19:12] And how we actually go bring that capability to bear is something I need to look at. [19:16] We're not ready to use that many small SUVs. [19:23] We are always ready to launch them, and we are ready for them to go do their thing within [19:27] the range that they would do that in, which is in the sustainment of how long they last [19:32] at sea. [19:34] But in the concept of employment against high-end threats, our ability to actually have those [19:38] staged and ready to be brought to bear from good solid concepts of deployment, employment, [19:44] and operations, we need more work to do there. [19:48] And so that's a command and control in how we build that out. [19:52] We have just stood up our USV RONs. [19:55] We're just deploying our first MUSV with the Theodore Roosevelt Strike Group. [19:59] So in the ability to actually do this the way we do it in the Navy, in an effective and [20:03] sustained way, we are still early in that stage. [20:06] Okay, let me move to General Smith. [20:08] What's the Marine Corps planning to do with unmanned systems? [20:11] Sir, we're primarily focused on small unmanned systems, small drones, swarming drones, using [20:17] them as munitions, as an extender of our infantry battalion's range. [20:21] So what we're looking at is, with the small UAS, having hand-thrown or manned portable drones [20:27] that can be used, again, as a munition so that I can extend the lethality and range of our [20:31] infantry battalions. [20:32] That's our primary focus on our unmanned systems. [20:34] Are there enough in the pipeline on the way for you at the moment? [20:40] There are not, sir. [20:41] We can't go fast enough. [20:42] We've got to make sure that we don't get tied down to one manufacturer, that we're able [20:47] to procure them from across the spectrum because there are multiple companies who make a one-way [20:51] attack drone. [20:52] What needs to happen? [20:53] Well, sir, frankly, we just have to get the budget that we need to procure them and then [20:58] go out and procure them without having all the red tape that we have had in the past, [21:03] we don't have now, to get after procuring from multiple vendors without getting, quote, [21:08] vendor lock. [21:09] Okay. [21:10] We're going to need you to amplify that in your response to written questions. [21:16] Sure. [21:17] But thank you both. [21:18] I appreciate your service. [21:19] And to Reed, you are recognized. [21:20] Well, thank you. [21:21] Welcome back. [21:22] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [21:24] And, gentlemen, thank you for your testimony and also for your service to the nation in [21:29] many different capacities. [21:33] Secretary Cao, the latest update received from the Navy about two weeks ago is that the contract [21:42] negotiations for the Virginia Block 6 boats, FY 25 to 29, 10 boats. [21:50] And for the Columbia Bill to two boats from FY 26 to 30, five boats are very close to being [21:58] finalized. [21:59] What is the status of this contract? [22:01] When will they be completed? [22:03] Do you have an idea? [22:04] Thank you for the question. [22:09] We're trying to accelerate the block buys and also accelerate the actual production of [22:16] the submarines as well. [22:17] That's why Vice Admiral Goucher has been in charge of the DRPM. [22:21] So everything's aligned underneath him. [22:22] He has all the authorities and everything he needs in order to make these things happen [22:26] and move the and accelerate the production to the left. [22:29] And I will turn over to Admiral Cottle to kind of tell you what our plan is for the session [22:34] of these. [22:35] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [22:36] Well, sir, I'll just tell you, we need to get the contract done. [22:38] But we want to make sure it's, you know, has what's baked into it. [22:43] The lessons we've learned on poor contracting strategies that we've not always been in the [22:48] right position to have the right oversight and the right incentives and the right mechanisms [22:54] to ensure we get them delivered on time. [22:56] So there has been a thoughtful approach by the Secretary of War's team and the Navy team [23:02] here under the PAE structure to actually get that right. [23:06] I expect at any time. [23:07] I can't give you the exact time, but it will be made. [23:10] And we're just making sure that we get that contract language correct, sir. [23:14] Well, I appreciate that. [23:15] I had an opportunity to go up to Pontius Point, and I believe it's retired Admiral McKee who is [23:21] there, and he's doing a very good job. [23:23] But the sooner we get the contract in, then the sooner the company can just keep proceeding [23:29] ahead much more rapidly than before. [23:33] Sir, I would just add, I mean, I don't want to take any more of your time, but it does [23:38] add to our, you know, our ability to actually execute our budget that we have from FY26 [23:43] and the One Big Beautiful Bill as well. [23:45] So it's tied to that. [23:46] So we are trying to get that done so that we have high execution numbers on both of those. [23:51] Thank you, sir. [23:52] Another issue, Mr. Secretary, for the industrial base program, that's the supply chain workers, [24:00] all those things. [24:01] The Navy's budget request is for $788 million for the submarine industrial base in the discretionary [24:10] category, which we will look at. [24:12] But another $205 million in the mandatory reconciliation column. [24:17] And there's always an issue whether or not reconciliation will become reality. [24:24] And what would happen to you if that $205 million was not available? [24:28] Thank you again for that question, Jarenki member. [24:31] This is why we need the whole bill. [24:33] We need $1.5 trillion for the Department of War, but also the $733.5 billion for the United [24:42] States Department of the Navy, because we just can't. [24:46] I mean, we're prioritizing everything right now. [24:50] And everything is a priority because we need unmanned systems. [24:53] We need submarines. [24:54] We need ships. [24:55] We need auxiliary ships. [24:57] We also need quality life for our sailors and Marines. [24:59] And this is why we need this whole bill. [25:01] So whether you pay it as one bill or two separate bills to us, we're agnostic to it. [25:07] We just need to move forward, Senator. [25:09] I know you're agnostic. [25:10] You want the money. [25:11] But I would kind of rate the possibility of getting the president's budget in some form [25:17] through as higher than another reconciliation bill. [25:21] And you might have to plan for accommodating that situation. [25:27] It would be worthwhile to do so. [25:30] Fleet readiness. [25:32] Admiral Cordell, we talked about this in the closed session. [25:35] But here in this open session, you always can do something to improve readiness, even [25:41] in the calmest of moments. [25:43] This is not one of them. [25:44] So can you give us an idea of the readiness steps you're taking now? [25:49] Well, sir, you know, readiness we look at across a typical acronym PESTO, which is people, [25:57] equipment, our supply and sustainment, our training and our ordinance. [26:00] And this budget funds our readiness accounts to 95 percent. [26:04] That is incredible for a service chief. [26:06] You know, I had to work very hard to figure out the puts and takes to get to that level, [26:10] even though I love readiness. [26:12] So this is ship operating calls, ship depot, our air operations, our sparing, our paying our manpower bills, of course, and our ordinance. [26:21] And so I think this budget goes a long way. [26:23] It's generational in what it's trying to do to ensure we don't have a hollow Navy. [26:27] We have a ready Navy. [26:28] 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're improving [26:37] ordinance production to our fourth generation models to ensure they're actually delivering the Navy we can give our combined commanders. [26:43] So there's a lot in your question, but I'm very happy with the levels that we have baked into this budget, sir. [26:49] Very good. [26:50] General Smith, I'll catch you on the second round, sir. [26:52] Thank you. [26:53] Thank you, Senator Reid. [26:54] Senator Fischer. [26:55] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [26:57] Secretary Cowell, I agree with the Chairman's opening comments. [27:01] I was disappointed to see that the FY27 budget did not include funding for slick men. [27:09] Our adversaries are not hesitating to expand their nuclear arsenals. [27:15] The Navy must prioritize slick men appropriately so that you can meet the statutory deployment date of 2032. [27:24] And I am hopeful that this will be corrected. [27:28] Adam, or Admiral, I have an Adam at home. [27:33] Admiral, how is the Navy working to accelerate delivery of the Columbia class submarine program? [27:43] Well, ma'am, first, unslick them in, if I could, can I give you one sentence on that? [27:48] You know, I looked hard at this with Johnny Wolfe because I knew this would come up, and Admiral Wolfe. [27:53] And he has assured me that the money in the One Big Beautiful Bill and the FY26 budget, $2 billion, is the right amount of money that we have currently that can be executed with fiscal responsibility. [28:06] So he is, I think, FY28, you'll see an additional ask. [28:10] But in the phasing of that money, that is what he thinks needs to be spent. [28:14] Admiral, my concern with that is not on your part, and it's not on Admiral Wolfe's part either. [28:22] It is on the part of Congress, where we seem bound and determined to move forward with continuing resolutions, which you and I both know is to the detriment of the defense of this country. [28:38] And 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. [28:50] You're behind that and not able to meet what is required of you when it comes to slick amend. [28:59] I want to make sure that the funding will be there no matter how this Congress may act and enable the Department and the Department of the Navy to be able to meet their obligations under the law [29:17] and for the defense of this country to give our combatant commanders the opportunity to present the president with the options that he needs. [29:28] That is why I am requesting that. Am I going to be docked for all that time I just took? [29:34] Senator, we're on the same page. [29:38] I know we are. We want to deliver this. [29:41] And I know you I know you do, but I'm looking at the realities I face in the political world and what happens here in Congress. [29:49] So tell me what's happening with the Columbia. [29:52] Well, Columbia, you know, currently 18 months off plan and working hard to get it delivered in 28. [29:58] 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. [30:09] Dual hatted as the DERPM to under secretary and the PAE under secretary cow. [30:15] So leadership matters there, but also production matters. [30:19] And so is, you know, I visit up at Quonset Point, of course, electric boat where all the super modules are now in place. [30:27] And so we're now in the final stages of putting those super modules together. [30:31] And so we're trying to knock down barriers that have historically prevented us from getting that done. [30:36] Some things on new technologies that we're bringing to bear of how we're actually doing non destructive testing in the off hours, how we're bringing in more robotic welding, [30:44] how we're improving artificial intelligence utilization to improve workflows and management of actual technical work documents. [30:51] 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. [31:05] That's good to hear. Can you give me an update on the Navy's efforts to extend the hulls of some of the Ohio class submarines, especially given the delays we're seeing with the Columbia? [31:18] I can. You know, what we're going to do is, you know, we were looking at, you know, a number like between four and five of these pyra as we call them, these post, you know, inactivation restricted availabilities. [31:30] And now the plans changed a bit and we're going to 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 pyra. [31:48] So we're going to 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. [31:59] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes. Thank you very much, Senator King. [32:07] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, Secretary Cowell, I want to 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. [32:17] I want to start with a I woke up about a month ago to one of the press conferences of Secretary Hegseth and Admiral Cain, General Cain, and General Cain said the following. [32:32] I perked right up. When we talk about an American destroyer, it's important that you and the American people understand their capabilities and Arleigh Burke class destroyers are the backbone of the United States surface fleet. [32:43] 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. [32:54] There are 11 now in in the vicinity of Iran, also in the Med, also in the Pacific. [33:00] It's one of the most. It is the backbone of the fleet. In fact, I don't have to assert that. That's what General Cain said. [33:09] These ships are armed to the teeth. This is a General Cain again with surface air missiles, missiles, land