Saved copy of

Department of Defense Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2024, Senate hearing

U.S. Government Publishing Office · 2023-04-18

Back to source details

The saved file is a PDF document of 5.1 MB. What follows is the text taken from it, which is the text the story quotes.

Jump to the cited passage

S. HRG. 118–520

Senate Hearings
Before the Committee on Appropriations

Department of Defense
Appropriations

Fiscal Year 2024

118 th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION

H.R. 4365/S. 2587

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

---

Department of Defense Appropriations, 2024 (H.R. 4365/S. 2587)

---

S. HRG. 118–520

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2024

HEARINGS
BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION

H.R. 4365/S. 2587
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES

Department of Defense
Nondepartmental Witnesses

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

(
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
50–509 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024

---

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chair
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 1 SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Vice Chair
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky
JACK REED, Rhode Island LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JON TESTER, Montana LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JERRY MORAN, Kansas
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland KATIE BRITT, Alabama
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico MARCO RUBIO, Florida
GARY PETERS, Michigan DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona 2
EVAN SCHATZ, Staff Director
ELIZABETH MCDONNELL, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE
JON TESTER, Montana, Chairman
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Ranking
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 1 MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky
PATTY MURRAY, Washington LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
JACK REED, Rhode Island LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii JERRY MORAN, Kansas
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 3

Professional Staff
KATE KÄUFER
MIKE CLEMENTI
LAURA FORREST
ABIGAIL GRACE
KATY HAGAN
BRIGID KOLISH
ROB LEONARD
RYAN PETTIT
KIMBERLY SEGURA
RYAN KALDAHL (Minority)
TODD PHILLIPS (Minority)
JASON POTTER (Minority)
JESSE TOLLESON (Minority)
MIKE WAKEFIELD (Minority)
Administrative Support
GABRIELLA ARMONDA
ALEX SHULTZ (Minority)
1 Died September 29, 2023.
2 Appointed to Committee October 18, 2023.
3 Appointed to Subcommittee November 2, 2023.

(II)

---

CONTENTS

HEARINGS

TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023 Page
Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary ......... 1

TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023
Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force and Space Force: Office
of the Secretary .................................................................................................... 91

WEDNESDAY, MAY 2, 2023
Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary ........ 143

THURSDAY, MAY 11, 2023
Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense ................................. 185

THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2023
Department of Defense: National Guard and Reserve ......................................... 251

BACK MATTER
List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements .......................... 341
Nondepartmental Witnesses ................................................................................... 325
Subject Index ............................................................................................................ 345
Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary .................................... 345
United States Space Force ........................................................................ 345
Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary .......................................... 345
Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary .......................................... 345
United States Marine Coprs ..................................................................... 345
National Guard and Reserve ........................................................................... 346
Office of the Secretary of Defense ................................................................... 347

(III)

---

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023

U.S. SENATE,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen Sen-
ate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Schatz, Baldwin, Shaheen,
Murphy, Collins, Murkowski, Graham, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman,
and Capito.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS DEL TORO, SECRETARY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. I call this committee meeting to order. Good
morning. I want to welcome our witnesses.
Secretary Del Toro, Admiral Gilday, General Berger, thank you
for your service to our Nation, and thank you for leading the Navy
and the Marine Corps.
I look forward to discussing your fiscal year 2024 budget prior-
ities today. The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Navy and
the Marine Corps is $255.8 billion, $11 billion more than in fiscal
year 2023, and about $32 billion more than fiscal year 2022. This
increase sounds robust but it is irrelevant unless we enacted De-
fense Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2024.
Our key priority this year must be to get the budget done on
time. Continuing resolutions kill military modernization and cause
billions in wasteful spending. And it is no secret that the Chinese
don’t operate under continuing resolutions.
I am encouraged by the work that Chair Murray and Vice Chair
Collins, have already put in to restore regular order to the Appro-
priations Committee. Their commitment to writing Bipartisan Ap-
propriations Bills that addresses the critical challenges facing our
Nation have my full-throated support.
This budget request represents continuity from last year’s budget
by furthering implementing the National Defense Strategy. And it
reinforces what we already know, despite Russia’s ongoing unjust
war in Ukraine; China remains our number one pacing threat.
(1)

---

2

We must continue to modernize our Military to stay ahead of
that threat. The Navy and Marine Corps play an important role in
defending our national and economic security by providing unparal-
leled maritime capabilities.
Every week Senator Collins and I hear from commanders in the
field about the varying threats facing our Nation. So the question
I have is: Are we spending taxpayer on the right things?
We look forward to hearing from you on where we have made
progress, and what challenges remain. And once again, I want to
thank each one of you for your service to our country.
Before you make your opening statements, I want to turn it over
to Senator Collins for her opening statement.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It has
been a great pleasure to work with you as we proceed as the Chair
and Vice Chair of this very important subcommittee.
I want to echo the Chairman’s thank you to each of our wit-
nesses, for your service, it is greatly appreciated. And I would ask
that you also pass on our gratitude to the Sailors and Marines that
you represent.
I also want to recognize the Department’s many civilians, and
their industry partners who build and maintain the ships, aircraft,
and munitions that sustain the Navy and the Marine Corps. They
make invaluable contributions, and I am personally proud that so
many Mainers have chosen to serve their country in these capac-
ities, such as, by working at Bath Iron Works, the Portsmouth
Naval Shipyard, and the Naval Computer and Telecommunications
Center in Cutler, Maine.
The administration’s 2022 National Defense Strategy accurately
describes the accelerating threat of China, as the Chairman has in-
dicated, and its unprecedented military modernization.
However, in my judgment, the administration’s budget request
does not fully reflect the challenges identified in its own National
Defense Strategy.
For example, the President’s budget request would result in a
fleet of 291 ships at the end of the next 5 years. That is smaller
than today’s fleet of 296 ships, and significantly smaller than the
Navy’s own requirement of 373 ships. I am also concerned with the
contrast to more than 440 ships that China is expected to have by
the year 2030.
The budget requests also inadequately accounts for the impact of
Inflation and Investment and Readiness Accounts. The Navy’s pro-
posed budget increase of 4.5 percent, which includes the Marine
Corps’ 2.6 percent increase, would likely provide less buying power
than the fiscal year 2023 enacted budget after accounting for infla-
tion.
For example, the budget request assumes a fuel price of $140 per
barrel, yet on the very day that the budget was rolled out fuel was
$169 per barrel, that is 20 percent more than budgeted.
Why does this matter? It matters because the Department of the
Navy consumes roughly 24 million barrels of fuel each year, and
each one dollar per barrel increase carries a $24 million dollar cost.
At $29 per barrel below current rates, this budget would equate to

---

3

a $700 million dollar unfunded cost just for the Department of the
Navy.
It is no surprise that Admiral Gilday and General Berger’s un-
funded priorities which highlights some of the shortfalls of this
budget, totaled $5.7 billion.
With that backdrop, Navy leadership deserves credit for redou-
bling its commitment to ship maintenance. This is evidenced by the
$1.8 billion dollar increase for ship repair, and the continued full
funding for the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan at the
Navy’s four public shipyards, including the Portsmouth Navy Ship-
yard in Kittery, Maine. These investments are critical to keeping
a greater portion of the Navy’s Fleet available for operations.
I also want to commend the Navy for pursuing a record number
of multiyear procurement contracts for munitions this year.
Ukraine’s War has taught us that we must transition from just-in-
time stockpiles of weapons and munitions to just-in-case stockpiles.
If implemented well, these multiyear contracts will provide indus-
try with the certainty necessary to make that transition a reality,
and deliver cost savings for the taxpayers at the same time, and
help with workforce challenges.
I look forward to discussing all of these issues with our distin-
guished witnesses today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins.
You will each be given 5 minutes for your presentation. Know
that your full written testimony will be a part of the record.
And we will start with you, Secretary Del Toro.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS DEL TORO

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman
Tester, Ranking Member Collins, distinguished Members of the
Committee. It is an honor to appear before you, alongside General
Berger and Admiral Gilday, to discuss the Posture of the Depart-
ment of the Navy.
Today, our Nation faces challenges in every region and domain
we operate in, from the seabed to the stars. We recognize the Peo-
ple’s Republic of China as our pacing threat executing a strategy
aimed at upending international order.
To preserve our way of life the National Defense Strategy calls
upon the Joint Force to deter aggression while being prepared to
prevail in conflict. A strong Navy and Marine Corps are the foun-
dation upon which the success of the Joint Force exists.
The President’s 2024 budget sends a strong signal to the Amer-
ican people of the value President Biden, and Secretary Austin,
and myself place in maintaining a robust Navy and Marine Corps
team to confront the threats that we face. This year’s budget re-
quest supports our three enduring priorities: strengthening mari-
time dominance, building a culture of warfighting excellence, and
enhancing our strategic partnerships around the globe.
With your support over the past year we have made major
strides to modernize our fleet and our force. In 2022 we saw the
first deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, pro-
viding the Navy with lessons learned that will benefit future Ford-
class carriers.

---

4

With the support of our partners in Congress we are proud to
field capable aircraft carriers as part of our fleet with a lower serv-
ice life cost than their Nimitz-class predecessors. Construction of
high-end surface combatants continues, including the first Con-
stellation-class frigate, USS Constellation, and the first of our
Early Bird-class Flight III destroyers, the USS Jack Lucas, which
we are scheduled to commission in the fall.
We continue progress on our first Columbia-class Ballistic Mis-
sile Submarine, the District of Columbia, our pre-construction ac-
tivities on the second Columbia-class Ballistic Missile Submarine,
the USS Wisconsin, have also begun.
On the innovation front, Task Force 59 in Bahrain continues to
test a wide range of uncrewed surface vessels. We look forward to
bringing the capabilities that these platforms provide us to addi-
tional regions that we operate in around the globe.
When we consider the composition of our fleet we seek to strike
a balance between readiness, modernization and capacity, with an
immediate emphasis on readiness.
This year, our divestment request includes three amphibious
ships, at least two cruisers in poor material condition that offer
limited warfighting capability. Our decisions to divest or extend the
ship’s life are based on a hull-by-hull evaluation. For example, we
recently announced the modernization of the destroyer, USS
Arleigh Burke, DDG–51, to keep it sailing through 2031, 5 years
beyond its estimated service life. We hope to be able to continue
that trend with other ships when possible.
We owe it to the American people to be responsible stewards of
our taxpayer dollars, as you have stated Mr. Chairman; investing
in platforms with limited capability conflicts with that responsi-
bility. The Navy and Marine Corps are not just about platforms
and systems, however, our Sailors and our Marines are our great-
est strength. This year’s budget request contains multiple invest-
ments to support them and their families, with services, benefits,
housing, and education.
In addition to our commitments to our people, we are reinforcing
our relationship with our allies and partners around the globe, in-
cluding our Ukrainian partners as they defend their sovereignty in
response to Russia’s illegal and unprovoked invasion.
In the Indo-Pacific we continue to play our leading role in the
AUKUS Security Partnership. Just this month, President Biden
announced the optimal pathway for Australia’s acquisition of con-
ventionally armed nuclear-powered, fast-attack submarines. Our
Navy will be critical to this initiative’s success as we support a very
important ally.
In addition to our partnerships abroad, we are also committed to
strengthening our relationships here at home with industry. We
value your support and recommit our leadership toward defueling
and remediating the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility spill as
well. We are committed to doing what it takes to address the con-
cerns of our service members, their families, the people of Hawaii,
and all other communities throughout the U.S.
As I have said before, we build trust one day at a time, one ac-
tion at a time, and we are committed to doing the right thing.

---

5

Lastly, I am grateful for the trust you have placed in me to lead
this Department. I look forward to discussing how best to support
our Sailors, our Marines, and their families in defense of our Na-
tion.
And I thank you, sir.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CARLOS DEL TORO
Chairman Tester, Vice Chair Collins, distinguished members of the committee, it
is an honor to appear before you alongside General Berger and Admiral Gilday to
discuss the posture of the Department of the Navy (DON). We appreciate your trust
and confidence in us to lead the DON, and appreciate opportunities like this to come
together with you and address how to best to recruit, train, equip, and prepare our
Sailors and Marines so they can fulfill their vital role in support of the Joint Force,
protecting our national security interests.
The United States requires a strong Navy and Marine Corps. The national and
economic security of our Nation depends on free and open access to the sea. Ninety
percent of international trade travels over the seas and one third of that transits
the South China Sea. Over 400 undersea fiber-optic cables carry more than a trillion
dollars in transactions every day. And the rules-based international order that bene-
fits us all requires a strong maritime force, campaigning forward alongside allies
and partners to provide the sea control and integrated deterrence we need to
counter strategic competitors today and into the future.
We find ourselves at an inflection point, one that demands we renew our commit-
ment to naval primacy as we chart a course through this century of intense mari-
time competition. Over the past two decades, the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
has more than quadrupled its export trade and used its growing wealth and eco-
nomic power to rapidly expand and modernize its military and its navy. The Peo-
ple’s Liberation Army Navy has added over one hundred combatants to its fleet in
that time—a naval buildup that is a key component of its increasingly aggressive
military posture. Today it has approximately 340 ships, and is moving towards a
fleet of 440 ships by 2030. The PRC is conducting active, aggressive maritime activi-
ties in the South China Sea and beyond that have the potential to undermine our
system of international law, including the freedom of the seas, a foundational U.S.
interest.
Our maritime challenges are not confined to the Indo-Pacific. Moscow has not
abated in its efforts to control large swaths of the Black, Baltic, and Arctic Seas,
trying to intimidate and deny other countries the opportunity to exercise their
rights to free passage. That is why six of seven of NATO’s priority operating regions
are maritime-focused, and NATO is moving to adopt its first maritime strategy.
Our Navy and Marine Corps team are meeting these threats on the sea, under
the sea, in the air, and in cyberspace every single day. To defend freedom of the
sea, we must ensure our Sailors and Marines have the capability and forward pres-
ence to stand by our allies and our partners.
That is why I have directed our Navy and Marine Corps team to prioritize our
investment in readiness, to make sure our ships and aircraft are always prepared
to deploy. This approach will deliver the integrated deterrence at sea required by
our National Defense Strategy.
THREE ENDURING PRIORITIES GUIDING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Last year I had the privilege of introducing my strategic vision for the Depart-
ment of the Navy to this committee, centered on our Department’s three enduring
priorities, which are complementary to and supportive of both the CNO’s Navigation
Plan 2022 and the Commandant’s Force Design 2030.
First, we are strengthening our maritime dominance so that we can deter poten-
tial adversaries, and if called upon, fight and win our Nation’s wars. Second, we are
building a culture of warfighting excellence, founded on strong leadership, and root-
ed in treating each other with dignity and respect. And third, we are enhancing our
strategic partnerships, across the Joint Force, with industry, with academia, and
with our allies and partners around the globe. Over the past year and a half, our
DON team has made irreversible progress across our three enduring priorities, sup-
porting positive growth and modernization in our naval force. I highlight the
progress we’ve made and successes we’ve enjoyed over the past year through the
support of the committee and your other colleagues throughout Congress.

---

6
Strengthening maritime dominance requires us to rapidly field the concepts and
capabilities that create advantage relative to our pacing threat, with the
sustainment necessary to generate integrated, all-domain naval power. That is why
we are making the investments now, guided by the CNO’s Navigation Plan and Ma-
rine Corps Force Design 2030, to ensure we remain the most lethal, capable, and
globally postured force on this planet for decades to come.
Last June, our shipbuilders laid the keel for USS District of Columbia, the first
of a new class of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines that will underwrite
the Nation’s nuclear deterrent out to the year 2080. The second Columbia-class hull,
USS Wisconsin, has begun pre-construction activities.
In July, we commissioned USS Fort Lauderdale, an amphibious warship that will
help modernize our amphibious fleet and extend the reach of our Marines to fight
from the sea wherever there is a need.
What’s more, USS Tripoli, the second of our America-class amphibious assault
ships, completed its maiden deployment in 2022, operating throughout the Indo-Pa-
cific with our larger, traditional aircraft carriers as a test of our F–35B ‘‘Lightning
Carrier/Assault Carrier’’ concept. Deployments like this one highlight the Navy and
Marine Corps’ interoperability as well as the strategic and operational advantages
that amphibious ships continue to provide to the Joint Force.
With regard to aircraft carriers, we’ve made significant progress on USS Gerald
R. Ford, the first new carrier to be deployed in almost 50 years. We are taking the
lessons learned from the Ford as we build the future USS John F. Kennedy, USS
Enterprise, and USS Doris Miller. Our carriers are not only vital to deterrence, they
are also the cornerstone of our interoperability with our allies.
Our most advanced fighter aircraft, the F–35 Lightning II, now brings fifth-gen-
eration stealth and multi-role, multi-mission reach and power wherever we need to
fight. Meanwhile, the F/A–18E/F Super Hornet will be the numerically predominant
aircraft in the carrier air wing well into the 2030s. Service-life modification initia-
tives and capability upgrades enhance our inventory by advancing the tactical rel-
evance of the F/A–18 E/F and closing the Navy’s strike-fighter gap. We are working
with industry to ensure trained mechanics are prepared to support induction sched-
ules, and that they are bringing electrical and avionics experts onboard to support
Block III transition efforts.
Marine aviation continues to build capability and capacity in the image of the fu-
ture force. Recently, we stood up Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 153
in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, significantly increasing the reach and sustainment capa-
bilities of Marines in the Pacific theater.
The fifteen KC–130J tanker aircraft that VMGR–153 will have by 2026 will en-
hance the organic mobility available to Marines during training, in response to cri-
sis, or in conflict. We are approaching 1 year since the CH–53K Sea Stallion pro-
gram became operational, and we are well underway transitioning Marine Heavy
Helicopter Squadron 461 into our first fully operational Sea Stallion squadron.
While it is still in transition, HMH–461 is already conducting heavy-lift assault sup-
port missions previously impossible with legacy aircraft.
Over the past year, DON personnel have also demonstrated the immense poten-
tial of unmanned and autonomous vehicles. The Overlord Surface Vessel Ranger
successfully transited from the Gulf Coast to the West Coast without an embarked
crew. These unmanned surface vehicles will reduce the risk to our personnel, lower
operating costs, and protect access to areas like the South China Sea. In addition,
U.S. Naval Forces Central Command’s Task Force 59, a new, first-of-its- kind task
force, is rapidly integrating unmanned systems and artificial intelligence into mari-
time domain awareness in the Fifth Fleet area of operations, and we will soon ex-
pand that capability to other regions of the world.
In addition to procuring the modern platforms, we are also expanding the areas
available for our personnel to train. With our partners in Congress, through the Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act of 2023, we are expanding and modernizing our
training ranges at Naval Air Station Fallon. This initiative will provide our pilots
with the airspace and ground necessary to hone their skills in the advanced aircraft
we field.
Another area of improvement is shipyard performance: our significant investment
in the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, known as SIOP, is modern-
izing our four aging public shipyards by optimizing facilities and infrastructure as
well as increasing dry-dock capacity and capability. We are also looking at estab-
lishing a parallel high-end technical track in nuclear welding, robotics, hull tech-
nology, software and electronics integration, as well as additive manufacturing for
high-paying blue collar career.
We have made significant improvements to surface ship readiness. Working with
industry partners, we have reduced maintenance delays on major maintenance peri-

---

7
ods in private shipyards by 39 percent since 2019. On-time completion of availabil-
ities has also steadily increased from 34 percent in FY19 to 41 percent for all main-
tenance periods completed in FY22. We have brought data and advanced analytics
to inform the plan for each maintenance and repair availability period, and im-
proved our processes to better scope work and structure each availability well before
ship arrival dates.
Public shipyards are also improving from FY19 in both fewer days of maintenance
delay and increases to on-time completion percentages. In FY22, despite lingering
COVID challenges to production, the public shipyards reduced number of days of
maintenance delay by 29 percent from 2019 with on-time completions now at 33 per-
cent.
Our second enduring priority, building a culture of warfighting excellence, de-
mands more aggressive recruiting, more ‘‘training like we fight,’’ and a stronger
commitment to retaining a strong, diverse, and healthy force—a force that is ready
at all times and focused on warfighting and strong, positive leadership at every
level. That’s why we have expanded community- and school-based outreach while
simultaneously increasing media campaigns in underserved and minority markets.
We must attract the broadest possible talent pool from throughout our all Nation,
including more women.
Recognizing that quality of life for our service members and families is insepa-
rable from warfighting excellence, we have directed substantial investments in qual-
ity-of-life initiatives, infrastructure improvement, and the largest military pay raise
in over 20 years. All of these efforts are centered on one goal: combat readiness. Our
Sailors and Marines are better prepared and more focused when they know their
families are being cared for and doing well.
Our third strategic priority, enhancing our strategic partnerships, sustains and
expands our advantage by seeking to achieve seamless integration, communication,
and collaboration with each of our partners. With our Government partners, we
have strived toward greater agility, adaptability, trust, and transparency in support
of our warfighters. Globally, we have strengthened our relationships with like-mind-
ed maritime nations, deepening interoperability and interchangeability in order to
enable mutual action to address shared challenges.
Our actions in the face of adversity will long be remembered by our allies and
partners. Since the start of the conflict in Ukraine, the Navy and Marine Corps
have supported our Ukrainian partners as they continue to defend their sovereign
territory in the face of unprovoked Russian aggression. Together, we have risen to
the occasion, supplying an unprecedented volume of capabilities to assist in their
time of need. In 2022 alone, the Department of the Navy coordinated the identifica-
tion, adjudication, and delivery of over $1.3 billion in critical systems, weapons plat-
forms, munitions, and support equipment to address critical Ukrainian needs.
Beyond tending to our international partnerships, we are working to expand on
relationships here at home. We have made a concerted effort to support our defense
industrial base, with special attention paid to supporting entrepreneurs leading
small and medium-sized businesses. As a direct result of the President of the United
States’ Executive Order 13985, ‘‘Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Under-
served Communities Through the Federal Government,’’ the DON took action to fur-
ther develop and refine our strategic and tactical approaches to maximize small-
business utilization across a diverse industrial base. These deliberate actions have
increased our outreach to small businesses, improved subcontracting compliance and
oversight, fostered more opportunities to fully utilize the Department of Defense
(DoD) Mentor-Protégé Program, and increased Phase III Small Business Innovation
Research program funding by 16 percent over the previous year.
All of these endeavors contribute to our desired expansion of the DoD’s supply
chain marketplace.
THE FISCAL YEAR 2024 PRESIDENT’S BUDGET

Despite the successes and progress highlighted above, there is still work to be
done on all fronts. The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 (PB24) request to
Congress is a clear signal of
President Biden’s support for our Navy and Marine Corps team and of the rec-
ognition of our critical role in the Joint Force especially in light of the complex stra-
tegic environment. Our request this year totals $255.8 billion, a 4.5 percent increase
over last year. Every dollar of this request will contribute to the warfighting
strength of our Navy and Marine Corps, from research and development of next-
generation technologies and systems to procurement of high-end platforms critical
to defending our Nation, infrastructure improvements, and most importantly, taking
care of our Sailors, Marines, and their families who sacrifice so much.

---

8
STRENGTHENING MARITIME DOMINANCE

Fleet Investments
A modern, capable, and lethal Navy requires sustained investment across a vari-
ety of platforms to complete missions in all environments. PB24 prioritizes the de-
velopment, procurement, and sustainment of our Navy’s ships to provide our Nation
with the most capable platforms. The request includes the full funding for two de-
stroyers, two nuclear-powered attack submarines, two frigates, one T–AO fleet re-
plenishment oiler, and one AS(X) submarine tender, while providing the next incre-
ment of funding for construction of CVN 80, CVN 81, and LHA 9, as well as the
first year of incremental funding for the second Columbia-class ballistic missile sub-
marine.
The budget request also includes a significant investment in submarine mainte-
nance with the goal of reducing maintenance periods and improving the operational
availability of these critical assets. These funds are aimed at improving material
availability and strengthening the private and public industrial bases.
PB24 prioritizes modernization of the Zumwalt Class (DDG–1000) guided-missile
destroyer to enable the Navy’s first fielding of the conventional prompt strike sea-
based hypersonic weapon system. It also includes key enablers for the Integrated
Combat System such as Infrastructure-as-Service. The Integrated Combat System
will allow the Navy to deliver future capabilities through software uploads instead
of hardware installations.
Fleet Divestments
Within PB24 is the request for the divestment of eight surface combatants: three
cruisers (CG); three Landing Ships, Dock (LSD); and two Littoral Combat Ships
(LCS). The three CGs—USS Cowpens (CG–63), USS Shiloh (CG–67), and USS
Vicksburg (CG–69) are all within 3 years of their end-of-service-life dates. While
these cruisers have a large vertical-launch capacity for a variety of weapons, the
cost associated with repairing, modernizing, and sustaining the hulls requested sig-
nificantly outweigh any warfighting contribution they provide to the fleet, and oc-
cupy limited, valuable private shipyard space that could be better used for main-
taining more- lethal ships.
In addition to the three cruisers, we are requesting divestment of USS Jackson
(LCS–06) and USS Montgomery (LCS–08), both Independence-Class LCS variants.
We acknowledge that both hulls are a third of the way through their projected serv-
ice life of 25 years. However, these platforms are less lethal, less capable, and far
more expensive to sustain than what is needed for the contested seas our Navy now
finds itself operating in.
Finally, we are requesting the divestment of USS Germantown (LSD–42), USS
Gunston Hall (LSD–44), and USS Tortuga (LSD–46), three amphibious ships that
are all at or over 34 years of service and in unsatisfactory material condition. The
planning and repair periods required for these ships to reach a deployable status
would put all three at or near their 40-year end-of- service-life mark. Undertaking
the repair of these ships, with potential cost growth, would tie up funding, shipyard
capacity, and take an enormous personal toll on our Sailors assigned to the projects.
However, we recognize this request brings us below the 31 amphibious ships we are
required to maintain per the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2023. The CNO, Commandant, and I are committed to ensuring we meet this re-
quirement and doing so in a timely manner, but with a capable, sustainable mix
of ship classes that will support our Marines and Sailors for decades to come.
In PB23, the DON proposed 16 ship divestments, but was only allowed to divest
four. Ultimately, it is our Sailors and Marines who pay the price when we are re-
stricted from retiring legacy platforms and investing in the capabilities needed for
the future.
Research and Development (R&D) of Enhanced Capabilities
PB24 requests a total of $26.9 billion to increase innovation and modernization
efforts in R&D. The budget request commits $718 million of R&D funding to the
recapitalization of all portions of the undersea leg of the triad including Columbia-
class submarines, Take Charge and Move Out (TACAMO) capability, and the Tri-
dent D5 life extension 2. The next-generation air defense family of systems includes
the F/A–XX, the ‘‘Quarterback’’ of the manned/unmanned team concept, directing
multiple tactical platforms at the leading edge of the battlespace. PB24 also funds
$861 million in R&D for unmanned platforms, including the MQ–4 Triton, the MQ–
25 Stingray, the Large Unmanned Surface Vessel, the Extra Large Unmanned Un-
dersea Vehicle, and the MQ–9A Reaper.

---

9
Sustaining Maritime Information Superiority
Information is combat power, and we will continue modernizing our information
technology infrastructure, ashore and afloat to ensure this essential backbone of our
maritime power remains secure and survivable and continues to deliver information
everywhere to maintain decision advantage over our adversaries. PB24 budgets ap-
proximately $13 billion for enterprise IT, cyber activities, business systems, and
other communications across the DON.
These investments are a critical warfighting priority for the Department. The
DON is building information superiority to win the naval fight by modernizing its
infrastructure, innovating and deploying new capabilities, and defending its infor-
mation. These initiatives are enabled by data that is managed as a strategic asset.
Bringing the DON’s enterprise infrastructure to parity with Industry is essential
for us to maintain our advantage in competition, crisis and conflict. We have
charted a path to a digital work environment where users can securely access their
data anywhere on any device with performance that rivals best-in-class experiences
in Industry.
The DON is accelerating the modernization and transformation of our IT capabili-
ties by ensuring that decisions made to sunset or rationalize unneeded, obsolete, un-
productive, insecure, and un-auditable IT applications are realized. This effort,
coined Cattle Drive, will accelerate modernization within multiple business and core
IT portfolios and self-identify funds for potential re-alignment to transformational
investments.
The DON is accelerating adoption of game-changing low-earth orbit commercial
satellite technology to provide resilient, low-latency, high-speed communications for
warfighting, support, and quality-of-life-and-work solutions. We are adopting a new
approach to cybersecurity that will move the DON from its current ineffective com-
pliance-based cybersecurity approach to one based on readiness where the right to
operate is earned and managed every day.
The DON is a leader within the DoD on the initiative to implement a more effec-
tive cybersecurity model called zero trust that is better adapted to today’s threat
and computing environments. Finally, data management and analytics progress the
DON is making on multiple fronts is enabling us to improve decisionmaking, sus-
tain information superiority and meet the goals of the DoD data strategy by ensur-
ing quality data are accessible, understood, and shared to the point of need.
Enabling Cyberspace Superiority
In addition to building information superiority, the Department will ensure our
networks and systems are secure, our critical infrastructure and weapon systems
are survivable, and our cyber forces can impose costs on adversaries in and through
cyberspace when required.
Adversaries and competitors worldwide leverage cyber vulnerabilities to hold our
capacity and capabilities at risk. This malign behavior requires a robust response,
and we will prioritize building cyber resilience and strengthening our capacity to
withstand, fight through, and recover quickly from disruption. To do this, the De-
partment must ‘‘bake in’’ cybersecurity to new capabilities and platforms we procure
while ‘‘bolting on’’ cybersecurity capabilities to legacy platforms. This strategy also
requires training our Sailors and Marines to operate in cyber contested environ-
ments.
In addition to building cyber resilience, the Department is advancing the tech-
nology, tactics, and readiness of our military cyberspace operations forces. One ex-
ample of this force development is the Navy’s forthcoming establishment of a spe-
cific cyber warfare officer designator and enlisted rating. The Department is simi-
larly committed to improving the readiness of the cyber forces we present to U.S.
Cyber Command, and we will expand the integration of non-kinetic effects afloat.
Marine Corps Information Command, which operates under the Marine Forces
Command, achieved initial operational capacity in January 2023. Marine Corps In-
formation Command provides critical linkages at the operational level as well as
task-organized elements to support campaign objectives by providing decision-mak-
ers the ability to leverage authorities and approvals across the cyber, space, influ-
ence, and intelligence functions, generating multi-domain advantages.
Our information space requires new approaches to training, such as the Persistent
Cyber Training Environment, which integrates capabilities to continuously evolve
cyber training and exercises. This joint capability has expanded access over the last
year, enabling force readiness and driving decisions on the tactical, operational, and
strategic levels.