attack, cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, anti-submarine rockets, torpedoes, five inch guns, extending the reach and capability of each and every one of these destroyers. [33:23] What puzzles me is that the budget that's been submitted only requests one. And I don't really understand that, particularly as the chairman pointed out, there are going to be retirements coming in the future. [33:38] So we're not even if there are three retirements and we're only building one a year, we're going into the hole. [33:46] Every hearing we've had in this committee for the past, I don't know, six months has talked about rebuilding the industrial base. [33:55] The only way to rebuild the industrial base is with consistent demand signals. [34:00] 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 going to run out of work in a year or two. [34:11] And that's the situation that comes. [34:13] So I hope you will reconsider the request for only one destroyer as we've been doing it over the years. [34:19] It's been three one year, two the next, three the next, and two after that. [34:24] And I hope that we can return to the this is the year that should be three rather than one. [34:29] So, Mr. Secretary, I hope you'll look carefully at that because we're talking about the backbone of the Navy here. [34:35] And these these shipyards and Admiral Culley, you've been to Bath. [34:39] I thank you for doing that. [34:41] They can't turn off their workforce and back on again. [34:44] If welders leave, they're gone. [34:46] And so we have to maintain a consistent work level. [34:50] And one another term for a backlog is a consistent demand signal. [34:55] And Mr. Secretary, I hope you'll take some cognizance of that. [35:00] Senator, thank you for the question. [35:01] And again, I I'm with you. [35:03] This is the backbone of the U.S. fleet and it's the workhorse. [35:07] But the fact is right now we have 80 ships on contract throughout the various yards, 59 in construction. [35:13] In Bath alone, sir, is there's 11 destroyers that are on contract for Bath alone and seven are in construction. [35:21] We haven't even begun cutting metal for for the other four. [35:25] I'm just we're trying to allow for the industrial base to catch up. [35:28] But I would love to put 10 destroyers in there in the budget. [35:31] But the fact is that I need for this industrial base to catch up. [35:35] Senator, and I agree with you. [35:36] And one way to do that is to provide the demand signal so that the shipyards can make the additional capital investments, [35:44] along with the Navy, in order to increase productivity. [35:47] And that's happening at Bath. [35:48] I'm there very frequently. [35:50] But I think that's I think we agree on that. [35:53] Now, the second part of this is there's talk around this budget about building ships and even destroyers in Japan and Korea. [36:04] That's the worst idea since the Red Sox traded Babe Ruth to the Yankees. [36:08] I mean, it just doesn't make sense to be handing over that level of technology even to our allies. [36:15] And I have two reports I want to submit for the record, both about substantial, even higher backlogs in Japan and Korea and shipyards. [36:24] So, Mr. Chairman, I'd like the permission to put these reports in the record. [36:28] Is there objection without objection? [36:30] And also, let's put the chart, which you just referred to in the record also. [36:39] Is there objection without objection? [36:41] That's done. [36:42] I mean, the idea of building ships, building naval ships in a foreign shipyard, I just don't understand. [36:48] Admiral, every stitch of clothing you have on is required to be made in the USA under the Berry Amendment. [36:55] 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. [37:03] So, I hope we can revisit this terrible idea of talking about building naval vessels abroad, both from a national security point of view, [37:11] but also rebuilding the industrial base means providing the demand signal that will allow our industrial base to reconstitute itself [37:20] and to meet the demand that we're placing on them. [37:23] So, I appreciate your work on this. [37:27] 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. [37:35] And we want to strengthen their ability to do that, their productivity, and that's happening. [37:41] So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. [37:43] I appreciate the time. [37:45] Thank you for those comments, Senator King. [37:48] Senator Budd. [37:49] Thank you, Chairman. [37:50] Thank you all for being here. [37:51] Thank you for your service and that of your teams behind you. [37:54] Admiral Connell, it's great to see another North Carolinian, North Forsyth High School, if I believe is correct. [38:01] So, a question for both you, Admiral Connell, and General Smith, as well. [38:06] So, I visited DARPA last week and I learned about their artificial blood program. [38:12] So, what's the Navy doing to have enough blood on hand in the event of a large-scale operation or combat operations in the Pacific? [38:20] We'll start with you, Admiral. [38:21] Sir, I just visited DARPA myself not too long ago and got maybe the same brief that you got on the initiatives there. [38:31] This is FSHARP, this type of synthetic blood and synthetic platelets that they're working on. [38:38] That is the keys of the kingdom on battlefield, you know, survivability, ensuring we can meet the golden hour across a vast Indo-Pacific. [38:46] So, synthetic blood products is something I'm very interested in. [38:50] I don't think we have got it to a place from a perspective of fielding it where we should be. [38:57] I know BUMED has worked on this, probably not with enough energy and effort. [39:00] I know personally now the Director of Health Agency, Department of Health Agency, Darren Vai, knows about this program and knows how important it is. [39:11] So, you have my commitment to look at this and along with my good shipmate here, Eric Smith, it's important to keep his Marines alive as well, sir. [39:19] Thank you for that, Admiral. [39:19] General, that same question, but also, are there any policy or resourcing challenges that I can help with? [39:29] Well, sir, on the room temperature blood products, that's the holy grail of battlefield medicine. [39:33] You know, when I was shot in 2004, I came close to bleeding out. [39:37] I was fortunate to be medevaced to a hospital in Baghdad and had five units of blood pumped into me. [39:42] But, had I had the ability to do room temperature blood products on the battlefield, I would have been in much better shape. [39:51] I'm still here, but that is the holy grail of battlefield medicine. [39:55] Thank you both. [39:56] Secretary Cowell, General Smith. [39:58] So, I had the chance to see some of the Cherry Point F-35s a week or so ago, and I noted that their surface-to-air missile threat trainers on their range, [40:08] they seem outdated to be able to replicate modern threats. [40:12] So, what's the plan to modernize electronic warfare ranges at Cherry Point and all along the East Coast for our F-35s? [40:20] Sir, we're going to have to do that in simulators. [40:23] We've got to increase our simulation abilities and our capabilities in those simulators, [40:28] because once we go into certain modes of the F-35, you're lighting up like a Christmas tree, [40:34] and the overhead persistent SR by the PRC will pick that up very quickly. [40:38] So, you know, my own aide, Colonel Putty Shoup, call sign Putty, is an F-35 pilot, [40:45] and he can tell you that we have to do that in simulation underneath closed doors. [40:49] We've got to get the money for the simulators. [40:51] We've got to get them up to speed. [40:53] We've got to get them to be able to replicate what an F-35 can do in full mode. [40:59] Thank you. [41:01] General Smith, another question about the Marine Raiders. [41:05] So, MARSOC is authorized to have 3,337 billets, yet a recent congressional inquiry revealed that only 2,802 positions are filled, [41:16] so over 500 short. [41:18] Are there any production or retention challenges, and how are you addressing it, and how can we help? [41:22] Well, sir, I don't think there's actually anything we can do to help that. [41:26] We're holding our standards high. [41:28] Our attrition rate through the pipeline is something that I'm concerned with. [41:32] I've got our MARSOC commander working mightily on that. [41:36] We hold a very, very high standard for those MARSOC Marines, [41:41] and so what we've got to do is expand the input to make sure that people aren't afraid of the standard, if you will. [41:48] They're not afraid of the in-doc to be able to get a higher percentage of people through that, [41:52] because our standard is our standard, and I, too, am concerned about being able to fill the Raider ranks, [41:58] but I'm also more concerned with being able to make sure the Raiders stay the Raiders. [42:03] Thank you for that. [42:04] Another question, General. [42:05] So, I'm concerned with the lack of counter-UAS systems at Cherry Point when I was down there recently, [42:10] protecting our aircraft facilities and, most importantly, our people. [42:15] That's a no-fail mission. [42:16] So, how are we investing and delivering quickly to prevent an enemy drone strike on our bases? [42:22] Well, sir, we're not going fast enough. [42:24] There's multiple systems that we're investing in to get after a counter-UAS system. [42:29] The small UAVs are our primary concern right now at our bases. [42:32] Most of them are look-y-loos, people that are flying drones on their own. [42:36] They happen to violate our airspace, and we bring them down. [42:38] But we've got to do better than drone defender and drone guns, and that is something that I'm working on. [42:43] We have not yet found the solution that is man-portable enough to be useful, both at an installation and in combat, [42:49] because what I don't want to do is train my people up on multiple systems. [42:52] I want to have a generic system that works both in garrison and in the field. [42:57] It is something that we have not gone fast enough on. [42:59] The solution is out there. [43:00] We just haven't found it yet, sir. [43:01] Thank you, all. [43:03] Chairman. [43:03] Thank you, Senator Budd. [43:04] Senator Hirono. [43:10] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [43:12] This is for Secretary Cao and Admiral Caudill. [43:18] The Navy spent $70 million in planning and design funds over the last several years on Pearl Harbor's new shipyard waterfront production facility, [43:29] which was to go hand-in-hand with the new dry dock that is being built at Pearl Harbor, [43:39] and only to determine, after spending that much money recently, [43:43] to determine that the original site was cost prohibitive, [43:47] which I believe was pretty obvious from the start, [43:50] given that it was planned to go on top of the current site of an existing dry dock. [43:55] So, you know, $70 million, I don't think it can be justified. [44:00] But I just want to ask both of you that how is the Navy going to course correct [44:07] and ensure that we will still achieve the optimization and efficiency gains originally envisioned under PSYOP? [44:16] The idea was to have the production facility near the dry dock, [44:20] but now that's not going to happen. [44:22] And so how are you going to ensure that the supplies that will be needed to do the job on the dry dock will be nearby? [44:33] Do you have a plan for that, Admiral? [44:35] Senator, again, we need a forward staging area for repair. [44:41] And again, the workers in Hawaii are probably some of the best shipyard workers out there, [44:47] and so we need to make sure we have the right equipment and right facilities for them. [44:51] And this is why that study was there, to make sure that whether or not it was feasible. [44:55] And we will definitely look at somewhere around there to make this happen, Senator. [45:00] I'm going to want to get a description of what you all intend to do to optimize the situation after spending $70 million, [45:09] which, in my view, it can't be justified. [45:13] For Secretary Cao, so you don't need to answer that particular question. [45:16] I have another one for you, Secretary Cao. [45:18] The DOD has a significant number of military construction projects on Guam, [45:23] and I know you are familiar with the situation there, so on Guam, CNN, MI, and Wake Islands. [45:29] And for that, we need to continue to extend the H-2B visas, [45:32] and we keep doing this in these short periods of time. [45:37] And the current visa authorization expires in 2029. [45:42] We're going to need to authorize an extension. [45:46] So I'd like to know if you would support extending the H-2B visas authority through 2035. [45:54] Senator, Guam is near and dear to my heart. [45:56] Right now, as the confirmed Undersecretary of the Navy, I am the senior defense official of Guam, [46:01] which is kind of funny because 51 years ago, I landed in Guam as a refugee, [46:05] so that was my first taste of freedom in the world. [46:09] But we do want to extend the H-2B visas. [46:13] I've been working with your counterparts in the House in order to make this happen, Senator, [46:17] and I hope to have your support as well to push this through, to extend it. [46:21] To 2035? [46:23] Yes, Senator, around there, because it drives up the cost of everything. [46:25] I think we need to create some stability here. [46:26] You're absolutely right, because it drives up the cost four times [46:29] if we don't have the H-2B visa center. [46:32] Exactly. Admiral Cotter and General Smith, do you agree? [46:36] I agree wholeheartedly. [46:37] So we can look for your support, too. [46:41] So I have a question about the condition of the airfield at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. [46:50] The ramp at the airfield is in a state of disrepair. [46:53] For example, 62% of parking spots there cannot support max weight C-17 aircraft. [47:00] And given the Navy and Air Force's agreement on a 10-year repair schedule, [47:06] I would just like to get your commitment, Admiral, [47:09] that this agreement will be adhered to, [47:15] and that the Navy will adhere to the schedule of repairs on the ramps [47:20] and execute the plan as agreed to with the Air Force. [47:23] Senator, you have my full commitment on that. [47:26] It's a long time coming, and finally there is an agreement. [47:29] I think the Air Force would very much appreciate keeping to schedule. [47:33] There's been a lot of emphasis on the negotiation of several leases in Hawaii, [47:39] and mainly that's involved the Navy, but for the Army, rather. [47:48] The Navy, though, has a very important lease in Kauai [47:52] for the Pacific Missile Range Facility, PMRF. [47:55] And I'd like to get your commitment that you will continue to coordinate closely [48:00] with the state and members of the public, [48:03] particularly the Native Hawaiian community, [48:05] in negotiating the lease at PMRF. [48:07] My full commitment on that is a world-class operation there. [48:13] You have my full commitment. [48:14] Thank you very much. [48:15] Thank you, Senator Hirono. [48:16] Senator Scott. [48:18] Thank you, Chairman. [48:19] First, I want to thank each of you for your service [48:22] and all the men and women that work with you. [48:24] General Smith, thanks for passing audits. [48:28] I'm a business guy, so audits, I think, are pretty big. [48:31] So I understand the importance of that. [48:33] So, Acting Secretary, so what... [48:37] You just got the job, so I'm sure you don't have a solution for everything. [48:42] But talk about what you need to do to be... [48:45] Because the Navy has not been able to do theirs, [48:47] and the Marines have been able to do theirs, okay? [48:50] And so you're on top of it. [48:53] So how are you going to get this done? [48:56] Senator, thank you so much for that question. [48:58] As the Undersecretary, when I came in seven months ago, [49:01] I've been pushing hard for the clean audit. [49:03] So, again, we made sure the Marine Corps met their third clean audit. [49:07] And for the Navy, we are well ahead of schedule. [49:10] I'm talking about months for the Working Capital Fund. [49:13] And we're going to finish the General Fund next year, [49:16] so we will meet the deadlines or exceed the deadlines. [49:20] Make sure we do it ahead of time, sir. [49:21] Do you have, from auditors, [49:24] do you have a good list of exactly what you have to do? [49:26] Yes, Senator. [49:28] We have a plan and milestones that we're meeting every single day. [49:32] I mean, just everything from just even looking at the real estates [49:35] and just quantifying the cost of the land and doing the inventory. [49:40] We are well ahead of schedule, Senator. [49:43] General Smith, you brought up your need for 40 or more amphibious ships [49:48] to meet the requirements. [49:50] So, Secretary, can you talk about, you know, [49:53] how you're going to get that done? [49:55] And what's the plan to get that done? [49:57] Because as far as I understand, [49:59] it's still not part of the Navy's plan to get the 40 amphibious ships. [50:03] But can you talk about how you're going to get there? [50:06] Thank you, Senator. [50:07] Yes, we have an Amphibious Forces Readiness Board [50:11] that's chaired by the Vice Chief of Naval Operations [50:13] as well as the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps. [50:15] And they just submitted a report to me, [50:17] which I forwarded to the Secretary of War yesterday, [50:20] which plans out there's two courses of action. [50:23] And the course of action that we would like to pursue [50:25] would be able to extend the OFRP to 56 months, [50:31] allowing us to have two workup cycles, [50:33] two integrated training cycles, [50:35] as well as two deployments for every ship. [50:39] So for that, we would require 40 amphibious ships. [50:42] Right now, we're 31. [50:43] And in the FITUP right now, [50:45] we have one LPD per year [50:48] and an LHA with a center of every two years [50:52] in order to accomplish this. [50:55] So how long will it take to get there? [50:56] It will take probably to the end of the FITUP center. [51:00] How many? [51:01] Until the future year development plan, [51:03] which goes from 28 to 32. [51:06] So 2032, sir. [51:10] Okay. [51:11] All right. [51:12] You took it coming in, [51:14] you and the prior secretary took over [51:16] a need to start building ships. [51:18] Can you talk about what you're going to, [51:20] how you're going to change to start getting this done? [51:23] Because the Navy's had a very difficult time [51:25] to build ships on budget and on time. [51:28] And so talk about what the plan is to get there. [51:31] You're absolutely right, Senator. [51:32] We are right now, [51:33] there's 80 ships on contract [51:35] and 59 in construction alone. [51:37] And we're just not moving fast enough. [51:39] It's taken about six to eight years [51:40] for us to develop a destroyer. [51:43] We are looking at various ways [51:45] to energize and induce more, [51:49] I guess, competition to the industrial base. [51:53] And this is, [51:54] I know we've been told earlier, [51:56] hey, we're buying ships from overseas. [51:58] We're not. [51:58] We're looking at whether or not [52:00] those ships are feasible [52:02] to work inside our formation. [52:03] And then what we're doing [52:05] is having those foreign shipyards [52:07] invest in the United States. [52:08] We're going to create 540,000 jobs [52:11] in order to get where we are right now [52:12] in order to build ships. [52:14] That includes pushing the supply chain [52:15] and getting everything in the United States [52:18] in order to make this happen, sir. [52:20] Again, it's not just about warships. [52:22] We're talking about merchant ships as well. [52:24] Right now in the United States, [52:25] there's only 188 flagged commercial U.S. ships [52:29] and 105 military seal of command ships. [52:32] We need more than that. [52:33] In fact, the Chinese right now [52:34] have 11,000 merchant ships out there. [52:37] And we are a maritime nation [52:40] that borders on the Atlantic and Pacific. [52:42] And we require this in order [52:43] to thrive as a nation, sir. [52:45] Why can't you design a ship in six months? [52:48] I mean, it just doesn't make sense to me [52:51] that if you've got everybody in a room, [52:54] I mean, I've built a lot of stuff in my life [52:56] and I've not built a ship, [52:57] but you just get everybody in a room [52:58] and make a decision. [52:59] And the way I've always thought about it [53:01] is we shouldn't be buying, you know, [53:03] expensive, you know, stuff, [53:05] but we should buy exactly what we need [53:07] and quit changing it. [53:09] So it doesn't make sense to me. [53:13] So take the time to answer that question, [53:15] Mr. Secretary. [53:16] You're absolutely right, Senator. [53:17] And this is exactly why we need the Golden Fleet, [53:20] which goes from small to large combatants. [53:22] The small combatants are we're investing a ship [53:26] that's already been planned and built right now, [53:29] which is the national security cutter. [53:31] It's already out there and it's proven. [53:34] So we would commission this ship and build it [53:37] and then and put Mark 70 launchers on there. [53:40] So it's basically containerized systems. [53:42] So, you know, the hardest thing we have in warfare [53:45] is the vertical launch system, [53:48] the replenishment at sea. [53:49] We've been trying that for years, [53:50] but in containerized systems, [53:52] you're able to pull in any port [53:53] and using gantry cranes, [53:55] you can pull those those containers [53:57] on and off quickly. [53:58] And so this is why we need [53:59] the low to high mix of ships, [54:01] because I can't have a destroyer do everything [54:03] like, for example, [54:04] the missions down in South America [54:05] or even, you know, escorts as well. [54:09] I hope that answers your question, Senator. [54:12] Thank you. [54:13] I just wanted to six months is a good time [54:15] to get it all designed. [54:17] Yes, sir. [54:17] You may want to follow up with a question [54:19] on the record, Senator Scott. [54:21] Senator Rosen. [54:23] Well, thank you, Chairman Wicker, [54:25] Ranking Member Reed for holding this hearing. [54:27] And excuse me, [54:29] I'd like to thank the witnesses [54:29] for testifying today [54:31] and for your service to this country. [54:33] We appreciate you. [54:35] And I want to talk a little bit [54:36] about Fallon Naval Air Station [54:39] and modernization. [54:40] I see you know a lot about it. [54:42] So Secretary Cowell and Admiral Cottle, Nevada. [54:45] I'm going to tell everyone [54:46] who doesn't know here, [54:47] Nevada's proud to host [54:48] Naval Air Station Fallon. [54:50] Yes, we have a naval base in Nevada. [54:52] We are proudly home to Top Gun, [54:55] our nation's premier carrier air wing [54:57] and SEAL training centers, [54:59] among other things. [55:00] And as you well know, [55:02] the Nevada delegation [55:03] has worked closely with the Navy, [55:04] federal agencies, [55:05] tribal governments, [55:06] and local stakeholders [55:07] for years to secure [55:08] the Fallon Range Training Complex [55:11] modernization in FY23 NDAA, [55:14] expanding the range [55:15] by over 600,000 acres [55:17] to meet critical [55:18] national security training needs. [55:21] So now we're nearly four years [55:23] into the modernization effort. [55:25] And I've made it clear [55:26] each time that Navy leadership [55:27] has come before the committee [55:29] that as part of the deal [55:30] you struck in 2022, [55:32] you have to fully, [55:33] completely compensate [55:34] those grazing permit holders [55:36] for their lifetime loss. [55:38] Because the payments offered [55:39] to the ranchers [55:40] in the B-16 range complex [55:42] completely, [55:43] it's missing the mark. [55:44] The two-year clock [55:45] for payments to the ranchers [55:47] on the B-17 range [55:48] has already begun. [55:49] So we just have to get this right. [55:51] You have to get this right. [55:53] I'm disappointed [55:54] there's still significant discrepancies [55:55] in valuing the permanent loss [55:57] to forage [55:58] and considering the loans [55:59] that the permittee must repay. [56:02] Because permit grazers losses [56:04] should be treated [56:05] as a complete loss. [56:06] It's not a buyout. [56:08] And in many cases in Nevada, [56:09] these are multi-generational families. [56:12] They've just been there forever. [56:14] And they're giving up [56:16] not just the grazing rights, [56:18] their livelihood [56:19] and what their family's done [56:20] for generation after generation. [56:22] And they're giving it up [56:23] in service to our country. [56:25] And so these Nevadans [56:26] have kept up their side [56:27] of the bargain. [56:28] And we have to do [56:29] what's necessary [56:30] for our aviators [56:31] and SEAL teams, [56:32] as you know, [56:33] Sir Secretary, [56:34] and this is the best training [56:35] in a realistic environment. [56:37] So now it's the Navy's turn. [56:39] So to Secretary [56:40] and Admiral Kow, [56:41] how has the Navy reviewed [56:44] and reassessed payment offers [56:45] based on the latest input [56:46] that the team in northern Nevada [56:48] has received [56:49] to ensure every single permittee [56:51] is made whole [56:52] in this process? [56:53] Well, Senator, [56:53] if I could just take two seconds [56:54] to brag about Fallon, [56:57] because I've spent a lot of time [56:58] there, clearing there. [56:59] That was built [57:00] in World War II [57:01] when we had to fight [57:02] two sides. [57:03] And we didn't know [57:04] if we were going to, [57:05] if we had to give up one side, [57:06] we would basically give up [57:07] the Pacific [57:08] and fight the Atlantic [57:09] and use bases like Fallon [57:11] on the other side of the mountain [57:12] to do a counterattack [57:13] to take back California. [57:14] So that's really [57:15] the history of the base. [57:17] And right now, [57:18] every single carrier air wing [57:19] goes out there [57:20] to train, [57:21] to go out there. [57:21] That's how we were able [57:22] to do Epic Fury [57:23] and Absolute Resolve [57:24] so well, [57:25] because of the training ranges there. [57:27] Again, [57:28] Fallon has done [57:28] a lot of things [57:29] over the years. [57:30] I remember back in the days [57:31] we put [57:31] the solar panels [57:34] all around the bases [57:35] in order to pay back [57:37] to the city [57:38] to export the energy [57:40] out there. [57:41] We have been in negotiations [57:42] with the ranchers. [57:45] And again, [57:46] I have a fiduciary responsibility [57:48] also to the United States Navy [57:49] to make sure [57:50] we get the best deal [57:51] for us as well. [57:52] And we are, [57:53] I would love to come out there [57:54] and visit the base [57:55] one more time. [57:55] Again, [57:56] I love riding around [57:57] the ATVs, [57:58] slapping C4 [57:58] on all those [58:00] unexploded munitions. [58:01] and blow them up. [58:02] But I'll go out there [58:03] with you, [58:03] Senator, [58:04] and we'll... [58:04] Perfect. [58:05] So we have a bunch [58:06] of other things. [58:08] I'm going to have [58:09] the Admiral speak [58:09] to this too, [58:10] but we have other roads [58:12] out there [58:12] that have to be moved around. [58:14] We have some flooding issues [58:15] on the B-16 range. [58:16] So I welcome you [58:17] to come to my office [58:18] and we can discuss it [58:19] in length. [58:20] You know it well [58:21] and we can get [58:22] moving forward. [58:24] Please, Admiral. [58:26] Well, Senator, [58:27] you know, [58:27] we've talked, [58:27] I'm committed [58:28] to doing what's right [58:29] by the ranchers there. [58:30] I want to. [58:31] But, you know, [58:31] these things are delicate [58:32] and they've got both sides [58:33] and there's rubrics [58:34] on how we evaluate [58:35] these things [58:36] and there's escrow accounts [58:38] and all these things [58:39] that are going on [58:40] from really outside my lane. [58:41] But you have my full support [58:43] on the importance of Fallon. [58:45] It goes without saying. [58:46] I mean, [58:46] we have worked very hard there [58:48] to deliver a lot [58:49] of quality of service [58:50] improvement there. [58:51] The housing there [58:52] is a challenge [58:53] and, you know, [58:54] over 100, [58:55] I think it's 172 [58:56] military homes [58:57] that need to be, [58:58] you know, [58:59] completed there [58:59] as part of that initiative. [59:00] And we need even more [59:00] than that. [59:01] We need infrastructure [59:02] as well. [59:03] The demand's outstripping [59:04] our supply. [59:05] Yes, ma'am. [59:05] Yeah, because there are [59:06] men and women [59:08] who work out there [59:09] and their families, [59:10] they're having to live [59:11] an hour away in Reno [59:12] where housing [59:13] is already short. [59:14] So there's a lot to do. [59:15] I'd love for you [59:16] to come talk with my team [59:17] and we can review that [59:19] and continue to move forward [59:21] and keep Fallon [59:23] as amazing place as it is. [59:25] Thank you. [59:26] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [59:26] Thank you, Senator Rosen. [59:27] There's a vote going on [59:28] on the floor, [59:29] but I think we can conclude [59:31] within time. [59:33] Senator Banks, [59:34] you are recognized. [59:35] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [59:36] Admiral Caudill, [59:37] Secretary Cal, [59:38] I want to start [59:39] by thanking both of you [59:40] for your decision [59:42] to assign a one-star [59:43] reserve flag officer [59:45] at Crane Navy Base [59:46] in Indiana [59:47] by the end [59:48] of the fiscal year. [59:49] This is a really big deal [59:50] for Indiana, [59:51] for Crane [59:52] and I think [59:53] for the country [59:54] and a game-changing moment [59:55] for Crane [59:55] to help accelerate [59:56] and field slick them in [59:59] and CPS. [1:00:00] Secretary Cal, [1:00:01] can you elaborate [1:00:02] for a minute [1:00:02] on the strategic importance [1:00:04] of this move? [1:00:05] Thank you, Senator, [1:00:06] for the question. [1:00:07] Again, [1:00:08] this is so important to us. [1:00:09] I mean, [1:00:09] conventional prompt strike, [1:00:10] a missile they can't stop. [1:00:12] They can go from here [1:00:13] to California [1:00:14] in 16 seconds, [1:00:15] be launched [1:00:16] from a ship [1:00:16] like the USS Zumwalt [1:00:18] that can't be seen [1:00:19] from the air [1:00:20] or on, [1:00:21] I mean, [1:00:21] this is exactly [1:00:22] what we need [1:00:22] or from a submarine [1:00:23] and as well [1:00:24] as slick them in. [1:00:25] We talked about before [1:00:27] having the strategy [1:00:28] of having slick them in [1:00:29] on a submarine. [1:00:30] So instead of 14 [1:00:31] ballistic missile submarines, [1:00:32] we add the other 48 [1:00:33] fast attack submarines [1:00:35] as part of the arsenal [1:00:36] for strategic strikes [1:00:37] as well. [1:00:38] So the only way [1:00:39] to make this, [1:00:40] to accelerate this program, [1:00:41] make it go faster [1:00:42] is to put an admiral up there [1:00:43] that will have oversight [1:00:45] of these programs, sir. [1:00:46] Admiral, [1:00:47] anything to add? [1:00:48] How is this good [1:00:49] for the Navy? [1:00:50] Sir, [1:00:50] you know, [1:00:50] first of all, [1:00:51] thank you [1:00:51] for your persistent leadership [1:00:52] on advocating for Crane. [1:00:54] It is, [1:00:54] you know, [1:00:55] one of a kind [1:00:56] facility out there [1:00:57] that does things [1:00:58] for slick them in [1:00:59] and CPS [1:00:59] as we've discussed, [1:01:00] but missile electronics, [1:01:02] radar electronics, [1:01:03] systems integration, [1:01:05] the launch systems [1:01:06] that we have to do [1:01:07] to launch slick them in [1:01:08] and launch CPS, [1:01:09] all of that technology [1:01:11] is at the heart [1:01:12] of Crane's operation. [1:01:13] And so, [1:01:15] you know, [1:01:15] putting flag leadership [1:01:17] out there [1:01:17] really gives an opportunity, [1:01:19] I think, [1:01:19] to go re-wicker a bit [1:01:21] the command and control [1:01:22] structure of how [1:01:23] that's being overseen. [1:01:24] So while the first step [1:01:25] has been done [1:01:26] to commit to the new flag officer, [1:01:28] there's work to be done [1:01:29] to go land [1:01:30] on what that organizational [1:01:31] structure can be [1:01:32] in the future [1:01:32] to be most effective. [1:01:34] Secretary Cowell, [1:01:34] can you talk for a moment [1:01:35] about Secretary Hegseth, [1:01:37] President Trump, [1:01:38] and your vision [1:01:39] to move more program offices [1:01:42] closer to where the programs [1:01:43] are administered, [1:01:44] not just in this case [1:01:45] at Crane, [1:01:46] but across the board? [1:01:46] How is this good [1:01:47] for the Navy? [1:01:49] Senator, again, [1:01:50] you can't, you know, [1:01:51] it's one of those things, [1:01:52] leadership by presence. [1:01:53] You actually have to walk around [1:01:54] and be there, [1:01:55] and it's just hard [1:01:55] to fly around. [1:01:57] You know, [1:01:57] not everybody has a Gulfstream [1:01:59] or something like that [1:01:59] to fly around, [1:02:00] so it's best to have them [1:02:01] right there [1:02:02] at the production site. [1:02:04] The same way we have [1:02:05] Rob Goucher [1:02:05] and Kayvon Hakemzadeh [1:02:09] just to look at, [1:02:10] you know, [1:02:11] ship production, [1:02:12] nuclear aircraft carriers, [1:02:14] nuclear submarines. [1:02:15] This is why we have [1:02:16] to have leaders [1:02:16] right where they are [1:02:18] to motivate [1:02:18] and push industry [1:02:20] and push our civilians, too. [1:02:22] Thank you. [1:02:22] I want to thank you, too, [1:02:23] Mr. Secretary, [1:02:23] for your leadership [1:02:24] in deploying ShipOS [1:02:26] throughout the country. [1:02:28] ShipOS is exactly [1:02:30] the kind of modern, [1:02:31] AI-enabled [1:02:32] software infrastructure [1:02:34] that our shipbuilding [1:02:35] industrial base needs. [1:02:37] What is your vision [1:02:38] for scaling ShipOS [1:02:40] across the fleet [1:02:41] beyond submarines [1:02:42] and the broader [1:02:43] shipyard enterprise? [1:02:46] Senator, [1:02:47] you know, [1:02:49] the fact that we're still [1:02:50] going on clipboards [1:02:51] and Excel spreadsheets [1:02:52] and foremen going down [1:02:54] the line and going, [1:02:55] okay, [1:02:55] I need two guys [1:02:56] that can weld today, [1:02:58] okay, [1:02:58] Hung and Jim, [1:02:59] and like, [1:03:00] okay, [1:03:00] but we need somebody [1:03:01] to do the gas-free engineering. [1:03:03] So it just doesn't work [1:03:04] that way. [1:03:04] It's just best [1:03:05] to use these AI systems [1:03:07] in order to drive efficiencies [1:03:09] and streamline processes [1:03:11] so we can get our ships [1:03:12] out in time, [1:03:13] so we can get our destroyers [1:03:14] out faster [1:03:15] than six to eight years. [1:03:16] We need to develop them [1:03:17] within two years [1:03:18] because our fleet needs it [1:03:20] and our country needs it, sir. [1:03:21] I know you're hitting [1:03:22] the ground running [1:03:23] and new in the acting role [1:03:25] and hopefully [1:03:26] in the permanent role soon, [1:03:29] but what's been the whole, [1:03:30] we funded ShipOS [1:03:31] and the big, beautiful bill [1:03:33] well over a, [1:03:35] it was a year ago. [1:03:37] What's the holdup? [1:03:38] What's taken so long? [1:03:39] What are the obstacles [1:03:40] with fully accelerating [1:03:43] the expansion of ShipOS? [1:03:46] Well, sir, [1:03:46] a lot of that money, [1:03:47] I know you funded a year ago. [1:03:49] We just got the money [1:03:50] and right now, [1:03:50] I know that we're [1:03:51] at 19% execution, [1:03:53] but by the end [1:03:54] of the July, [1:03:55] we'll be at 63% execution [1:03:57] for all the money [1:03:58] that we process [1:03:59] and by September, [1:04:01] we'll be at 98%. [1:04:02] So it's just a matter [1:04:03] of getting the money [1:04:03] in time and on time [1:04:05] and this is why, [1:04:06] you know, [1:04:07] shutdowns [1:04:08] and continued resolutions [1:04:09] don't help us [1:04:10] because it just delays everything. [1:04:12] It's the accordion effect. [1:04:13] It's like when you're [1:04:14] running in formation, [1:04:15] you know, [1:04:15] one person speeds up [1:04:16] and slows down. [1:04:17] It just causes that [1:04:18] and exactly why we need [1:04:19] this bill, [1:04:20] the full bill [1:04:21] in order to pay forward [1:04:23] and really take care [1:04:24] of the Navy and Marine Corps, sir. [1:04:25] Thank you for your leadership. [1:04:26] If I could just add one, [1:04:27] I think one thing [1:04:28] that's key to this too [1:04:29] is the Palantir system [1:04:31] has to tap [1:04:32] authoritative data sources [1:04:34] and those things [1:04:35] are disparate. [1:04:35] They're just, [1:04:36] we're all over the map [1:04:37] on our data strategy. [1:04:38] So getting the connections [1:04:40] to the data sources [1:04:41] that we can rely on [1:04:42] so that we can see ourselves [1:04:43] through these type [1:04:44] of AI technologies [1:04:45] has been a limb fact, [1:04:46] but we're moving out [1:04:47] at speed just like [1:04:48] the Secretary said. [1:04:50] That's helpful. [1:04:50] Thank you. [1:04:51] I yield back. [1:04:51] Thank you, Senator Beck. [1:04:52] Senator King. [1:04:54] Thank you, Mr. Chair [1:04:55] and to our Navy and Marine [1:04:57] and to the Committee [1:04:57] a compliment [1:04:58] on the timing [1:04:59] of this hearing. [1:05:01] President's budget first, [1:05:03] shipbuilding plan two a second, [1:05:05] hearing third. [1:05:05] I love that order. [1:05:07] In past years, [1:05:08] we've sometimes done [1:05:09] the posture hearing [1:05:09] before we had the budget [1:05:10] or before we had [1:05:11] the shipbuilding plan, [1:05:13] but this year, [1:05:14] we've timed it right, [1:05:15] which means that we can do [1:05:16] work we need to do. [1:05:18] Secretary Cowell, [1:05:18] I'm going to ask you a question [1:05:19] that I hadn't intended to ask, [1:05:21] but in your verbal testimony, [1:05:24] you said something [1:05:24] that perked my ears up [1:05:25] because I didn't remember [1:05:27] it from your written testimony. [1:05:29] And I went back [1:05:29] and looked at the written testimony [1:05:30] and I think you added something. [1:05:33] You were talking about [1:05:34] deploying recently [1:05:36] with the Ford Carrier Strike Group [1:05:37] and how proud you are [1:05:38] and we are of their service. [1:05:40] And then you use this line, [1:05:42] do not believe the fake news [1:05:44] that claims food shortages, [1:05:46] backed up toilets, [1:05:48] and low morale. [1:05:49] And my ears perked up at that, [1:05:51] particularly the subject [1:05:53] of backed up toilets. [1:05:56] It has been widely reported [1:05:58] by the Navy Times [1:05:59] and the Military Times [1:06:00] by BBC and NPR [1:06:02] that there was a problem [1:06:03] of backed up toilets [1:06:05] on the Ford. [1:06:06] It had actually been predicted [1:06:08] in a GAO report [1:06:10] that was done in 2020 [1:06:11] that the design of the plumbing system [1:06:14] on the Ford [1:06:15] was insufficient for 4,000 sailors [1:06:18] and could lead to problems. [1:06:19] And we also have a lot of constituents [1:06:21] in Virginia [1:06:22] who are connected to the Ford [1:06:24] and we've heard this [1:06:25] from constituents. [1:06:27] Are you saying, [1:06:28] and if I could, [1:06:29] Mr. Tchard, [1:06:29] I'd like to introduce [1:06:30] one of the articles [1:06:31] for the