---

10
Munitions Procurement
PB24 takes full advantage of new authorities granted by Congress in the Fiscal
Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act that provided a streamlined
multiyear procurement process for critical munitions. Not only will this authority
allow the Department to replenish munitions stockpiles which are reduced in sup-
port of the war in Ukraine, it will also support efforts to strengthen the industrial
base capacity to develop, produce, and field munitions. We are requesting funding
for the procurement of 34 Block V Tactical Tomahawk missiles for the Marine
Corps, as well as several hundred Tactical Tomahawk recertification kits, naviga-
tion and communications kits, and Maritime Strike Tomahawk kits for the Navy.
Additionally, PB24 supports the awarding of multi-year procurement contracts for
critical munitions, including Standard Missile (SM–6), the Naval Strike Missile, and
Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM). Overall, funding for these and other weap-
ons increased by $2 billion in this budget— a growth of nearly 50 percent compared
to last year.
Organic Industrial Base
The DON’s organic industrial base is vital to our national security, and the DON
is committed to ongoing depot modernization and optimization efforts. A modernized
and ready organic industrial base generates Fleet readiness and strengthens our
Nation’s security.
PB24 continues the investment in our industrial base to further efforts to train,
recruit, and retain the workforce, expand capacity and enable the development and
integration of new technologies. Deliberate investments in the planning and design
of facilities and optimization within the depots, as well as contract execution in dry-
dock repair and refurbishment are focus areas of the budget cycle.
PB24 reflects the three named efforts within the Organic Industrial Base where
these investments highlight the commitment to the Nation’s security with regard to
maintaining our wartime assets. First, the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization
Program consists of four public shipyards located in Portsmouth, VA; Kittery, ME;
Bremerton, WA; and Pearl Harbor, HI. PB24 funding totals $2.7 billion across mul-
tiple accounts. Replacing Dry Dock 3 at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard is a critical
enabler of increased naval capability. This project will construct a graving dock in
order to support Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard’s ability to continue serving the Navy
decades into the future by maintaining and modernizing the Pacific Fleet’s nuclear-
powered submarines. Second, the Fleet Readiness Center Infrastructure Optimiza-
tion Program consists of three Fleet Readiness Centers located in NAS North Island
San Diego, CA; NAS Jacksonville, FL; MCAS Cherry Point, NC. And finally, the
Marine Corps Organic Industrial Base consists of two Marine Corps production
plants located in Albany, GA and Barstow, CA.
The Presidential Budget request funds public shipyard depot maintenance to 100
percent, and increases the overall workforce from 37,089 to 37,234 full-time employ-
ees, adding an additional 145 full- time employees for the Pearl Harbor Naval Ship-
yard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility Guam Detachment. PB24 also aligns
funding to improve supply-chain capability and materiel availability in order to
make proper budget and schedule decisions for items such as long-lead- time mate-
riel.
Aviation Investments
The F/A–18E/F Super Hornet will be the numerically predominant aircraft in the
carrier air wing into the 2030s. PB24 funds service-life modification initiatives and
capability upgrades that enhance our strike-fighter inventory by maintaining the
tactical relevance of the F/A–18 E/F and minimizing the Navy’s strike-fighter short-
fall. The presidential budget request also funds delivery and support of survivable,
reliable, and resilient airborne command, control, and communications through the
installation of critical modifications to the existing E–6B fleet, along with platform
recapitalization to procure a follow-on TACAMO capability.
We will prioritize the continued development and production of unmanned aircraft
systems to support current Fleet intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance re-
quirements and to support future unmanned aircraft system integration into the
carrier air wing. The budget funds two MQ–4 Tritons, three MQ–25 Stingrays, and
five MQ–9A Reapers for the Marine Corps. PB24 requests funding for 35 F–35s: 19
F–35C variants for the Navy and Marine Corps and 16 F–35B variants for the Ma-
rine Corps. These aircraft will be the backbone of DON air combat superiority for
decades to come, complementing the carrier strike group with a dominant, multirole,
fifth-generation aircraft capable of projecting U.S. power and deterring potential ad-
versaries.

---

11
PB24 also requests funding for the procurement of 15 CH–53K King Stallions.
These production assets will be part of a two-year block buy contract authorized by
Congress in the FY23 NDAA. The program recently achieved a Full Rate Production
decision.
Climate Readiness
For the Navy and Marine Corps, a changing climate means a contested oper-
ational environment. Climate change brings extreme weather events, more humani-
tarian crises, and heightened friction around essential natural resources. A more
volatile world increases demands on our Navy and Marine Corps forces while simul-
taneously impacting the capacity to respond to those demands. Improving the en-
ergy performance of our platforms and weapons systems is essential to providing a
combat-effective force in contested operating environments. To do this, the Depart-
ment is working to establish rigorous, energy-informed requirements for new capa-
bilities that are then sustained throughout our acquisition decisionmaking.
Last year, the DON published Climate Action 2030 to maintain the superiority
of our naval forces through resilience and reducing the national security threat of
climate change. In support of this initiative, last December, the Naval Postgraduate
School signed an education partnership agreement with Stanford University’s Doerr
School of Sustainability. In bringing together these two globally recognized institu-
tions, it is our hope to realize solutions our Navy and our Nation can employ to
mitigate and reduce effects of a changing climate.
Jointly with our partners in Congress, we are constantly seeking innovative solu-
tions, leveraging science, partnering with industry and other government entities,
and investing responsibly to ensure mission readiness. Climate readiness is a tac-
tical, operational, and strategic enabler, and we must ensure our naval forces can
operate and succeed in any environment.
BUILDING A CULTURE OF WARFIGHTING EXCELLENCE

Building the Future Force
The civilian work force is comprised of talented individuals from all walks of life
whose experiences and skillsets are critical not just to our economic success, but to
the overall security of our Nation. Today’s Navy and Marine Corps team is a for-
ward-deployed highly sophisticated network that is one of the most technologically
advanced networks ever conceived and which operates either in concert with other
combat units or fully self-sustained, and able to dominate in the air, sea and under-
sea.
As we become a more technologically advanced force, top civilian talent is increas-
ingly critical to maintaining America’s might upon the sea. Technical talent is need-
ed for the wide array of challenges the DON faces. More than half of the civilian
workforce are top-tier scientists, logisticians, engineers, mathematicians, technology
specialists, or cyber experts; almost a quarter of the workforce are artisans per-
forming critical work at the shipyards, depots, civilian mariners, or safeguarding
our facilities and activities. As one indication of the quality and expertise of our
workforce, the DON was issued 225 patents (more than the Air Force and Army
combined) in FY22 and holds more than 58 percent of all active DoD patents
(4,129).
Our civilian workforce ensures a 24/7 rapid response to warfighter requirements,
develops and manufactures critical systems, repairs and maintains our ships and
aircraft and develops game- changing technology and equipment. The civilian work-
force is present in 55 countries, supporting Sailors and Marines around the world.
We are in a competition for talent with many other employment sectors, which
is driving us to re-evaluate how we manage the careers of our Sailors, Marines, and
civilians, from initial recruitment to retirement. To maintain a Fleet that is pre-
pared to defend our Nation from all potential adversaries, we must continue to en-
hance our ability to attract, develop, and retain a workforce equally as talented and
diverse as the American people they serve. This includes maintaining an appro-
priate number of senior executive leadership (general officer, flag officer, and SES)
billets to ensure optimal operational readiness.
The Marine Corps continues to make great strides toward retaining more experi-
enced Marines under the Service’s Talent Management program. Leveraging au-
thorities previously enabled by Congress, the Service enacted nine initiatives in
2022, from which they will expand and accelerate in 2023 including Early Reenlist-
ment Authority, SNCO Promotion Board Realignment, Recruiting Station Com-
manding Officer Selection Boards, the Special Duty Assignment volunteer program,
MarineView 360-degree leadership reviews, officer promotion opt-outs, Digital

---

12
Boardroom 2.0, Separate Competitive Promotion Categories, and the Career Inter-
mission Program.
As a result of many of these programs, the Marine Corps met or exceeded its first
and subsequent term alignment program goals for the first time in 13 years and
retained a statistically higher-quality group of Marines. The Service is examining
numerous other evolutionary initiatives and remains committed to evolving the tal-
ent management system with the primary goal of improving warfighting readiness
in an increasingly complex world.
As another example of a positive development in force development, in August
2022, Naval Special Warfare Command (NSW) formally established its Assessment
Command (NSWAC) to transform how its units compete for talent by building a sus-
tainable architecture for diversified outreach. It conducted more rigorous pre-assess-
ments for character, cognitive, and leadership attributes, and strengthened NSW’s
culture of continuous assessment. NSWAC is taking a whole-person approach to
identify, prepare, and mentor qualified candidates from diverse backgrounds to com-
plete training programs and pursue a successful career in NSW. As this new com-
mand was being developed, NSW conducted 60 outreach events with more than half
specifically focused on increasing force diversity and inclusivity with underrep-
resented demographics. These efforts will enhance the way NSW continuously as-
sesses and selects its incoming officers and enlisted personnel.
Educational Initiatives
Last year I talked about the Targeted Re-entry Program, which empowers com-
manding officers to identify and nominate their Sailors for an accelerated return to
active duty. This year we want to highlight our increased partnership with the De-
partment of Education, trade schools, and colleges and universities to develop and
recruit the military and civilian workforce we need.
As we become a more technologically advanced force, education will be a crucial
warfighting enabler to maintaining America’s might upon the sea. Our naval edu-
cation enterprise is working to develop leaders with warfighting knowledge, intellec-
tual dynamism, and creativity to maintain a strategic advantage against competi-
tors and global adversaries. Through our naval university system, we are creating
a continuum of learning that develops such leaders to serve at every level and
equips them with skills to maintain and operate increasingly complex systems in
an ever- changing warfighting environment.
PB24 requests a $480.2 million investment to continue supporting and growing
our naval education institutions. We maintain several world-class institutions, in-
cluding the US Naval Academy, Naval Postgraduate School, Naval War College, and
Marine Corps University. This requested funding will also sustain our efforts to ex-
pand our enlisted personnel’s access to the Naval Community College to support
their education goals. We are deeply committed to formalizing a culture of lifelong
learning for both our enlisted and officer communities.
Resiliency & Readiness
Mental health concerns and rising suicide rates are national-level issues to which
the Services have not been immune. We are well aware of the inextricable link be-
tween mental health, resiliency, and the readiness of our force. To that end, Admiral
Gilday, General Berger, and I are committed to supporting and ensuring the mental
health, safety, and well-being of all Sailors, Marines, and their families, and the De-
partment’s civilian workforce.
We must do everything we can to foster the well-being of our people and prevent
suicide. No one solution applies to every Sailor, Marine, family member, or civilian.
We are constantly evaluating how we do business when it comes to providing serv-
ices and resources to ensure they are meeting needs. Military service entails sac-
rifice not just for the service members, but for their families as well, and we want
to make sure family members feel seen, heard, and taken care of regardless of
whether their Sailor or Marine is home, stationed overseas, or deployed. The DON
offers multiple mental-health and counseling resources to all service members at all
levels. As we continue to encourage positive help-seeking behaviors and combat the
stigma around mental healthcare among our Marines and Sailors, PB24 requests
$87 million for mental health support, an increase of $13.1 million from last year.
This additional funding will provide for increases to our Sailor Assistance and Inter-
cept for Life (SAIL) program, which provides rapid assistance to those in crisis, as
well as the addition of two Warrior Toughness Teams for each coast.
Given the complexity of this challenge, our Office of Force Resiliency has taken
an integrated approach to enhance holistic, data-driven suicide-prevention strategies
which recognize the benefits of addressing common risk and protective factors to
promote healthy cultures and climates. As such, our suicide prevention efforts draw

---

13
from and harmonize with the Defense Strategy for Suicide Prevention and the
White House Strategy to Reduce Military and Veteran Suicide. We are taking action
on the recently released report from the Suicide Prevention and Response Inde-
pendent Review Committee, and will work within DoD’s coordination framework to
implement key recommendations that will strengthen our prevention effort.
The Department of the Navy is laser-focused on countering sexual assault and
sexual harassment at every level. In addition to the toll on victims, sexual assault
and sexual harassment directly impact unit cohesion and ultimately undercuts our
readiness. We must create environments that foster respect, maintain the dignity
of military service, and increase our warfighting readiness. Sexual assault and sex-
ual harassment are a persistent challenge requiring a multi-pronged approach that
leverages a wide range of initiatives, not only to address these issues, but also to
prevent them before they occur.
I directed the establishment of an Implementation Advisory Panel for the Depart-
ment of the Navy last spring, bringing leaders to the table to pinpoint strategies
for the Navy and Marine Corps to implement the recommendations of the Inde-
pendent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, as approved by the
Secretary of Defense. Through the Implementation Advisory Panel, the DON has al-
ready made significant strides to implement the Independent Review Commission’s
recommendations, focusing on the committee’s highest-priority efforts first. We fully
recognize that we need to continue to confront and prevent these destructive behav-
iors. We are investing significant resources to fuel the needed changes and we have
made substantial progress in standing up a dedicated prevention workforce to pre-
vent harmful behaviors, professionalizing the sexual assault response workforce to
better provide victim care and support, and establishing Offices of Special Trial
Counsel.
Additionally, our Office of Force Resiliency actively synchronizes the DON’s sex-
ual assault awareness and training, prevention, victim response, and accountability
initiatives with the DoD Office of Force Resiliency. Sexual assault and harassment
are more than just criminal matters. They undermine the trust and commitment
that are foundational to our forces and they erode faith in our leaders, institutions,
shipmates, and Marines. This is a leadership issue, and you have my commitment
to clearly and actively support these efforts and to demonstrate that sexual assault
and sexual harassment will not be tolerated in any way, shape, or form.
Taking Care of Our People
We continue to make great strides in providing quality-of-life services and improv-
ing housing options available to our Sailors, Marines, and their families. In PB24,
we are asking you to support our DON families with $622 million aimed at sus-
taining our child and youth services. Additionally, we continue our investments in
housing for both accompanied and unaccompanied personnel. Notably, our request
includes $131.8 million for the construction of a Bachelor’s Enlisted Quarters and
Support Facility at Marine Corps Barracks, here in Washington, DC. We are also
requesting funding to support housing renovations at multiple bases, to include
Naval Base San Diego, Naval Air Station Lemoore, Naval Air Station Oceana, and
Naval Base Ventura County. These investments will yield dividends for years to
come as we continue to offer safe, affordable, and convenient housing to those who
defend our Nation.
STRENGTHENING STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

Community Partnerships
The DON is leveraging the Department of Defense Readiness and Environmental
Protection Integration Program (REPI) to partner with local governments and non-
governmental organizations to advance mission readiness through mutually bene-
ficial, sustainable communities near our installations and ranges. The recently an-
nounced 2023 REPI Challenge includes several projects that support DON installa-
tions, to include: invasive species management and reef preservation near Pacific
Missile Range Facility Barking Sands and Marine Corps Base Hawaii; habitat im-
provement and species management at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Naval
Base Coronado, Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, and Naval Weapons Sta-
tion Seal Beach in California; and shoreline stabilization near Marine Corps Base
Quantico, Virginia.
Outside our fence lines, the communities that host our Navy and Marine Corps
installations continue to utilize the Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot (DCIP)
program to fund community infrastructure projects that benefit local installations,
enable the DON’s warfighting mission, and provide support to our service members
and their families. Using 2022 DCIP grant funds, Onslow County in North Carolina

---

14
will upgrade a runway at a local airport to benefit travel in southeastern North
Carolina, including Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Air Station
New River, and Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point. In Florida, a new water
main will improve capacity and pressure for not only for Naval Station Mayport, but
also the surrounding community where many of our Sailors, Marines, civilians and
their families live.
Finally, the city of Newport News in Virginia will undertake a $15 million project
at the Harwood’s Mill Reservoir Dam to increase flood protection for the entire com-
munity and ensure a reliable water supply to Naval Weapons Station Yorktown.
We continue to work with our partners across the Federal Government, the State
of Hawaii, and Congress to close the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility and reme-
diate the effects of the 2021 spill. We are committed to doing what it takes to ad-
dress the concerns of service members, their families, and the people of Hawaii. As
I’ve said before, we rebuild trust one day at a time, one action at a time. Aging in-
frastructure such as that at Red Hill is a challenge we face at the national level,
and we appreciate Congress’s support and partnership as we increase our focus on
revitalizing the shore infrastructure our Navy and Marines Corps rely upon.
Joint Force and Government
The Department of the Navy is committed to providing the right mix of capabili-
ties and remaining dominant against threats defined in the National Defense Strat-
egy. Across both Services and throughout the DON, PB24 will invest in capabilities
for maritime dominance. Successful implementation of the concepts within the Navi-
gation Plan and Force Design 2030 will be pursued through a unified, integrated
effort at every echelon. But our fully integrated naval force is only part of the formi-
dable Joint Force team that stands united in the protection of the American people.
Collaboration between military departments and with the interagency is critical to
the defense of the United States.
We are constantly seeking opportunities to maximize the combined efficiency and
effectiveness of our Navy and Marine Corps in cooperation with the Army, Air
Force, and Space Force. For example, we continue to work with our fellow Services
on critical advanced research programs including hypersonic weapons. And world-
wide, the Joint Strike Fighter program is yielding unprecedented reach and agility
for the entire Joint Force.
The Department of the Navy, as a forward-deployed force, is a key contributor to
Integrated Deterrence as our daily interactions with allies, partners, and potential
adversaries impact diplomatic, economic, and intelligence equities in addition to the
obvious military impacts.
Our most significant contribution as a military department is America’s naval
forces. The combat-credible forces of the Marine Corps and the Navy are unique as
America’s most timely, flexible, and forward-deployed force across the full spectrum
of challenges—from naval diplomacy to strategic deterrence, resource competition,
crisis, and conflict. Our allies and partners as well as our potential adversaries see
these forces conducting forward operations and training, alongside partner nations.
This constant forward presence engenders trust through episodic engagements as
well as urgent response in the event of a national emergency.
The iconic presence of Marines in our embassies is just one highly visible way the
Department of the Navy supports the State Department and whole-of-government
activities. Behind the scenes, military attachés strengthen our bonds with inter-
national partners as they facilitate and coordinate activities, from small-scale per-
sonnel exchanges to large-scale multi-lateral military exercises.
Allies and Partners
Over the past 18 months, the Department of the Navy has been fully committed
to the multi- phased, commitments-based process, known as the Australia—United
Kingdom—United States Partnership (AUKUS) to facilitate the development of the
optimal pathway for Australia’s acquisition of conventionally-armed nuclear-pow-
ered submarines, which will contribute to maintaining peace and stability in the
Indo-Pacific region by enhancing deterrence. As part of this initiative, Australian
sailors will embed on U.S. SSNs and the U.S. Navy will increase SSN port visits
to Australia beginning this year. Additionally, as early as 2027, the Navy plans to
rotate up to four U.S. Virginia-class submarines to HMAS Stirling near Perth, an
initiative we are calling ‘‘Submarine Rotational Force—West (SRF–W; ‘‘Surf West’’).
Beginning in the early 2030s, pending statutory authority, we intend to sell Aus-
tralia at least three Virginia-class SSNs, and potentially an additional two more if
needed. The AUKUS partners will begin delivering the trilaterally-developed SSN–
AUKUS in the late 2030s. The cost sharing through the different phases of AUKUS
will be fair, transparent, and proportional—with the United States and Australia

---

15
making investments to upgrade the U.S. submarine industrial base. We will con-
tinue to lead and advance this effort as directed by the President and Secretary of
Defense.
As the world has seen over the last year with Russia’s unprovoked and indefen-
sible invasion of Ukraine, and the strengthened resolve and solidarity of NATO and
like-minded nations around the world, the value of allies and partners cannot be
overstated; the global landscape offers a stark contrast between those countries with
strong international partnerships and those who are isolated due to their antithet-
ical stance vis-à-vis the rules-based international order. Globally, we have strength-
ened our relationships with like-minded maritime nations, deepening interoper-
ability in order to enable mutual action to address shared challenges.
As we emerged from the COVID pandemic and returned to our historic operating
pace, we have looked for ways to expand cooperative deployments and operations
around the world. Our recent growth in cooperative efforts with our partners has
been focused on increasing interoperability and moving towards interchangeability
with allied and partner maritime forces. In every international engagement, I have
consistently heard the same message from our allies and partners: ‘‘We want to do
more with the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps’’—a signal that we are the partner of
choice across the globe.
In January 2023, the United States and Japan reaffirmed the necessity to opti-
mize our force posture and enhance response capability through a readjustment in
the laydown of U.S. Forces in Japan. This will provide for stationing of the 12th
Marine Littoral Regiment in Japan by 2025, and with it, advanced intelligence, sur-
veillance, and reconnaissance capabilities as well as anti-ship and transportation ca-
pabilities.
In a demonstration of the capabilities and resolve of NATO, the USS George H.W.
Bush Carrier Strike Group recently completed Exercise Neptune Strike 22.2., oper-
ating under the command of Striking Forces NATO (STRIKFORNATO), and flexing
the capabilities of all-domain warfare at a critical time.
During the same period, we employed the USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike
Group for the first time with our NATO allies during Exercise Silent Wolverine. The
exercise was designed to test the carrier’s capabilities through integrated high-end
naval warfare scenarios, leading to its inaugural deployment this year. The USS
Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group and 22 Marine Expeditionary Unit provided
persistent presence in the Baltic Sea. This demonstration of capability exemplifies
the unparalleled power of alliance and partnerships.
Last year, I personally witnessed the power of partnership during RIMPAC 2022,
when forces from 26 nations from nearly every continent converged at Pearl Harbor.
We came together as capable, adaptive partners, and declared our commitment to
work together, to grow our collective capability, and to nurture and enhance rela-
tionships that are critical to ensuring the safety of the sea lanes and the security
of the world’s interconnected oceans.
Strengthening maritime dominance requires us to rapidly field the concepts and
capabilities that create advantage relative to our pacing threat with the
sustainment necessary to generate integrated, all-domain naval power.
Alongside our Filipino allies, Marines from 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment com-
pleted the largest iteration of Exercise Balikatan last April. This was the initial
operational employment of 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment, and they used it to flex
their capability to deploy from Hawaii and carry out amphibious landings in north-
ern Luzon, ultimately enabling combined coastal defense training. This exercise not
only strengthened the bond with our Filipino partners but tested small, distributed,
and austere encampments, resulting in refinements of the concepts integral to the
Marine Littoral Regiment.
This month, Marines and Sailors with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit com-
pleted the first Japan-based Iron Fist exercise, which increased interoperability and
strengthened relationships between the DON and the Japan Self-Defense Forces,
and demonstrated the commitment of U.S. and Japan forces to maintain a free and
open Indo-Pacific.
Last November I had the chance to visit my Indian counterparts in an effort to
drive forward high-end navy-to-navy cooperation to address challenges in the under-
sea warfare domain. While we continue to advance thinking on concepts and tech-
nology, we are furthering our defense information sharing and exercising in ways
that are relevant to our shared goals, as exemplified by the USS Ronald Reagan
Carrier Strike Group’s participation in Exercise Malabar with India, Australia, and
Japan, and which included high-end tactical anti-submarine warfare.
While in Brazil, I had the privilege of presiding over the opening ceremony of the
longest-running maritime exercise, UNITAS, and took the opportunity to spotlight
the importance of partnerships in our own hemisphere and the Atlantic basin. It

---

16
was a particular honor to meet with the Cameroonian Head of Navy and visit his
two ships, which had conducted their first-ever trans-Atlantic voyage in order to
participate in the exercise. Their pride, determination, and dedication to being a
part of this U.S.-led multinational exercise were evident as they celebrated this ex-
ceptional achievement. Strengthening our relationships across Africa and the West-
ern Hemisphere is an important aspect of furthering the National Defense Strategy
as the PRC endeavors to extend its influence over our neighbors and African part-
ners.
One of the most significant detriments to local economies is illegal, unreported,
and unregulated (IUU) fishing. I have been keenly interested in this complex chal-
lenge, and we are working with our partners across the globe to increase maritime
domain awareness, information sharing, and information operations to counter this
scourge. Massive fishing fleets from countries such as the PRC prey on countries
with weak capabilities to protect their exclusive economic zones. Closely linked to
the IUU fishing problem is a country’s ability to effectively conduct maritime do-
main awareness.
As the Navy and Marine Corps team works tirelessly to ensure our forward pres-
ence, we are in an intense global competition with the PRC for strategic access and
influence. That competition is particularly concentrated in the Indo-Pacific. To pre-
vail, we will continue to innovate, leveraging our naval diplomacy to maximum ad-
vantage. Improving ports and enabling enhanced maritime patrolling capacity from
modern airfields serves U.S. security interests as well as island nations’ interests.
Combined, these critical enablers of U.S. influence, posture, and readiness in the
Indo-Pacific are also the core components of the DoD’s ability to deliver humani-
tarian assistance and disaster relief in the region as the catastrophic consequences
of climate change accelerate. A resilient, distributed posture to meet our operational
needs and outcompeting the PRC for strategic access and influence in the Indo-Pa-
cific go hand in hand.
PB24 will strengthen global alliances and partnerships with funding for joint op-
erations and exercises around the world, including CARAT, Malabar, and Balikatan
in the Indo-Pacific; NATO operations in the Mediterranean; and exercises like
UNITAS in our own hemisphere.
We will continue to foster opportunities for Sailors, Marines, and DON civilians
to train, learn, and operate side-by side with their counterparts in partner and al-
lied forces. We will work on operationally integrating with our allies and partners
through shared warfighting concepts, continually campaigning forward to deter ad-
versaries and protect the rules-based international order.
Our Sailors, Marines and civilians are warrior-diplomats for our Nation. Their
professionalism and dedication promote the connections that strengthen our collec-
tive security and cultivate shared ideals that send the message that the United
States is a friend worth having.
CLOSING

The United States Navy and Marine Corps Team is on the front lines of defending
the free and open rules-based international order against those who would cast us
into a new dark age defined by the principle of ‘‘might makes right.’’
I have a sacred obligation to Congress and to the American people to ensure that
our Navy and Marine Corps are always prepared to defend those liberties, those
non-negotiable American values wherever the Nation’s interests may be threatened.
The Navy and Marine Corps remain, after all, this Nation’s single most versatile
instrument of national power.
For this, I am grateful for your sustained, bipartisan support of a strong Navy
and Marine Corps. I look forward to working with old friends and new partners in
Congress to advance the Nation’s security with a Navy and Marine Corps supremely
able, first and foremost, to deter all potential adversaries, and if called upon to fight
and win our Nation’s wars.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Secretary Del Toro.
Next, we have, Admiral Gilday.
STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY, CHIEF OF NAVAL OP-
ERATIONS
Admiral GILDAY. Chairman Tester, Vice Chair Collins, distin-
guished Members of the Committee; Good morning, and thank you
for the opportunity to appear today with Secretary Del Toro and
General Berger.

---

17

For the past 77 years the United States Navy has been an an-
chor of world stability; deterring war, upholding international law,
and assuring access to the seas. Today, our Navy’s role has never
been more expansive or consequential.
This past year, our Navy and Marine Corps team executed more
than 22,000 steaming hours, and nearly one million flying hours.
We participated in roughly 100 exercises with allies and partners
across the globe, and at this moment we have nearly 100 ships at
sea, reassuring America’s allies and partners that we stand the
watch alongside them, and reminding potential adversaries that we
seek to preserve peace, but we are prepared for any fight.
The United States has always been a maritime Nation, to pre-
serve our security and prosperity America needs a combat-credible
Naval Force to project our interest in peace and to prevail in war,
not just today, but for the long run. Our fiscal year 2024 budget
request remains consistent with the Navy’s enduring priorities.
And to your point, Mr. Chairman, about whether or not the tax-
payers, are being consistent for the taxpayers in these investments,
we are prioritizing readiness: First, with an emphasis on the sail-
ors who empower everything that we do, ensuring that we are al-
ways combat ready.
Second, we are modernizing our capabilities, ensuring that our
forces today stay combat-ready, now and into the future in a rap-
idly changing world.
Third, we are continuing to build our capacity ensuring that we
have relevant lethal platforms to achieve warfighting advantage
with a hybrid fleet of manned and unmanned platforms on, above,
and below the sea.
Our budget request reflects the Navy’s commitment to deliver,
and deploy, and maintain our fleet. It fully funds the Columbia-
class submarine, as the Secretary stated, ensuring the on-time de-
livery of the most survivable leg of our Nation’s strategic deterrent
triad. It keeps our fleet ready to fight tonight dedicating the re-
sources necessary to train, and to educate resilient sailors that can
out-think, that can out-decide, and that can out-fight any potential
adversary.
It funds private and public sector ship maintenance to 100 per-
cent, increasing capacity and retaining highly skilled labor to get
our ships back to sea faster, with full magazines and spare parts
in their store rooms, to be prepared for any contingency.
It invests in modernizing our fleet, procuring weapons with
range and speed, along with integrated systems to improve fleet
survivability in a resilient, cyber secure network infrastructure.
And then invest in capable capacity, building towards a larger dis-
tributed hybrid fleet, fielding a ready fleet today while modernizing
for the future.
Our competitors are investing heavily in warfighting capabilities
of their own, and the oceans we are operating in are growing more
lethal and more contested every single day. Failing to modernize to
meet those threats would erode America’s maritime superiority, at
a time when the command of the seas will determine the balance
of power for the rest of this century.
This means we can no longer afford to maintain ships designed
for a bygone era, especially at the expense of readiness, moderniza-

---

18

tion, and new platforms, and buying new ships most relevant to to-
day’s fight.
America cannot afford a hollow force. We have been there before
and we have seen tragic results. It is a mistake we must never re-
peat. Ships, submarines, and aircrafts are, no doubt, expensive in-
struments of national power, as are the costs of maintaining them.
But history shows that without a powerful Navy the price tag could
be much higher.
Thank you again for inviting me to testify. And I look forward
to answering your questions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY
Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the posture of the United
States Navy. On behalf of every American Sailor, Navy civilian, and their families,
thank you for your continued leadership and support.
With increased funding in the 2023 Defense Appropriations Act, Congress has
provided the means for the U.S. Navy to deliver the fleet our Nation needs in sup-
port of the 2022 National Defense Strategy. This investment will help us turn the
corner on readiness to meet strategic competitors in peace and war, ensuring our
ability to maintain free and open oceans and the international rules-based order.
Moreover, consistent, steady funding is necessary to provide a clear signal to our
industry partners, especially our shipbuilders, on the way ahead. This statement
will detail where we are—and what we must do—to ensure our maritime dominance
deep into this century.
Flanked by two oceans, the United States has always been a maritime nation. The
seas remain the lifeblood of our economy, our national security, and, consequen-
tially, our way of life. Our livelihood depends upon free, open, and secure maritime
trade. A strong naval force is essential to U.S. national security and long-term eco-
nomic health. The United States Navy has and will continue to serve as our Na-
tion’s primary instrument of sea control and power projection, ensuring our global
maritime access during times of peace and war.
From our humble beginnings with six wooden frigates, the composition of the U.S.
Navy has steadily evolved to defend U.S. interests around the world and ensure
American security. For the past 247 years, the U.S. Navy has played a critical part
in defending and advancing national policy. For the past 77 years, we have been
an anchor of world stability by deterring war, upholding international law, and as-
suring access to the global maritime domain for our Nation, our Allies, and our part-
ners.
Today, our Navy’s role has never been more expansive or consequential. We now
face challengers who are attempting to rewrite the rules-based international order
and reshape the world to meet their autocratic desires. The People’s Republic of
China (PRC) has aggressively modernized its militaries and fielded offensive
warfighting capabilities at unprecedented speed and scale across all domains. These
developments are not solely to support regional designs.
They are for global ambitions. At the same time, Russia’s unprovoked, full-scale
invasion of Ukraine has triggered the largest conflict in Europe since the Second
World War—with combat occurring on both land and sea. The future of the global
order depends on the actions we take in this moment.
Our Fiscal Year 2024 budget request remains consistent with the Navy’s prior-
ities. To meet the challenges of today while building the fleet of tomorrow, our Navy
continues to prioritize readiness first—with a special emphasis on the Sailors who
empower everything we do. Next, we are focused on modernizing our capabilities.
Then, we will continue to build the capacity of the fleet. Prioritized investments in
people, technologies, and platforms ensure that we are ready to fight tonight, while
making progress on the capabilities we need to maintain our combat credibility far
into the future. To enable Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO), we must gen-
erate cost-effective capacity to achieve warfighting advantage with acceptable risk.
We have already begun building the future fleet—a hybrid force enhanced by un-
manned platforms operating on, above, and below the waterline.