record. [1:06:34] The Navy Times, [1:06:36] the Navy's largest ship [1:06:37] continues to be plagued [1:06:38] by plumbing issues [1:06:39] dated January 22, 2026. [1:06:42] Are you saying [1:06:43] that these public reports [1:06:44] and our constituents [1:06:46] and the GAO report are lies? [1:06:49] Senator, [1:06:52] in my years as the Navy, [1:06:54] it wouldn't be a sea story [1:06:55] if there wasn't some embellishment. [1:06:56] Again, [1:06:57] with the food [1:06:57] and stuff like that, [1:06:58] I mean, [1:06:58] I was serving these guys food [1:07:00] and there's a lot of things. [1:07:01] Backed up toilets. [1:07:01] Backed up toilets. [1:07:02] The commanding officer [1:07:03] did show me [1:07:04] the backed up toilets. [1:07:05] It's actually next to [1:07:05] where the fire was. [1:07:07] So it hasn't backed up since, [1:07:09] but it's just [1:07:10] we have finished [1:07:11] some of this stuff. [1:07:12] But Admiral Cottle [1:07:14] wants to comment [1:07:14] on some of these. [1:07:15] I'd like him to, [1:07:16] but I just want to say [1:07:17] if somebody tells me [1:07:19] that something [1:07:19] that is in the record [1:07:21] as true [1:07:22] is fake news, [1:07:24] that's essentially [1:07:25] telling me [1:07:25] that it's a lie. [1:07:27] And it raises [1:07:28] honest issues, [1:07:28] but it raises [1:07:29] another issue. [1:07:30] When somebody says [1:07:31] a problem [1:07:32] is fake news, [1:07:33] then that makes me think [1:07:35] they're not going [1:07:36] to fix the problem [1:07:37] because they're denying [1:07:38] the problem. [1:07:39] Now, Admiral Cottle, [1:07:40] are we taking steps [1:07:41] with respect to the Ford [1:07:43] and other ships [1:07:44] in that category [1:07:45] to make sure [1:07:46] that the plumbing system [1:07:47] is sufficient [1:07:48] for the needs [1:07:49] of sailors deployed? [1:07:50] Of course, sir. [1:07:51] I think what the Secretary [1:07:52] is trying to get across [1:07:54] is, you know, [1:07:54] it's not a binary state [1:07:56] on calling out the article. [1:07:58] It's to what extent. [1:07:59] 5,000 sailors a day [1:08:01] flushed the commode [1:08:02] at least four times a day [1:08:03] at least [1:08:03] over a 10-month deployment, [1:08:05] which is what, [1:08:06] you know, [1:08:06] this went a little bit [1:08:07] almost 11 exactly. [1:08:09] That's 6 million flushes. [1:08:11] That's a lot of flushes. [1:08:13] So this is a less [1:08:14] than a 1% problem. [1:08:16] Now, it's a significant problem [1:08:17] when the heads are down. [1:08:18] But the time between [1:08:20] somebody flushing [1:08:21] a T-shirt in there, [1:08:23] a rag in there, [1:08:24] something else in there [1:08:25] that's not supposed [1:08:26] to be by our procedure [1:08:27] until it was up again [1:08:28] is like a couple hours [1:08:30] type of thing. [1:08:31] Let me say it this way. [1:08:32] The reports that I've read, [1:08:34] including the one [1:08:34] I put into the record, [1:08:36] the Navy acknowledge [1:08:36] that it's a problem [1:08:38] they're working on. [1:08:39] The Navy did not say [1:08:41] this is fake news [1:08:42] or a lie. [1:08:43] They acknowledge [1:08:44] that it was a problem. [1:08:46] What is being done [1:08:47] right now [1:08:48] with respect [1:08:49] to future deployments [1:08:50] to make sure [1:08:51] that the plumbing systems [1:08:52] on these Ford class [1:08:54] are sufficient? [1:08:54] I think the plumbing system [1:08:57] on the Ford class [1:08:57] is a good design. [1:08:59] We went away [1:08:59] from a gravity drain [1:09:00] and normal flushing [1:09:01] type system to a vacuum. [1:09:02] Is there any current effort [1:09:03] to do any improvement? [1:09:05] Are you 100% satisfied [1:09:06] with the system? [1:09:06] No, I think it's, [1:09:08] I'd have to check [1:09:09] on the specifics [1:09:10] of whether or not [1:09:10] there's a limb fact [1:09:11] in the volume [1:09:12] of certain piping systems [1:09:14] that allow a sailor [1:09:16] to do something wrong [1:09:17] and clog it [1:09:18] and take it down [1:09:19] and put it out of commission [1:09:20] that I could go [1:09:21] improve upon. [1:09:22] If that system [1:09:23] is operating [1:09:23] in accordance [1:09:24] with procedure [1:09:25] then it does not clog. [1:09:27] So would you say [1:09:28] that the reports [1:09:28] of backed up toilets [1:09:29] are fake news? [1:09:30] Would you use that phrase? [1:09:32] I would say [1:09:32] that they're highly exaggerated. [1:09:34] That's, okay, [1:09:35] that's what you would say. [1:09:37] Two last points [1:09:38] that I'll just make [1:09:39] as points. [1:09:39] One, [1:09:41] 250,000 civilians [1:09:42] in the Navy [1:09:43] no proposal [1:09:44] for a pay raise [1:09:45] for civilians. [1:09:46] There's a bonus pool. [1:09:47] But good proposals [1:09:49] for pay raises [1:09:49] for sailors [1:09:50] as there should be. [1:09:51] We'll support that. [1:09:52] I worry about [1:09:53] the message it sends [1:09:54] when we're increasing [1:09:55] the budget [1:09:55] from $800 billion [1:09:57] to $1.5 billion [1:09:58] when there's zero [1:09:59] proposal for pay raise [1:10:00] for Navy civilians. [1:10:01] I'll have other questions [1:10:02] for the record [1:10:02] but I yield back. [1:10:05] Admiral Caudill, [1:10:06] is there more [1:10:09] of a problem [1:10:10] on the backed up toilets [1:10:12] than usual? [1:10:15] I think that's the question. [1:10:18] I think Ford [1:10:18] has a newly designed system. [1:10:21] It does require [1:10:22] a tighter adherence [1:10:24] to misuse [1:10:25] where we would find [1:10:27] routinely [1:10:27] underwear, [1:10:29] t-shirts, [1:10:30] large rags [1:10:31] in our sanitary tanks [1:10:33] because the previous system [1:10:35] would let that go through. [1:10:36] It is more susceptible [1:10:38] to misuse [1:10:39] like an airplane's [1:10:40] vacuum drag system. [1:10:42] So whether or not [1:10:44] I can put things in [1:10:46] it sailor proof that [1:10:47] I need to talk [1:10:47] to the design engineers [1:10:48] but I would say [1:10:50] the fact that [1:10:50] the time it's offline, [1:10:52] sir, [1:10:53] from the time it clogs [1:10:54] to offline [1:10:54] is a less than 1% [1:10:56] problem of its overall use. [1:10:58] Is it fair to say [1:10:59] that your testimony [1:11:01] is that most [1:11:02] of the problem [1:11:03] resulted from misuse? [1:11:06] There's no question. [1:11:06] To the extent [1:11:07] we actually started [1:11:09] standing a watch [1:11:10] in our heads [1:11:11] to ensure people [1:11:13] complied with the procedures [1:11:14] to keep it [1:11:15] from being misused. [1:11:16] So the system is, [1:11:18] again, [1:11:18] a vacuum drag system [1:11:19] and whether or not [1:11:21] that's robust enough [1:11:22] for sailors [1:11:22] I can look at. [1:11:24] Okay, very good. [1:11:25] Thank you for that clarification [1:11:27] and I'm sure [1:11:27] there'll be [1:11:28] some more discussion there. [1:11:29] Senator Moody, [1:11:30] I believe you're next. [1:11:31] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:11:33] Acting Secretary Cow, [1:11:35] Admiral Cottle [1:11:35] and General Smith, [1:11:36] thank you for being here today [1:11:37] and thank you to everyone [1:11:39] sitting here [1:11:39] that wears a uniform [1:11:40] for answering the call [1:11:42] and choosing service [1:11:43] as your profession. [1:11:44] I greatly respect you [1:11:46] for making that choice [1:11:47] in your life. [1:11:48] Thank you very much [1:11:48] and the American people, [1:11:49] thank you. [1:11:50] As you know, [1:11:51] Florida is home [1:11:52] to several naval installations [1:11:54] including Naval Air Station [1:11:55] Pensacola, [1:11:56] Mayport Jacksonville, [1:11:57] Key West, [1:11:58] many more support offices [1:11:59] across our state. [1:12:01] When the average American [1:12:02] and I think many watch [1:12:04] these hearings, [1:12:05] these open hearings, [1:12:06] they think of the Navy [1:12:07] the first thing [1:12:07] that comes to mind [1:12:08] are submarines [1:12:09] or carrier strike groups. [1:12:11] Oftentimes people forget [1:12:13] the platforms needed [1:12:14] to support the Navy's missions [1:12:16] across the globe. [1:12:18] Without proper testing [1:12:19] of future systems [1:12:20] and prototypes, [1:12:21] the Navy cannot innovate [1:12:22] at a pace it needs [1:12:23] to deter our adversaries. [1:12:25] In fact, [1:12:25] in many of these hearings, [1:12:27] many sitting in those chairs [1:12:28] will say, [1:12:29] we have to reconfigure [1:12:32] how we do things [1:12:33] from procurement [1:12:34] to training [1:12:34] to keep pace [1:12:35] with innovation [1:12:36] so we're strategically [1:12:37] outpacing our adversaries. [1:12:40] The Eglin Gulf test [1:12:41] and training range [1:12:42] plays a vitally important role [1:12:44] in that mission. [1:12:45] It supports the testing [1:12:46] and evaluation [1:12:46] of weapon systems, [1:12:48] unmanned surface [1:12:49] and underwater vehicles, [1:12:50] hypersonic platforms, [1:12:51] and a wide range [1:12:53] of other capabilities [1:12:54] that the fleet depends on. [1:12:56] At 180,000 square miles [1:12:58] of controlled airspace [1:12:59] stretching from Key West [1:13:00] to North Florida, [1:13:02] the Eglin range [1:13:02] is the largest test [1:13:04] and training range [1:13:04] in the continental United States. [1:13:07] And the Department of War [1:13:08] has identified it [1:13:09] as a national military asset [1:13:11] that cannot be replicated [1:13:13] anywhere else in the country. [1:13:15] From hypersonic weapons testing [1:13:17] to unmanned systems development [1:13:19] to live fire evaluation, [1:13:21] the work being done [1:13:21] on that range [1:13:22] directly shapes the lethality [1:13:24] of the future Navy [1:13:26] and I would argue [1:13:28] the future success [1:13:29] of our military. [1:13:31] Admiral Cottle, [1:13:32] I'd like to start with you [1:13:34] and give you an opportunity [1:13:35] to speak on the record [1:13:36] about the importance [1:13:37] of that range, [1:13:38] the Eglin Gulf test [1:13:40] and training range [1:13:41] to the Navy. [1:13:43] From your perspective [1:13:44] as Chief of Naval Operations, [1:13:46] how critical is the range [1:13:47] to the Navy's testing, [1:13:49] development, [1:13:49] and modernization efforts? [1:13:51] Specifically, [1:13:52] what does that range [1:13:53] contribute to the Navy [1:13:54] that the service [1:13:55] could not get [1:13:56] or could not get [1:13:57] as effectively [1:13:58] from any other location [1:14:00] in the country? [1:14:02] Well, Senator Moody, [1:14:03] thank you. [1:14:03] I mean, you're like pushing [1:14:05] an open door here [1:14:06] from, you know, [1:14:06] on this question. [1:14:08] You know, with the 96 test wing [1:14:10] that's there, [1:14:11] the joint integration [1:14:12] we do with the Air Force there, [1:14:14] collaborative platforms there. [1:14:16] We have F-35 Charlie training there, [1:14:20] EOD school, [1:14:21] weapons testings [1:14:21] as you've laid out. [1:14:22] All of those things [1:14:24] are significantly important [1:14:25] to the United States Navy. [1:14:27] We have a lot of joint integration [1:14:29] that's done there [1:14:30] and so Eglin serves [1:14:31] a very vital role [1:14:32] in everything you laid out [1:14:33] toward our gaining lethality. [1:14:35] And as you look [1:14:36] to where the Navy is going [1:14:37] and certainly we can look [1:14:38] at conflicts [1:14:39] that have just recently happened, [1:14:41] how important the Navy is, [1:14:43] unmanned systems, [1:14:44] hypersonics, [1:14:45] advanced munitions, [1:14:46] distributed maritime operations. [1:14:47] How essential [1:14:48] is preserving [1:14:49] the full footprint [1:14:49] of that range [1:14:50] to delivering those capabilities [1:14:52] to the fleet? [1:14:54] Well, like you said, [1:14:54] it's a national asset. [1:14:55] So when you start shrinking [1:14:56] these type of ranges down [1:14:58] and I don't get the ability [1:14:59] to conduct full range maneuvers [1:15:01] of these very advanced systems, [1:15:03] then you're going [1:15:03] to limit me somehow [1:15:04] to do real-world testing [1:15:05] and result mostly to simulation, [1:15:08] which doesn't completely [1:15:09] give us the full answer [1:15:10] on our capabilities. [1:15:11] And I want to just shift over [1:15:13] to Acting Secretary Cal. [1:15:15] Shifting from capability [1:15:17] to policy, [1:15:17] as you know, [1:15:18] since 1983 [1:15:19] and codified [1:15:20] by the Gulf of Mexico [1:15:21] Energy Security Act [1:15:22] in 2006, [1:15:23] the military mission line [1:15:25] has served as the boundary [1:15:26] protecting the range [1:15:27] from encroachment [1:15:28] by offshore drilling [1:15:29] or oil and gas activity [1:15:31] that is fundamentally incompatible [1:15:33] with military testing [1:15:34] and training. [1:15:36] The Pentagon itself [1:15:37] reaffirmed this position [1:15:38] in its May 2018 report [1:15:40] to Congress, [1:15:41] and I'll quote, [1:15:42] it was titled [1:15:43] Preserving Military Readiness [1:15:44] in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. [1:15:46] And in that report, [1:15:47] the department stated, [1:15:48] quote, [1:15:49] if oil and gas development [1:15:50] were to extend east [1:15:51] of the MML [1:15:52] without sufficient surface [1:15:54] limiting stipulations [1:15:55] and or oil and gas [1:15:56] activity restrictions [1:15:58] mutually agreed [1:15:58] by the DOD and DOI, [1:16:00] military flexibility [1:16:01] in the region [1:16:02] would be lost [1:16:03] and the test [1:16:03] and training activities [1:16:04] would be severely affected. [1:16:06] This result would be [1:16:07] less capable [1:16:08] and less prepared [1:16:08] military force. [1:16:09] This outcome would be [1:16:10] in direct conflict [1:16:11] with the National Defense Strategy. [1:16:14] So if that's [1:16:14] the department's own assessment [1:16:16] and the strategic environment [1:16:18] has only sharpened [1:16:19] since 2018, [1:16:21] even if you fully support [1:16:23] American dominance [1:16:24] and energy [1:16:25] and exploring [1:16:25] all of the available resources [1:16:27] to support that mission, [1:16:29] how important [1:16:30] is it that we maintain [1:16:32] and preserve [1:16:33] that MML [1:16:35] and that testing range? [1:16:39] Yes, Senator. [1:16:40] I spent five years [1:16:41] of my career [1:16:41] in the panhandle, [1:16:42] some of it in Eglin. [1:16:44] There's no other place. [1:16:45] And also in industry, [1:16:46] we did a lot of [1:16:47] counter-US signals. [1:16:48] I mean, [1:16:48] there's an unfederated [1:16:50] EW range [1:16:51] that we can do [1:16:51] a lot of testing [1:16:52] and facilitating there. [1:16:54] So yes, [1:16:54] Eglin is extremely important [1:16:56] to the United States Navy [1:16:57] and to our mission. [1:16:59] And preserving that [1:17:00] testing range [1:17:00] is incredibly important [1:17:01] to the future of the Navy. [1:17:02] Yes, Senator. [1:17:04] Thank you, Senator Moody. [1:17:05] Senator Kelly. [1:17:08] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:17:10] Mr. Secretary, [1:17:11] I want to discuss [1:17:12] how we revitalize [1:17:14] our maritime industrial base. [1:17:16] So the Navy's [1:17:17] shipbuilding delays, [1:17:19] maintenance backlogs, [1:17:20] and workforce shortages [1:17:21] are not isolated problems. [1:17:25] They're symptoms [1:17:25] of a broader decline [1:17:27] in U.S. shipbuilding capacity [1:17:29] that has developed [1:17:29] over decades. [1:17:30] Meanwhile, [1:17:32] China has built [1:17:33] a massive maritime [1:17:34] industrial base [1:17:35] by linking [1:17:36] commercial shipbuilding [1:17:38] and naval shipbuilding [1:17:40] and naval production [1:17:41] together. [1:17:42] I want to start out [1:17:43] with just some basic questions, [1:17:46] yes or no. [1:17:48] Would you agree [1:17:49] that the source [1:17:50] of many of the Navy's challenges [1:17:51] delivering new warships [1:17:53] on time and on budget [1:17:54] are due to a weakened [1:17:56] shipbuilding industrial base? [1:18:00] Yes, Senator. [1:18:00] Would you agree [1:18:02] that looking at [1:18:03] the other great shipbuilding [1:18:04] powers in the world today, [1:18:05] Korea, Japan, China, [1:18:07] even the Europeans, [1:18:08] their shipyards benefit [1:18:10] from having business [1:18:13] from both commercial shipowners [1:18:15] and military shipbuilding orders? [1:18:19] Yes, Senator. [1:18:19] So would you agree [1:18:21] that the U.S. [1:18:22] would benefit [1:18:23] from having a viable market [1:18:25] for U.S.-built commercial vessels, [1:18:28] especially since [1:18:29] that would mean [1:18:30] in having a resilient supply chain [1:18:32] that can support [1:18:33] both commercial [1:18:34] and military shipbuilding? [1:18:37] Yes, Senator. [1:18:38] As I said earlier, [1:18:39] I mean, [1:18:39] we only have 188 commercial [1:18:41] flagged U.S. ships [1:18:42] and 105 military [1:18:43] sea lift commander ships, [1:18:44] and we need thousands [1:18:46] the way the Chinese have. [1:18:47] Would you agree [1:18:48] that in a major conflict, [1:18:49] the United States military [1:18:51] depends heavily [1:18:52] on commercial sea lift capacity [1:18:54] to move fuel, [1:18:56] equipment, ammunition, [1:18:57] and supplies overseas? [1:18:59] Senator, [1:19:00] logistics wins the wars. [1:19:01] And would you agree [1:19:02] that our current sea lift fleet [1:19:04] is aging [1:19:05] and the United States [1:19:06] lacks sufficient [1:19:07] domestic shipbuilding capacity [1:19:09] to recapitalize [1:19:11] that fleet quickly? [1:19:13] Yes, Senator. [1:19:13] It's not just the number of ships. [1:19:14] We also need [1:19:15] merchant mariners as well. [1:19:16] I mean, [1:19:16] that's why we need to push [1:19:17] U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. [1:19:19] We need to push [1:19:20] Maine Maritime Academy, [1:19:21] Massachusetts, [1:19:22] New York Maritime, [1:19:23] all those avenues [1:19:25] in order to get more [1:19:26] merchant mariners out there. [1:19:28] Thank you. [1:19:28] for that as a graduate [1:19:29] of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. [1:19:31] I appreciate that. [1:19:32] I wasn't trying to placate you, [1:19:33] but I guess I won something. [1:19:35] Would you also agree [1:19:36] that in a prolonged conflict [1:19:38] in the Indo-Pacific, [1:19:39] we can't assume [1:19:40] foreign shipyards [1:19:42] or foreign-controlled [1:19:44] shipping networks [1:19:45] will remain fully available [1:19:47] to the United States? [1:19:49] Well, Senator, [1:19:50] I think I know [1:19:51] where you're going with this. [1:19:52] We're trying to bring these [1:19:52] to the United States, sir. [1:19:53] I mean, [1:19:54] when I buy my Toyota [1:19:55] or whatever, [1:19:56] it's not built in Japan anymore. [1:19:58] It's built in the United States. [1:19:58] Yeah, we want them [1:19:59] investing in the United States. [1:20:01] We want them investing [1:20:02] in us, sir. [1:20:03] I agree. [1:20:04] And would you agree [1:20:05] that rebuilding [1:20:05] American commercial shipbuilding [1:20:07] and sea lift capacity [1:20:08] is not just an economic issue, [1:20:10] but a core [1:20:11] wartime readiness issue? [1:20:14] Yes, sir. [1:20:15] And so taken together, [1:20:17] would you agree then [1:20:18] that as a matter [1:20:20] of government policy, [1:20:21] we should be working [1:20:22] to develop [1:20:23] such a commercial industry [1:20:25] through regulation reforms, [1:20:30] tax incentives, [1:20:31] and more? [1:20:33] We need to pull [1:20:33] all levers, Senator. [1:20:35] It includes, [1:20:35] for example, [1:20:36] for shipyard workers. [1:20:38] There's a lot [1:20:38] of young people out there [1:20:39] that went to college [1:20:40] with the hopes [1:20:41] of getting a job [1:20:42] and they can't [1:20:43] do anything else. [1:20:43] So why can't we [1:20:44] freeze their loans? [1:20:46] And for every year [1:20:47] they work in shipyard, [1:20:48] we forgive that year. [1:20:50] I mean, [1:20:50] these are levers [1:20:51] we need to pull [1:20:52] as a country [1:20:52] in order to get [1:20:53] our industrial base going, sir. [1:20:54] Well, that could be [1:20:55] a possible addition [1:20:57] to my Ships for America Act [1:20:59] because we're trying [1:21:00] to strengthen [1:21:01] this legislation right now [1:21:02] and it tries to do [1:21:04] all these things. [1:21:05] And I think it's important [1:21:06] that we recognize [1:21:07] that no country [1:21:08] has ever become [1:21:09] a great shipbuilding power [1:21:12] on the backs [1:21:13] of military shipbuilding alone. [1:21:15] Chinese have learned [1:21:16] that lesson. [1:21:18] So given all that, [1:21:20] I'm concerned [1:21:21] by the growing discussion [1:21:22] about outsourcing [1:21:24] Navy shipbuilding work [1:21:25] to foreign shipyards. [1:21:26] To me, [1:21:27] it risks treating [1:21:28] the symptom [1:21:29] instead of fixing [1:21:31] the underlying problem. [1:21:32] The United States [1:21:33] maritime industrial base [1:21:34] did not decline overnight. [1:21:36] It happened over decades. [1:21:38] Now, to be clear, [1:21:38] we need to work [1:21:39] with our allies closely [1:21:41] and partners [1:21:42] like Japan [1:21:43] and South Korea [1:21:44] to counter China's [1:21:45] shipbuilding advantage. [1:21:46] We should also [1:21:47] be sharing best practices, [1:21:49] deepening repair cooperation [1:21:50] and leveraging [1:21:51] allied expertise [1:21:52] to cut down [1:21:54] on our shipbuilding [1:21:55] costs and production timelines. [1:21:57] But there's a difference [1:21:58] between working [1:21:58] with allies [1:21:59] and partners [1:22:00] to strengthen [1:22:00] our industrial base here [1:22:02] and becoming [1:22:03] strategically dependent [1:22:04] on foreign shipyards [1:22:06] that could themselves [1:22:07] become vulnerable [1:22:09] to Chinese attacks [1:22:11] in a conflict. [1:22:12] So to put a fine point [1:22:13] on it, [1:22:14] we want to encourage [1:22:15] these world-class shipbuilders [1:22:17] to come here [1:22:17] to the United States [1:22:18] and invest here [1:22:20] in the United States. [1:22:21] and that's what [1:22:22] the President's [1:22:23] Maritime Action Plan [1:22:25] and the Ships for America Act [1:22:27] seeks to do. [1:22:29] But for these [1:22:29] foreign shipyards, [1:22:31] if it's a lot cheaper [1:22:32] for them to just get paid [1:22:34] by the U.S. Navy [1:22:35] to build ships [1:22:36] in their existing shipyards, [1:22:38] then they're probably [1:22:38] not going to seriously [1:22:39] consider investing [1:22:40] in our maritime [1:22:42] shipbuilding capability [1:22:44] and capacity here. [1:22:45] So I'm interested [1:22:49] in working with you, [1:22:50] Mr. Secretary, [1:22:51] Secretary on this. [1:22:52] It's clear to me [1:22:53] that it is a national security [1:22:56] and economic imperative [1:22:58] that we rebuild [1:23:00] the maritime industry [1:23:01] here in the United States. [1:23:03] It's going to help the Navy. [1:23:04] It's going to help [1:23:05] the Marine Corps. [1:23:06] It's also going to create [1:23:07] good-paying jobs. [1:23:08] You referenced young people [1:23:10] who could have [1:23:12] these great-paying careers. [1:23:13] Admiral, [1:23:14] we can get up [1:23:15] to two submarines a year. [1:23:17] One of the things [1:23:18] that can help [1:23:18] is rebuilding [1:23:19] the commercial sector. [1:23:22] And, Mr. Chairman, [1:23:23] I'm sorry I'm over my time, [1:23:24] but this is one [1:23:25] of my top priorities. [1:23:26] And I look forward [1:23:27] to talking to you [1:23:28] about this [1:23:29] with some of my colleagues [1:23:30] maybe later this month. [1:23:32] Would there be an objection [1:23:33] to asking Admiral Cottle [1:23:35] what he thinks [1:23:36] of your questions? [1:23:38] No objection. [1:23:39] Sir, go ahead. [1:23:41] Well, you know, [1:23:42] this is a complex topic. [1:23:45] I need ships. [1:23:46] I need them now. [1:23:47] I need capacity. [1:23:48] We have workforce [1:23:49] limitations here. [1:23:50] We have an industrial base [1:23:52] that can't support the load [1:23:53] without being creative [1:23:54] on modularity [1:23:55] and these new construction techniques. [1:23:58] This is an all-hands-on-deck thing. [1:24:00] But what I will commit to [1:24:01] is when we look at this, [1:24:02] and we've got the money [1:24:03] to go look at this hard, [1:24:05] that the secretary [1:24:06] in my chain of command [1:24:07] will give my best [1:24:07] military advice on it. [1:24:09] This is not [1:24:10] a no-brainer decision. [1:24:11] When you start bringing [1:24:12] foreign ship building in [1:24:13] and foreign ships [1:24:14] into the United States Navy arsenal, [1:24:16] I have to look closely [1:24:17] at how we fight that ship, [1:24:19] man it, [1:24:19] how we damage control it, [1:24:22] the procedures associated with it, [1:24:23] and the parts support [1:24:24] that supply it. [1:24:25] So it will get a full hard look [1:24:27] from me [1:24:27] and my best military advice. [1:24:28] Admiral, [1:24:29] but what about [1:24:30] the earlier point [1:24:33] of utilizing [1:24:36] the commercial shipyards [1:24:39] in conjunction [1:24:41] with building our military? [1:24:43] Well, Senator Kelly [1:24:44] and I, [1:24:44] we've talked about this before. [1:24:45] There is no question [1:24:46] he is right [1:24:47] that when you gain [1:24:49] the competency [1:24:49] and capacity [1:24:51] and the expertise [1:24:52] and subject matter expertise [1:24:54] of actually building ships [1:24:56] in our country, [1:24:57] that that will translate naturally [1:24:59] to a workforce [1:25:00] that does that for a living, [1:25:02] which will extend [1:25:03] by definition [1:25:04] over to being able [1:25:05] to build more combat ships. [1:25:06] You said [1:25:07] there's really no question [1:25:08] on that, [1:25:09] that he's right. [1:25:10] And I want to congratulate [1:25:12] both of you [1:25:13] for your statements today [1:25:16] because I think [1:25:19] that is, [1:25:20] that's an opportunity [1:25:22] that somehow [1:25:23] we've been missing [1:25:25] in recent decades. [1:25:28] Senator Sullivan, [1:25:29] you're recognized [1:25:29] for two minutes. [1:25:31] Thank you, [1:25:35] Mr. Chairman. [1:25:37] Gentlemen, [1:25:38] thank you