---

19
NAVY’S UNIQUE PEACETIME MISSION

With the passage of the fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, the
United States Navy has a new mission statement. The old mission statement, ar-
ticulated in Title 10 of U.S. Code, called for the Navy to be ‘‘organized, trained and
equipped primarily for prompt and sustained combat.’’ Now, Congress has addition-
ally charged the Navy with supporting ‘‘the peacetime promotion of the national se-
curity interests and prosperity of the United States.’’
Though the mission statement is new, the mission is not. U.S. naval power has
always played a unique and vital role in promoting our Nation’s security and pros-
perity during peacetime. The law now accurately reflects our Navy’s contributions
throughout the history of our Republic.
Whether providing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, countering sea-
based illicit activity, safeguarding global shipping lanes, saving lives, or deterring
conflict, Sailors advance U.S. interests every day. Constantly on call, our Sailors are
forward deployed in submarines, ships, and aircraft, standing guard with our Allies
and partners around the world. In part, the change to Title 10 acknowledges our
historic mission and recognizes that peacetime activities can produce strategic re-
sults. However, the change does more than describe what the Navy has always
done. It also highlights the need to build a healthy, ready naval force that will safe-
guard our Nation—one that is properly sized, equipped, and trained for the vast
array of operations needed to preserve peace and prevail in competition, crisis, and
conflict.
Of all the peacetime missions that promote security and prosperity, deterring con-
flict is foremost. Our Sailors are constantly present, operating, and training, often
in parts of the world that may become hotspots. We are America’s away team, de-
ployed in peace and ready to answer the call if we are needed in war.
During peacetime, the U.S. Navy must continue strengthening and expanding our
network of Allies and partners. Whether in day-to-day competition, crisis, or conflict,
Allies and partners add significant defense capabilities and resources. They provide
integrated deterrence against adversaries by expanding access to maritime infra-
structure through cost-effective, secure, reliable, and geographically distributed
bases, and provide information in support of distributed operations.
Thanks to support from Congress, we are starting to rebuild our fleet following
two decades of ground wars. Still, rebuilding will not happen overnight. It will re-
quire years of stable and predictable funding and a long-range plan that incentivizes
our industry partners to invest in the infrastructure and capacity needed to support
our growing fleet.
While most combat forces generally only meet in times of war, navies are in con-
tact with potential adversaries every single day. We are forward deployed around
the globe, sailing waters in close proximity to other navies, coast guards, and mari-
time militias, contesting threats to the rules-based international order and ensuring
the world’s waterways are free and open for all. In this critical decade, the chal-
lenges we face are mounting.
THE MARITIME CHALLENGES TO U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY

The United States continues to face pacing, acute, and persistent challenges to
our national security. Above all, our pacing challenge is the PRC. As we have wit-
nessed over the past several decades, the PRC seeks to undermine U.S. alliances
and security partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region, and leverage its growing capa-
bilities, including its economic influence and the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA)
growing strength and military footprint, to coerce its neighbors and threaten their
interests. In only two decades, the PRC has tripled the size of its Navy—and is on
pace to quadruple to over 400 ships by 2030. Additionally, it has expanded its stra-
tegic nuclear capacity and capability, advanced its cyber and space capabilities, and
constructed a system of sophisticated sensors and long-range precision weapons to
intimidate neighbors, challenge free and open access to the seas, and hold U.S.
forces at risk.
The PRC seeks to deny U.S. and allied forces access within the First Island Chain
and beyond. Advances in missile technology by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
Rocket Force have provided the PRC with the offensive means of striking U.S. and
Allied forces. As the PRC has attempted to displace the U.S. Navy from the waters
in the Western Pacific, the PLA Navy, alongside the People’s Armed Forces Mari-
time Militia (PAFMM) and China Coast Guard (CCG), has increasingly conducted
aggressive operations—actions just short of war—to intimidate neighbors and force
nations to submit to Chinese territorial claims. Through these ‘‘gray zone’’ oper-
ations, the PRC has staked illegal maritime claims to offshore resources that threat-
en the peace, prosperity, and ecological stability of the world’s oceans. Without ques-

---

20
tion, the PRC’s investments in offensive warfighting systems—across all domains—
are aimed at the heart of America’s maritime power.
Russia remains an acute threat as its unprovoked war of aggression against
Ukraine continues. Although the Kremlin predicted Ukraine would fall within days
and NATO would fracture, the citizens of Ukraine have successfully contested Rus-
sian forces on land and sea, bolstered by the support of the United States and other
like-minded nations. This conflict has reminded Russia, and would-be aggressors ev-
erywhere, of the power and importance of Allies and partners. Along with our Allies,
we draw inspiration and strength from the tenacity and courage of the Ukrainian
people, and we remain resolute in our responsibility to uphold the rules-based inter-
national order, and every nation’s inherent right to freedom and self-determination.
In its most provocative year of missile launches ever, North Korea has been a per-
sistent threat on the Korean Peninsula as it continues to expand its nuclear and
missile capability to threaten the U.S. homeland, deployed U.S. forces, and the Re-
public of Korea (ROK) and Japan. With forces on the peninsula and vessels in the
surrounding seas, the U.S. Navy and the Joint Force stand with our ROK Allies.
During my visit to the ROK this past November, I confirmed that our alliance and
friendship remain strong. We left no doubt that our commitment to extended deter-
rence for the Korean Peninsula is ironclad.
Iran, beyond its nuclear advancements, has been building and exporting missile
systems and unmanned aircraft, most notably to support Russia’s brutal campaign
in Ukraine. All the while, Iran is advancing maritime capabilities that threaten
maritime chokepoints, putting at risk the free flow of energy resources and inter-
national commerce. Further, Iran is undermining regional stability supporting ter-
rorist groups and military proxies, employing its own paramilitary forces, engaging
in military provocations, and conducting malicious cyber and information oper-
ations. Global terrorist groups have had their capabilities degraded, but some may
be able to reconstitute them in short order, which will require monitoring indica-
tions and warning against this threat.
Whether they are pacing, acute, or persistent challengers, our adversaries are fo-
cused on acquiring sophisticated technologies that are changing the battlespace.
From drone technologies to robust networks of sensors, our adversaries—both state-
and non-state-sponsored—have the ability to harm our national interests in myriad
ways. In the coming years, developments in new technologies such as artificial intel-
ligence (AI), quantum computing, and additive manufacturing will continue to dis-
rupt the way war is conducted.
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE JOINT FORCE, NESTED IN THE NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY

A combat-credible U.S. Navy— forward-deployed and integrated with all elements
of national power—remains our Nation’s most potent, flexible, and versatile instru-
ment of military influence. Together with the U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Coast
Guard, our Navy must deploy forward and campaign with a ready, capable, combat-
credible fleet. Decisive naval power is a critical component of the Joint Force.
This past July, I released an updated Navigation Plan, aligning our priorities of
Readiness, Capabilities, and Capacity to the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS).
The U.S. Navy remains committed to (1) strengthening our Nation’s deterrence, (2)
campaigning through forward presence, and (3) building enduring warfighting ad-
vantages. In this rapidly changing world, a formidable naval force is crucial in effec-
tively implementing the NDS and the 2022 National Security Strategy (NSS). The
Navy’s FY24 budget request will deliver on our commitments to the Joint Force by
aligning our planning, resources, and investments with national policy objectives:
Strengthening Deterrence. Integrated deterrence—the cornerstone of the 2022
NDS and a strategic focus of the 2022 NSS—is how the Department of Defense
(DoD) aligns DoD’s policies, investments, and activities to sustain and strengthen
deterrence. It is tailored to specific competitors and coordinated to maximum effect
inside and outside of the DoD. Integrated deterrence leverages the Joint Force’s
combined capabilities in all domains. It emphasizes a unity of effort throughout the
U.S. Government as the Department of Defense (DoD) coordinates with and sup-
ports the State Department, Intelligence Community, and other government agen-
cies. Additionally, integrated deterrence promotes the importance of working with
our Allies and partners to uphold the international rules-based order throughout the
globe. Neither the DoD nor the public sector holds a monopoly on delivering deter-
rent effects—thus, we must work with America’s vast and innovative private sector
to ensure peace.
A secure and reliable strategic nuclear deterrent backstops integrated deterrence.
Our Navy operates and maintains the most survivable leg of the Nation’s nuclear
triad, representing approximately 70 percent of America’s treaty-accountable, nu-

---

21
clear arsenal. Navy’s FY24 budget requests the resources to replace the 14 Ohio-
class submarines with the more capable Columbia- class and continue development
of the second life extension of the TRIDENT II D5 missile, as well as refresh sup-
porting infrastructure and modernize our nuclear command, control, and commu-
nications systems. Our Ohio-class submarines have been patrolling the oceans on
deterrent missions for 42 years. This once-in-a-generation overhaul of our ballistic
missile submarine force comes with a massive price tag, but it is a must-pay bill
for the Nation so that we maintain America’s assured second-strike capability.
In addition to our nuclear forces, our combat-credible conventional naval forces re-
inforce deterrence. These forces deploy globally to protect American interests across
the spectrum of conflict. Operating far from U.S. shores, naval forces provide the
first physical line of U.S. Homeland Defense, preventing potential adversaries from
using the seas to threaten the American homeland. Naval Forces are the only ele-
ment of national power that can fulfill this role.
To deter war, we must continue to work more seamlessly with our Allies and part-
ners across all domains and by integrating key technologies and other instruments
of national power. Among other initiatives, we have been working hard to bolster
the trilateral security partnership of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United
States, known as AUKUS. AUKUS is a generational opportunity to reinforce the col-
lective defense and prosperity of the United States and two vital Allies who always
stand beside us. With the overarching objective of promoting peace and stability in
the Indo-Pacific, through our efforts to enable Australia to acquire a conventionally-
armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability, AUKUS provides a unique oppor-
tunity to strengthen the U.S. Submarine Industrial Base while enhancing two of our
Allies’ military capabilities. This trilateral security partnership also provides an op-
portunity to set a historic precedent in naval nuclear propulsion, setting the highest
standards of nuclear nonproliferation. To successfully compete with the PRC and en-
sure a free and open Indo-Pacific region, we will continue to find ways to integrate
our efforts with our robust network of Allies and partners.
The naval service’s ability to control the seas and project power has underpinned
America’s national defense and economic vitality for generations. Sea control pro-
vides freedom of maneuver to the Joint Force and our Allies while denying it to our
adversaries in conflict. Our ability to project power deters aggression by convincing
rivals they have no viable means of achieving their objectives through force. Should
conflict arise, forward deployed Sailors and Marines stand ready to fight alongside
the rest of the Joint Force, our Allies, and our partners to deny enemy objectives,
destroy enemy forces, and compel war termination.
Forward Presence and Campaigning. Naval forces provide the United States stra-
tegic advantages in position, influence, and flexibility, independent of access to over-
seas land bases. Our forward posture guarantees our Nation the ability to respond
to crisis, blunt gray-zone activities, and preserve a stable and secure global mari-
time order. The Navy’s global maneuverability supports diplomacy, reassures our
Allies, and generates favorable influence and access in critical regions.
Alliances and partnerships remain the United States’ greatest strategic advan-
tage. Our Allies and partners recognize U.S. naval forces as their on-scene partner
of choice for building combined maritime strength. In turn, the U.S. Navy recognizes
the value of America’s unmatched network. Having met with over 40 heads of na-
vies around the world over the past year, I have witnessed the power of personal
connections to bolster our collective strength. Relationships forged on the seas for
over seven decades have been the bedrock of the free and open, international, rules-
based order. And they will continue to be so.
Our adversaries do not have the same reinforcing strength and global backing
that America shares with like-minded nations. In turn, the United States provides
maritime power that no other country can. The U.S. Navy also brings to NATO an
ability to assemble and further the interoperable naval combat power of Allies and
partners and enable continued deterrence in response to Russia’s war on Ukraine.
We also leverage the strength of our allies and partners as part of our integrated
deterrence of the PRC as well. We are constantly strengthening interoperability,
sharing maritime domain awareness, and helping to build capacity for resilient, in-
tegrated logistics for our allies and partners.
Across the spectrum of conflict, the U.S. Navy operates forward, exposing and con-
testing malign activities of our adversaries. The U.S. Navy remains the partner of
choice not just because of our strength, but also because of our respect for the rule
of law.
Building Enduring Warfighting Advantages. To maintain our warfighting advan-
tage at sea, America needs a larger and more capable Navy. Faced with competitors
and emerging disruptive technologies, we must become more agile in developing and
delivering our future force. Above all, our naval forces must be combat credible—

---

22
measured by our ability to deliver lethal effects in contested and persistently
surveilled battlespaces.
In collaboration with the other U.S. Armed Services, we have prioritized the fu-
ture capabilities we need to employ our warfighting concepts and maintain credible
deterrence. As we build the future fleet, we group these critical capabilities into six
overarching Force Design Imperatives, as I described in Navigation Plan 2022.
Expand Distance. Long-range precision fires across all domains and platforms
with greater reach enable naval forces to strike hostile targets while increasing our
own survivability.
Leverage Deception. Deceptive measures—including stealth, concealment and ma-
neuver, emissions control, and electronic warfare—degrade enemy surveillance and
increase adversary uncertainty, enabling naval forces to operate effectively in con-
tested battlespaces.
Harden Defense. Integrating directed energy with hard-kill and soft-kill defensive
systems disrupts attacks and keeps naval forces survivable when targeted by adver-
saries.
Increase Distribution. Distributing forces geographically and in all domains en-
ables them to threaten an adversary from multiple attack axes. Smaller, lethal, and
less costly platforms—including those manned, unmanned, and optionally manned—
further complicate threat targeting, generate confusion, and impose dilemmas for
our adversaries.
Ensure Delivery. Resilient logistics connecting the foundry to the fleet—enabled
by secure communications and information technology—refuel, rearm, resupply, re-
pair, and revive distributed naval forces down to the last tactical mile.
Generate Decision Advantage. Naval forces will out-sense, out-decide, and out-
fight any adversary by accelerating our decision cycles with secure, survivable, and
resilient networks, accurate data, and the assistance of AI-enabled decision aids.
Connecting sensors, weapons, and decision-makers across all domains enables naval
forces to mass firepower and influence without massing forces.
Together, these six Force Design Imperatives enable DMO and other Joint
warfighting concepts. These imperatives also define the requirements for the sur-
face, subsurface, aviation, and information platforms that our fleet needs and will
guide our priority investments going forward.
U.S. NAVY PRIORITIES

Navy’s FY24 budget request delivers a combat-credible Navy designed to deter
and, if necessary, prevail in conflict. To deliver that fleet today, tomorrow, and in
the future, we will continue to focus on three priorities: Readiness, Capabilities, and
Capacity.
Our central challenge is balancing our investments in the future fleet while sus-
taining a forward posture that keeps America safe and prosperous. It is increasingly
costly to operate and maintain our ships. We appreciate Congress’ support with ad-
ditional funding in FY23 to mitigate the effects of inflation. We will continue to need
congressional support of the robust budget in FY24.
In today’s fiscal environment, we face the enormous challenge of simultaneously
recapitalizing our strategic nuclear deterrent, century-old dry dock facilities, and
strategic sealift capacity, while investing in weapons and platforms we will need in
a future fight. Our focus on Readiness, modernizing Capabilities, and building Ca-
pacity is a result of the threats facing our Nation today and the challenges we face
in the decades to come. To defend our homeland and protect our national interests,
we cannot field a fleet larger than we can sustain. Hollow fleets cannot fight to-
night, and sacrificing current readiness for future capabilities or increased ship
counts would severely constrain our Navy’s ability to respond in crisis or conflict.
Our Nation needs a larger, more capable, more lethal fleet—but we must build the
future fleet at a sustainable rate; not at the expense of warfighters that must be
ready to stand the watch tonight.
READINESS

Readiness remains our top priority. Forward-deployed, combat-credible forces
deter conflict and protect the free and open system underpinning American security
and prosperity.
Across the Navy, from our shipyards and aviation depots, to our global network
of bases and stations, to the steaming and flying hours our Sailors need to hone
their skills, we are focused on readiness. Our FY24 budget request dedicates the re-
sources necessary to train and educate resilient Sailors that can out-think, out-de-
cide, and out-fight any potential adversary. Today’s security environment demands

---

23
ships, aircraft, and submarines, as well as expeditionary, information, and special
warfare forces that are ready to fight and win.
The Navy is committed to accelerating our warfighting advantage by unleashing
our people, and our ‘‘Get Real, Get Better’’ call to action empowers our warfighters
to find and fix problems, and to innovate at every level, from the deckplates to our
senior leaders. While our Navy team remains the most capable maritime force in
the world, we have identified unacceptable variability in our performance. To ad-
dress this, we must standardize and incentivize best practices, leadership behaviors,
and problem-solving techniques throughout the force to reduce this variability and
unleash our full potential. The essential element is fostering a healthy ecosystem—
a culture—that assesses, corrects, and innovates better than the opposition, accel-
erating our warfighting advantage in this critical decade.
This past year, the Navy-Marine Corps team executed more than 22,000 steaming
days and nearly one million flying hours. Additionally, the Navy participated in
roughly 100 exercises with Allies and partners across the globe, strengthening
America’s integrated deterrence. We are planning for similarly robust level of exer-
cises and engagement efforts over the next year and in years ahead. As our naval
forces remain in high demand, our budget request emphasizes critical aspects of our
readiness. Our Sailors stand ready all over the world, from Sasebo to San Diego and
from Norfolk to Naples, as our Navy keeps the oceans open and free.
Since the invasion of Ukraine, the Navy has had a continuous Carrier Strike
Group presence in the Mediterranean, from the extended deployment of the USS
Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), to the current deployment of the USS George H. W.
Bush (CVN 77) Carrier Strike Group. Furthermore, the Navy provided early support
to European Command operations with surge deployments of additional forces, to
include six destroyers, two P–8 aircraft, two submarines, and a destroyer squadron
staff. Our Sailors have been present where it matters, when it matters. Addition-
ally, America’s first-in-class aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) returned
to Naval Station Norfolk in November after successfully completing its inaugural
deployment in the Atlantic, conducting exercises, strategic engagements, and port
visits with Allies and partners.
We have deepened our integration with the U.S. Marine Corps with the establish-
ment of Task Force 61/2 under Naval Forces Europe. This effort streamlined com-
mand and control of Navy and Marine Corps forces deployed to act as a deterrent
and reinforce Alliance cohesion in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. We
operationalized this cohesion with the deployment of the USS Kearsarge (LHD 3)
Amphibious Readiness Group (ARG) with the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit
(MEU) embarked. After the USS Kearsarge ARG–MEU deployment, the same team
provided the core U.S. military command element that quickly established humani-
tarian support for Türkiye after the recent earthquake, utilizing the USS Hershel
‘‘Woody’’ Williams (ESB 4) to deliver disaster relief supplies for those affected by the
earthquakes.
To deliver forward presence and capability, our Navy continues to make progress
improvements. For example, our aircraft depots are reducing the time it takes to
conduct maintenance and return aircraft and engines back to the Fleet. Our PB24
request improves funding over FY23 enactment to sustain gains in our aircraft mis-
sion capable rates. Of note, in our aviation depot maintenance account, we increase
funding for engines by $25 million, $9 million for components, and $1 million for
our Depot Readiness Initiative. The PB24 request provides for the operation, main-
tenance and training of nine active Navy Carrier Air Wings, with the necessary
flight hours and maintenance efforts to ensure their carrier and expeditionary strike
groups are combat ready. The budget request aligns with our broader focus across
Naval Aviation to increase lethality and readiness through process improvement
and finding efficiencies at all organizational levels. As aviation costs—across both
the private and public sectors—continue to increase, the Navy recognizes the need
to maintain a relentless drive to reap the full benefit of every investment dollar.
Better maintenance performance has been a point of emphasis across the Navy.
Repeatedly deploying combat-credible forces starts with performing high-quality
maintenance on time and in full. Data-driven reforms such as Performance-to-Plan
(P2P), the Naval Sustainment System (NSS), and other initiatives continue to im-
prove maintenance processes and increase operational availability. Over the last
several years, the aviation community has enhanced readiness as we maintained
over the threshold Mission Capable Rate for most Type-Model-Series Aircraft, in-
cluding the F/A–18E/F, E/A–18G, E–2D, P–8A, MH–60R, and MH–60S. This rep-
resents a significant improvement in Navy aircraft readiness, but we are not yet
satisfied. We are getting real and getting better at applying what we have learned
in aviation to our maintenance processes across the fleet.

---

24
We continue to take a data-driven approach to improve surface ship and sub-
marine maintenance, and we have seen positive results. However, unprecedented
hiring challenges in a competitive job market, along with sustained, pandemic-in-
duced delays and supply chain issues, have hampered progress for our public and
private shipyards. Our budget request funds both private and public sector ship
maintenance to 100 percent, with a focus on increasing capacity and retaining high-
ly skilled labor at the public shipyards. On top of those resources, we have invested
considerably in other requirements essential to the material condition of our Fleet.
Completing maintenance for our Virginia-class submarines and returning them to
the Fleet on time is a critical warfighting priority. To that end, we added $541 mil-
lion for Virginia-class materiel and spares to build depth and breadth in on-hand
inventory to help ensure that the necessary parts are available when required dur-
ing maintenance availabilities.
We remain committed to driving down costs wherever and whenever possible. In
particular, P2P-driven improvements—such as the goal of awarding contracts 120
days before the start of a maintenance availability, level loading ports through bet-
ter prediction of workload, better availability planning, and improved long-lead-time
material acquisition—have provided effective solutions for readiness. Still, just like
our industrial partners, our public shipyards face headwinds from workforce con-
straints, supply chain logjams, and increased costs due to inflation. We recognize
the challenges, are not satisfied with current conditions, and will continue to invest
in people, processes, and infrastructure to drive maintenance delays down to the
only acceptable number—zero.
Today, the average age of U.S. naval shipyard facilities and related infrastructure
is 62 years, while the average dry dock age is approaching 100 years. The Shipyard
Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) provides a strategic roadmap for nec-
essary investments in our public shipyard dry docks, capital equipment, and facili-
ties. We are committed to taking a holistic, analytic approach to our critical shore
infrastructure, making necessary investments to overhaul and optimize our Nation’s
shipyards through SIOP, and ensuring our shore establishment can support fleet op-
erations. With $2.7 billion requested for SIOP in our budget request, the Navy can
continue to upgrade and reconfigure our four public shipyards. This robust invest-
ment in the infrastructure and facilities of our four public shipyards is a vital effort
to maintain and support upgrades of current and future submarines, aircraft car-
riers, and surface combatants.
When fully executed, SIOP will deliver required dry dock repairs and system up-
grades that will optimize workflow within the shipyards through significant changes
to their physical layout. Moreover, the SIOP investments allow the public shipyards
to recapitalize industrial plant equipment with modern technology that will sub-
stantially increase productivity and worker safety. As a result of previous SIOP in-
vestments, we have already completed construction of the Super Flood Basin at
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, construction of the Norfolk Naval Shipyard Production
Training Facility, and design of Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard Dry Dock 3 Replace-
ment. We remain committed to working with Congress, DoD leadership, the ship-
yard workforce, impacted communities, regulators, and industry leaders as we con-
tinue to drive down maintenance delays. We acknowledge that submarines are still
experiencing an unacceptable amount of delay days. Still, these investments in our
four public shipyards are rebuilding the industrial base we need to maintain, up-
grade, and return our ships, submarines and aircraft carriers back where they be-
long—deployed at sea.
Maintenance delays and other readiness issues are not solely shipyard problems.
To ensure fleet readiness, we must also reinforce and build resiliency into our sup-
ply chain. The Naval Sustainment System-Supply is driving end-to-end naval supply
chain integration and reform as it streamlines the Navy’s supply chains to increase
readiness, decrease turn-around times, increase availability of spares, and reduce
costs. The key to sustained success will come from the better use of data as we im-
prove the resilience and responsiveness of the Naval Supply System.
Our Sailors—and the civilian workforce that supports the fleet—remain our most
important weapon system. We must continue to evaluate and improve our capabili-
ties to achieve our mission of attracting, developing, and managing talent to ensure
our advantage at sea while providing exceptional service to our Sailors and their
families. Notably, our budget request contains a substantial 5.2 percent pay raise
for our military and civilians. From education and training to overall health and
wellness, our budget invests in our Navy’s most important asset—our people.
To ensure the readiness of every operational unit, we are working hard to resolve
the manpower problems that exist in the fleet. The solution begins with more robust
recruiting and retention efforts. We also need to keep honing and optimizing per-
sonnel readiness metrics to include the experience and proficiency of Sailors to de-

---

25
termine whether operational units are getting personnel with the right skills. The
solution demands the continuous effort of leadership as we must continue to
prioritize and care for our Sailors and Civilians.
The Navy continues the Fleet Training Wholeness initiative to integrate live plat-
forms and simulators across our strike groups. This initiative funds Live, Virtual,
and Constructive (LVC) training at the unit and strike group levels. In the fleet,
LVC continues to be a game-changer in training our combat leaders. To date, fleet
exercises like Large Scale Exercise-21 have connected eight Maritime Operations
Centers, three Marine Force Operations Centers, eight Carrier and Expeditionary
Strike Groups, and 30 ships into a single LVC training environment. As we look
ahead to Large Scale Exercise-23, planned for August of this year, our expanding
LVC capabilities will only increase the numbers of total participants—training both
at-sea and pierside—in an advanced, global scenario. From the pilot in the cockpit
to the technician on the radar scope, LVC initiatives allow warfighters in all do-
mains to train together at unprecedented levels of integration and complexity.
Investments in training like the Ready Relevant Learning (RRL) initiative allow
the Navy to continue to modernize Navy training and accelerate new delivery meth-
ods, supplementing our traditional brick-and-mortar schoolhouses with modern,
multi-media, multi-platform solutions. In addition, RRL will develop Career-Long
Learning Continuums for Navy ratings to map out technical, professional, and lead-
ership training requirements for apprentice, journeyman, and master level mile-
stones in a Sailor’s career. Career-Long Learning Continuum efforts will change the
paradigms of Navy training by delivering Navy Enlisted Classification refresher
training, performance support at the point of need coupled with journeyman and
master core training to close not only existing capability gaps, but also enhance fleet
readiness.
To maintain a Fleet prepared to fight and win in long-term strategic competition,
we continue to evaluate and improve our capability to attract, develop, and manage
a talented and diverse workforce. Furthermore, at a time of intense talent competi-
tion and a rapidly evolving tactical and technical landscape, we are committed to
modernizing and enhancing our entire talent management approach to recruit and
retain the best and brightest. We are also reengineering advancement and assign-
ment policies and practices to deliver a positive Sailor experience in terms of trans-
parency, flexibility, and career-driven choice, while attempting to balance Sailor per-
sonal and professional desires with Navy priorities.
As part of this initiative, we released MyNavy Assignment (MNA)—an upgrade
to our detailing platform providing visibility of all available billets as part of the
Detailing Marketplace Assignment Policy (DMAP). MNA is a modern user interface
providing Sailors the ability to bookmark billets of interest and provide amplifying
information. DMAP continues to expand Sailors’ options beyond the traditional en-
listed career paths. It also rewards Sailors in sea-intensive ratings who stay on sea
duty by offering assignment-based monetary incentives and early advancement op-
portunities for many Sailors who possess the requisite proficiency and experience.
We expanded this practice and policy to supervisor positions through the Senior En-
listed Marketplace (SEM), beginning with Master Chief billets during FY 2024 ad-
vancement selection boards. We plan to expand to Senior Chief and Chief Petty Offi-
cer billets in the following 2 years to expand SEM to become the primary means
of advancement.
To accelerate those Sailors with the highest competence and strongest record, we
expanded the Advancement-to-Position (A2P) program to fill priority supervisor and
journeyman-level billets in eight additional ratings. A2P assists in filling critical
gaps and rewards proven performers willing to take a difficult assignment with a
spot promotion. We have also empowered commanding officers and officers-in-charge
to reward top performers with both an advancement and geographic stability al-
lowed by a guaranteed follow-on three-year assignment at the same unit through
the Command Advancement-to-Position program. These talent management initia-
tives support Sailor development, increase transparency, and generate Fleet-wide,
warfighting readiness.
With great sadness, we recognize that suicide rates increased in 2022. Navy lead-
ers and I have been traveling to ships, squadrons, and bases to listen, learn, and
help. Every loss of life is a tragedy. As we continue to destigmatize mental health
treatment, we are working to ensure every Member has access to the full continuum
of mental health support. Our budget request expands mental health programs like
Sailor Assistance and Intercept for Life, adds support for the 21st Century Sailor
Office, and increases our Warrior Toughness Teams to help foster the mental, phys-
ical, and spiritual resilience of our forces. Along with these programs, we are work-
ing to ensure the availability of mental health and wellness support worldwide, in-
cluding at specialty and primary care clinics, Navy installation counseling centers,

---

26
on the waterfront, embedded within the fleet, and via virtual health platforms.
Navy Chaplains and deployed resiliency counselors provide confidential counseling
and are essential in ensuring the spiritual readiness and resiliency of the Naval
Force. The Navy’s budget request continues to resource quality care for our Sailors
and support services for them and their families.
Though we work in the profession of arms and accept the hazards that come with
defending our country, all Sailors deserve to be treated with respect and dignity and
should feel safe among their fellow shipmates. We are focused on creating a culture
intolerant of sexual assault and are actively executing and evaluating the DoD Pre-
vention Plan of Action. This is a comprehensive approach to promote prevention and
reduce destructive personnel behaviors that lead to incidents. In addition, we are
implementing the 82 Independent Review Commission (IRC) recommendations on
accountability, prevention, climate, culture, and victim care. Sexual Assault Preven-
tion and Response (SAPR) personnel remain fully available to Sailors worldwide to
address victims’ physical, mental, and emotional well-being, strengthen resilience,
encourage reporting, and support victim recovery.
Moreover, we do not accept any form of sexual harassment in our Navy. To ensure
Sailors are heard, and to remove actual or perceived bias from the process, Navy
Sexual Harassment investigations are now conducted by an independent third party
assigned from outside the command. Likewise, the establishment of the Navy’s Of-
fice of Special Trial Counsel ensures that accountability for sexual assault and sex-
ual harassment, among other serious offenses, will be handled by an independent,
specialized, and expert cadre of professionals. We listen, and we continue to learn.
Our work to eliminate sexual assaults and remove sexual harassment from our fleet
is not done.
When Sailors are valued for their diverse talents and are treated with respect and
dignity, they feel a sense of belonging to their teams and deliver a higher level of
performance. With nearly 50 percent of recruitable talent coming from diverse popu-
lations, the Navy must be deliberate in advancing a culture where every person, re-
gardless of their background, has the opportunity to succeed as a Sailor and where
our Navy, in turn, benefits from our Sailors’ talents, experiences, and insights. We
have built on lessons learned from our findings in Task Force One Navy and have
launched 53 Task Force One Navy initiatives, which remain on track for full imple-
mentation.
All of our most pressing challenges require strong leadership. However, in the
past year, as required to support the Space Force and by the FY17 National Defense
Authorization Act, the Navy reduced more than 8 percent of its Flag Officer billets.
These leadership reductions
come at a high cost to maintaining operational readiness, impeding the Navy’s ef-
forts in an already challenging operational environment. At present, nearly one-
third of the Navy’s remaining 149 Flag Officer billets are double- or triple-hatted.
These significant additional demands on leadership have ripple effects on readiness
that negatively permeate across the fleet. To ensure our Navy can respond in crisis
and win in conflict, we need Flag Officers with the focus and bandwidth to respond
thoughtfully to the many challenges the Navy must navigate.
In the Navy, we serve as families. To improve the lives of our Sailors and their
families, we continue to focus on improving the consistency of Sailor pay, quality
of unaccompanied housing, and other quality of life services. This includes installing
broadband Internet services and wireless connectivity, improving berthing barge liv-
ing conditions, improving crew parking and transportation, and ensuring an overall
better experience for Sailors on the waterfront. Access to high-quality childcare is
critical to supporting our warfighters. Our budget request supports increased staff
salaries and adds two new Child Development Centers. Funding will also support
adding full-day pre-Kindergarten opportunities at overseas locations.
We know that to retain our Force of talented and trained Sailors we must con-
tinue to invest in ways that benefit them and their families, while providing envi-
ronments that make them feel valued and enable them to serve honorably. Contin-
ued funding to improve the lives of Sailors will be our greatest return on invest-
ment. Our people form the keel of our fleet’s readiness and they will inspire the next
generation to answer our Nation’s call to serve.
CAPABILITIES