for your service. [1:25:40] General, [1:25:41] I want to begin with you. [1:25:42] I want to commend you [1:25:44] and the Marine Corps [1:25:44] for the new [1:25:46] Marine Forces Alaska [1:25:48] campaign and operation plan. [1:25:51] General Shea did a great job [1:25:52] up in my state [1:25:54] last weekend. [1:25:55] This, as you know, [1:25:57] has a training [1:25:59] kind of rotational force, [1:26:02] Six Anglico [1:26:03] reserve active component. [1:26:07] So thank you, [1:26:07] first of all, [1:26:08] a lot of excitement [1:26:08] in Alaska [1:26:09] on this initiative. [1:26:12] Can you talk [1:26:12] a little bit about it, [1:26:13] General, [1:26:14] and maybe give your vision [1:26:16] of future ops [1:26:18] in the great state of Alaska, [1:26:20] the most strategic place [1:26:21] in the world, [1:26:22] according to Billy Mitchell, [1:26:23] the father of the U.S. Air Force? [1:26:24] Sir, I can. [1:26:25] One, you know, [1:26:26] I was taught [1:26:26] as a young officer [1:26:27] the cold makes cowards [1:26:28] of us all. [1:26:29] And the extreme cold [1:26:30] of Alaska [1:26:31] is something [1:26:31] that we want to train in. [1:26:32] It puts Bridgeport, [1:26:33] our Mountain Warfare [1:26:34] Training Center, [1:26:35] to shame [1:26:35] in terms of the extreme conditions. [1:26:36] It's a very, very, [1:26:37] very cold winter [1:26:38] in Alaska. [1:26:38] It is very cold, sir. [1:26:40] So, you know, [1:26:41] the Arctic is growing [1:26:43] in its importance. [1:26:44] It is not decreasing [1:26:45] in its importance. [1:26:46] And the Marine Corps [1:26:47] has to be prepared [1:26:49] to operate [1:26:49] in those extreme conditions. [1:26:51] And the Marine Rotational Force, [1:26:52] Alaska, [1:26:53] and Supporting Arms Liaison Team, [1:26:55] Alaska, [1:26:55] keeps Marines forward, [1:26:57] postured, [1:26:57] and ready [1:26:58] for those extreme conditions. [1:27:00] And those are [1:27:00] expeditionary conditions. [1:27:03] Supporting Arms Liaison Team, [1:27:05] Alpha, [1:27:06] Alaska, [1:27:07] Sixth Anglico Detachment, [1:27:08] provides a permanent detachment [1:27:10] to integrate with allies [1:27:12] and enable rapid expansion. [1:27:14] And again, [1:27:14] a permanent, [1:27:16] capable platform [1:27:17] to integrate [1:27:18] with allies [1:27:18] and partners [1:27:19] and to set the theater [1:27:20] because, again, [1:27:22] you can, [1:27:23] we are very, very close [1:27:25] when you get up [1:27:26] into Alaska. [1:27:26] You're very, very close [1:27:28] into the Indo-Pacific theater. [1:27:29] You have a reach. [1:27:30] Our F-35s love training there. [1:27:32] They love the wide open airspace [1:27:34] because you can do anything there. [1:27:35] You can go into full mode. [1:27:37] You can use the entirety [1:27:38] of the F-35 spectrum up there. [1:27:40] So Alaska for us [1:27:41] is vital, sir. [1:27:43] Great. [1:27:43] Well, I appreciate that. [1:27:44] And I was with a number [1:27:45] of the military leadership [1:27:46] from the Army [1:27:47] and the Air Force [1:27:49] just in the last week [1:27:50] back home. [1:27:50] And they are excited [1:27:52] about more training [1:27:54] with the Marines [1:27:56] in Alaska. [1:27:56] So I think it's going [1:27:57] to be a great initiative. [1:27:59] And I appreciate you [1:28:00] working with me [1:28:02] and others. [1:28:02] And like I said, [1:28:03] General Shea did a great job. [1:28:04] Mr. Secretary, [1:28:05] congratulations. [1:28:06] Appreciate the hard work [1:28:07] you're doing. [1:28:08] You know, [1:28:09] I want to talk about [1:28:10] another initiative [1:28:10] in Alaska. [1:28:12] Last year, [1:28:12] this committee appropriated [1:28:15] $115 million [1:28:16] to rebuild [1:28:18] the Navy base [1:28:19] at ADAC, [1:28:21] which is very strategic, [1:28:23] 1,100 miles west of Hawaii. [1:28:25] A lot of people [1:28:25] don't recognize that. [1:28:27] Both the Indo-PACOM commander [1:28:29] and the NORTHCOM commander [1:28:31] in testimony here [1:28:32] in front of this committee [1:28:34] said they strongly recommended [1:28:36] reopening that Navy base [1:28:39] for its strategic location. [1:28:43] We're off to a strong start [1:28:44] with that funding. [1:28:45] A lot of partners now, [1:28:47] not just the Army [1:28:48] or the Navy [1:28:49] and the Marine Corps [1:28:50] and the Coast Guard, [1:28:52] but the state of Alaska [1:28:53] is putting in money. [1:28:54] The private sector [1:28:55] is putting in money. [1:28:57] It looks like [1:28:58] a real innovative approach. [1:28:59] Can you commit [1:29:00] to work with me [1:29:01] and my team [1:29:02] on this initiative? [1:29:04] And I know we're both [1:29:05] trying to get out there soon, [1:29:06] to have you and I [1:29:11] both walk the ground there. [1:29:12] But can you give me [1:29:13] your vision on that? [1:29:14] It's going well, [1:29:15] but I think we need [1:29:16] the top leadership [1:29:17] from the Navy on this. [1:29:20] Absolutely, Senator. [1:29:21] Thank you for the question again. [1:29:22] I think I love the most [1:29:23] is when we look [1:29:24] from bird's eye view [1:29:25] on top of the poles, [1:29:27] how close Alaska is, [1:29:29] especially ADAC [1:29:30] and all the Aleutian Islands [1:29:32] is to our competitors [1:29:34] up in whether China [1:29:36] or Russia. [1:29:38] I mean, you've always shown [1:29:39] that chart of all the SAGs [1:29:41] that have gone through there. [1:29:42] And it's unacceptable [1:29:43] that we do not have [1:29:44] the ISR along that area. [1:29:47] So I will work with you, sir, [1:29:48] and I'd love to go to Alaska. [1:29:50] I just didn't want to do it [1:29:51] in January, sir, [1:29:52] because I didn't want [1:29:53] to get stuck there. [1:29:54] But I would love to get to ADAC. [1:29:55] We'll get you there anytime. [1:29:56] Yes, sir. [1:29:57] Let me end here. [1:29:59] I'm going to submit [1:29:59] a question for the record [1:30:00] on the Straits of Hormuz. [1:30:02] CENTCOM commander, [1:30:03] who I think is doing [1:30:04] a great job, testified last week [1:30:06] if given the order, [1:30:08] he could open that [1:30:09] with the Joint Force, [1:30:10] led by the Marine Corps [1:30:11] and the Navy, by the way. [1:30:12] Admiral, the Navy's [1:30:13] doing an amazing job. [1:30:15] But very quickly, [1:30:17] the vice chairman [1:30:19] in the recent review, [1:30:22] vice chairman [1:30:23] of the Joint Chiefs, [1:30:24] validated the MU 3.0 concept. [1:30:27] I think the MU-ARG [1:30:28] is clearly proving its worth [1:30:30] throughout the world right now [1:30:31] in terms of combat operations. [1:30:33] It talked about [1:30:35] an actual amphib fleet [1:30:37] of 40 amphibs, [1:30:40] and that was if there would be [1:30:41] a 36-month maintenance cycle. [1:30:44] We know that's kind of ambitious. [1:30:46] If it's a 44-month maintenance cycle, [1:30:48] the number is closer to 47 amphibs. [1:30:51] So can I get a commitment [1:30:52] from all of you? [1:30:54] This is a really important issue [1:30:55] to all of us, [1:30:56] particularly the Marine Corps. [1:30:57] Why don't we start with you, [1:30:58] General Smith, [1:30:59] just on the 3.0 mute. [1:31:01] Are you supporting [1:31:02] the vice chairman's review? [1:31:05] And, Mr. Secretary and Admiral, [1:31:06] I'd like to get your views [1:31:07] on that very quickly as well. [1:31:09] Well, the vice chairman [1:31:10] is one of the smartest men [1:31:11] I've ever met. [1:31:12] So if he says it, [1:31:14] then you can take it [1:31:14] to the bank, sir. [1:31:15] Mr. Secretary, [1:31:16] are you good to go on? [1:31:17] I just sent forward [1:31:18] my recommendation [1:31:19] to the Secretary of War [1:31:21] for basically the 56-month OFRP, [1:31:26] which includes 40 ships [1:31:27] for the ARG-MUSER. [1:31:29] And most importantly, Admiral, [1:31:31] how about you? [1:31:32] 40 amphibs from the U.S. Navy. [1:31:34] Fully committed. [1:31:35] If you've got nine deployed worldwide [1:31:37] and you've got a four-to-one, [1:31:38] that's 36. [1:31:39] If you have a five to make one, [1:31:41] that's 45. [1:31:42] So just, I mean, [1:31:43] 40 just makes a lot of sense [1:31:45] that it's going to take that [1:31:46] to give me the friction in there [1:31:48] necessary to have [1:31:49] a persistent 3-0, sir. [1:31:51] So I think it's a solid number, [1:31:53] but we'll refine that [1:31:54] as we look hard at it. [1:31:55] But it's a correct number. [1:31:57] Great. [1:31:57] Thank you. [1:31:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:31:59] Thank you, Senator Sullivan, [1:32:00] for that excellent line [1:32:01] of questioning. [1:32:03] Senator Shaheen, [1:32:05] you're recognized. [1:32:06] Thank you all for being here. [1:32:08] Secretary Cowell, [1:32:08] I want to begin with you [1:32:10] because Congress [1:32:11] has passed legislation, [1:32:13] I know because I was [1:32:15] one of the co-sponsors, [1:32:17] that exempts [1:32:18] the four public shipyards [1:32:19] from future civilian hiring freezes. [1:32:22] Implementation on that [1:32:23] is lagged, [1:32:24] so much so that [1:32:25] I had the opportunity [1:32:27] to raise it with [1:32:28] Secretary Higseth [1:32:29] when he was before the committee. [1:32:31] He committed to investigate [1:32:32] the hiring delays [1:32:33] before he left. [1:32:35] Secretary of the Navy, [1:32:37] Secretary Phelan committed [1:32:39] that there would be [1:32:39] no further reductions [1:32:40] in force [1:32:41] at our public shipyards. [1:32:43] Can you tell us [1:32:44] what the status is [1:32:45] currently of that? [1:32:46] Senator, thank you so much [1:32:48] for your question [1:32:48] because the workers [1:32:50] at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard [1:32:51] are some of the best [1:32:52] in America. [1:32:54] And we, again, [1:32:56] I know there's been rumors. [1:32:57] We are not laying off. [1:32:58] In fact, [1:32:58] all the wage-grade workers [1:32:59] have been exempt [1:33:01] from any cutbacks, [1:33:04] and so we will make sure [1:33:05] we don't cut [1:33:05] any more workers [1:33:07] from there. [1:33:08] So you have my pledge. [1:33:09] We will not cut workers [1:33:11] from the shipyards. [1:33:12] Thank you. [1:33:13] I very much appreciate that. [1:33:14] The other question [1:33:16] is also an issue [1:33:18] that's come up [1:33:19] at the shipyard [1:33:20] because civilian shipyard [1:33:21] workers who are represented [1:33:22] by the Metal Trades Council [1:33:24] have fired an unfair [1:33:25] labor practice [1:33:26] with the Federal Labor [1:33:27] Relations Authority [1:33:28] related to changes [1:33:30] in workplace conditions. [1:33:32] The FLRA has refused [1:33:33] to process this charge [1:33:35] citing Executive Order [1:33:36] 14-251, [1:33:39] which strips [1:33:40] certain federal employees [1:33:41] of collective bargaining rights. [1:33:42] and they have refused [1:33:45] to process it [1:33:46] despite an existing [1:33:47] court injunction [1:33:48] on the Executive Order. [1:33:50] In his testimony [1:33:51] in the House, [1:33:52] Secretary Hegsest said [1:33:53] that collective bargaining [1:33:54] agreements have [1:33:55] affected efficiency, [1:33:57] I quote, [1:33:58] but he couldn't articulate [1:34:00] any specific examples. [1:34:02] So I would ask you, [1:34:04] Secretary Cal, [1:34:04] the same thing, [1:34:05] but beyond that, [1:34:07] has the Navy assessed [1:34:08] whether current uncertainty [1:34:09] surrounding labor protections [1:34:12] are going to be affecting [1:34:15] workforce morale [1:34:16] and readiness [1:34:17] at our shipyards? [1:34:19] Again, Senator, [1:34:21] anytime there's rumors [1:34:22] of layoffs [1:34:24] or anything else, [1:34:24] it always affects morale [1:34:25] and workmanship [1:34:28] and everything else. [1:34:29] And we will do everything [1:34:30] we can to protect [1:34:31] the wage-grade workers, [1:34:32] basically your pipe fitters, [1:34:34] your ship fitters, [1:34:35] your welders, [1:34:35] your electricians, [1:34:36] everybody that works [1:34:37] really hard [1:34:38] in the shipyard. [1:34:38] I mean, [1:34:38] we need to get [1:34:40] this industrial base going, [1:34:41] we need to get America going, [1:34:42] we need to build ships, [1:34:43] and we need to do it yesterday. [1:34:44] And so we will make sure [1:34:45] that we protect our workers. [1:34:47] And I assume [1:34:48] that the Navy will comply [1:34:49] with the court order? [1:34:52] Senator, [1:34:53] if it's court order, [1:34:54] then we will do our best [1:34:57] to comply to it. [1:34:59] Thank you. [1:35:01] My next question [1:35:03] is really for both [1:35:04] Admiral Cottle [1:35:05] and General Smith, [1:35:06] because what we've seen [1:35:07] from the operations [1:35:08] in Southcom [1:35:09] and in the Middle East [1:35:13] is that it's pulled [1:35:15] equipment and resources [1:35:17] from those arenas [1:35:20] and also from [1:35:21] the Indo-Pacific. [1:35:22] So can you talk about [1:35:24] how you're addressing [1:35:24] readiness, [1:35:26] given those unexpected [1:35:27] operations, [1:35:29] and what that means [1:35:31] as you're thinking [1:35:31] about the future? [1:35:32] Admiral Cottle, [1:35:33] I'll ask you to go first. [1:35:34] Senator, thank