The Navy’s budget request makes substantial investments that will modernize our
capabilities. The Navy prioritizes delivering capabilities that can achieve lethal and
persistent effects inside adversary weapon engagement zones, generate advantages
to create off-ramps in crisis, and decisively win should crisis escalate into conflict.
As the challenges in this era require the support and unified effort of Allies and

---

27
partners, it is fundamental to our success that we develop compatible and com-
plementary capabilities. To win now and in the future, we strive not only for inter-
operability with Allies and partners, but also for interchangeability across the com-
bined force.
As we build and deploy a Navy capable of deterring and, if necessary, defeating
a strategic competitor, we must prioritize capabilities for DMO—our Navy’s
foundational operating concept for maintaining warfighting advantage in contested
seas. The Navy’s budget request focuses on delivering these critical capabilities. To
expand our reach, we are investing in hypersonic weapons, space-based capabilities,
unmanned tanking, and long-range precision fires. For increased deception and de-
fense, we are investing in undersea platforms, weapons, and systems, next-genera-
tion aircraft and surface platforms, cyber capabilities, counter-surveillance, and in-
tegrated weapons systems. Finally, we are investing in smaller, lethal platforms, au-
tonomous systems in all domains, AI, resilient logistics, and integrated combat sys-
tems and networks, all of which enable a more distributed fleet, the delivery to sus-
tain it, and expand our decision advantage.
Our adversaries are also heavily investing in emerging technologies. In response,
the Navy will adopt a more agile approach to experimentation and force moderniza-
tion, leveraging partnerships with industry and academia. Working closely with Al-
lies and partners, we will expand our partnerships across the entire technology eco-
system. Maritime dominance has always depended upon the employment of game-
changing capabilities in combat.
Rising to meet today’s challenges with unmatched capabilities, the Navy-Marine
Corps combat team completed its first deployment of F–35C and CMV–22B this past
year. The warfighting advantages these platforms bring to the battlespace provide
the Joint Force with an undeniable, lethal edge over our adversaries. Both aircraft,
though different mission sets, allow our forces to project power deep behind enemy
lines. In addition, the USS Gerald R. Ford completed its first deployment. This air-
craft carrier not only signals the next generation of our fleets’ principal weapon of
power projection has arrived, but also that our nation remains poised and com-
mitted to maintaining our warfighting advantage for decades to come. Deploying
such capabilities and platforms marks the culmination of many years and many
people’s hard work, showing the capabilities that our Nation can bring to bear.
One of the key areas that is shaping and will continue to shape future warfare
is the incorporation of cyber-warfare tools to detect and defeat adversary attempts
to infiltrate and disrupt our warfighting systems. The Navy continues to make this
a priority focus area to ensure our forces are ready to respond to adversary cyber-
attacks. In addition, the Navy is working closely with the Joint Force to develop
cyber capabilities that can be used across the entire spectrum of conflict. As such,
the Navy will continue moving from its current compliance-based cybersecurity ap-
proach to one where the right to operate is earned and managed every day. Teams
organized around the Department’s recently-announced Cyber Ready effort will de-
velop solutions, select tools, and produce methods, policies, guidance, and concepts
of operation for instituting this new approach. A critical element to implementing
this approach is the need to ensure the Navy has a skilled cyber-workforce com-
prised of both military and civilian cyber experts. To ensure the Navy has the cyber
workforce the nation needs, and in alignment with Congressional intent, we are im-
plementing a dedicated cyber designator. We remain committed to growing this ca-
pability alongside the Joint Force, as well as with our Allies and partners, collec-
tively building a more robust security outlook.
In response to potential adversaries developing and fielding hypersonic missile
systems, the Navy collaborated with the rest of the defense enterprise to make
hypersonics one of our highest priority modernization efforts. This past year has
been marked with certified successes for our Conventional Prompt Strike capability.
In 2022, we conducted one First Stage and one Second Stage Solid Rocket Motor
static fires, marking five successful static fire tests of the newly developed missile.
In another joint effort, the Navy Strategic Systems Programs and the Army
Hypersonic Project Office successfully conducted the second High Operational
Tempo for Hypersonics flight campaign in October, 2022. These developments rep-
resent significant progress in our hypersonic capabilities, and both programs are on
track to support the first fielding of a hypersonic capability to the Army later this
year. Both the Army and the Navy programs are on track to support the first field-
ing of a hypersonic capability to the Army later this year. Stable funding at the re-
quested level will keep this critical capability on track to field on Zumwalt-class
DDGs, followed by Virginia-class SSNs equipped with the Virginia Payload Module.
The rapid development and demonstration of conventional land and sea-based
hypersonic strike weapon systems support our Nation’s ability to deter and, if nec-

---

28
essary, defeat potential strategic competitors. Modernizing capabilities will remain
a priority to ensure our Navy maintains warfighting advantage.
Weapons with range and speed are critical capabilities. Our budget request pur-
sues four multi-year procurement contracts for Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air
Missiles and Standard Missile-6 (SM–6). In addition, our request allows us to con-
tinue to work jointly with the Air Force in the procurement and production of Joint
Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles and Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles. We are also in-
creasing our investments in Maritime Strike Tomahawks, as well as refreshing and
recertifying existing Tomahawks and MK–48 Heavyweight Torpedoes.
Above the sea, we remain resolute in our commitment to the Joint Force in estab-
lishing air superiority in the maritime domain, and sustaining our unique ability
to project power from the flight decks of our aircraft carriers. The Navy’s PB24 re-
quest supports procurement of thirty-four aircraft, modification, spares and support
equipment. In this budget, our significant aviation investments include 15 F–35C
Lightning II’s, 14 Multi-Engine Training Systems, 2 MQ–4 Tritons, and 3 MQ–25
Stingray II’s. These advanced platforms are helping us drive down risk in our future
carrier airwings, which will fully integrate unmanned carrier aviation. This past
year, we completed MQ–25A aircraft in-flight refueling of Navy carrier-based air-
craft and its first carrier demonstration. This unmanned aerial platform will com-
plement the capability of our combat strike fighters and extend the range of our air-
craft carriers.
We continue to make progress on the future technologies we need. This past year,
we completed over 4000 hours and 46,000 nautical miles of unmanned surface vehi-
cle operations. These unmanned systems, and others like them, will play a key role
in building our capability to conduct DMO. To operationalize the Department’s Un-
manned Campaign Plan, we established Task Force 59, which has been a game-
changer for the fleet. As we prioritize the Indo-Pacific and push warships to patrol
those waters, we have leveraged unmanned surface vessels and achieved out-
standing maritime domain awareness in a critical region with three major
chokepoints—the Suez Canal, the Bab Al-Mandab, and the Strait of Hormuz—span-
ning a maritime area the size of California. This achievement provides the Navy
with scalable solutions to monitor the world’s waterways and keep the oceans open
and free.
As AI and other disruptive technologies rapidly proliferate, we must proactively
work to gain every advantage. Many of these rising technological developments play
to our strengths as a nation. More sensors, providing more information, create more
battlespace transparency. Our application of AI solutions will provide our forces
with decision superiority as we map, measure, manage, and govern the battle space.
We will continuously leverage such technological developments to better the fleet
and our Sailors. While strengthening our Force, we must remain aware that no na-
tion has a monopoly on innovation—and history has shown us the navy that con-
tinues to adapt, learn, and improve the fastest gains a strategic warfighting advan-
tage.
To enhance our current and future hybrid fleet, we are maturing AI-enabled
warfighting capabilities and developing an AI-ready workforce. This past year, Task
Force 59 led and participated in International Maritime Exercise (IMX) 2022, the
largest maritime AI and autonomous system exercise ever held. Along with this
IMX, we executed Digital Horizon, an event exercising 15 advanced unmanned sys-
tems, 10 of which operated in the Middle East for the first time. Task Force 59 led
industry partners during phased evolutions, both ashore and at sea, to advance fleet
efforts to enhance regional maritime awareness with greater effectiveness and re-
duced cost.
Along with building testing platforms and driving operational concepts for the fu-
ture fleet, Task Force 59 advances our understanding of commercial technology that
has the potential to complement other government-sponsored AI procurement and
operations. In support of these efforts, the Unmanned Task Force continues to focus
on rapid experimentation and solving operational problems to quickly inform acqui-
sition strategies. We also continued work with partners and Allies in events such
as NATO Maritime Unmanned Systems Initiative Exercises.
CAPACITY

Congress’s support of the Navy’s shipbuilding budget this past year helped us sig-
nal our partners in industry—as well as our challengers around the world—that we
will remain the world’s strongest maritime power. Authorizing and appropriating
the procurement of 12 battle force ships displays Congress’ continued commitment
to the Navy’s shipbuilding programs. We appreciate the strong support by Congress

---

29
for naval shipbuilding during FY23 enactment. This year, our budget requests fund-
ing for procurement of an additional nine battle force ships.
With sustained funding, the Navy can turn the corner on beginning to build the
fleet this Nation needs: a combat-credible, hybrid fleet capable of succeeding across
the continuum of day-to-day competition, crisis, and conflict. We also need a fleet
with the capacity to distribute assets and deliver larger volumes of kinetic and non-
kinetic effects across all domains to meet the strategic and operational demands of
the Joint Force.
The Navy’s most critical role in support of our national defense and robust nu-
clear posture continues to be maintaining the most lethal ballistic missile sub-
marines in the world. Thus, our number one acquisition priority remains the on-
time delivery of the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine. Originally designed
for a 30-year service life, the first of the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines will
be retired in 2027 after 42 years of highly effective deterrent patrols. The Columbia-
class will replace it as the Navy’s contribution to the nuclear triad—which remains
the most survivable leg of the U.S. strategic nuclear deterrent force. This is a once-
in-a-generation investment, and sustaining our Nation’s most secure and reliable
strategic nuclear deterrent will require considerable resources. When the Columbia-
class enters full-rate production in FY26, delivering the Nation’s sea-based nuclear
deterrent will consume nearly a quarter of the Navy’s entire shipbuilding budget.
The Navy’s request funds the second Columbia-class submarine and delivery of the
first vessel in FY28. Specifically, the Columbia-class program request of $5.8 billion,
includes the first of 2 years of incremental full funding for the second submarine,
to be awarded in FY24. The budget request also includes continuing Integrated En-
terprise Plan funding initiatives, material procurement for future boats, and contin-
ued funding for Submarine Industrial Base investments. The strategic significance
of this platform requires the Navy and the Nation to dedicate the necessary re-
sources to ensure its on-time delivery.
Shipbuilding remains critical to increasing our fleet’s capacity, and requires sig-
nificant investments from both the government, as included in the FY24 request,
and the private sector. A combined commitment ensures healthy competition in the
shipbuilding industrial base, which is vital to meeting Navy requirements in sup-
port of our national interests and defense of the homeland. With the help of Con-
gress, the Navy and private shipbuilders are identifying opportunities to generate
resiliency and productivity in the shipbuilding workforce. Part of the challenge of
growing the fleet is having enough shipyards with the capacity and workforce to
build the ships that we are budgeted.
The shipbuilding industrial base faces an increase in demand across the enter-
prise, particularly in nuclear ship construction. As the Navy ramps up production
of the Columbia-class, we continue to procure two Virginia-class submarines per
year. The Virginia-class submarine budget requests $10.3 billion, or 32 percent of
this appropriation, funding two Block V submarines and Advance Procurement for
two FY 2025 and two FY 2026 submarines. Additionally, we continue production of
the world’s most capable, most lethal surface vessels. The Ford-class carrier pro-
gram requests $1.9 billion, and funds the seventh increment of funding for CVN 80,
and the sixth increment of funding for CVN 81. As part of the surface combatant
portfolio, our budget requests $4.5 billion for two Arleigh Burke-class Destroyers as
part of the FY23–FY27 multi-year procurement of modern Flight III Destroyers. We
plan to award these destroyers this fiscal year. To support the building of our Con-
stellation-class Frigates, our request includes $2.2 billion for the fifth and sixth
ships of this class. These investments ensure that we field a fleet that sails forward,
keeps the oceans open, and ensures our maritime advantage on and below the seas.
To ensure that we can build the future submarines and aircraft carriers, we are
taking steps to expand and strengthen the nuclear industrial base by investing in
six key areas: shipbuilder infrastructure, supply chain capability/capacity, scaling
new technologies, addressing workforce trade skill gaps and constraints, expanding
productive capacity via strategic outsourcing of large scale fabrication, and govern-
ment oversight of expanded industrial base efforts. In the Navy, any time we are
splitting atoms, we know the work will be demanding, but these nuclear-powered
platforms require our sustained commitment and continued support of the ship-
builders delivering these critical assets to the fleet.
Beyond these nuclear shipbuilding projects, we are working closely with private
shipyards to strengthen the Surface Combatant Industrial Base and Frigate Indus-
trial Base. A key focus has been on the Workforce Development investments that
address risk in schedules, increase capability to meet future force structure, promote
job creation and economic security, and address risk in single or fragile supply
chains. Expanding the capabilities of suppliers and shipyard infrastructure in the
surface ship industrial base results in greater industrial base stability, cost savings,

---

30
and improved efficiency as production increases to build greater quantities of sur-
face combatants. These initiatives are paralleled by ongoing private sector invest-
ments to expand the nation’s shipbuilding industrial base. We support any efforts
to grow our capacity to build more ships annually. This is all part of a long-term
commitment and clear signal to industry that the unique work done in our private
shipyards is essential to the nation, and the workforce they provide will be gainfully
employed for years to come. The Nation’s shipbuilding industrial base remains a
strategic asset. It requires continued support to expand its capacity, and to recruit
and retain the workforce the Nation needs to deliver the fleet of tomorrow.
A robust munitions industrial base, capable of delivering critical munitions in
large quantities and in strategically relevant timeframes, is also an essential compo-
nent of our Nation’s warfighting capacity. The rapid expenditure of munitions in
Ukraine has demonstrated the timeless truth that industrial capacity is a key en-
abler of victory. Our budget request adds over $2 billion in critical munitions invest-
ments, including supporting multi-year procurement contracts. We are working
closely with our defense partners to make the necessary investments to allow us to
rapidly ramp up production of critical munitions right now. We are taking a multi-
pronged approach to introduce both stability and competition into the weapons ac-
quisition process in order to accelerate delivery times, increase inventories, and
lower costs. This includes use of multi-year contracts and large lot procurements,
recertification of existing munitions, new production, and exploration of alternative
systems designed to circumvent our adversaries’ advantages and play to our
strengths. We are also working with our partners and Allies to ensure their require-
ments are met, as well. Today’s weapons are intricate, specialized, and depend on
complex supply chains, which challenges our ability to quickly ramp up production.
We cannot afford to wait until conflict begins to make these critical munitions ca-
pacity investments.
Unmanned systems will play an ever-increasing role in expanding the capacity
and distribution of our fleet. We will explore opportunities to scale proven capabili-
ties of unmanned Maritime Domain Awareness systems, such as those dem-
onstrated by Task Force 59. In addition, the AI-enabled software that meshes our
network of systems and platforms will provide an array of decision advantage solu-
tions as we track forces, manage the battlespace, and maintain our dominance at
sea. Finally, we must focus on accelerating the adoption of technologies and scalable
platforms that provide increased capability and capacity, while laying the founda-
tion for our future hybrid fleet.
CONCLUSION

The U.S. Navy’s mission has never been more essential for the preservation of
American security and prosperity. Facing increasingly aggressive challengers, the
Navy’s priorities—Readiness, Capabilities, Capacity—will help us maintain our com-
bat credibility in contested seas.
In line with the NDS, the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2024 budget request keeps us on
a steady path to modernize U.S. naval power, while maintaining readiness and sus-
taining a forward posture that keeps America and our Allies safe and prosperous.
Capable ships, submarines, and aircraft are expensive instruments of national
power, as are the costs of maintaining and sustaining them. However, without a
ready, powerful Navy, the costs we incur in potential conflict could be much higher.
The investments we make now will shape the global maritime balance of power for
the rest of this century.
This is my final testimony before this Committee. It has been the honor of a life-
time serving as the Chief of Naval Operations these past three-plus years.
On behalf of more than 600,000 active and reserve Sailors and Navy Civilians,
thank you for allowing me to testify today. I am grateful to this Committee and to
your colleagues in Congress for your steadfast commitment to the Navy. Let us con-
tinue our work to deliver the Navy that this Nation deserves—a Navy that will pre-
serve peace, strengthen prosperity, and defend America for many decades to come.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Admiral Gilday.
Next up, we have got General Berger.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL DAVID H. BERGER, COMMANDANT OF THE
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
General BERGER. Thank you. Three years ago,—it did a rapid
change, and was required to meet our statutory missions and the
mandates of the National Defense Strategy, and with the bipar-

---

31

tisan help of this committee and the support of my civilian leader-
ship in the Pentagon. The Marine Corps Force Design is no longer
a future aim point, it is today. It is a reality.
And in INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command), for example, Task
Force 76.3 creating advanced information webs to support Mari-
time Awareness, they took what they learned in experimentation,
and turned it into kill webs during exercise in the Philippines and
in Japan earlier this spring, right in the Chinese backyard. And
the EUCOM (European Command) Task Force 61.2 found ways to
create greater Air and Maritime Domain Awareness for the Sixth
Fleet, focusing on Russian naval and air activities.
In CENTCOM (Central Command), General Kurilla has Marine
Corps MQ–9s, providing persistent ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance,
Reconnaissance) that he needs to monitor the key Maritime Ter-
rain. Next month, our new Marine Littoral Regiment, Third MLR,
will demonstrate some of its newest sensing and lethal capabilities
in the Philippines during an exercise called Balikatan, right along-
side our allies and partners.
And in January of this year, a couple months ago, Japan agreed
to host our Second Marine Littoral Regiment, which is Twelfth
MLR that will be forward into the first island chain, where per-
sistent Marine Corps presence matters most. So in short, your Ma-
rines are aware it matters most today, just as they always have
been.
Three years ago, I described how the Marine Corps would not
just modernize quickly, but we would self-fund those changes we
had to make. We would get leaner, lighter, and more naval. And
in 3 short years your Marines have done just that. Marines are in
the field, and those changes are in the field today, we are not wait-
ing for 2025, or 2027, or 2030, your Marines are ready to handle
any crisis, anywhere now.
Our major divestments are done. We are at our fighting weight.
Now we have to sustain our modernization efforts while focusing,
as the Secretary mentioned, on the quality of life issues most im-
portant to the Marines, Sailors, and the families. People are the
real source of our competitive advantage. And I ask for your help
now to invest in their quality of life.
We must focus now on where Marines and families live, where
they eat, where they work, Marines and Sailors expect that from
us, and they deserve it. Restoring and modernizing our infrastruc-
ture is directly tied to retention, supporting our families and gener-
ating readiness.
So on behalf of all Marines I ask for your support now as we
bring our facilities up to par with the quality of Marines and Sail-
ors operating from those warfighting platforms.
And I would also ask for your support to our Naval Expedi-
tionary capability, the CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) and I
agree on three key principles when it comes to amphibious ships.
First, the absolute minimum of L-class amphibious ships the Na-
tion needs is 31. That is the warfighting requirement. Second,
block buys save money, and they give industry predictability. And
third, divesting without replacing creates unacceptable risk.
Amphibious ships are critical to crisis response for this country.
That is how we evacuated citizens, U.S. citizens out of Lebanon.

---

32

That is how the U.S. made initial entry into Afghanistan after 9/
11, from the sea. And when DOD (Department of Defense) sends
its life-saving support after hurricanes, and typhoons, and earth-
quakes around the world, and here in the U.S., amphibious ships
with embarked Marines were the only practical option.
Today, we need to do all that plus directly contribute to cam-
paigning in integrated deterrence. Here is the bottom line from
where I see it, the first time we can’t respond to an ally or partner
in time of crisis it will probably be the last time they depend on
us for help, and we cannot let those partnerships erode.
In my final year as commandant, I will finish by just saying
thank you. Your Marine Corps wouldn’t be where it is today with-
out your oversight, your guidance, your unwavering support.
And with that, I welcome your questions. I look forward to work-
ing closely with this committee in the months to come. Thank you,
sir.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENERAL DAVID H. BERGER
Chair, Ranking Member, and distinguished members of the Committee, I am
thankful for the opportunity to report the progress of your Marine Corps over the
last year and seek your support in continuing to prepare the Service to face an in-
creasingly uncertain and challenging future. I would be remiss, in my final year as
Commandant, if I did not first acknowledge the unwavering support of this Com-
mittee over the last 3 years. Simply put, the Marine Corps of today is a better fight-
ing force because of your guidance, commitment, and resourcing decisions. But there
is still much work to be done. A brief review of world events over the past few years
tells us we are moving in the right direction, but we cannot slow down. In fact, we
need to accelerate our efforts so your Marine Corps can effectively deter while re-
maining ready to immediately respond to any crisis, anywhere on the globe, at any
time. The work of this Committee is crucial to the modernization of the Marine
Corps into a force that will continue to do just that.
POSTURE

Today, more than 32,000 Marines are forward-deployed or stationed across 50
countries. There are also, on average, 102 Marine Corps fixed-wing aircraft (F–35,
F/A–18, and KC–130J) forward-deployed or stationed overseas, a 22 percent increase
since 2018. This forward posture is a critical requirement for integrated deterrence
and reinforces a national source of strategic advantage—our global network of allies
and partners.
Most Marine forces west of the International Date Line are based in Japan. In
January, the Government of Japan announced its intention to host the future 12th
Marine Littoral Regiment (MLR). This unit will possess advanced intelligence, sur-
veillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities as well as long range precision fires
capabilities, improving both maritime domain awareness and our ability to deter po-
tential adversaries. When combined with the other stand-in force capabilities of III
Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF), 12th MLR will provide a major lethality up-
grade for the fleet and joint force in the Indo-Pacific.
While our posture has become more robust in the Indo-Pacific, fewer of our for-
ward-deployed Marines are serving afloat with the fleet. In 2018, 16,000 Marines
served aboard ships, but in 2022, just 12,660 did so—a 20 percent decrease. The
principal reason for this decline was the lack of amphibious warfare ship avail-
ability. As directed by the Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) National Defense Authorization
Act (NDAA), 10 LHA/LHD and 21 LPDs are the bare minimum necessary for our
amphibious fleet. Additionally, in my best military judgment, the Marine Corps
needs a minimum of seven Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Units
(ARG/MEU), three MLRs, and 35 Medium Landing Ships (LSM) to provide a strong
forward posture for building partnerships in the littorals and to contribute to inte-
grated deterrence.

---

33
RESOURCES

The FY24 budget request for the Marine Corps is $53.2 billion (B). To date, the
Marine Corps has taken every possible opportunity to self-fund our modernization.
This required hard choices and difficult, unpopular decisions. With the support of
our civilian leadership in the Department of the Navy (DoN), Department of De-
fense (DoD), and Congress, from Presidential Budget 2020 (PB20) to PB23 this ap-
proach succeeded. Over the last five program objective memorandum (POM) cycles,
the Marine Corps divested $18.2B across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP)
in structure and legacy platforms and systems and has reinvested $15.8B directly
into modernization. The success of these divest-to-invest actions would not have
been possible without the support of our civilian and Congressional leadership.
To be clear, the Marine Corps is now complete with our major divestments. Re-
ducing the approved acquisition objectives (AAO) of major programs like the CH–
53K or F–35 at this point would not produce resources for investment elsewhere and
would be premature decisions. We approached FY24 as a program review year. Lim-
iting the introduction of new programs in FY24 allows the Marine Corps to main-
tain or even accelerate progress on investments from preceding budget cycles that
are directly tied to our pacing threat.
The suggestion that we may have to choose between preparing to fight tonight—
which your Marines are fully prepared to do—and preparing for some distant point
in the future presents a false dichotomy. Readiness, lethality, and modernization to
meet future challenges are all required today. Our collective challenge is to balance
the resource tension between the force we employ today and the development of the
force to compete and win in the years to come.
WARFIGHTING READINESS

In many ways, Marine Corps readiness has improved since 2018. Our units have
higher levels of persistent manning/staffing, more equipment and supplies, en-
hanced individualized training, and more collective training—much of it force-on-
force. Our combat arms units are equipped with modern capabilities far superior to
those of past formations. Yet, while many things have changed, the foundational ele-
ments have not. We remain the most elite infantry in the world, with the most pro-
ficient combined arms teams on the globe.
While there have been substantive readiness improvements across the force, no-
where have these improvements been more visible than in Marine aviation. Across
all type/model/series of aircraft, our mission capable rate has increased from 57 per-
cent in 2018 to 66 percent in 2023—an achievement that would not have been pos-
sible without Congressional support and the herculean efforts of Marine aviation
mechanics and maintenance crews. We anticipate further improvements to aviation
readiness as we retire older airframes (e.g., F/A–18 and CH–53E) and accelerate ac-
quisition of newer platforms like the F–35B/C and CH–53K.
In 2018, we employed a lethal, though primarily fourth generation, tactical air
(TACAIR) force of 173 F/A–18C/D and 126 AV–8B, with 72 fifth generation F–35B/
Cs. Today, our TACAIR force is comprised of 174 F–35B/C and 178 fourth genera-
tion aircraft—a major step forward. Despite the challenges associated with
transitioning the force from fourth to fifth generation aircraft, the overall readiness
of our TACAIR fleet increased from 56 percent in 2018 to 68 percent in 2023.
We have also achieved significant gains in the readiness of our MV–22 fleet, ris-
ing from 52 percent in 2018 to 64 percent in 2023. The current challenges sur-
rounding a series of hard clutch engagements caused each of the Services to take
immediate action to replace certain transmission components in our V–22 fleets.
That action is ongoing, and we expect to see a rebound in readiness this spring and
summer.
Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV): The introduction of the ACV has the potential
to greatly enhance our littoral mobility and expeditionary reach. However, as with
all new systems and technologies, there have been a few notable challenges. At
present, we are working with BAE Systems to address two major component
issues—one with the struts/shock absorbers, and the other with the central tire in-
flation system. Both issues have caused part failures, resulting in a decrease in reli-
ability and a corresponding decrease in readiness. We have also identified issues re-
lated to possible water incursion into the power train and are working with our in-
dustry partner to resolve those as well. In addition to these mechanical issues, we
have experienced three incidents in the surf zone that resulted in vehicles rolling
over. According to BAE Systems and confirmed by our safety investigations, these
rollovers were caused by a lever effect generated when the vehicle becomes parallel
to the surf-line and is struck by a large wave. These events were, in large part, the
product of training shortfalls. We are actively working with BAE Systems to rectify

---

34
all mechanical concerns and are enhancing the training regimen for our vehicle op-
erators on this new and more sophisticated amphibious vehicle.
F135 Engine: In both PB22 and PB23, Congress enacted funding to support F135
engine modernization. In addition to this funding, the Office of the Secretary of De-
fense (OSD) added significant resources for an engine core upgrade and for power
and thermal management system (PTMS) modernization. We will continue to mon-
itor the current F135 engine and F–35 PTMS’s ability to support Block IV mission
systems and will work with the Joint Program Office to ensure our requirements
are being met.
Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Pilot Training: As an integral part of Force De-
sign, we embarked along a path in late 2019 to double our uncrewed aircraft capac-
ity across the force from three unmanned aerial vehicle squadrons (VMU) to six
squadrons, while transitioning from the RQ–21 to the much more capable MQ–9.
While our commitment to uncrewed systems is unshakeable, we have concluded the
Air Force’s capacity to generate trained MQ–9 UAS officers is insufficient to satisfy
Marine Corps requirements. At present, half of our total inventory of UAS officers
(72 of 148) are not yet trained and qualified to operate the MQ–9. We are working
with the Air Force to remedy this throughput issue. However, there is a need to
direct the necessary resources in future budgets to establish a Naval UAS School
to resolve this larger joint force issue.
Pilot Readiness Concerns: Service Chiefs are routinely asked about how the joint
force can effectively compete against the Department’s pacing challenge—the Peo-
ple’s Republic of China (PRC)—or our acute threat—Russia. But there is a different
competition that is more directly and more adversely impacting the joint force than
that emanating from either Russia or China, and that is the unhealthy competition
between the Services and the airline industry. As the head of personnel for the Air
Force stated during testimony in 2017, we cannot compete with the airlines. We
could not then and we cannot now. This is an issue that requires your oversight.
We are at a competitive disadvantage and risk our reservoir of pilots drying up. As
an example, in 2018, the Marine Corps had 88 of the 203 required F–35 pilots (43
percent of the requirement). At the end of 2022, we had 218 of 498 F–35 pilots (44
percent of the requirement). At the end of 2022, we had 200 F–35 pilots in flight
school and another 62 at our fleet replacement squadrons with FY23 and FY24 com-
pletion dates. We are making some progress, but not enough—and certainly not
quickly enough. We are exploring various options for structuring aviation bonuses
and aviation incentive pay under the new authorities granted in the FY23 NDAA.
But ever-larger monetary incentives are neither sustainable nor the appropriate
remedy. This is not just a Marine Corps problem. It is a joint force problem, and
we will continue to work with the other services and Congress as our understanding
of this issue develops.
FORCE DESIGN AND CURRENT OPERATIONS