you. [1:35:36] Thank you for your advocacy [1:35:37] for the shipyard there, [1:35:38] too, to state that. [1:35:39] You know, [1:35:41] the Navy's designed [1:35:42] to do what we're doing [1:35:42] in Epic Fury. [1:35:44] You know, [1:35:45] it does, [1:35:45] we do go to the well [1:35:46] here to actually deliver [1:35:48] that kind of combat power [1:35:49] for sustained operations, [1:35:50] but we're built to do that. [1:35:53] And we will have to have [1:35:54] some time to recover [1:35:55] post-Epic Fury [1:35:56] to go rebuild [1:35:57] some of that readiness. [1:35:58] But I am in good [1:35:59] communication [1:36:00] through the chairman [1:36:01] and with Admiral Cooper [1:36:02] on any limitations [1:36:03] of pushing parts, [1:36:06] food, [1:36:06] and munitions [1:36:07] to the theater [1:36:08] to be able to sustain [1:36:09] those operations [1:36:09] and to make sure [1:36:10] that we're, you know, [1:36:11] baking in time [1:36:13] for sailors and Marines [1:36:14] to take a knee [1:36:15] periodically in those operations [1:36:17] so that we can sustain [1:36:18] that fight. [1:36:20] So, yes, [1:36:20] it is straining. [1:36:22] It is, [1:36:22] it does distract [1:36:23] from conducting [1:36:24] some operations [1:36:25] in other theaters [1:36:26] by its very nature. [1:36:28] But I am fully confident [1:36:29] we can continue this [1:36:30] until the president [1:36:31] needs us to not do it [1:36:32] any longer. [1:36:33] Thank you. [1:36:34] General Smith. [1:36:35] Senator, [1:36:35] I'll echo [1:36:36] my shipmate, [1:36:37] Daryl Caudill. [1:36:38] The Marines like to deploy. [1:36:40] We're built on a one-to-three, [1:36:42] six-away, [1:36:43] 12-home, [1:36:44] six-away, [1:36:45] but we're capable [1:36:45] of operating on a one-to-two, [1:36:47] six-away, [1:36:48] six-home, [1:36:49] six-away, [1:36:50] six-home. [1:36:50] We did that for years [1:36:51] in Iraq and Afghanistan, [1:36:52] and the Marines like to deploy. [1:36:54] In fact, [1:36:55] I get rusty [1:36:56] when I stay home too long. [1:36:57] So we are fully capable [1:36:59] of continuing [1:37:00] to keep up this pace [1:37:02] in perpetuity. [1:37:03] Well, [1:37:05] I'm almost out of time, [1:37:06] but I do want to ask [1:37:07] a final question [1:37:08] about Taiwan [1:37:08] because, [1:37:10] General Smith, [1:37:10] I recently traveled [1:37:11] to Taiwan, [1:37:12] and we had a briefing [1:37:14] from the 3rd Marine [1:37:15] Expeditionary Force [1:37:16] during a stopover [1:37:17] in Okinawa, [1:37:18] and it was very clear [1:37:19] as part of that briefing [1:37:20] just how critical [1:37:21] our presence is. [1:37:23] And one of the things [1:37:26] that I have been troubled by, [1:37:28] and I'm not going to ask you [1:37:29] to respond to this [1:37:30] because I don't want [1:37:32] to put you all [1:37:32] in a difficult situation, [1:37:34] but it was very clear [1:37:37] from our time in Taiwan, [1:37:39] I think that was reinforced [1:37:41] by the President's meeting [1:37:42] with President Xi in Beijing, [1:37:45] that China still [1:37:48] is very much eyeing Taiwan. [1:37:50] That is one of their priorities, [1:37:53] and our presence [1:37:55] and our support for Taiwan [1:37:58] is absolutely critical. [1:37:59] That's why it's so troubling [1:38:01] to me that we are holding, [1:38:02] that the President is holding [1:38:03] the $14 billion in sales [1:38:05] to Taiwan that were approved [1:38:07] by a notice to Congress [1:38:08] in January. [1:38:09] So, Mr. Chairman, [1:38:11] I'm not going to ask [1:38:11] for a response from folks, [1:38:13] but I do think it's important [1:38:14] for us to weigh in [1:38:16] on how important [1:38:17] providing those sales [1:38:18] to Taiwan are. [1:38:20] Thank you, Senator Shaheen. [1:38:22] Senator Peters, [1:38:23] have you voted? [1:38:25] I have. [1:38:26] How did you vote? [1:38:26] I'm just kidding. [1:38:28] You're recognized. [1:38:30] Thank you. [1:38:30] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:38:32] Gentlemen, thank you [1:38:32] for being here today. [1:38:33] Thank you for your service [1:38:35] to our country as well. [1:38:37] General Smith, [1:38:38] as you know very well, [1:38:40] the medium landing ship [1:38:42] is going to allow [1:38:43] the Marine Corps [1:38:44] to rapidly move equipment, [1:38:46] troops and supplies [1:38:47] without needing to rely [1:38:49] on existing port infrastructure. [1:38:52] Certainly that's going [1:38:53] to be essential [1:38:53] for the Marine Corps [1:38:54] in any potential conflict, [1:38:56] but in particular [1:38:57] in the Indo-Pacific. [1:39:00] So my question for you is, [1:39:02] can you share the importance [1:39:03] with this committee [1:39:05] of the medium landing ship [1:39:07] to the Marine Corps, [1:39:08] including your ship [1:39:09] acquisition plans, [1:39:10] as well as your desired [1:39:12] fielding timeline? [1:39:14] Because I know this is [1:39:14] an important project for you. [1:39:16] Yeah, the last part first. [1:39:18] We can't go fast enough. [1:39:19] We need them yesterday. [1:39:21] The landing ship medium, [1:39:23] or LSM, [1:39:24] is our inter-island connector. [1:39:25] It's what enables us [1:39:26] to disaggregate and re-aggregate forces [1:39:28] to make ourselves [1:39:30] less targetable [1:39:31] than we otherwise would be [1:39:32] by the PRC, [1:39:34] primarily useful [1:39:35] in the Indo-Pacific, [1:39:36] but useful globally. [1:39:38] It disaggregates [1:39:39] and re-aggregates our forces. [1:39:41] It moves our medium missile batteries. [1:39:42] It moves our ground air [1:39:43] task-oriented radar, [1:39:45] and it moves them into places [1:39:46] that are not otherwise targetable [1:39:48] by an adversary. [1:39:49] You don't pull into your fixed ports, [1:39:51] which are all well-known. [1:39:53] This thing with a shallow beach gradient [1:39:55] can get you into [1:39:56] multiple smaller ports [1:39:58] and complicate an adversary's [1:40:01] targeting regime [1:40:02] and targeting calculus. [1:40:05] Great. [1:40:05] I just want to follow. [1:40:06] Mr. Secretary, [1:40:07] as the Commandant outlined, [1:40:09] the medium landing ship [1:40:10] is certainly key [1:40:11] to the future [1:40:12] of the Marine Corps, [1:40:14] and I think it's absolutely central, [1:40:16] as the general outline, [1:40:17] that the Navy accelerates [1:40:18] this program [1:40:18] at least as much as possible. [1:40:20] As you know, [1:40:21] Mr. Secretary, [1:40:22] Thiccantary Marinette Marine, [1:40:24] which is kind of, [1:40:26] it's over in Wisconsin, [1:40:27] but half the workers [1:40:28] are in Michigan, [1:40:29] to be very clear, [1:40:31] will construct several [1:40:32] of the six planned vessels [1:40:34] in FY27 budget. [1:40:36] I understand Thiccantary [1:40:38] has additional construction capacity [1:40:40] right now [1:40:40] to not only accelerate the program, [1:40:44] but also, [1:40:44] which is incredibly important, [1:40:46] they have to maintain [1:40:46] their skilled workforce [1:40:47] in that part of the country, [1:40:48] and if they don't, [1:40:50] it'll be hard to reconstruct that [1:40:51] and we can't lose those folks. [1:40:53] So my question to you is, [1:40:55] how is the Navy ensuring [1:40:56] that the landing ship [1:40:59] by results [1:41:01] and a quick acquisition [1:41:03] and the four ships [1:41:04] that Thiccantary [1:41:05] can build very quickly [1:41:06] can be facilitated? [1:41:09] Thank you for that question, [1:41:09] Senator. [1:41:10] Again, this is why [1:41:11] we're going with [1:41:11] a proven design ship. [1:41:13] I mean, the Marines [1:41:13] already walked [1:41:14] from stem to stern [1:41:15] of that ship [1:41:16] to make sure [1:41:17] it fits with [1:41:18] the Marine Corps' needs. [1:41:19] And that's why [1:41:20] we need to get it [1:41:21] out there quickly. [1:41:22] Like you said, [1:41:22] the first ship [1:41:23] will be built in Mississippi [1:41:25] and the next five [1:41:26] will be built [1:41:27] at Thiccantary. [1:41:29] And this is why [1:41:29] we need to get that going. [1:41:31] Great. [1:41:31] And you're committed [1:41:32] to make sure [1:41:32] that happens [1:41:33] and make sure [1:41:33] the Marine Corps [1:41:34] has the tool [1:41:35] that they need. [1:41:36] Yes, Senator. [1:41:36] Good to hear. [1:41:37] Thank you. [1:41:38] Admiral Cottle, [1:41:39] as we discussed last year, [1:41:41] the University of Michigan [1:41:42] has the last [1:41:44] standalone [1:41:45] Naval architecture [1:41:46] and marine engineering [1:41:47] program [1:41:47] at an R1 university [1:41:49] in the entire country. [1:41:51] U of M's unique program [1:41:52] can also rely upon [1:41:53] access to world-renowned [1:41:56] researchers [1:41:57] and academics [1:41:58] in nuclear engineering, [1:42:00] industrial operations, [1:42:01] to support their [1:42:03] extensive naval [1:42:04] engineering efforts there. [1:42:06] So my question [1:42:07] for you, sir, [1:42:07] is what role [1:42:08] could U of M's [1:42:09] Naval architecture program [1:42:10] play in mitigating [1:42:11] what is a real [1:42:12] technical workforce shortage [1:42:14] that we're facing [1:42:14] right now? [1:42:16] And if unaddressed, [1:42:17] certainly may continue [1:42:19] to delay [1:42:20] both submarine production [1:42:21] as well as other [1:42:22] naval shipbuilding efforts. [1:42:25] A huge role. [1:42:26] You know, [1:42:26] it often, [1:42:27] when we look [1:42:28] at workforce shortages, [1:42:30] we tend to immediately [1:42:31] go to the vocational, [1:42:32] wage-grade, [1:42:33] blue-collar-type jobs, [1:42:35] which are vital. [1:42:36] Electricians, [1:42:37] plumbers, [1:42:37] ship-fielders, [1:42:38] fedders, welders. [1:42:39] But these engineers [1:42:41] that come from [1:42:41] these types of degrees [1:42:42] that understand [1:42:43] how to actually build [1:42:45] and design ships [1:42:46] is a critical part [1:42:47] of the workforce [1:42:48] we need at every [1:42:49] commercial yard [1:42:50] and every yard [1:42:51] that builds our combat ships. [1:42:53] Senator Scott asks, [1:42:54] why does it take so long [1:42:55] to design a ship? [1:42:56] Well, quite frankly, [1:42:57] it's because we don't [1:42:58] have enough folks [1:42:58] that understand [1:42:59] what can be done [1:43:00] with state-of-the-art [1:43:01] computer-aided design, [1:43:03] computer-aided manufacturing, [1:43:04] software tools, [1:43:06] and artificial intelligence [1:43:07] integrated into those tools [1:43:08] to accelerate designs [1:43:10] and get them into [1:43:11] the drawing hands [1:43:12] of our people [1:43:13] to build these more quickly. [1:43:14] So places like this [1:43:15] are exactly the type of thing [1:43:17] we need to expand on [1:43:18] and scale. [1:43:19] And how are you working [1:43:20] to promote that [1:43:20] in places like [1:43:21] the University of Michigan? [1:43:22] It's part of the [1:43:23] submarine industrial base [1:43:24] and maritime industrial base [1:43:25] funding, [1:43:26] part of the forge efforts. [1:43:28] It's part of the thing [1:43:28] that I think our PAE, [1:43:30] Undersea, [1:43:32] and Derpam, [1:43:33] Admiral Goucher [1:43:33] will be doing [1:43:34] to leverage that. [1:43:35] I can talk to him [1:43:36] specifically about [1:43:37] this one use case, [1:43:38] but through the broader effort, [1:43:40] I think we need [1:43:40] to expand that type [1:43:42] of STEM degree, [1:43:43] engineering majors [1:43:44] in this field [1:43:45] to actually get [1:43:46] on top dead center [1:43:47] on this issue, sir. [1:43:48] Great. [1:43:49] Well, thank you. [1:43:49] I'd love to talk more [1:43:50] about that [1:43:50] and how we can strengthen [1:43:51] that program [1:43:52] to meet this critical need. [1:43:53] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:43:54] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:43:55] Very important point [1:43:56] to end on, [1:43:57] Senator Peters. [1:43:58] Thank you, gentlemen, [1:43:59] for an excellent hearing [1:44:02] and a lot of good information. [1:44:04] We stand ready [1:44:07] at this committee [1:44:08] to help you make [1:44:10] a quantum leap. [1:44:12] Let us know [1:44:13] what you need. [1:44:14] Can I add one quick thing, [1:44:16] sir? [1:44:16] I'm sorry. [1:44:16] As long as no one else [1:44:18] walks in, Mr. Secretary. [1:44:19] MQ-25 reached Milestone C, [1:44:21] which is huge [1:44:22] because now we have [1:44:23] in-flight refueling [1:44:24] that's unmanned. [1:44:25] And this is something [1:44:26] I wanted to bring up [1:44:27] at the close hearing [1:44:28] this morning, [1:44:28] but it's just, [1:44:29] it's a great capability, [1:44:30] sir, [1:44:31] for unmanned aircraft [1:44:32] and refueling as well. [1:44:34] Thank you very much. [1:44:34] And feel free [1:44:35] to expand on that [1:44:36] on the record. [1:44:38] This concludes [1:44:39] the open portion [1:44:39] of today's hearing. [1:44:41] Thank our witnesses [1:44:41] for the information [1:44:43] of members. [1:44:43] Questions for the record [1:44:44] will be due [1:44:45] to the committee [1:44:46] within two business days [1:44:48] of the conclusion [1:44:49] of this hearing. [1:44:50] And we are adjourned.