There is a misperception by some that Force Design might create a gap in Marine
Corps capabilities between divestment and fielding new capabilities. The reality is
that fielding new capabilities associated with Force Design is already well under-
way. Many of these ‘‘future’’ capabilities tied to Force Design 2030 are already being
employed by Marine forces today. Six examples from 2022 are illustrative:
TF 61.2 and Reconnaissance and Counter-reconnaissance: In March 2022, U.S.
Sixth Fleet partnered with II MEF to create Task Force (TF) 61.2. TF 61.2 was de-
signed as a joint task force crisis response capability to command and control naval
forces supporting contingencies in Europe and Africa. This force was delegated tac-
tical control of amphibious forces (ARG/MEU) in theater, allocated Marine forces
(Marine Rotational Force—Europe), and a task organized reconnaissance/counter-re-
connaissance force. Near simultaneously, II MEF and 2d Marine Division were
tasked with ‘‘accelerating experimentation with maritime, multi-domain reconnais-
sance constructs and activities to enhance the ability of the stand-in force to domi-
nate the information environment, sense and make sense of the situation, and win
the reconnaissance vs. counter-reconnaissance competition.’’ Commander, Sixth
Fleet, immediately volunteered TF 61.2 to support these broader Service experimen-
tation efforts. During the next several weeks, TF 61.2 conducted training aboard
both the USS Woody Williams (ESB–4) and USS Georgia (SSGN–729), and engaged
in combined-arms training in both Greece and Turkey. Those initial exercises dem-
onstrated that maritime expeditionary forces could increase surface, subsurface, and
aerial domain awareness for the fleet commander—regardless of theater—and al-
lowed us to focus on the information web required to create domain awareness in
a contested space. TF 61.2 then transitioned these experimental capabilities to the
Baltics, where it participated in bilateral training on maritime domain awareness

---

35
with the Estonian Navy in the Gulf of Finland. During this period, TF 61.2 partici-
pated in an amphibious landing in Estonia and Exercise BALTOPS with 16 North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) nations, utilizing 47 ships and 7,000 per-
sonnel. This new organization has been so successful the previous Commander, U.S.
European Command (EUCOM) chose to highlight the value of the task force during
his spring 2022 annual testimony. The bottom line is that your Marines’ ability to
conduct reconnaissance and counter-reconnaissance is a current force capability that
directly contributes to competition and deterrence today.
TF 76.3: Building upon the success of TF 61.2, in October 2022, the 3d Marine
Expeditionary Brigade and Naval Task Force 76 staffs merged into a completely in-
tegrated naval task force in the Indo-Pacific. Over the next several months, TF 76.3
experimented with naval concepts at sea and ashore via a broad campaign of learn-
ing labeled NOBLE FUSION 22.2. TF 76.3 also participated in exercises
KAMANDANG in the Philippines and RESOLUTE DRAGON in Japan. Once again,
Marines and Sailors demonstrated the ability to create advanced information webs
to support maritime domain awareness across the theater. Just as importantly, they
demonstrated this capability to potential adversaries.
USS Tripoli: The most recent deployment of the USS Tripoli (LHA–7) dem-
onstrated the strategic and operational advantage that amphibious warfare ships
create today. In early 2022, Tripoli set sail as an independent deployment, in part
to test our F–35B ‘‘Lightning Carrier/Assault Carrier’’ concept by which 16–24 F–
35Bs were embarked and operated in concert with a traditional carrier strike group.
During Tripoli’s time in the Indo-Pacific, embarked Marines and Sailors trained
with and supported the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN–72) and USS Ronald Reagan
(CVN–76), among other traditional surface combatants. Not only did the deployment
illustrate the potency of the Lightning Carrier concept in support of carrier strike
group operations, it also demonstrated the versatility and value of the platform for
the integrated Navy-Marine Corps team. During Exercise VALIANT SHIELD 2022,
the Commander of U.S. Seventh Fleet, Vice Admiral (VADM) Karl Thomas, em-
barked his staff aboard the Tripoli and used it as his command platform for 15
days—a strong endorsement of the platform’s importance within the larger fleet.
VADM Thomas noted, ‘‘One day you can have F–35Bs on the flight deck, the next
day you could have MV–22s and you can be putting Marines ashore. . . .it just is
a very versatile instrument . . . [with] 14 5th-gen fighters on board—it’s an incred-
ibly capable sensor.’’
The LHA’s size, which closely mirrors the amphibious warfare ships of our allies,
makes it an attractive partnership and learning platform. During their deployment,
Marines and Sailors from Tripoli and the 31st MEU trained with forces from Japan,
Australia, the Philippines, and Singapore.
Multifunction Air Operations Center (MAOC): In March 2022, 2d Marine Aircraft
Wing (MAW) conducted the Service’s first operational deployment of a multi-func-
tion air operations center (MAOC). In Lithuania, under the command of U.S. Air
Forces Europe, the MAOC conducted air surveillance and multi-domain awareness
in support of NATO operations. This is not simply an evolutionary step in fixed
aviation command and control (C2) nodes, but rather, a transformational, expedi-
tionary capability that can serve as a hub for Marine Corps, naval, and joint kill
chains and webs. The MAOC provides the Marine Corps with the capability to con-
trol aircraft and missiles, and enables decision superiority. It also offers the ability
to gain and maintain custody of adversary targets and hold those targets at risk
via fires with its organic TPS–80 Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/ATOR), Com-
mon Aviation Command and Control System (CAC2S), and highly proficient avia-
tion C2 Marines. The MAOC is scalable by task-organized units, small enough to
support distributed teams or large enough to support a multi-MEF or Corps-level
fight. This agency construct is also the model we are using for the development of
all-domain C2. 3d MAW is now leading the Service’s MAOC experimentation efforts
and employed this capability as part of Marine Rotational Force—Darwin (MRF–D),
integrating C2 and sensor services for 16 allied and partner nations during Exercise
PITCH BLACK. From these initial efforts, 3d MAW has matured the MAOC, cre-
ating a persistent hub to enhance the common tactical picture for I and III MEF.
Recent experiments in February 2023, which included U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
(USINDOPACOM), have further demonstrated the MAOC’s ability to integrate addi-
tional capabilities from the MEF Information Group and improve the common tac-
tical picture for a carrier strike group, and is visible evidence of Joint All-Domain
Command and Control (JADC2) in practice.
Marine Corps Information Command (MCIC): In October 2022, we streamlined
and simplified much of the coordination required for space and cyberspace oper-
ations at the headquarters level, by realigning current relationships and structure
at Headquarters, Marine Corps (HQMC) from a staff officer to an operational com-

---

36
mander, to create the MCIC. The MCIC is a service-retained command designed to
integrate global Marine Corps capabilities in information, intelligence, cyberspace,
and space to support Fleet Marine Forces (FMF) resulting in decision advantage.
This two-star command operates under Marine Forces Command (MARFORCOM)
and provides critical linkages across operational level planning. It also provides task
organized detachments to support the FMF commander’s campaigning objectives.
This allows the commander to leverage the authorities needed to synchronize global
cyber, space, influence, and intelligence effects and generate multi-domain advan-
tages in support of the commander’s objectives. The MCIC achieved initial oper-
ational capability (IOC) in January 2023.
VMGR–153 and HMH–461: In January 2023, we activated Marine Aerial Refueler
Transport Squadron 153 (VMGR–153) in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii. By 2026, VMGR–
153 will bring 15 KC–130J aircraft to the region, building on the organic mobility
available to Marines responding to crisis or conflict in the region. We are also ap-
proaching 1 year since the CH–53K program achieved IOC and are well underway
transitioning Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 461 (HMH–461) into our first fully
operational CH–53K squadron. Despite their ongoing transition, HMH–461 is al-
ready demonstrating the significant impact of this new capability, conducting heavy
lift assault support missions previously impossible with legacy aircraft. In parallel,
the operational test and evaluation squadron (VMX–1) continues to push the bound-
aries of heavy lift operations. Last December, they successfully lifted an F–35C,
demonstrating the platform’s utility in conducting next generation tactical recovery
missions.
FORCE DESIGN AND THE GROUND COMBAT ELEMENT (GCE)

Infantry Battalion Experiment (IBX): IBX is an ongoing Service-level initiative de-
signed to evaluate the future infantry battalion’s ability to conduct expeditionary,
offensive, and defensive operations as an element of a MEU, MLR, or infantry regi-
ment in support of fleet and joint operations. The results of IBX live-force experi-
mentation represent a critical component of our campaign of learning and are one
of several inputs informing our ongoing assessment of the future infantry battalion.
After 24 months of experimentations and force-on-force exercises with three infan-
try battalions, our combat developers, division commanders, and MEF commanders
recommended an 811-person infantry battalion. This new battalion demonstrated
improved C2, sensing, and lethality. Importantly, this recommendation reflects the
value of our campaign of learning. In 2019, we experimented with a 735-person bat-
talion. But force-on-force experimentation made clear our initial assumptions were
off. It also demonstrated a need for additional ground ISR and indirect fires capac-
ity. In line with these findings, we right-sized personnel, added back indirect fires
capacity, and added organic UAS platforms and personnel to improve surveillance
and target acquisition. Future infantry battalions will possess Block IV Javelins at
the company-level to increase anti-armor capability and will have loitering muni-
tions (organic precision fires (OPF)) at the squad and platoon levels to increase
lethality, enhance maneuver, and facilitate distributed operations. They will have
additional communications, logistics, and intelligence capabilities at the company-
level, and new signals intelligence and electromagnetic warfare capabilities at both
the battalion and company levels. They will possess vehicle-mounted and canister-
launched OPF at the company and battalion level to enhance the lethality, multi-
domain awareness, and reach of those units, and will have improved C2 systems
at the company-level. But our learning never stops. We will build from past efforts
and conduct another round of experiments with two additional battalions this year.
These experiments will evaluate the new infantry battalion design against a peer
adversary, with the aim of further refining its structure and capabilities to the de-
mands of the modern battlefield. We will also begin incorporating our lessons
learned into FMF battalions not directly involved in IBX later this year.
Close Combat Lethality: In 2018, former Secretary of Defense James Mattis con-
vened the Close Combat Lethality Task Force (CCLTF). As we approach 5 years
since that effort was launched, we should take stock of its significant impact. The
CCLTF’s insights have been instrumental in informing the ongoing transformation
within our infantry formations, the most visible of which being the success of the
Multi-purpose Anti-armor Anti-personnel Weapon System (MAAWS). It provides a
multiple-effects rocket system to infantry and combat engineer squads to increase
firepower and enhance their ability to close with and destroy the enemy. The
MAAWS is a medium-range, multi-purpose, man-portable, line-of-sight, reloadable,
recoilless, day/night, anti-armor, and anti-personnel weapon system with an avail-
able suite of 84mm rockets. MAAWS munitions will be capable of obscuration, illu-
mination, personnel denial, armored vehicle denial and penetration, bunker and

---

37
hardened facility penetration, and soft target destruction capabilities. Every rifle
squad, combat engineer squad, and Marine Special Operations Command
(MARSOC) team will be equipped with one MAAWS. Fielding began in the 3d quar-
ter (3Q) of FY21 and will be complete in 3QFY25.
The Marine Corps has also fielded lightweight body armor including a new plate
carrier (PC Gen 3), and an enhanced combat helmet—all of which address the sig-
nificant weight of the individual Marine’s combat load so well documented from op-
erations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, new night vision devices (AN/PVS–
31A) have enhanced night movement and weapons lethality for our infantry, im-
proving their situational awareness and ability to acquire targets. The MAAWS,
Squad Common Optic, M27 squad automatic rifle, M17 pistol, and Mk13 and Mk22
precision rifles have all increased organic lethality within our small units. Multi-
domain sensing and targeting is being addressed with a new signals intelligence/
electromagnetic warfare (SI/EW) program called Marine Electromagnetic Ground
Family of Systems (MEGFoS). This SI/EW suite of equipment, crewed by dedicated
SI/EW and cyberspace personnel, will be employed in the future infantry battalion,
greatly enhancing tactical level target identification and engagement. All these ca-
pability enhancements make our squads and platoons more lethal.
3d MLR and 12th MLR: On 3 March 2022, we activated 3d MLR and it is on
track to achieve IOC this year. 3d MLR has an established littoral combat team
(LCT), combat logistics battalion (CLB), and littoral anti-air battalion (LAAB), all
of which have been exercising in operations, activities, and investment events in the
Indo-Pacific region. 3d MLR continues to operate in coordination with the Naval
Surface Group Middle Pacific (NAVSURFGRU MIDPAC) to further develop its mari-
time fires capabilities, and most recently, deployed to Marine Air-Ground Task
Force—Training Command (MAGTF—TC) to execute the first Service-level MLR
training exercise. This exercise focused on the MLR’s ability to sense and make
sense of the operating environment and rapidly close kill chains. 3d MLR is de-
signed to be a stand-in force, but it is not the Service’s sole stand-in force. Rather,
it is one part of the larger III MEF system of stand-in forces that includes our for-
ward deployed naval force, as well as other expeditionary capabilities including the
F–35B/C.
We are on track to activate 12th MLR by 2025. The Government of Japan and
Secretary Austin recently announced that 12th MLR will be forward stationed on
Okinawa to create greater maritime domain awareness and enhance our collective
ability to deter in the region. As Secretary Austin stated during the announcement,
‘‘We will equip this new formation with advanced intelligence, surveillance, and re-
connaissance, as well as anti-ship and transportation capabilities that are relevant
to the current and future threat environments.’’ 12th MLR’s presence and capability
suite will augment our existing stand-in force capacity in the first island chain.
These littoral regiments provide the joint force two essential capabilities. First,
they serve as eyes and ears of the joint force—meaning their persistent, forward,
and distributed posture enables the joint force to reach well inside of weapons en-
gagement zones. Second, they provide decision space and time for the other joint
forces to deploy, while maintaining continuous maritime domain awareness.
FORCE DESIGN EMERGING CAPABILITIES

In addition to current operations that demonstrate Force Design in action today,
a number of emerging capabilities on the horizon will increase the Marine Corps’
ability to enable full-spectrum operations for the Joint Force in contested environ-
ments.
Unmanned Logistics System-Aerial (ULS–A): As the ongoing conflict in Ukraine
has illustrated, even traditional ground resupply, executed over interior lines and
relatively short distances, can be disrupted with operational level effects. Consistent
with these lessons, the Marine Corps is developing the ULS–A Small or Tactical Re-
supply Unmanned Aircraft System (TRUAS). The TRUAS has a 9-mile range and
maximum payload of 150 pounds, which is sufficient to fly in ammunition, food,
medical supplies, and batteries, among other supplies. This small system only re-
quires two Marines to operate and will be a game-changing capability for our dis-
tributed forces. The TRUAS is anticipated to achieve IOC in 2023 with fielding com-
pleted in 2027. Fielding this capability is critical toward setting conditions for the
development of the ULS–A Medium system, which is the required capability for
large-scale tactical distribution in a contested space. The emerging ULS–A Medium
will be fielded in 2025 and will provide payloads between 300 and 600lbs with a
range of up to 100 miles.
Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS): MADIS is an expeditionary,
upgradable, and state-of-the-art capability to protect maneuver forces, installations,

---

38
and other designated critical assets from fixed/rotary wing (FW/RW) aircraft and
Group 1–3 UAS. It uses sensor-integrated C2 to provide beyond line-of-sight cueing,
targeting, and engagement. Current air defense capabilities only defend against FW/
RW targets and Group 3 UAS within line of sight. The MADIS is composed of a
complementary pair of Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV). The Mk1 JLTV is de-
signed to kill FW/RW variants with a turret-mounted 30mm cannon, Stinger mis-
siles, and an electromagnetic warfare (EW) jammer. The Mk 2 JLTV provides re-
dundant, non-kinetic and kinetic fires while primarily employing C2 software and
sensors to collect, interpret, and pass radar tracks to the Mk 1 via a wireless local
network for target engagements. The AAO is 131 systems comprised of 262 vehicles;
the FY24 budget request provides for 13 MADIS (26 vehicles). We will achieve IOC
in 4QFY24 with the delivery of 17 systems, and we anticipate reaching full oper-
ational capability (FOC) in FY31. The FY24 budget request for the MADIS family
of systems is $265 million (M).
Medium Range Intercept Capability (MRIC): The MRIC defends forward-deployed
forces against the threat of cruise missiles and other aerial threats with similar
flight profiles. This is accomplished through the integration of already-fielded Ma-
rine Corps and Israeli systems that include CAC2S, the TPS–80 G/ATOR, the Iron
Dome Battle Management Controller, and the Tamir missile and guidance uplink.
Each MEF will be fielded with one MRIC battery. A battery is comprised of a head-
quarters element and four independently deployable firing platoons. To date, there
have been four successful live fire events: August 2019, November—December 2021,
April—June 2022, and September 2022. Each live fire successfully demonstrated the
destruction of multiple operationally challenging missile threats. The Service’s FY24
budget request is for $44 million.
Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS): The Marine
Corps is transitioning the majority of its existing lightweight 155mm towed artillery
batteries into medium-range missile (MMSL) batteries equipped with NMESIS to
conduct anti-surface warfare operations as a component of an integrated naval force.
By 2030, the Marine Corps will have 14 MMSL batteries: three batteries forward
deployed in support of MLRs and 11 continental U.S. (CONUS)-based batteries sup-
porting the rotational and MEU deployments. The program will enter low-rate ini-
tial production (LRIP) in 3QFY23. The first six operational launchers will be fielded
to MMSL Battery, 3d MLR in 4QFY23 to give the Service its first capability to con-
tribute to sea denial and sea control operations with ground based anti-ship missile
(GBASM) fires. We anticipate reaching IOC in FY25 after fielding five MMSL bat-
teries and a MMSL battalion headquarters. We anticipate reaching FOC in FY30
when all 14 MMSL batteries have been fielded. The Service’s FY24 budget request
for $402 million supports procurement of 24 NMESIS launchers and associated
equipment, and 90 Naval Strike Missiles (NSM) keeping the program on track to
reach 774 NSM. The 774 NSMs provide one combat load plus one combat load re-
supply per deployed MMSL unit.
Long-Range Fires (LRF): OSD directed the Marine Corps to develop and field a
ground-launched Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) capability to support joint
force long range, precision fires requirements. The LRF weapons system is composed
of a Remotely Operated Ground Unit for Expeditionary (ROGUE) Fires leader kit,
LRF launcher, LRF C2 System (LC2S), and LRF Reload and Resupply System
(LRRS). All four components are required to complete a full mission of loading,
transporting, and firing a Tomahawk missile. This capability leverages existing
Navy and Marine Corps hardware and software such as the Mk41 Vertical Launch
System, Tactical Tomahawk Weapon Control System, Tomahawk cruise missile, and
JLTV to reduce risk by accelerating capability delivery to the FMF and combatant
commanders. The current plan is to establish three 16-launcher, long range missile
(LMSL) batteries to form one LMSL battalion capable of deploying one battery at
a time by 2030. The first four operational launchers are scheduled to be fielded dur-
ing 4QFY24. Remaining batteries are planned for activation between FY26 and
FY28. OSD provided $1.2B in research, development, testing, and evaluation
(RDT&E) and Procurement Marine Corps (PMC) funding through FY26 to support
the development and procurement of 56 LRF launchers, C2 and support equipment,
and 152 Tomahawk (TLAM and MST) missiles. The FY24 budget request for LRF
is $142 million.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVALUATION (RDT&E)

This year, we will invest heavily in the next generation of RDT&E efforts. We are
placing an emphasis on the future of Marine aviation, JADC2, persistent sensing,
and contested logistics, while expanding our experimentation efforts. With the sup-
port of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering’s

---

39
Joint Capability Technology Demonstration office, we will begin the Long-Range At-
tack Munition (LRAM) project, to rapidly develop and field a low-cost, air launched,
family of loitering and swarming munitions. The LRAM can be employed by not just
H–1s and F–35s, but also palletized and employed from MV–22s, CH–53Ks, and C–
130s, thereby significantly expanding our magazine depth. Likewise, we have moved
out in earnest on experimentation with our capstone research and development ef-
fort, the family of integrated targeting cells (FITC). FITC accelerates the evolution
of combined arms to a new level. It fuses operations, intelligence, and fires functions
together in one center and creates the means by which the Marine Corps will be
able to participate in and control joint fires, while also gaining and maintaining per-
sistent custody of adversary targets. We will also expand our ground launched loi-
tering munitions capabilities by demonstrating a common launcher for the family
of munitions, and we continue testing a low-cost, hypersonic booster that will be in
a form factor the Marine Corps can logistically support in a contested environment.
For maritime mobility, we are also investing in our first Stern Landing Vessel (SLV)
prototypes, which are helping buy down risk and advance the Medium Landing Ship
(LSM) program. We will continue efforts to develop a medium-sized, uncrewed logis-
tics aircraft and will begin small boat experimentation to determine the future of
our surface reconnaissance capabilities.
FORCE DESIGN EXPERIMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF CONTESTED LOGISTICS

The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, in close collaboration with both the
Navy and III MEF, is currently experimenting with more than a dozen new tech-
nologies and potential future capabilities focused on enabling logistics in a contested
environment. These operational experiments include well-known capabilities such as
the SLV and wing-in-ground-effect (WIG) craft, as well as lesser-known, emerging
capabilities such as the autonomous low-profile vessel (ALPV). Based on our existing
experimentation plans, operational experimentation with these and other capabili-
ties will continue over the next 3 years and inform future capability investment de-
cisions.
FORCE DESIGN EXPERIMENTATION WITH LITTORAL MOBILITY

Mobility is a key characteristic to the dispersion and persistence of stand-in
forces. In the case of the Indo-Pacific, littoral mobility will be essential to our ability
to maneuver through the complex geography of the region. We recognized this capa-
bility gap early in the design process and identified the LSM as a mechanism to
transport Marines in this unique maritime environment.
Medium Landing Ship (LSM): Distinct, yet complementary to traditional L-Class
amphibious warfare ships, the LSM is purpose-built to provide tactical maneuver for
regimental sized units, forward-deployed naval forces, and other expeditionary ad-
vanced base-enabling forces operating within contested environments. The LSM is
a maneuver asset, and as a shore-to-shore connector, is unique and critical to expe-
ditionary littoral mobility. It will facilitate campaigning and support diverse mis-
sions such as security cooperation, humanitarian assistance/disaster relief (HA/DR),
and logistics support. While not optimized for any one threat or region, we envision
the LSM being of particular utility in the maritime gray zone contests omnipresent
in the Indo-Pacific. Given its size and characteristics, this vessel could be employed
with a lower risk of escalation than larger platforms.
After extensive research and wargaming, we calculated a need for nine LSMs to
support a single regimental sized unit. The DoN’s Amphibious Force Requirements
Study over the last 2 years validated this number, articulating a requirement of no
fewer than 18 LSMs to support littoral maneuver. Given that current force structure
plans call for three MLRs, we require 35 LSMs to account for operational avail-
ability and mobility for those units. We anticipate an initial request for 18 of the
35 LSMs we seek will be a step toward enabling us to more effectively counter ad-
versaries’ strategies, support and reinforce alliances and partnerships, and do so at
a relatively low cost.
Despite focusing our efforts over the past 3 years on deterring, competing, and
if necessary, contesting the pacing challenge, the Marine Corps will not fully realize
the capabilities of the MLR until we have the littoral mobility assets that enable
these forces. The decision to delay LSM procurement from FY22 to FY25 was a set-
back in our ability to bring this capability online within an operationally relevant
timeframe. As Marines do best, we have adapted to this challenge and are devel-
oping bridging solutions to experiment with LCU–1700s and leased Expeditionary
Fast Transports (T–EPF) and SLVs. While these platforms will inform the eventual
employment of the LSM, they will fall short of desired capabilities if called upon
in an operational setting. Our modernized expeditionary forces need a comparably

---

40
modern mobility platform to bring the full weight of their capability to bear on com-
petitors or adversaries, particularly in littoral regions.
FORCE DESIGN CAMPAIGN OF LEARNING

Marine Corps Wargaming and Analysis Center (MCWAC): Wargames play an es-
sential role in concept development and operational planning, and provide the basis
for informed decisionmaking. The Marine Corps is undergoing a shift from human-
driven to technology-enabled processes that will provide disproportionate benefits—
not only to the Service, but the joint force writ large.
Upon completion in 2024, the MCWAC in Quantico will provide a state-of-the-art
facility designed to help decision-makers better visualize the threat environment,
gain competitive advantages over adversaries, and simulate future operating envi-
ronments. It will also provide data that informs force development, force manage-
ment, and system functionality. Simulations will support existing and developing
weapons platforms and capabilities in all regions of the globe.
MCWAC will incorporate elements of artificial intelligence and machine learning
to amplify decision accuracy on issues that determine the way we organize, train,
and equip for the future fight. This facility will also provide a critical asset to the
joint force and senior leadership currently unavailable in the National Capital Re-
gion. Its location facilitates participation by joint, interagency, and multinational or-
ganizations, in addition to Service-specific analysis.
Lessons Learned: Between July 2019 and December 2022, we executed 25
wargames. This calendar year, we will conduct another 9 wargames and welcome
the participation of any Member, or their staff, interested in observing. These
wargames will primarily focus on two subjects: (1) reconnaissance and counter-re-
connaissance, and (2) III MEF deployment and sustainment during major combat
operations.
One of the persistent lessons from our wargames is that our current logistics con-
cepts and capabilities are not optimized for maritime campaigns in a contested envi-
ronment. Improving joint and combined logistics integration, and streamlining logis-
tics C2, are critical areas for further planning and development. The number and
capabilities of current logistics distribution platforms are insufficient to adequately
deploy, maneuver, and sustain stand-in forces. Due to geographical distribution of
forces, all Services will be challenged to meet their sustainment requirements. This
suggests the Marine Corps will have reduced access to connecters under the oper-
ational control of the other Services.
Our learning is continuous, and we have already refined some of our initial Force
Design decisions based on that learning. For example, when we initially reduced the
number of cannon batteries, we assumed that the existing 6-gun per battery model
would be sufficient to meet requirements. After additional study, we decided to ex-
pand those batteries back to their original, pre-2015, 8-gun structure and added
back two batteries. Next, we initially assessed 10-plane fighter-attack squadrons
(VMFA) as the operationally suitable and sustainable approach for the future force.
After multiple studies, a series of experiments and wargames, and emergent capa-
bilities development, we know the 10-plane model requires redress and are under-
taking that effort now. Likewise, initial assessments of our heavy-lift helicopter ca-
pacity demonstrated we could cut several squadrons; yet real-world considerations
have resulted in a modification to our original plans and restoration of some of that
structure and capacity.
AMPHIBIOUS WARFARE SHIPS

Achieving the priorities of the National Defense Strategy requires a Navy that
creates advantage for the joint force across the competition continuum. Sustaining
and recapitalizing our nuclear deterrent and nuclear command, control, and commu-
nications systems; enhancing and expanding our undersea advantage; and creating
advanced naval expeditionary forces that consist of all classes of ships and are capa-
ble of persisting and prevailing against any threat, are all things we must do now.
We cannot create and sustain this force on the time horizons necessary to achieve
competition and deterrence objectives without a significant expansion of our defense
industrial base, which is currently organized for peacetime efficiency. We are a mar-
itime nation that requires naval forces capable of answering the Nation’s call, when-
ever or wherever that might be. Amphibious warfare ships are, and will continue
to be, a critical component of the Nation’s fleet. They provide an essential capability
to the joint force that cannot be overstated. As the amphibious fleet requirement
authority, as designated in the FY23 NDAA, it is my obligation to ensure this Com-
mittee is aware of the current status of your amphibious fleet.

---

41
Secretary of the Navy Amphibious Ship Studies: Since 2019, three DoN studies
have examined amphibious warfare ship force structure requirements. Combining
the findings of those studies with amphibious warfare ship readiness trends over
the past 10 years and projected ship availability rates, I conclude that the Nation
requires no fewer than 31 traditional amphibious warfare ships (10 LHA/LHD and
21 LPDs/LSDs) to ensure the warfighting readiness and responsiveness of amphib-
ious naval forces.
The Importance of Amphibious Warfare Ships and the ARG/MEU: Our Nation’s
amphibious warfare ships enable Marines to execute three essential missions in
support of the National Defense Strategy. First, unlike traditional surface combat-
ants whose role is to sink enemy surface combatants and submarines or destroy
enemy aircraft and missiles, amphibious warfare ships are meant to project the na-
tional power of the United States globally as both a warning to our adversaries and
as a visible sign of our commitment to allies and partners. Our defense strategy
clearly identifies those allies and partners as a source of our strategic advantage.
As Secretary Austin has previously stated, we ‘‘need resources matched to strategy,
strategy matched to policy, and policy matched to the will of the American people.’’
Our strategic aims are clear: we must deter any act or activity intended to disrupt
the rules-based international order. Our strategy is to not fight unless necessary;
we seek only to deter conflict. Effective integrated deterrence requires amphibious
warfare ships. More so than any other Marine Corps operation, activity, or invest-
ment, amphibious warfare ships with embarked Marines provide a flexible, scalable,
and visible capability for our combatant commanders to employ at the time and
place of their choosing in support of integrated deterrence campaigning.
Second, amphibious warfare ships enable Marines to immediately respond to cri-
sis or contingency. When the Japanese nuclear reactor in Fukushima was damaged
by an earthquake in 2011, an amphibious Task Force responded immediately. Non-
combatant evacuations in Lebanon, the response to Hurricane Katrina in New Orle-
ans, the rescue of downed U.S. aircrew in contested areas, and numerous other situ-
ations around the world have all required an amphibious response, either due to
lack of inland access or a determination that a large U.S. military footprint ashore
would exacerbate an already dire situation.
Third, amphibious warfare ships and their embarked Marines ensure the Presi-
dent and his ambassadors, as well as all U.S. citizens living outside the United
States, have the on-call crisis response protection required to ensure their safety.
Whether in Haiti, Venezuela, South Sudan, Yemen, Eswatini, or anywhere else on
the globe, MEUs are ready to respond and protect. We must maintain forward-de-
ployed ARG/MEUs with the operational reach to rapidly respond to our highest
threat consulates and embassies globally. Marines forward-deployed aboard ships
are the operationally desirable solution.
Lastly, the 31 combined amphibious warfare ships are vital components of our
Nation’s seven ARG/MEUs. This number of ships allows the Nation to maintain at
least two ARG/MEUs at sea, with the option to surge to five. Assuming our present
trajectory, we will fall below the congressionally mandated floor of 31 amphibious
warfare ships. From my perspective, this is a result of divesting these platforms
faster than we are procuring their replacements. The result of not meeting this re-
quirement became most acutely visible when we were unable to provide traditional
disaster-relief response following the earthquake in Turkey earlier this year. Our
ARG/MEU deployments are a visible sign of commitment to our allies and partners
and provide evidence to the PRC of our readiness to contest any malign activities.
They also provide a visible sign to Russia about our commitment to NATO. In fact,
when the Prime Minister and Minister of Defense for Sweden wanted to send a
clear signal to Russia regarding Sweden’s intention to join NATO, they did so by
making a statement on the flight deck of the USS Kearsarge—a Wasp-class amphib-
ious assault ship.
LPD Flight II Program: The PRC is accelerating their production of amphibious
warfare ships. We cannot overlook the fact that since 2019, the People’s Liberation
Army Navy (PLAN) has launched three Type 075 ‘‘LHA-like’’ and three Type 071
‘‘LPD-like’’ amphibious warfare ships. The PLAN intends to launch an additional
five Type 075 ’’LHA-like’’ amphibious warfare ships in the next 5 years. It appears
that the PLAN sees amphibious warfare ships as highly relevant and a critical in-
strument in power projection as evidenced by their recent deployments extending
beyond the South China Sea. In my opinion, there is also a soft power component
to our amphibious warfare ships that cannot be replaced by other platforms. It is
obvious the PRC is learning this lesson and is pursuing their own amphibious war-
fare ship program as a competitive act.
Next, an LPD’s or any other amphibious warfare ship’s vulnerability to an anti-
ship missile is no more relevant to its value than an aircraft’s vulnerability to being

---

42
shot down is relevant to its value. Over 5,000 helicopters were destroyed during the
Vietnam War, yet we do not hear persistent arguments related to their surviv-
ability. In a recent series of wargames held by the Center for Strategic and Inter-
national Studies, 2 carriers and 10—20 destroyers and cruisers were sunk in the
Pacific during each of the 24 iterations. Just as these wargames do not signal the
irrelevance of these surface warships, conjecture about the survivability of amphib-
ious warfare ships does not either. Instead of focusing exclusively on the surviv-
ability of platforms in a high-end fight, we should instead seek an appropriate bal-
ance of capabilities needed to effectively campaign and maintain deterrence with
those capabilities optimized for major war. As evidenced by constant year cost, the
LPD Flight II is the most effective and affordable answer until a follow-on amphib-
ious warfare ship is developed.
FORCE DESIGN AND MARINE FORCES RESERVE

The Marine Innovation Unit (MIU), manned by Marine Reservists, was recently
established aboard Stewart Air National Guard Base in New York. This cutting-
edge unit will make considerable contributions by focusing Marine talent toward ac-
celerated identification and adoption of advanced capabilities, transforming naval
service capacity for technology employment, and retaining and investing in human
capital. MIU is expanding Marine Corps reach into the wider innovation ecosystem
and developing key partnerships with the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), NavalX,
Army Futures Command, and others to increase tempo and progress toward Force
Design objectives.
The MIU is just the beginning. We continue to explore the efficacy of establishing
a maritime reconnaissance capability within our Reserve Component (RC) as part
of our larger multi-domain reconnaissance initiatives across the force. We are cur-
rently evaluating the potential to establish a reserve MQ–9 squadron, as well as re-
serve augmentation detachments with active duty squadrons.
In addition to its role supporting Force Design, Marine Forces Reserve
(MARFORRES) continues to function as both an operational and strategic reserve
to augment and reinforce the Active Component (AC). In 2022, more than 1,100 Ma-
rines and Sailors activated to support Operation ALLIES WELCOME (OAW),
honing their security and humanitarian relief skills. From that activation, 103 Ma-
rines volunteered to deploy to OAW-Kosovo aboard Camp Bondsteel. Finally, as the
Service brought new capabilities online during FY22, MARFORRES provided High
Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and Amphibious Assault Vehicle
(AAV) rotations in support of USINDOPACOM requirements. This augmentation
enabled the AC to execute Force Design experimentation and unit transitions with-
out an impact on combatant commands. The Marine Corps’ continued employment
of the RC demonstrates our total force approach and has proven to be a critical com-
ponent of force modernization efforts.
FORCE DESIGN AND MARINE SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES

As part of the larger Force Design effort, our Marine special operations forces are
modernizing through their Next Generation Raider Force (NGRF) initiative. The
NGRF is intended to implement the strategic shaping and reconnaissance (SSR) op-
erating concept, and its two major sub-components—irregular warfare and special
reconnaissance, both focused in the littoral regions of the globe. In a manner con-
sistent with other Marine forces, MARSOC seeks to provide the joint force with the
capability to shape the operating environment; illuminate adversary actions, activi-
ties, and intentions; and provide options to impose cost, both kinetically and non-
kinetically, from competition to conflict.
TALENT MANAGEMENT

Talent Management 2030 (TM2030) directed accelerated personnel reforms and
oriented the Service toward retaining more experienced Marines. In February 2022,
I directed the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps to form a Talent Manage-
ment Strategy Group to align and harmonize Service-wide talent management ef-
forts. This group focuses on future demographics, economic, and human capital
trends, while working with academia, research organizations, pertinent departments
in HQMC, and commanders in the FMF to identify initiatives that will better align
individual abilities, skills, and desires with the warfighting needs of the Service.
Since the release of TM2030, we have better aligned departments and organizations
involved in talent management, assessed, and mapped out interdependencies of
total force personnel policies, and begun to generate momentum with a sense of ur-
gency. Leveraging authorities previously enabled by Congress, we enacted nine ini-
tiatives in 2022, which we will expand and accelerate in 2023:

---

43
Commandant’s Retention Program (CRP): During FY23, the CRP offered pre-ap-
proved reenlistments to top-performing Marines by streamlining the process and
giving priority access to primary military occupational specialty (MOS) monitors for
duty station and assignment options. The CRP resulted in a 72 percent increase of
first-term reenlistment submissions by top-performing Marines with the average re-
enlistment approval accomplished in 24 to 48 hours, much quicker than the previous
norm. Going forward we will expand the program to more first-term Marines as well
as our career force.
Staff Non-Commissioned Officer (SNCO) Promotion Board Realignment: Begin-
ning in FY24, we are realigning SNCO promotion boards to sequence more effec-
tively with the assignments and reenlistment processes. This initiative will reduce
SNCO billet gaps in the FMF and decrease the processing time of reenlistment
packages. The realignment will provide greater predictability for SNCOs and their
families while dramatically reducing the number of permanent change of station
(PCS) moves across the force.
Recruiting Station Commanding Officer Selection Board: We implemented two ini-
tiatives for the fiscal year 23 Recruiting Station Commanding Officer (RSCO) selec-
tion board. First, officers now have the opportunity to volunteer for command, in-
cluding officers otherwise not scheduled for consideration. Second, officers may also
request removal from RSCO consideration for 1 year, without penalty, should they
prefer to complete a deployment or other professional obligation, or due to a per-
sonal life circumstance.
Special Duty Assignment (SDA) Volunteer Program: Prior to 2022, we screened
and selected Marines for Special Duty Assignments en masse. But last year, we
launched a pilot SDA volunteer program, expanding incentives to provide duty sta-
tion preference for volunteer recruiters, drill instructors, and combat instructors. As
a result, volunteers increased by 62 percent, reducing the number of involuntarily
screened Marines by 38 percent. This minimized disruption to our Marines, their
families, and FMF units while also reducing SDA school attrition. We will improve
and expand this program in 2023.
MarineView 360–Degree Leadership Review: MarineView360 is a development tool
for leaders that helps Marines identify their strengths, personal blind spots, and
areas for focused improvement through the polling of their supervisors, peers, and
subordinates. Leaders receive feedback and advice through a dedicated mentor and
coach. The MarineView360 pilot began with a group of 150 sitting commanders and
is now leveraging the experience of 200 additional selected commanders and senior
enlisted advisors. The final phase of the pilot will expand to 1,000 Marines of vary-
ing rank from gunnery sergeant to colonel.
Officer Promotion Opt-Out: Starting in 2022, both the AC and RC offered certain
officer populations the ability to opt-out of consideration for promotion once without
penalty. This allowed officers increased flexibility in their career paths to pursue
unconventional career experiences or formal education that would otherwise take
them off track for key developmental assignments. We are currently exploring the
expansion of this initiative to enlisted Marines to afford them the same flexibility
in their careers.
Digital Boardroom 2.0 (DBR 2.0): DBR 2.0 increases the functionality and accu-
racy of information presented to board members, enhances the conduct of virtual
boards, safeguards data, and improves this critical talent management process. The
Enlisted Career Retention and Reserve Aviation boards successfully used DBR 2.0
in 2022. With the availability of cloud-based data, we will expand use of DBR 2.0
while simultaneously assessing the outcomes, cost and time savings, and profes-
sional depth and breadth of board members to benchmark with our legacy process.
Separate Competitive Promotion Categories: To meet the demands of the future,
the Marine Corps must retain the highest quality officers with the necessary skill
sets at all ranks. To that end, we are exploring options to reorganize the unre-
stricted officer population into separate competitive categories to better meet the
Marine Corps’ needs for diverse expertise and experience at all ranks by competing
for promotion with peers having similar skill sets, training, and education. We will
conduct a pilot program to evaluate the merits of this reorganization during the
2025 field grade officer promotion boards.
Career Intermission Program (CIP): Many Marines desire to pursue specialized
education, or to focus on family for a significant life event. The CIP is an initial
step toward allowing Marines an option to temporarily pause their active-duty serv-
ice and later resume their careers without penalty. This program enables career
flexibility, and in doing so, also encourages retention of experienced, talented Ma-
rines.

---

44
TALENT MANAGEMENT WAY-AHEAD

Manpower Information Technology System Modernization (MITSM): In February
2022, Deputy Commandant, Manpower and Reserve Affairs (DC, M&RA), created a
business capability requirements document that outlines the capabilities required to
begin the MITSM acquisition process. MITSM will aggregate legacy systems and ca-
pabilities into a device-agnostic, data-driven, and dynamic human resources infor-
mation technology solution that meets the evolving needs of the Marine Corps’ tal-
ent-based work force. One aspect of the MITSM will be a web-based ‘‘talent market-
place,’’ which will enable a collaborative and transparent assignment process and
increase the role of both commanders and individual Marines. This capability will
help us better align the talent of individuals with the needs of the Service to maxi-
mize the performance of both. Despite its criticality to modernizing our talent man-
agement systems and processes, MITSM is currently challenged by the acquisition
process.
Potential Implementation of ‘‘Indefinite End of Active Service’’ Policy for Enlisted
Personnel: As we seek to mature the force, we also seek to eliminate antiquated
processes and policies that induce both friction within the personnel system as well
as personal and familial stress. There is little reason why those who have served
honorably for 16∂ years need to worry about re-enlistment before completing twen-
ty-years of service. This year, we will explore the feasibility of senior SNCO career
designation to establish an indefinite expiration of active service. This shift will
align senior SNCO retention practices with those of officers, increase flexibility in
assignments, reduce administrative burden and needless paperwork, and minimize
uncertainty for SNCOs and their families.
Small Unit Leader Initiative: Under the current policy, first-term Marines are in-
eligible for promotion to sergeant. While the spirit of that policy is reasonable, it
creates a disincentive to the highest performing Marines across the force by estab-
lishing an administrative obstacle they cannot overcome regardless of individual tal-
ent. Going forward, if one of our talented Marines with at least 36-months of service
wishes to re-enlist, then that Marine will become eligible for promotion to sergeant
upon their re-enlistment. This program will incentivize the most talented who desire
to stay for another enlistment and should help mitigate the persistent need for ser-
geants across the FMF.
Active and Reserve Permeability: During the next year, we will explore options to
increase the permeability between the AC and RC. The aim is to better match the
diverse—and often immediate—operational needs of AC commanders with the spe-
cialized skills of individual Marines in the RC. Due to statutory limitations on re-
serve employment, we will work with the Administration to identify potential oppor-
tunities for improvement to AC–RC permeability.
Orders Issuance: In an attempt to give individuals and their families as much
time as possible when executing a PCS move, we will increasingly attempt to issue
orders up to twelve months before the execution date. We will also assess the feasi-
bility of issuing follow-on assignment orders to those individuals selected for resi-
dent professional military education. This should do two things. First, it should pro-
vide greater clarity to service members and their families to facilitate proper plan-
ning for any school transitions, childcare needs, and special healthcare needs, and
will provide spouses more time to secure desirable employment. Second, earlier
issuance of orders would allow the Service to clarify a unit’s incoming personnel pic-
ture to increase long-term planning, effectiveness, and risk management.
Five-Year Orders: The importance of unit cohesion cannot be overstated. To
achieve that cohesion, we need to shift from a three-year tour model toward a five-
year tour model—with notable exceptions for some of locations such as Okinawa,
Japan and Twentynine Palms, California. In addition to creating greater unit cohe-
sion and, as a result, greater readiness, a five-year model would facilitate improve-
ments to family stability and family readiness. Using the standard twenty-year ca-
reer timeline, the new assignment length would only require a family to relocate
three times after the initial assignment. This suggested tour length should enable
children to finish elementary or secondary school in one location, and would enable
extended periods of spouse employment—minimizing the impacts on dual-income
households.
Assignment Incentive Pay/Hardship Duty Pay: Congress and the Department
have provided us with the authorities necessary to incentivize service at some of the
more challenging duty stations and we have a plan to use them. We will increas-
ingly utilize Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP)—consistent with the other services—
to increase the attractiveness of hard-to-fill duty stations. Notably, Army soldiers
stationed at Fort Irwin, California or in Korea, have many of the same concerns as
our Marines at Twentynine Palms and Okinawa. In addition to AIP, we are explor-

---

45
ing other authorities provided by Congress, to incentivize duty by our most talented
Marines in our hardest-to-place locations.
Weapons Systems Officers (WSO) & Electronic Countermeasures Officers (ECMO):
As we transition from the F/A–18D and EA–6B to the F–35, we will have the oppor-
tunity to transition some of our most talented Naval Flight Officers (NFOs) cur-
rently serving as WSOs and ECMOs into our expanded uncrewed aircraft squadrons
(VMUs). At present, we have 95 WSOs and 32 ECMOs. While the legacy aircraft
these officers were previously associated with are being retired, their individual
skills remain critical to the future force.
Attracting, developing, incentivizing, and retaining dedicated professionals that
increase our readiness and lethality is a priority and necessary to improve our effi-
cacy as a force. The initiatives undertaken since the publication of TM2030 dem-
onstrate our commitment to our expeditionary warfighting legacy and our drive to
fight and win in 2030 and beyond. Our performance in future battles will be defined
by the investments we make in our Marine Corps today. All actions to evolve our
talent management system are aimed squarely at supporting our warfighting re-
quirements. They will incentivize and optimize our talent and sustain our ability
to serve as the Nation’s premier expeditionary force in readiness within the rapidly
evolving world we face.
RECRUITING AND RETENTION

The Marine Corps is not insulated from the challenging recruiting and retention
environment impacting the entire DoD. The FY24 budget supports an active-duty
end strength of 172,300 Marines, an achievable target. The Marine Corps will mon-
itor and reevaluate end strength, even as we continue to increase retention as part
of our Talent Management strategy. We appreciate the support and flexibility that
Congress provides us on retirement, retention, and end strength.
In 2022, we achieved our annual recruiting mission and exceeded both our first-
term re-enlistment goal (101 percent) and our subsequent-term re-enlistment goal
(107 percent). To put this in perspective, 5,063 first-term Marines re-enlisted in
2018, while 5,820 re-enlisted in 2022. Further, we are re-enlisting those Marines
earlier. In FY22, the Service met its First Term Alignment Program (FTAP) mission
on 8 July 2022, which at the time was considered a major accomplishment. In fiscal
year 23, we met our FTAP mission of 6,225 Marines on 6 February 2023—a full 6
months earlier—and retained higher quality Marines than we have in the last few
years.
The Marine Corps met or exceeded both our FTAP and Subsequent Term Align-
ment Program (STAP) goals across the force for the first time in 13 years. In FY23,
we expanded early re-enlistment authorizations for Marines with at least 24
months’ time in service from 200 to 600. We reached 150 in the first weekend, and
then reached 200 (last year’s total) within three weeks. We then expanded this pro-
gram to accommodate the 700∂ submissions we had received by 1 February this
year. Completing these early re-enlistments will help mitigate any recruiting chal-
lenges across a two-year period (FY25–27). In FY23, we satisfied our retention goal
of infantry Marines before December for the first time in over a decade. As a result
of these retention efforts, we are gradually maturing the force. This will result in
more mature non-commissioned officers leading our youngest Marines and will gen-
erate better operational outcomes on the modern battlefield.
As noted by RAND economist Dr. Beth Asch, we should never forget that we do
not have an all-volunteer-force; but rather, a predominantly all-recruited force. To
overcome current challenges in recruiting, we have challenged all assumptions. We
have also resurrected and reviewed ideas and options previously generated over the
years, but never actioned or implemented. The results have been very promising.
While some assumed five year ‘‘infantry-only’’ contracts would not be well re-
ceived, that assumption has been invalidated. During the past year, we conducted
a limited experiment in which we offered recruits a 60-month infantry-only contract.
This 400-spot program ‘‘sold out’’ immediately and was subsequently expanded to
accommodate the demand. Infantry-only contracts ensure unit cohesion and almost
guarantee Marines two deployments in a single contract, mitigating unit turnover
between deployments. Since the completion of that pilot program, we continue to
find that our young Marines prefer the stability afforded by these 60-month con-
tracts and are choosing this option over 48-month contract options.
Some assumptions related to the utility of monetary incentives have also been in-
validated. Big sums of money are not required to incentivize potential Marine re-
cruits. This past year, we implemented a $5,000 shipping bonus program for new
enlistees with great success. In exchange for this one-time payment, we direct ship-
ping at a date of our choosing, which gives us greater predictability and flexibility.

---

46
This experiment was very successful. We also implemented a $9,000 shipping bonus
program with similar success. In exchange for this one-time payment, the individ-
ual’s contract time does not officially begin until they arrive at their first unit. As
a result, those in this program that become infantry Marines will average 2 deploy-
ments during their first contract, because their initial 7 months of entry-level train-
ing will not count towards their obligated service.
Finally, we want to make the statement, ‘‘there is always boat-space for talent,’’
a truism across the Marine Corps. In the past, talented individuals were denied re-
enlistment due to ‘‘closed’’ MOSs or other administrative obstacles beyond their con-
trol, such as an inability to transition from an MOS they didn’t choose or perhaps
never wanted. These talented Marines want to re-enlist, but they also want a new
(primary MOS) PMOS. The ability to ‘‘laterally move’’ talent into a new PMOS is
an obstacle at present, but we are working on this issue. This is a training issue,
not a personnel issue. Regardless, we are not going to let 8–12 weeks of retraining
costs prevent us from benefiting from the talents and leadership of these proven
Marines for another 4 years or more of service. If we must choose between proven
leadership and MOS credibility, we will prioritize proven leadership for a greater
return-on-investment. Retraining costs less than the $42,000 cost to recruit a Ma-
rine. While recruiting will remain challenging for the foreseeable future, the Marine
Corps is up to the challenge. But there is one option that we will not exercise: we
will not lower our standards. This is non-negotiable. Despite the well-known recruit-
ing challenges in recent years, from 2018 and 2022, the average Armed Forces Qual-
ification Test (AFQT) and average General Technical (GT) scores of our infantry Ma-
rines (0311s) have actually increased across the force.
CHILDCARE

Addressing the availability of childcare remains a top priority for the Service. Un-
fortunately, persistent supply and demand imbalances have resulted in unaccept-
able wait times for our Marine families. At present, there are notable waitlists for
full-time childcare at Marine Corps Base (MCB) Quantico, MCB Camp Lejeune,
MCB Camp Pendleton, and MCB Hawaii. These locations still maintain approxi-
mately 77%of the Service’s unmet waitlist for ages six weeks to 5 years. This is pri-
marily due to a shortage of qualified workers, high turnover due to less competitive
pay, lengthy hiring and background check processes, seasonal PCS fluctuations, and
facility renovations. While we have capacity to serve 6,523 children at present, we
only have sufficient staff to serve 5,880 children. To provide a variety of options that
fit families’ needs and to mitigate lengthy Child Development Center (CDC)
waitlists, we also offer fee assistance for eligible Marines who are geographically re-
mote, reside more than 15 miles from an installation, or are assigned to an installa-
tion with a lengthy CDC waitlist.
In 2022, with the support of OSD Office of Military Family Readiness Policy, we
established the Child Care in Your Home (CCYH) Pilot Program. CCYH is a DoD
fee assistance pilot program that helps military families cover the cost of full-time
childcare (30–60 hours per week) provided in their homes.
Designed to support families with non-traditional work schedules, care can be pro-
vided every day of the week and during non-traditional hours, such as evenings and
weekends, or on rotating schedules. At present, we maintain 58 childcare facilities
(32 CDCs and 26 school-aged care facilities). Renovations are currently in-progress
aboard MCB Quantico and Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Beaufort. We recently
completed a $37.7M construction project aboard MCAS Miramar, which will provide
412 new childcare spaces to our families. In addition, we have construction planned
aboard MCB Butler in Okinawa for a new school-aged care facility, aboard Camp
Pendleton for a new CDC that will add 250 additional spaces, and aboard MCB
Camp Blaz in Guam to satisfy the needs of 276 children in the future.
SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION

The Marine Corps’ Substance Abuse Program focuses on three distinct areas: drug
demand reduction, alcohol misuse prevention, and substance misuse non-medical
counseling services. As part of our continued vigilance, we have expanded our uri-
nalysis testing to include both illicit and prescription drugs, including the most mis-
used and abused opiates. One hundred percent of urine samples are now tested for
fentanyl. Additionally, due to a regrettable resurgence in lysergic acid diethylamide
(LSD) in some of the communities surrounding our major bases and stations, we
added LSD testing back to the standard drug testing panel. Delta-8
tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) was also added to the standard drug testing panel in
July 2021, expanding testing for THC products. THC remains the most prevalent
drug detected during our testing. While expansion in testing did result in an in-

---

47
crease in positive test results, the Marine Corps remains below the DoD benchmark
for positive test results and current data indicates that prescription drug misuse is
low.
SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

As a Service, we have focused on countering sexual assault within our ranks by
professionalizing the prevention workforce, improving training for Marines at all
levels, professionalizing the sexual assault response workforce, and strengthening
an environment of accountability by establishing an Office Special Trial Counsel. As
of January, our newly established Office of Special Trial Counsel reached IOC and
is on track to reach FOC by December 2023, putting prosecutorial discretion for
these offenses in the hands of trained attorneys. In addition to these efforts, the Ma-
rine Corps continues to implement the recommendations of the Independent Review
Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, as approved by the Secretary of De-
fense. These efforts include developing organizational structure, hiring qualified pro-
fessionals, and ensuring our prevention workforce is trained and postured to provide
this crucial support to commanders. We are also investing in education to enable
prevention, focusing on leadership responsibilities to both prevent and respond to
sexual assault and sexual harassment, and providing training for trauma-informed
leadership. While this larger societal problem persists, we are actively pursuing so-
lutions to improve prevention and ensure offender accountability when prevention
efforts fail.
SUICIDE PREVENTION

As part of our larger human performance management efforts, we continue to ex-
amine our mental health programs and suicide prevention efforts. Every life lost to
suicide is one too many. As an organization known for our camaraderie, we take
every loss of life seriously and continue to pursue all opportunities to reduce the
incidence of suicide amongst our Marines, Sailors, and their family members.
The Secretary of Defense recently released a report from the Suicide Prevention
and Response Independent Review Committee. The committee concluded that the
most important preventative measure is engaged quality leadership, and we agree.
This has long been a focus of ours, as have many of the recommended personnel
reforms, which mirror our on-going talent management initiatives. We also embrace
the Committee’s conclusions about the criticality of access to mental healthcare pro-
fessionals and services, and their recommendations related to TRICARE reform to
enable such access.
HEALTHCARE

Developmental Pediatricians: Generating ready forces requires building and sus-
taining readiness at-home among our military families. Military service is demand-
ing. Extended training, frequent military moves, and routine deployments—sched-
uled and unscheduled—strain marriages and stress families, regardless of a Ma-
rine’s rank or time-in-service. That stress is magnified in cases where children have
special medical needs, such as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Regrettably, we
are currently unable to provide sufficient developmental pediatric care across the
force, even in areas where we enjoy highly developed military healthcare infrastruc-
ture, such as San Diego or the National Capital Region. Parents are often forced
to wait 6 months or longer for an appointment. This is not acceptable. The scholar-
ship is clear and undisputed: early intervention is the key to better outcomes for
children with ASD. Today, we have four active duty and three civilian develop-
mental-behavioral pediatricians to support the force, which is insufficient to meet
the needs of our families. The force requires at least two developmental- behavioral
pediatricians per medical treatment facility to meet the needs of our families. If pro-
viding these additional developmental pediatricians is considered unsupportable,
then we would ask for Congress’ support in creating legislation to make it easier
for families requiring this care to obtain it from the civilian market. Parents should
not be forced to choose between their profession and calling to serve, and their need
to provide for their families.
Defense Health Agency (DHA): The DHA has undertaken the largest trans-
formation in the history of the military health system. From the lens of providing
support to service members and families, this undertaking has failed to satisfy ex-
pectations, and has resulted in both unsustainable costs and degraded services.
While the DHA is maturing in its role as a combat support agency (CSA), the lack
of agreement between the DHA and military departments regarding DHA’s roles
and responsibilities as a CSA, as well as business rules governing employment of
uniformed personnel inside the medical treatment facilities (MTFs), has created sig-

---

48
nificant challenges. This problem is compounded by a recent exodus of military and
civilian healthcare professionals due to ‘‘burn out’’ from the COVID–19 pandemic
and operational tempo, the ability to double or even triple salaries in the civilian
sector, and uncertainty and frustration over the DHA transition.Due to the nation-
wide shortage, the DoD is competing for the same finite resources when attempting
to hire contract healthcare professionals. Unfortunately, the DoD contract pay rate
is near the lowest, if not the lowest, in the industry, making recruitment particu-
larly challenging.
In terms of improving the affordability of healthcare as promised, these cost sav-
ings have not been realized. In fact, the transition has come with higher costs. An
additional undesired outcome of the movement away from Service authority, direc-
tion, and control of healthcare delivery is the lack of consideration for Service-spe-
cific requirements and the impact to healthcare operations. Specifically, in remote
locations such as Okinawa and Iwakuni, decisions to reduce access to care inside
MTFs has negatively impacted dependents and civilian personnel, which impacts
operational readiness.
I ask for your continued oversight of the DHA and help in addressing the over-
whelming gap between DoD contract healthcare labor rates and the civilian market.
The success of the military health system (MHS) requires the ability to hire quali-
fied, civilian healthcare labor. The MHS must have contract rates that can compete
in a highly competitive market for a finite and highly valuable resource. Failure to
remedy this issue will have catastrophic consequences on the readiness of the force.
TRAINING AND EDUCATION

The Marine Corps enjoys a hard-earned reputation as a learning organization.
The previous 3 years of Service-level training exercises, along with other large and
small exercises, wargames, and live force experiments, established a sound founda-
tion for organizational learning. Collectively, they provided clear evidence that
change is required. We have learned that today’s training and education system
must rapidly evolve to prepare individual Marines and units to succeed on an all-
domain battlefield. Those changes are articulated in the recently published Training
and Education 2030 report.
Training and Education and the Russo-Ukraine Conflict: While the future re-
mains uncertain, clear trends are emerging from the conflict in Ukraine that are
consistent with much of what we have seen in other recent conflicts, evidencing the
need for accelerated modernization across the joint force. However, we should not
lose sight of the fact that the Ukrainians succeeded in the early phases of the con-
flict not because of superior equipment, but because they were adaptable—especially
at the tactical level—and rapidly innovated new concepts of employment to address
specific areas where the Russians had achieved advantage. In fact, their bias for ac-
tion, unit cohesion, and emphasis on decentralized C2 had a significant impact on
the readiness of Ukraine’s infantry and maneuver forces. These factors allowed
Ukrainian battalions to effectively operate in and control battlespace we would nor-
mally associate with an Army Brigade or Marine Regimental Combat Team—units
3 or more times larger than a traditional battalion. The operational requirements
associated with these expanded areas of responsibility are placing more and more
demands upon junior leaders that can only be addressed through greater investment
in the training and education of our Marines. The conflict is demonstrating that ad-
vanced capabilities will be available and employed at much lower tactical levels
than we have witnessed in our own recent past. In future conflicts, we are going
to ask junior leaders at the company level and below to do things battalion com-
manders may not have had the authority to do in recent years. It is clear this will
require an increasing investment in the training and education of our leaders at all
levels and across the entire joint force.
DOCTRINE

Doctrine establishes the basis for developing operational concepts and require-
ments. It also describes our understanding of how those capabilities are to be em-
ployed and ultimately, details training and associated resource requirements. Ma-
rine Corps Doctrinal Publication (MCDP) 1, Warfighting, tells us that doctrine ‘‘es-
tablishes a particular way of thinking about war and a way of fighting. It also
provides . . . a mandate for professionalism, and a common language.’’ Our doc-
trine, including its bedrock in Warfighting, has given us a solid grounding in the
essential elements of maneuver warfare, upon which we expect our philosophy of
warfare to remain anchored for the foreseeable future. This is not enough. The char-
acter of warfare has always been subject to the constant and uneven pressures of
technological advance and social and geopolitical change. Warfare’s changing char-

---

49
acter means we must constantly review and revise our assumptions; they will
change and we must change with them. Doctrine, in turn, must evolve, adapt, and
keep pace. For example, in June 2022 we published MCDP 8, Information, describ-
ing how the Marine Corps gains and exploits information advantages in all
warfighting domains across the competition continuum. We also recently revised
MCDP 4, Logistics, updating our doctrinal foundation of this critical warfighting
function to meet the challenges of the future.
Changes to our warfighting ideas, theories, and concepts must be expressed clear-
ly and quickly. This leads to greater emphasis on the rapid creation and dissemina-
tion of doctrine at a level of specificity below that of our capstone publications and
tied tightly to our campaign of learning, including feedback from the FMF. Most im-
portantly, we must hold ourselves accountable for training and operating in accord-
ance with our refined doctrine.
ENHANCED INFANTRY AND LEADER TRAINING

14-week Infantry Marine Course (IMC): Before our IMC pilot effort began, the Ma-
rine Corps underwent a deliberate process to identify the infantry skills necessary
to win in a fight against a peer adversary. During this process, Training and Edu-
cation Command developed 39 behaviors required for all infantry Marines. These re-
quired behaviors range from traditional skills like employing the service rifle, pa-
trolling, and land navigation to skills such as ‘‘embodying the Marine Corps’
warfighting philosophy’’ or ‘‘manag[ing] signature.’’ Based on feedback from our divi-
sion commanders, a subset of 20 of the original 39 infantry behaviors were
prioritized as a requirement for entry-level training. Those 20 infantry behaviors be-
came the foundation for a new program of instruction (POI) and the first pilot of
the 14-week IMC.
IMC Marines are held to a much higher physical standard to both enter training
and to graduate than previously required. Marines earning the infantry MOS are
now challenged to achieve first class scores on the Physical Fitness Test (PFT) and
Combat Fitness Test (CFT), achieve a minimum swim qualification of Water Sur-
vival Intermediate (WSI), and pass an evaluation on the Shallow Water Egress
Trainer (SWET), which simulates procedures for evacuating a sinking aircraft. Stu-
dent physical graduation requirements also include a 10-kilometer (km) Combat En-
durance Assessment (CEA) and completion of a 20km hike with a 75-pound fighting
load.
In addition to better physical fitness, IMC Marines develop better decisionmaking
skills. By the end of the course, students make thousands of decisions, receiving con-
stant feedback from both combat instructors and peers, significantly increasing the
experiential foundation for sound decisionmaking. As IMC builds a better decision-
maker, it also produces a significantly more lethal Marine. IMC graduates are
trained to a markedly higher standard in rifle marksmanship and are combat capa-
ble in all environments with the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). They are fur-
ther trained in the employment of medium machine guns, grenade launchers, anti-
armor systems, and light mortars—all of which are new weapons skills for basic ri-
flemen.
Better-trained Marines generate operational tempo—a key to success in maneuver
warfare. The outcomes thus far are remarkable. IMC graduates are trained to be
quicker-thinking and better decision-makers, more physically fit, and much more le-
thal at earlier points in their careers than their predecessors. All these things
should increase the readiness of their units and the overall force. To date, 3,524 Ma-
rines have graduated from this program. While it is too early to make any definitive
conclusions, initial findings suggest IMC graduates may have lower non-EAS attri-
tion rates.
THE MODERNIZED MARINE CORPS TRAINING ENVIRONMENT (PROJECT TRIPOLI)

We train how we fight. But we are limited by the number of ranges and training
areas available, environmental limitations, airspace restrictions, and several other
factors that ensure Marines can employ the full range of capabilities they will have
at their disposal. One solution to this challenge is to expand and modernize the Ma-
rine Corps training environment (MCTE) through an effort called Project Tripoli,
which seeks the integration of the live, virtual, and constructive training domains.
The MCTE is our combined arms training concept for the future that will enable
us to realistically train and exercise with our advanced capabilities both internally
and as part of the joint force. Importantly, it permits training with capabilities in
a manner concealed from our adversaries and in ways that would otherwise be re-
source prohibitive in terms of materiel, ordnance expenditure, and personnel. The
MCTE will enable combined arms training in the broadest sense and will allow new

---

50
and expanded dimensions in force-on- force (FoF) exercise capabilities. Conceptually,
a modernized MCTE integrates all training enablers—from high-fidelity flight sim-
ulators, to ranges and training areas, to FoF training systems—into C2 architec-
tures and networks supporting training events. MCTE is not a single acquisition
program, but a system comprised of multiple training programs. To further improve
the MCTE network, we will continue to build interoperability among existing train-
ing systems as we bring new systems online, pre-designed with enabling tech-
nologies to support increasingly dynamic training environments.
Our next big step will be to field our Force-on-Force Training System (FoF–TS)
Next Program across the force to equip units with the training tools necessary to
conduct realistic and challenging FoF training. This system is designed specifically
to accommodate rapid changes and refinements in the training continuum. Addition-
ally, it will process the tremendous amounts of sensor data needed for our FoF–TS,
UAS, cyber, electronic warfare, and loitering munition capabilities to facilitate read-
iness. The FY24 budget request for training and education modernization is $581
million.
TRAINING AREAS AND RANGES

At present, ensuring sufficient range access and training in the Western Pacific
region is challenged a by a lengthy supply chain, environmental constraints, infra-
structure challenges, and access restraints. To ensure the persistent readiness of
Marines in the region, the Marine Corps has a number of planned investments
across the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Investments planned
for Guam include: a live-fire training range complex, a multi-purpose machine gun
range, and urban combat training facility, and a training support center. On Tinian,
the Marine Corps is pursuing a platoon level live-fire and maneuver range and an
explosive ordnance disposal range. These efforts are pending a positive determina-
tion of ongoing environmental impact studies. The Marine Corps is also involved in
the Pacific Multi-Domain Training and Experimentation Capability (PMTEC) initia-
tive. PMTEC will better integrate existing capabilities and expand the ranges and
training areas available to Marines, to include the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Com-
plex and the Pacific Missile Range Facility.
Training areas and ranges in Alaska continue to grow in importance to overall
Marine Corps readiness. The sophistication, instrumentation, infrastructure sup-
port, and sheer size of Alaska ranges make them indispensable for the development
of 5th generation fighter aircraft tactics. During 2022, Marines participated in four
joint exercises in Alaska, to include the high-end rehearsal exercise RED FLAG. The
Marine Corps provided 38 F–35Bs across different phases of the exercise as well as
leading edge air C2 capabilities. In 2023, we will expand our participation in exer-
cises in Alaska to include Exercises NORTHERN EDGE and ARCTIC EDGE.
While our efforts to prevent encroachment have focused on protecting the ranges
and training areas we have, modernized training requirements are going to push
us to expand training areas in multiple domains to ensure we have trained and
ready forces to meet our Nation’s needs into the future. MCAS Yuma makes an out-
sized contribution to the training readiness of Marine aviation due, in part, to the
presence of Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One (MAWTS–1) and
the conduct of the biannual Weapons and Tactics Instructor (WTI) courses. In addi-
tion to the decades long challenges associated with the location of the Yuma Fair-
grounds, the continued use of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Yuma’s Barry M.
Goldwater Range (BMGR) in support of modernized aviation training is at risk due
to the loss of Flat Tailed Horned Lizard (FTHL) habitat associated with border wall
construction. By risk we mean, the loss of habitat increases the likelihood that the
FTHL would be listed under the Endangered Species Act. Listing the FTHL could
result significant restrictions to our ability to train and experiment to meet force
design objectives. To prevent this from occurring, we need to act now to secure nec-
essary FTHL habitat and are leveraging the Readiness and Environmental Protec-
tion Integration Program as one tool to support habitat protection efforts.
In addition to physical ranges, we will also leverage a variety of virtual ranges
like the Persistent Cyber Training Environment (PCTE) for joint qualification re-
quirements and rehearsals. The PCTE integrates capabilities that support contin-
uous evolution of cyber training and exercises, enabling force readiness and driving
decisions on tactical, operational, and strategic levels. Over the past year, the PCTE
has expanded access to cyber operating forces in the FMF. We are confident that
access to these modern training environments will significantly enable the all-do-
main nature of our Marine forces.

---

51
INSTALLATIONS AND LOGISTICS

In recent years, we have identified logistics as the ‘‘pacing function’’ for
warfighting. Among the seven warfighting functions, logistics most dictates the
tempo of operations and the operational reach of a unit. No other warfighting func-
tion more profoundly affects our ability to persist in contested spaces. Moreover, lo-
gistics and sustainment capability and capacity have a deterrent effect. Persuading
an adversary that a quick win is not possible by demonstrating an ability to gen-
erate, re-generate, and sustain combat power is, in itself, a deterrent.
An uncertain future, the threat of peer and near-peer competitors, and developing
challenges in all warfighting domains create wide-ranging implications for sus-
taining the current and future force. To support emerging and future operational
requirements against peer and near-peer adversaries, we will have to transform our
approach to logistics. Simply put, we must transition from a force optimized for sup-
porting sustained operations ashore to a maritime force capable of supporting oper-
ations in austere, expeditionary, and littoral environments that are contested across
all domains. This process of change and adaption began with the release of our In-
stallations and Logistics 2030 report and our revised foundational doctrinal publica-
tion on logistics, MCDP 4.
While our current approach worked well in the past, it is insufficient to meet the
demands of the future operating environment, particularly when contested across all
domains. The magnitude of change required to prepare the Marine Corps installa-
tions and logistics enterprise to support the future force mandates a fundamental
reevaluation of our approach to logistics.
INSTALLATIONS ASSESSMENT AND RESOURCES

Ready and resilient bases and stations are a critical requirement today and into
the future. Years of under-funding the installations portfolio has resulted in a fund-
ing shortfall across the FYDP in the tens of billions of dollars. Earlier decisions to
take near-term risk in these accounts and shift resources to support readiness-re-
lated accounts resulted in longer-term systemic risks to the Service that we must
address.
Beginning in 2023, we will engage in a comprehensive and informed infrastruc-
ture recapitalization that directly contributes to the requirements of the future
force. This will require additional funding, and while it will take more than one
FYDP to accomplish, the foundation must be laid today.
FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION (FSRM)

Fiscal Year 2024 will be the second year using our pilot Readiness Maximization
Tool. This pilot program prioritizes restoration, modernization, and demolition in
order to achieve a better facility readiness outcome as opposed to the traditional em-
phasis of focusing on sustainment metrics. The Marine Corps’ FY24 FSRM budget
request for the active and reserve forces totals $1.3B.
INSTALLATIONS PLAN 2023 (IPLAN)

In the near future, we will publish our first ever Installations Plan (IPLAN), mod-
eled after the Aviation Plan (AVPLAN), to create a shared understanding of the Ma-
rine Corps Installations Command (MCICOM) enterprise. We intend to produce this
reference document annually to show military construction (MILCON) and FSRM
funding framed across time by region, base, and station. The report will further
identify the five priority MILCON projects (funded or unfunded) by base and station
for the next 1—10 years. Finally, future versions of the IPLAN will include a threat-
based resiliency assessment by base and station regarding resiliency of force protec-
tion; airfield operations; range support; and command, control, and communications.
It will also describe the scope, cost, and schedule to achieve resilience.
MILCON PRIORITIES IN SUPPORT OF FORCE DESIGN

The FY24 budget includes $1.3B to support a total of 16 projects, which includes
both planning and design. This funding includes seven projects totaling $457 million
to continue our efforts to relocate Marines from Japan to Guam.
INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Infrastructure: Aging drinking water and wastewater systems were not de-
signed to meet increasingly stringent environmental requirements. These old sys-
tems also require significant maintenance to continue operation. Since FY16, the
Marine Corps has invested approximately $400 million to upgrade or replace drink-

---

52
ing water and wastewater infrastructure, improving environmental compliance and
reducing risk to personnel and the environment. We are currently evaluating the
need for future support.
Energy Infrastructure: The vast majority of our installations are dependent on a
commercial electrical grid vulnerable to disruption due to a variety of threats such
as aging infrastructure, severe weather, and both physical and cyber-attacks. While
procedures and infrastructure are in place to respond to short-term power outages,
there is a growing need to ensure we can maintain essential functions and critical
services during a prolonged outage. As part of our renewed focus on installations,
we will produce energy resilience plans by base and station in 2023.
Fuel Storage Tanks: In April of 2022, in response to an inquiry by the Assistant
Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment, MCICOM con-
ducted a risk assessment of significant (>10,000 gallon) fuel storage tanks located
on Marine Corps installations, and the risk to drinking water sources and systems.
This assessment included tank condition, tank location relative to systems and
sources, and condition and adequacy of containment systems. The assessment con-
cluded no immediate threat for this population of storage tanks. However, the as-
sessment did identify two >10,000-gallon tanks with a high-risk for release due to
condition, but due to their locations, concluded any release from either tank would
not impact water sources or systems. Since the completion of this assessment, the
high-risk tank located aboard Camp Fuji has been replaced, and the other tank, lo-
cated aboard MCB Quantico, is scheduled to be replaced this fiscal year. As an addi-
tional risk mitigation, the tank aboard MCB Quantico has been drained pending re-
placement.
Barracks: The Marine Corps possesses 672 barracks with 155,329 bed spaces. On
average, those barracks are 32 years old and in need of renovation. In FY22, we
renovated 14 barracks for a total cost of $118 million, and in FY23, we plan to ren-
ovate another 16 at a cost of $262 million. The barracks renovations completed in
FY22 to FY23 will positively impact 8,116 Marines living in them. The per barracks
renovation costs over the past 2 years have risen from $8.4M to $16.4M. At present,
16 percent or 108 Marine Corps barracks are in poor (Q3 on the facilities conditions
index ratings) or failing (Q4) condition. Current estimates to recapitalize, sustain,
or demolish require an additional $3 billion to return all assets to Q2 (>80 facility
condition index) by 2031. Clearly Q2 is not our goal; Q1 is and will be. In FY24,
we plan to use approximately $270 million to renovate 25 barracks including some
renovations previously deferred.
GUAM AND H2B VISAS

Earlier this year the Marine Corps reactivated Camp Blaz—a facility that secures
a geographically distributed and operationally resilient posture for the Marine
Corps in the Indo-Pacific. It also strengthens DoD’s ability to deter, defend, and sup-
port allies and partners in the region. The continued build-out of Guam projects will
require a reassessment of the H–2B visa issue, based on available qualified work-
force.
CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCE

Currently, the Marine Corps is undergoing a review of installation master plans
to build resilience against all hazards such as wildfires, water scarcity, rising sea
levels, and hurricanes. Marine Corps Recruit Depot (MCRD) Parris Island (PI) has
already completed a master plan (2021) and a Climate Change Resiliency and Adap-
tation Plan (2020), which are being used to develop MILCON and FSRM investment
projects to reduce existing and projected localized flooding. The Military Installation
Resilience Review of the low country community surrounding MCAS Beaufort and
MCRD PI developed a toolkit for structural interventions and nonstructural plan-
ning approaches to enable the low country communities to adapt to climate change.
The toolkit has been applied to three pilot projects: St. Helena Island wastewater
treatment plant, Lady’s Island neighborhood, and the Shell Point Interchange.
MCRD PI’s efforts to address sea-level rise and climate change with regional con-
servation groups and the local community is growing stronger. MCRD PI currently
has five initiatives in process with our regional partners: Lowcountry Sentinel Land-
scape Application, National Fish and Wildlife National Coastal Resiliency Fund
(carbon sequestration $550,000), South Carolina Department of Natural Resources,
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program, and US Army Corps
of Engineers.

---

53
CONCLUSION

On-going conflicts across the continent in Africa, along the line-of-actual-control
between India and China, along the Turkish-Syrian border, and in Ukraine remind
us that despite our best efforts, we can never know with certainty when, where, or
how an adversary might precipitate conflict—especially against an ally or partner.
We must be ready—not simply available—to respond tonight, tomorrow, and every
night into the future. We are. As a Service, we must ensure that your crisis re-
sponse force is globally deployable. We are. But we don’t have the luxury of building
a force for only one threat, one region, or one form of warfare. The Marine Corps
must be organized, trained, equipped, and postured for the full range of operations
in places we might not expect, and on timelines we did not anticipate. We are. In
these times of increasing complexity and uncertainty, the Nation needs one force,
maintained at the highest levels of readiness, that can respond to the crises that
few saw coming. We are that force.
This Committee’s support to our modernization efforts—anchored on Force Design
2030, Talent Management 2030, Training & Education 2030, and Installations and
Logistics 2030—has been crucial to our success thus far. Today is an opportunity
to re-recommit to our modernization program and help facilitate its acceleration,
while at the same time addressing issues often mistakenly deemed secondary to
readiness such as barracks, housing, childcare, and healthcare. Which are equally
essential to the readiness of the force.
Based on your continued support, 2022 and 2023 will be known as the years Force
Design transitioned from ideas to operational capabilities. Force Design is now; it
is here today. But with updates to organization and equipment well underway, we
must turn both our attention and our resources to manning, training, and retaining.
We must never lose sight that our most critical warfighting advantage is our people,
and that they deserve the best quality-of-life that we can provide them given the
anticipated stress associated with military service. I look forward to working with
the Committee members and staff over my final months as Commandant, and thank
each of you and your staff for the tireless efforts in support of the Marine Corps.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Berger. It is also fair to
say, the Marine Corps wouldn’t be where it is today without your
leadership. So we thank you for that.
I am going to yield my time to Senator Murray, who is the——
Senator MURRAY. Go ahead.
Senator TESTER. No, no, no. I know where the bread’s buttered.
I am going to yield to Senator Murray, the Chair of the Full
Committee.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR PATTY MURRAY

Senator MURRAY. Thank you, very much Chairman Tester, Vice
Chair Collins, really appreciate it. And we really are fortunate to
have two really tremendous leaders steering this subcommittee. So
I am grateful to both of you. And I am very glad to join today’s
hearing with you, as we continue to work towards regular order
here in the Senate for the first time in years.
And as Senator Collins and I have made very clear, we know we
have a responsibility to work in a timely fashion to write the bipar-
tisan bills that will fund our country, build us as a stronger coun-
try, and make our communities safer, and ensure that we stay
ahead of our global competitors.
And the conversations that we are having today, including this
hearing, really help us show how we are going to make those in-
vestments decisions, here in DC, that will help strengthen our
country and protect our families, which as we all know, is espe-
cially important when China and others are making significant in-
vestments in their own Navy and military right now. And if we are
going to keep pace with those countries we have to work together
to get a bipartisan funding bill done.

---

54

So I am really glad to have this opportunity to hear from the wit-
nesses today about the President’s budget request for the Navy and
Marines, particularly how we can make sure we are supporting our
service members and their families. And we need to remember that
includes making sure that our military families, as you just alluded
to, get things like child care, and mental healthcare, and good
housing, and schools, and a lot more, because at the end of the day
our best naval ships can’t go very far without the brave men and
women who are willing to put themselves on the frontlines to keep
our country safe.
So with that, I do have some questions for you today. And Admi-
ral Gilday, I would like to start with you, because in February seis-
mic deficiencies were found at three of the dry docks as you know,
at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, and the Delta Pier
at the Trident Refit Facility in Bangor. Two very critical facilities
in my home State of Washington. And as a result submarines were
prohibited from using three of those six dry docks at Puget Sound,
and the only dry dock at Bangor. Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is
the primary location for attack submarine and aircraft carriers
maintenance as we know, on the west coast, so I wanted to ask you
today: How exactly is the Navy working with Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, and Trident Refit Facility to plan and implement the
near-term mitigation? And what resources do you need to have to
accomplish that?
Admiral GILDAY. Thank you, ma’am. We are making good
progress right now on the repairs in three of those, facilities. So the
first one at TRF (Trident Refit Facility) Bangor will be completed
in June that is the most substantial work that we are doing, essen-
tially, repairing both sides of the entire dry dock; the two other
docks will be finished in April and May.
As they are progressing well. We are focused there on those por-
tions of the dock that are closest to the nuclear power plant and
the submarines, where we actually put them up in the dry dock.
There is a $300 million request in my unfunded list as you know,
that was a late-add that didn’t make it into the budget, so I re-
quest your help there.
Longer term, we will be looking at other upgrades that we need
to make in order to ensure the Seismic Resiliency of that facility.
As you stated we really count on it, in terms of providing sub-
marine maintenance for the fleet.
Senator MURRAY. So the $300 million is for the short term; that
is your request?
Admiral GILDAY. Yes, it is.
Senator MURRAY. And then longer term?
Admiral GILDAY. So longer term, too early for me to state what
that requirement is. We are right now scoping the long-term re-
pairs in conjunction with the SIOP (Shipyard Infrastructure Opti-
mization Program’s) work that we are planning up there as well.
Senator MURRAY. Okay.
Admiral GILDAY. So we want to make sure that it is Seismically
Resilient.
Senator MURRAY. Okay. And you will stay in touch with us on
that?
Admiral GILDAY. Absolutely, ma’am.

---

55

Senator MURRAY. Secretary Del Toro, back in 2021, it was an-
nounced that Naval Station Everett had been designated as the fu-
ture Home Port for Twelfth Constellation-class Frigates scheduled
to be delivered in 2026. That is great news. The Navy’s long-term
commitment to Everett and Snohomish County, my State, is really
clear. But as we get closer to that date, we need to make sure that
not only the Navy has the resources they need, but the Everett
community also has the support it needs to accommodate the influx
of sailors and their families. Are those still on track to arrive in
2026?
Secretary DEL TORO. We are currently looking at the lay down
plans, ma’am, for all of our ships given the increasing Indo-Pacific
threat that we face. I myself have visited the Puget Sound area
and looked at all the different infrastructure issues that are at play
there, and we are looking and discussing with the CNO exactly
what investments need to be made over the next several years, so
that we can move in the right direction, including greater support
for the hospital in the Puget Sound area as well, too.
And if I could just briefly comment, and thank you for your lead-
ership, as well as the collaboration that we have had with the com-
munity of Puget Sound, as we actually moved very aggressively to
effect the repairs to the dry docks very expeditiously. It has been
nothing but a great relationship.
Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much.
And just really quickly, Mr. Chairman; if I could just ask the
Secretary again about the Navy suicide rate; nearly 17 deaths per
100,000 sailors, that is just devastating. Does the President’s budg-
et request support any additional mental health?
Secretary DEL TORO. Very much so, ma’am. In the Department
of the Navy’s budget we actually have additional funds, upwards
of $200 million that are dedicated to this. In addition to the actual
human element of actually trying to bring everyone together to try
to solve this grave problem that we face as a Nation; and the Navy
too.
Senator MURRAY. Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Collins.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Admiral Gilday, the fiscal year 2022 NDAA (National Defense
Authorization Act) sought to empower the CNO by requiring the
CNO to submit his or her fleet size requirements directly to Con-
gress. In July of 2022, the first such requirement was submitted
and called for 373 ships, compared to 296 in the fleet today. Your
navigation plan, which was released that same month, called for 96
large surface combatants like those built at Bath Iron Works in my
home State.
Two questions: First, when do you anticipate that your analysis
will be released so that we have the benefit of your guidance in
drafting the bill? It likely that your updated fleet requirement will
be greater than the 373 ships in light of China’s modernization?
Admiral GILDAY. Ma’am, on the first question, I have committed
to Congress to deliver the report by the 10th of June, this year.
And I will make the deadline. We are on track with our analysis
team to do that.

---

56

Secondly, with respect to not only the size but the composition
of the fleet, I would expect that to change from the last report, par-
ticularly in terms of composition. It is too early to tell with respect
to size, but quite honestly, ma’am, I can’t see it getting any smaller
than 373 manned ships.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. And that is quite a ways from
where we are today?
Admiral GILDAY. Yes, it is.
Senator COLLINS. General Berger, as we were sitting here, a
headline came across my phone, and it says, ‘‘Pentagon comes out
against law requiring military wish lists’’, and it came across just
as you were explaining why you need more amphibious ships. And
that that was your number one unfunded priority. Isn’t it impor-
tant for Congress to know what your chief unfunded priorities are?
General BERGER. From my perspective it has been useful I think
to submit it from each of the services, and you to have visibility
on what is not in the budget, for whatever reason. So from my per-
spective, it seems useful if it is useful to members. And it has been
in the past.
Senator COLLINS. It is definitely useful to us. And I don’t think
that Congress is going to take the Pentagon’s advice on doing away
with the unfunded priorities list.
Admiral, let me return to you. Could you explain to the Com-
mittee why our surface Navy is so, important as a deterrent from
a deterrence perspective?
Admiral GILDAY. So the destroyers, the cruisers that we have at
sea today are really the backbone of the fleet, along with our air-
craft carriers and our amphibious ships. You just can’t replace for-
ward presence. It is there to not only ensure that U.S. interests are
looked after, but also poised in case any crisis comes up, we reas-
sure allies and partners that we are there 24/7, 365.
A full-third of the Navy is forward on any given day. A second-
third is in maintenance, and the remaining third has either just re-
turned from deployment, or is ramping up to go. That is where we
belong out forward.
The Secretary of Defense has directed readiness levels to us, and
those, our ships that are ready to respond within 10 days, those
ships are all at sea now. So what we are trying to do in order to
take advantage of the firepower that we have today is to improve
our maintenance cadence as an example to send more ships to sea,
the more the better; the bigger fleet, the better.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. So I will start with you, Secretary Del Toro.
Last year Congress accelerated investment in weapons so that our
weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies. In this
year’s budget the Department is proposing to lock in procurement
quantities for nine different weapons programs over 5 years. This
would provide significant predictability and stability to the indus-
trial base. However, I note in some cases, such as the Naval
Strength Missile, quantities requested this year are lower than ap-
propriated last year. Further, it is not clear what the private sector
investment will be in return for this procurement predictability
from the Government.

---

57

So Secretary, could you explain how multiyear procurements can
help stabilize the industrial base? And furthermore, what invest-
ments are you expecting in return from this predictability?
Secretary DEL TORO. Mr. Chairman, I believe that multiyear pro-
curements are critical to growing the size of the fleet in terms of
buying individual platforms, and ships, as critical as it is, to invest
in munitions. We appreciate the support of the Congress and being
allowed to use these multiyear procurements for the purchase of
Missile Systems as well, too.
Our budget, in this year’s fiscal, President’s budget submission,
increases the investment in munitions by 50 percent, investing in
Tomahawks, SM–6, Mark 48 torpedoes, LRASM (Long Range Anti-
Ship Missile), across the entire threshold of the missiles that are
needed, actually, for the Navy to be able to accomplish its mission.
I am also a big supporter of the Naval Strike Missile, just on the
LCS (Littoral Combat Ship) class of platforms, we are looking to
put them on all our LCS platforms moving forward.
So I wasn’t aware of the slight decrease in the numbers of NSMs
(Naval Strike Missile), I thought the numbers had actually gone
up, but I will go back and validate that and get back to you if there
has been a small decrease in the numbers of NSMs. I believe we
are purchasing over 99 across the entire fleet.
Senator TESTER. Okay. And what do you expect in return from
the industrial base with long-term predictability?
Secretary DEL TORO. I expect their commitment to recapitalize in
order to be able to provide these Missiles at the pace that we are
requiring them, for both the challenge that we face these—versus
Ukraine, as well as the potential need to be able to deter China in
the Taiwan scenario as well. These missiles will be required in the
numbers necessary to be able to get there, so industry has to do
its parts with a consistent signal being sent by the Department of
Defense, that we will be purchasing these Missiles for a long period
of time, they should feel comfortable in their confidence that they
can invest in their own capitalization and their workforce to be
able to produce these missiles and systems that are needed.
Senator TESTER. Despite repeated investments in the defense in-
dustrial base and the shipbuilding industrial base in particular, we
don’t really see improvements towards ships being delivered on cost
and on time. In fact, your annual report to pay for cost overruns
on new ships is about two billion bucks, or close to.
It seems like I ask this every year, but what else can we do to
support the shipbuilding industry to be able to get ships out on
time in particular, and under cost?
Secretary DEL TORO. Mr. Chairman, I think that our invest-
ments in the P2P (Performance-to-Plan) Plan that the CNO has
been committed to for the past several years, actually is starting
now to make some advancements in being able to get ships out of
shipyards, are far faster than before, whether they are ships being
repaired, or new construction ships for that matter as well. With
regards to the increased cost of the ships, much of it has been due
to inflation, and certainly the negative impacts of the CR (Con-
tinuing Resolution), and the workforce shortage that we are all ex-
isting.

---

58

I am hopeful that as we actually come out of COVID, and start
fixing some of these work shortages that we have, we will be in a
better place.
I want to thank the Congress, and you particularly, for your in-
vestment in over $2.3 billion in workforce, and industrial-based in-
vestments last year, and the number this year is equally signifi-
cant, $1.7 billion.
We will continue to make sure that those dollars get used wisely
with a return on investment on behalf of the American taxpayer,
with the right oversight that is necessary to create these programs
that hopefully will provide far greater numbers of workers to the
shipyards themselves.
Senator TESTER. The two Senators to my right and to my left
have made it clear that they intend to follow regular order and get
a budget up by the end of September. I think that is good news.
The other side of that coin is, is that we do need to do our job, but
also the industrial base needs to deliver on time. Is there anything
that we can do to help you make sure that they are delivering our
assets that we are having them built on time?
Secretary DEL TORO. As Secretary of the Navy, I have held them
accountable, actually, for delivering ships on time. I have had nu-
merous meetings with all of the CEOs (Chief Executive Officers),
I have walked all the shipyards myself to take a look at exactly
how engaged they are in the construction of ships, and providing
the quality of materials that are necessary.
I think from the Congressional perspective, your continued com-
mitment to invest in the industrial base, not just in the submarine
community, but as the Vice Chairwomen mentioned, in the surface
warfare industrial base as well, is critically important. Those are
measures I think Congress should continue to take in order for us
to get to a better place.
Senator TESTER. Senator Moran.
Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you very much.
Welcome to our panel. I appreciate your service and your pres-
ence here.
General Berger, let me begin with you. Both the Marine Corps
budget submission, and unfunded priority list invest heavily in
CH–53 King Stallions; explain why this particular aircraft is crit-
ical to the Force Design 2030, and the Marine Corps Mission, if you
would?
General BERGER. Late last fall, I went down to North Carolina,
and the Senator, to fly on that aircraft, having grown up in CH–
53Ds and Es. This is a state-of-the-art aircraft. It has a glass cock-
pit, it is a fly-by-wire digital airframe, it doesn’t fly itself, literally,
but it is just exponentially years ahead of where anything else that
we have.
Around the world, it is one of a kind, it has range, altitude capa-
bility, refueling, lift, and it is marinized to go aboard ship like we
do. To your question on how does it fit into Force Design? Both the
CNO and I believe strongly that we will need to operate in a dis-
tributed manner. That means you are going to have to move troops
and supplies around, the 53K is critical for that, especially in re-
gions where you have long distances where you got to do that over
water, this is the machine built for that.

---

59

And the price, which I am glad to see happen, gone down from
117 to 113 in the most recent lot, that is the direction you want
to see costs go as they learn how to build better airframe. The cost
is headed in the right direction.
Lastly, I will just say, it is scheduled to deploy later this fall. I
will be pretty excited to see what it does aboard ship when it is
actually deployed.
Senator MORAN. Thank you. Admiral Gilday; P–8s, advancing
technology, submarine capability of our adversaries, the P–8 Posei-
don, I assume, continues to be critical to deal with those threats.
I visited SOUTHCOM (Southern Command) last month, or a few
weeks before that, and the Commanding General in our conversa-
tion, but also in a conversation with Senator Shaheen, indicated
that the drug flow coming across our southern border is at an all-
time high, SOUTHCOM’s allocated resources to see this situation,
Her ISR assets quote, ‘‘Are at an all-time low.’’
The Navy’s procurement has stopped short of meeting the origi-
nal risk-informed requirements for the 138 aircraft, what risk as-
sessments went into this decision to halt the procurement of this
critical capability?
Admiral GILDAY. Sir, right now the estimate is 127, and we are
sticking to that, so this is based on evolving, wargaming analysis
that we are doing on an annual basis. The same thing goes into
our ship numbers, and our ship mix. As you said, P–8s are vitally
important. So I have never had to ask a combatant commander
twice if they need another P–8, they are in very, high demand.
They are not the only asset out there that we rely on for ISR,
but particularly with respect to an ASW (Anti-Submarine Warfare)
mission, which is what they were really designed for, they are less
optimum for SOUTHCOM, as an example, let us say, a Russian
submarine threat coming from the high north. As they tend to
come out with more frequency these days, as well as a growing
Chinese threat.
Our focus has really been on both of those primary global
threats, as outlined in the National Defense Strategy.
Senator MORAN. Thank you. And let me turn to you, Mr. Sec-
retary. Last year’s PACT Act was signed into law. It provides bene-
fits to veterans exposed to toxic substances. The law included a
provision allowing for individuals impacted by contaminated waters
at Camp Lejeune to file for damages in court, Federal court.
The PACT Act required claimants to present their claims to the
Navy before going to court, and this is certainly additional burdens
on claimants, the Department of Justice, the Federal court system,
if the Navy can’t find a way to provide an administrative remedy
in these cases. Would you explain where the Navy is in its effort
to set up an administrative claims process? How many claims have
been filed with the Navy since the law became—took effect on Au-
gust the 10th? How many claims has the Navy acted on? And can
you provide a reasonable timeline for the Navy to process and re-
spond to those claims?
Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Senator. And we are very grate-
ful for the support that was given by the Congress in order to pass
the PACT Act to take care of our Troops, our Sailors, our Marines,
and their families as well too.

---

60

Senator MORAN. Thank you.
Secretary DEL TORO. We have stood up an outward-facing
website at the Processing Unit. It is my understanding that we
have received over 20,000 claims. We are obviously going to have
to increase the personnel assigned to the Processing Unit, to be
able to address those claims. I will get back to you on an exact
number of claims that have already been addressed. I believe this
is just the beginning, and there is much more work to be done, but
we are committed to actually being able to process those claims in
a responsible manner in order to move down that path.
Senator MORAN. Does the President’s budget request reflect that
additional personnel?
Secretary DEL TORO. I will have to get back to you, Senator, I
don’t believe it does right now.
Senator MORAN. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Senator TESTER. Senator Schatz.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for
being here.
Secretary Del Toro, just very quickly; are we on track for
defueling Red Hill?
Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, we are very much on track for
defueling Red Hill. As you know, we have also submitted our clo-
sure plan for Red Hill, we have submitted addendum number one,
and we are working on addendum number two as well, so it will
be submitted later this year.
Senator SCHATZ. Do you have any reason to believe that
defueling will adversely impact the DOD’s ability to support mili-
tary operations in the AOR?
Secretary DEL TORO. I do not, Senator. In all my conversations
with senior leadership at the Pentagon, and looking at the strategic
lay down plan for defueling afterwards, I don’t see any challenges
whatsoever to executing that plan, over the course of time, abso-
lutely not.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. And do I have your commitment to
make sure that the Navy works with State and local partners on
the healthcare aspect of this as well, as environmental remedi-
ation?
Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, you have always had my commit-
ment on that subject, and you will continue to have my commit-
ment on that subject, working with the Office of Secretary of De-
fense, and DHA (Defense Health Agency) in particular, to ensure
that the service members, and also the people of Hawaii, have the
services they need from a health care perspective moving forward.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you very much.
Admiral Gilday, given that the INDOPACOM unfunded priorities
list includes Military construction, Joint training with regional
partners, and Logistics, can we be confident that—this is a delicate
question,—so I wish you luck with the answer. Can we be confident
that member-driven priorities aren’t crowding out our more
foundational budget priorities?
I am talking about divestment here, and we have had some good
conversations, and even on the committee we have been talking
about divestment, but everybody talks about divestment every
year. And as I look at these priorities, it seems to me that these

---

61

are things that should not be on the unfunded priorities list, but
on the list, that we are planning to fund. Can you reassure me that
we are not accommodating all of the members, and all of their
hometown business interests, in contradiction, of what the Depart-
ment of Defense needs?
Admiral GILDAY. Sir, the friction point with divestments, specifi-
cally ship divestments, directly against those members that are in-
terested in ensuring that repair yards have a sufficient throughput
going through them, right? And so if I look out to 2026, with a high
degree of confidence, I can tell you that as an example, in Norfolk,
through those shipyards will increase by 10 percent.
In San Diego, it will increase by 9 percent. There is a bit of a
dip there in 2024, but it does stabilize. If I could draw a parallel,
and to our ship-building plan, so our submarines you can look out
for 20 years and you know that we are in a cadence to build one
SSBN, and two SSNs. Likewise, that gives stability to the Force in
terms of what you are going to look at, in terms of the battle force
you are going to field under the sea, and what those repair require-
ments are, with a high degree of fidelity.
We are just now getting to that point in the surface build produc-
tion lines, destroyers, LPDs, we want to keep, that line going.
Senator SCHATZ. I get all that, and that——
Admiral GILDAY. It gives a higher degree of fidelity in terms of
what the future looks like for those repair yards.
Senator SCHATZ. Sure. And I am obviously supportive of keeping
the industrial base up and running.
Admiral GILDAY. Yes, sir.
Senator SCHATZ. And also the predictability, and probably the
price predictability of long-term contracts, and long-term Invest-
ments. But I just worry that we are giving short shrift to the kind
of boring stuff, making facilities more resilient, funding our part-
nerships in the region, sewer, water,——
Admiral GILDAY. I get your point.
Senator SCHATZ [continuing]. Housing, all of it.
Admiral GILDAY. I get your point. So if I were to take our invest-
ment strategy with respect to infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific,
and I have another billion, and then another $0.5 billion on my un-
funded list for infrastructure, most of that is in the Pacific, and it
is completely aligned with INDOPACOM’s plan for bases in places
that we need to expand in the Indo-Pacific, or to shore up because
we have not done any work there in a while.
We work our budget with respect to that, sir, hand in glove with
the combating commander.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. And just one final question for Sec-
retary Del Toro: Red Hill is not the only aging infrastructure in
Hawaii, that is for sure, and I would like you to speak to the sort
of more basic, more mundane needs regarding infrastructure in the
State of Hawaii?
Secretary DEL TORO. Very much, Senator. And we have actually
dedicated in this year’s budget, over a billion above last year or
two, investments in the infrastructure, and they are going to have
to continue. Historically, we have invested less than 1 percent of
the budgets over the last 10, 20 years actually, in infrastructure.

---

62

And it is as critical to combat readiness as the readiness of our
ships, and our aircraft, et.
With regards to the infrastructure on the Island of O’ahu, and
throughout Hawaii as well, it is challenged, it is very old, and it
needs to be replaced. I believe the CNO has actually executed three
recent assessments to take a look at the water, the sewage, and
electricity, actually on the island, in order to support the infra-
structure, and the ships that are there, and the families that are
there as well.
We have to continue that investment moving forward. We cannot
ignore it. I myself, have called for a 30-year infrastructure plan for
the Department of Navy, it will take us, a year to get it in the right
direction, but both of the Marine Corps and the Navy, are actually
paying a lot more attention to infrastructure because it is the right
thing to do.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This morning, in Alaska, there is—500 speakers that are lined
up to participate at the Arctic Encounter Symposium, the largest
Arctic gathering here in the country. We are talking a lot about the
Arctic nowadays. One of the principal issues of discussion will be
the China-Russia intersect and the interest in the Arctic. I am all
eyes on the Arctic all the time.
And I was a little concerned, Mr. Secretary, as well as Admiral
Gilday, in going through, at least your written testimony this
morning, some 50 pages of text between the two of you, there is
zero mention to resourcing your Department’s Arctic Strategy, or
defending America’s Arctic.
That worries me. We have seen Arctic strategies released by each
one of the services, that is greatly important, but we all know that
just having a strategy is nothing if we do not resource it, and re-
sources are reflected in the budget.
So Mr. Secretary, can you explain to me why you haven’t been
conducting more overt operations in the Arctic? And just, more gen-
erally, if you would like: whether or not you think that this budget
properly resources the Navy’s Arctic strategy?
Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, let me say that I deeply am con-
cerned about what is happening in the Arctic, obviously, the United
States is an Arctic nation, just like Russia. Unfortunately, they
have been investing far greater resources than we have, histori-
cally, in the Arctic, whether it has been icebreakers, or troops, et.
We need to do a better job of our investment in the Arctic. I
think we have been challenged, obviously, with the current situa-
tion in Ukraine, as well as challenged by the current increasing
threat of China, as the pacing threat, and the scenario with re-
gards to Taiwan, which has demanded additional resources to be
able to address those significant challenges.
But nevertheless, the CNO, myself, and the Marine Corps, and
General Berger, are looking at trying to increase the number of op-
erations that we have actually in the north, and also taking a look
at future deep-water ports, that perhaps we could reinforce, in
terms of the piers, and et. I am planning to go to Alaska in
June——

---

63

Senator MURKOWSKI. Good.
Secretary DEL TORO [continuing]. To address some of these
issues myself, so I look forward to that continued conversation with
you and the rest of Congress as we need to address these signifi-
cant threats that are evolving.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Good. We will certainly welcome you in
June. Any time you want.
General Berger, let me ask you the same, whether or not you feel
this budget appropriately resources the issues as they relate to our
Marine Corps and the footprint in Alaska?
General BERGER. Thanks for the question, ma’am. It gives us the
resources we need to train there, yes. Both in exercises that are
regularly scheduled, like you mentioned, the Arctic Edge being one
of them. Where we go up and, frankly, can train to a level we can’t
inside the rest of the United States, both because of the airspace
and the sea space; and the force-on-force opportunities that you
have in Alaska that it is really difficult to generate down here.
There is also the unit deployments that we do to Alaska, and I
took my Battalion to Alaska because you can build readiness there
and get a regular deployment. You can do things, again, that you
can’t do at home station. It does provide us the resource like the
Marine Corps, the resources to do that right now.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. Well, it is something that, again, we
recognize that this is a matter—this is an issue when it comes to
Arctic and Arctic readiness, that we are not there yet. I think we
would all recognize across all the Services, we are not there yet.
You mentioned icebreakers, and I am sure you know this, Mr. Sec-
retary, that we are sitting here still at one-and-a-half icebreakers
on a good day, compare that to Russia’s 56. China is moving for-
ward, even India is talking about building an icebreaker.
So we are well behind in the construction of how are we going
to facilitate our icebreaking fleet. I have two questions. And I am
probably not going to be able to get to them, so I would ask that
you both take these for the record.
And this is to you, Admiral Gilday, and to you, Mr. Secretary.
And they relate to World War II munitions and explosives of con-
cern, unexploded ordinances that were left near Unalaska, at the
end of the Aleutians, there have been several areas identified,
where these hazards can be. It has been concluded that risks to
public safety are present in many of these areas. It is a concern
amongst the people in the region, most notably.
Now, we are told that Navy says it does not plan to conduct an-
other survey until 2027, until more advanced underwater search
technology is developed. I want you to be aware of this, because I
am going to include language in the Defense Appropriations Bill to
conduct a more thorough survey in 2024. I think the people there
deserve it. And it is in addition to the unexploded ordinances.
I am also going to inquire about the chemical weapons, the Mus-
tard agent, the Lewisite that was deposited off of AT2, and again
the survey of that chemical weapons dumpsite. So just put that on
your horizon. If you can get back to me earlier than that, it might
obviate the need for it for language.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Baldwin.

---

64

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Del Toro, building on this committee’s prior ship-
building investments, I am advocating for additional funding for
the frigate industrial base and workforce in fiscal year 2024. The
ship will be a central part of the future fleet.
And as a new class will undoubtedly face workforce, supplier,
and shipyard infrastructure challenges, last year Congress pro-
vided $50 million for the Frigate Industrial Base and Workforce
Development Program. I want to thank you for noting your support
of this funding during last year’s hearing. First, can you share your
thoughts on how the fiscal year 2023 funding will be executed to
benefit this program? And then secondly, please follow up with, be-
cause I believe a sustained and robust investment is required to
continue supporting the ship’s production ramp up. How do you see
sustained industrial-based funding helping the program?
Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Senator. First let me thank you
for your commitment to ensuring the Constellation gets built on
time, and on track. I am pleased to report that she is on time an
for delivery. And we want to make sure that we continue that
record.
And the industrial-based investments are necessary. Most of the
monies, I believe, will be dedicated towards—Constellation will go
in the force of Workforce Development programs to try to help the
shipyard recruit additional, and train additional individuals in
Wisconsin to train them to be able to support, an increasing need
for the workforce in the shipyard itself.
I think that will be the best use of the monies. The shipyard
itself has invested a lot in CapEx, and has reinvested a lot of its
own profits, and its own capitalization as well too, to try to keep
the frigate on track.
So I am hopeful that the monies in 2023 are going to be better
used in workforce development than in actual CapEx like invest-
ments in the shipyard.
Senator BALDWIN. Okay. Thank you.
General Berger, the Marine Corps listed LPDs, that is the am-
phibious transport dock ships, as their number one priority on
their unfunded priority list. However, the Navy has halted its pur-
suit of the transport dock line, citing the program’s growing costs.
Can you explain why supporting the LPD Project is important to
the Marine Corps? And what the Second and Third order effects
would be, if the LPD Project is not funded?
General BERGER. Senator, in my opening comments I tried to
highlight the operational, and the statutory minimums, both man-
dated by Congress, and what I see, as the warfighting requirement.
And that is a floor, not a ceiling. And it consists of 10 big decks,
LHAs, LHDs, and 21 medium or small LPDs, and is the bare min-
imum.
This budget proposes early decommissioning of three of those
LSDs, with no construction, no acquisition of an LPD, so from my
role as defining what the requirements are, and the statutory mini-
mums of 31, there is no plan to get there.
From my perspective, I didn’t see any other way than to put it
on the unfunded list in order to reflect that there is no plan to get
to the minimum requirements.

---

65

If we don’t have it, to your question, what is the risk? The risk
is our inventory atrophies to a point where we cannot deter, can’t
campaign, can’t respond. And as I tried to highlight, when we can’t
respond when we have to, then our allies’ and partners’ trust goes
down, and in all likelihood the way the Chinese Navy is growing,
they are expanding, but they are liable to try to step in. And we
can’t afford that to happen.
I would say the last part of this, of course, is maintenance which
is the number one priority for the CNO, for four straight years, and
recovering that maintenance making sure we have the fleet that
we need that is ready, as he points out, is key also.
Senator BALDWIN. You have previously cited that the buy now or
block buy acquisition strategy will mitigate costs by footing the bill
up front. Can you explain why you think this will be an effective
way to mitigate costs, such as inflation; or if there are other meth-
ods to help mitigate those costs?
General BERGER. The CNO is better qualified to explain the vari-
ables here. But from my perspective, a predictable pattern of con-
struction on what they call centers, is key. Key for parts, key for
labor, and for LPDs it is 2 years, so we have to have a battle
rhythm, a cadence that allows them the predictability that they
need. If we don’t have that, then they can’t hold the workforce,
they can’t keep the supply chain working, and it starts to tumble
downhill.
Senator BALDWIN. Yes. I note that I have run out of time, but
maybe for the record, Admiral Gilday, I would like to give you the
opportunity to respond on the topic of LPDs, and feel free to submit
that to the committee in writing.
Admiral GILDAY. Thank you, ma’am.
Senator TESTER. Senator Graham.
Senator GRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
What is the inflation rate today, Mr. Secretary, do you know, for
the Nation?
Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, I believe it is approximately 4.6
percent, or so.
Senator GRAHAM. For the country?
Secretary DEL TORO. Overall.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Is the Navy budget equal to inflation?
Secretary DEL TORO. No, sir, it is not.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. What is the Navy budget—how far
below inflation is it?
Secretary DEL TORO. I believe it is about 2 percent below infla-
tion, sir.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. How many ships do we have in the
Navy?
Secretary DEL TORO. And when I mentioned the 4.6, that is the
predictors that were used.
Senator GRAHAM. All right. What’s the actual inflation rate?
Secretary DEL TORO. Somewhere in the 6 percent range, sir.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. So the predictor was wrong?
Secretary DEL TORO. Predictors are often wrong.
Senator GRAHAM. Yes. Okay. Have you accounted for that?
Secretary DEL TORO. Have we accounted for?
Senator GRAHAM. Yes.

---

66

Secretary DEL TORO. Well, we are very thankful for the addi-
tional $9 billion that the Congress provided to Department of De-
fense.
Senator GRAHAM. Well, the point is that you are a couple of
points below inflation. I think that is my point. So, how many ships
in the Navy?
Secretary DEL TORO. 296, sir, as of today.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. How many ships in the Chinese Navy?
Secretary DEL TORO. It is upward of 300.
Senator GRAHAM. Like 340?
Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. By 2028 how many ships will we have?
Secretary DEL TORO. By 2028 we will have approximately 291
ships, or so.
Senator GRAHAM. That is less than 296, right?
Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. How many will the Chinese have?
Secretary DEL TORO. I can’t predict exactly what the Chinese
will have, but estimates are upward of 440, or so.
Senator GRAHAM. Yes. Okay.
Secretary DEL TORO. I will add that our ships are extremely
more modern than they ever have been, as well.
Senator GRAHAM. Let us hope so. I believe, let us hope so.
Secretary DEL TORO. And lethal.
Senator GRAHAM. If not, we are in a world of hurt.
Let me ask you this, CNO, how many ships do we actually need?
Admiral GILDAY. 373 manned, and probably 150 unmanned.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. So under this budget the one—do you
support this budget?
Admiral GILDAY. I do.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. If we have 296 today, and under this
budget we are going to be at 291 in fiscal year 2028, how do we
get to 373?
Admiral GILDAY. Sir, right now we have 56 ships under construc-
tion, and another 76 that are under contract. We can’t buy back
time. For 20 years we are focused on ground wars, and understand-
ably so, the Navy wasn’t the priority. Sir, keeping old ships, that
are not usable or workable is not going to make us a stronger
Navy.
Senator GRAHAM. I am not arguing with you, I am just asking:
Does the budget get you to 373 ships?
Admiral GILDAY. If we follow the shipbuilding plan, that there is
three alternatives in the shipbuilding plan, the third alternative,
assuming about a 5 percent increase above inflation, above our top
line.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. You are assuming 5 percent above infla-
tion. The actual budget is 2 percent below inflation. How can you
support a plan that requires 5 percent to get you where you want
to go, and the actual plan is 2 percent below inflation? I mean that
doesn’t make sense to me. Does that make sense to you?
Admiral GILDAY. Well, sir, part of it gets at, what can the ship-
building industry actually produce?
Senator GRAHAM. Do we have a shipbuilding industry problem,
or do we have a budget problem?

---

67

Secretary DEL TORO. We have a shipbuilding industry problem
currently, Senator.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Well, let me just go back to the budget.
He just said you need 5 percent above inflation, am I quoting you
right?
Admiral GILDAY. They is a——
Senator GRAHAM. To get to that 373 number. You just said that
the Navy’s budget is 2 percent below inflation, and when you look
out, over time, in year ten, do you know what percentage of GDP
(Gross Domestic Product) we will be spending on defense?
Secretary DEL TORO. I cannot predict that in 10 years, sir.
Senator GRAHAM. Well, I can. And tell you right now; it is 2.5
percent. How many times has this Nation spent less than 3 percent
on GDP for defense in the in the modern era? I know, I will just
tell you, four times?
Secretary DEL TORO. Four time.
Senator GRAHAM. 1940, 1999, 2000, and 2001. This budget is
going to get us to 2.5, in fiscal year 2028 it goes to 2.9, so your
budget is taking GDP spent on the Navy and the Military to his-
toric lows, the budget you are supporting is below inflation, and
you are telling us, to get to where we want to go we have got to
be above inflation by 5 percent. If this is a good budget, I would
hate to see a bad budget. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to
each of you for being here today, and for your service to the coun-
try.
I don’t know, Mr. Secretary, or Admiral Gilday, which of you
would like to answer this question. But the Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard has done the first Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization
Program Dry Dock Modernization—it is a mouthful. Are there les-
sons learned there that you think should be applied to similar fu-
ture projects in Hawaii and Washington, and what are they?
Secretary DEL TORO. Very much so, Senator. And actually I am
pleased that the progress in Portsmouth actually has remained on
track, but it has been at the expense of many years of trying to un-
derstand exactly what we needed to do there from an engineering
perspective. And those lessons learned are being applied actually
in Hawaii. I just signed the first contract out in Hawaii for $2.8
billion, my staff did.
And we have applied those lessons to what we are experiencing
in Hawaii, although both shipyards actually aren’t exactly the
same nor are the projects themselves are exactly the same.
Senator SHAHEEN. Right.
Secretary DEL TORO. But I will ask the CNO to comment further
on.
Admiral GILDAY. I think one of the things—ma’am, that we
learned, because these projects are so complex and we haven’t done
them in a hundred years, is to bring the best in industry together
in a group to inform how we move together. We didn’t do that as
well in Portsmouth. We relied on a single contractor. We have
brought together many more experts when we did the estimate for
Hawaii, and the contract was just signed 2 weeks ago. I think we

---

68

are in a better position with a design that will keep us on track,
in a bit more challenging area in Hawaii than Portsmouth.
But that said, we have learned a lot from Portsmouth in terms
of how we both design and then move forward in execution.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Well, thank you both for your sup-
port for that project and for coming to see it. I think it has been
very impressive.
General Berger, the Marine Corps is in its fourth year now,
Force Design 2030. What have you seen in the Nagorno-Karabakh
War, or the Ukrainian War, that has validated your approach to
Force Design 2030? Are there lessons there? Or are there changes
that we need to make in response to what you have seen?
General BERGER. Well, that could be a long explanation I am pa-
tient.
Senator SHAHEEN. You have 2 minutes and 33 seconds.
General BERGER. I am patient in drawing long-term lessons
learned while there is a fight going on, because you can make a
mistake too early on thinking you have seen something and we
should change everything. We need to be a little bit patient.
That said though, I think we have seen enough to draw some
conclusions, as you point out, because this is 10, 12 years observing
this.
First, the ability of a force to operate more spread out and em-
power authorized junior leaders to make decisions at speed, mat-
ters. There is almost ubiquitous sensing nowadays everywhere you
need counter for that. And some of the counter to that is basics of
camouflage, and some of it is much more technical and logistics.
And lastly, I would say the ability of a force to adapt is huge.
It is hard to quantify, ma’am. But the fight that you are in is never
the fight that they taught you in school. We should be very im-
pressed by the ability of Ukraine to adapt over the past year, all
along the way, and the failure of Russian units to do the same. You
and the force has to adapt to the environment they have got. And
they have done a marvelous job of that.
Outmanned, outnumbered, they have all the odds against them,
except for NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and the
U.S., but they have adapted. We need to be able to do the same.
Senator SHAHEEN. Well, one of the things as I understand, you
are working to do, and how does this complement that? But it has
been described to me, hoping to change from the Marine Corps’ his-
torically young Force to a more experienced Force. So how does
that help us in those kinds of environments?
General BERGER. It is directly tied to it. If you are going to em-
power, you are going to authorize junior tactical leaders to make
really critical, key, tactical, and operational decisions, they need
the maturity to do that. By maturity I don’t mean in age.
Senator SHAHEEN. Right.
General BERGER. I mean enough repetition, seen enough, done
enough, to see a close semblance of what they have trained for be-
fore, and make a very quick decision. We have to mature the Ma-
rine Corps’ Force to reach a better balance of a very, young Force,
versus a Force that has enough experience in there to make those
tactical decisions, which is at the root of what Force Design for us
is doing. Reach that right balance, retain more talent, and balance

---

69

the experience that we are going to need, with the youth that we
have always had.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. And Secretary Del Toro, I am out
of time, but one of—we had a hearing last week in the Armed Serv-
ices Committee on Recruitment and Retention and the challenges
that we are facing in our military. One of the issues that I think
is very important to helping with recruitment—with retention, in
particular, is ensuring that there is child care for families who are
serving.
I am going to submit this for the record, but I would like to know
what we are doing to better expand our ability to provide child care
for DOD families? We have done a really interesting Congressional
Defense award in New Hampshire between the shipyard, and
Pease National Guard, who are doing a child care facility jointly.
Are there creative ideas like that that we are working on? But I
will submit for the record.
Secretary DEL TORO. Very quickly, we had two in the budget last
year. We have three in the budget this year.
Senator SHAHEEN. Great. Thank you.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven.
Senator HOEVEN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary, in your testimony you highlight the significance that—
of the challenge that China poses to our Navy and our Marine
Corps. But last fall the administration released a draft regulation
that would require contractors to report on any greenhouse gas
emissions linked to the work that they perform on DOD contracts,
and then prioritize emissions’ reductions regardless of the cost or
impact on the warfighter.
This regulations ‘‘finaled’’: it will increase costs, it will discourage
contractors from working with DOD, and put green mandates
ahead of operational requirements. And I would guess China would
be pleased to learn that U.S. is willing to spend more to make
weapons greener instead of getting more weapons or more lethal
weapons to combat our adversaries.
Can the Navy afford to have contractors increase their prices,
and so forth, and focus on how green their weapons are in the face
of the China challenge? And will somehow reducing the emissions
of our weapon systems help either the Navy or the Marine Corps
to more effectively meet the challenge that China poses, as you out-
line?
Secretary DEL TORO. Senator I am not exactly sure that the rela-
tionship between green gas; gas emissions were tied directly to the
weapon systems themselves. There is a lot of other utilities that
the United States Navy depends upon, in which case green tech-
nology does make a lot of sense, and we are investing in a lot of
green technology.
The Marine Corps alone, we have actually taken Marine Corps
Base Albany to zero essential emissions, essentially, and that pays
off tremendous dividends in being able to provide us more re-
sources to actually put into combat readiness, and to be able to buy
more weapon systems themselves.
Senator HOEVEN. Have you seen the proposed regulation I am re-
ferring to?

---

70

Secretary DEL TORO. I will have to look—no, I haven’t——
Senator HOEVEN. I would encourage you to take a look at it, be-
cause that is not what it does. It requires additional focus on mak-
ing the systems, weapon systems, and so forth, the contractors pro-
vide more green. And it is hard for me to understand, we were
talking about lethal weapons, that that would be the focus, or how
that could not be costly and counterproductive to our warfighters.
So I would encourage you to take a look at it.
Secretary DEL TORO. I promise to look at it and get back to you,
Senator.
Senator HOEVEN. Yes. Thank you, Secretary.
And then, Commandant, let me ask, General Berger, the UAS
pilot training, in your testimony you mentioned the Air Force prob-
ably does not have the capacity to train the number of MQ–9 offi-
cers that you need. So what are you doing to get that training? And
you know, are there enough trainers? Have you looked at contract
training? Have you looked at alternatives then to address it?
General BERGER. The way I captured it in the written testimony,
is as accurate, as picture is, me and General Brown, and the CNO
have. That we don’t see any shrinking of reduction of that demand.
So the CNO, we have got a couple options here. As you have point-
ed out, one is contract. Two, is a naval school for unmanned pilots
ourselves.
In other words, opening up a UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems)
school ourselves, which we are talking about. We don’t know yet
what that would cost, and where we would put it. The instructor
base, all that sort of thing, but it is pretty clear that relying on the
Air Force, as we have the last couple years, we wouldn’t be where
we were without them. This is not going to meet the requirement
going forward. So it is probably going to be in either a Naval UAS
school, or a contract solution.
Senator HOEVEN. I would like to talk to you about that. We have
put a lot of time and effort into working with Air Force at the
Grand Forks Air Force Base, both to have a Technology Park,
Grand Sky Technology Park, on that base, as well as a test site,
Great Plains Test Site. General Atomics is located there, the manu-
facturer, they are training their Foreign Military Sales Pilots. They
have the Brits there right now on the MQ–9.
And so I would sure like to talk to you about that, existing facili-
ties, the ability to fly in the NAS (National Airspace System) with-
out—beyond visual line of sight aircraft. You know, manned air-
craft having to chase all these things that might give you a tremen-
dous head start. I would like to explore that with you.
General BERGER. Absolutely, sir.
Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, General.
General BERGER. You are welcome.
Senator HOEVEN. Admiral, number one, two, and three things
you need to really advance your ability to address the challenge of
China in the Pacific?
Admiral GILDAY. One is to keep shipbuilding on track clear, sta-
ble, and demand signals.
Senator HOEVEN. I think Lindsey might agree with you on that
one.

---

71

Admiral GILDAY. A clear stable demand signal to the industry.
We haven’t always done so well in the past. We have been sinus-
oidal; we can’t afford to be like that anymore. A continued invest-
ment in readiness, so the investment in capacity cannot be at the
expense of current day readiness, we have to be ready for today,
and tomorrow.
And then I think a continued focus on modernization, 70 percent
of the fleet today we are going to have 10 years from now. So con-
tinuing to upgrade those capabilities, as well as taking care of the
material condition of those ships is really important.
Senator HOEVEN. I think you made a really important point ear-
lier, it is not just the numbers of ships, it is having the ships you
need to do the job.
Admiral GILDAY. Yes. Yes, sir.
Senator HOEVEN. And I think that was an important point that
you did make.
I would like to thank all three of you for your service, very much
appreciate it, and for being here today.
Admiral GILDAY. Thank you, sir.
Senator TESTER. Senator Capito.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank
Senator Collins as well. Thank you all for being here, and thank
you for your service.
Thank you, Secretary Del Toro, for the visit to my office several
weeks ago.
Over the past year, you and other defense leaders have spoken
about the urgent need to increase production, particularly in muni-
tions, to replenish our stockpiles, and be ready for the future con-
tingencies. In particular solid rocket motors, are a critical compo-
nent in our precision-guided munitions, and we need to increase
our capacity. I am proud that some of these solid rocket motors, for
many of our critical munitions, are made from a Navy-owned facil-
ity in the State of West Virginia.
So I would first like to ask you to visit there. Or I don’t know
if you have already been there, but I would love for you to have
an opportunity to tour that facility in the future. So I extend that
to you.
But Mr. Secretary, how important is the production of these solid
rocket motors to our national security objectives and readiness?
Secretary DEL TORO. It is——
Senator CAPITO. And where are we on the pendulum here? I
know we have expended a lot.
Secretary DEL TORO. Well first, Senator, thanks for your invita-
tion. I will most certainly take you up on that.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
Secretary DEL TORO. And not just to visit West Virginia because
it is a wonderful State, but because of the criticality of these solid
rocket motors, we are a bit of an extremist in terms of being able
to produce these at the rates that we actually need in the future.
And so we have to look for additional suppliers that can produce
them, we have to make sure that we don’t have continued mergers
of companies, for example, so that we have more competition in the
industry as well, they are critical to most of our missile systems,
whether it be SM–6s, or some of our larger missiles as well.

---

72

Senator CAPITO. Yes. Well, they are maximizing their space out
there, so they are putting a little bit more space, or a lot more
space in. Let me ask you this? Is the impact of this has anything
to do with the munitions that we have sent to Ukraine? Is that
why—are stockpiling enough there? Or is it just hard to keep up
with the production, which one of those would be true, do you
know?
Secretary DEL TORO. We have a commitment to provide Ukraine
the munitions that it needs.
Senator CAPITO. Correct.
Secretary DEL TORO. And we will continue to in the future. And
so that obviously has expended a lot of the munitions that we do
have, therefore we have to make a commitment to increasing muni-
tions across the board. The Office of Secretary of Defense, the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment has
been completely devoted to this effort, and working with manufac-
turers across the country, around the world indeed.
The Secretary of Defense, himself, has invested a tremendous
amount of time to working with other nations to ensure that we
bring as many munitions as possible to the support of Ukraine.
And that of course has allowed, or it requires us to continue to re-
furbish those stockpiles that we have here in the United States, in
order to get to a better place.
Senator CAPITO. Right. General Berger, could you speak to this,
the importance of a stockpile, and where you see that right now,
where we are?
General BERGER. A couple of thoughts, ma’am. First, based on
what we have seen in Ukraine in the last year the rate of expendi-
ture of munitions, is probably a lot higher in some scenarios, some
situations, than we recognize.
Senator CAPITO. Mm-hmm.
General BERGER. It is a good—in other words, a good reminder
to the rest of us, war isn’t a 48-, 72-hour kind of event all the time.
And every day, every week the expenditure amounts are very high.
We have a great process in place. I am very comfortable with it in
the Department of Defense, for each request from Ukraine, getting
analyzed and examined, and who can provide what.
But it is very clear that our stockpiles for training and for
warfighting, we need to reassess the assumptions in those to make
sure that we have the depth, because to highlight your point, our
industrial base, using a phrase from the Vice Chair earlier, can’t
be just-in-time if we have to go to a conflict.
Senator CAPITO. No.
General BERGER. We have got to have it just-in-case, we have the
depth in that industrial base to account for a big surge.
Senator CAPITO. Right. Yes. I mean, I think that is a source of
concern.
Admiral, do you have a comment on this?
Admiral GILDAY. I agree with everything the General said. I
think the biggest thing we learned was the expenditure rates it has
caused us to go back to take a look at our own wargaming and
analysis, what our predicted and expenditure rates would be, and
the questions and assumptions we made. So that is why, for the

---

73

Navy and Marine Corps, you see four multiyear procurements of
weapons in this budget proposal.
Senator CAPITO. So maybe your initial wargaming estimates
might have been low?
Admiral GILDAY. Yes.
Senator CAPITO. Or just used differently?
Admiral GILDAY. Yes. Yes, I think that we all assumed that our
expenditure rates would be lower, weapons are more techno-
logically advanced, and that is not playing out so well, in Ukraine.
Senator CAPITO. Yes.
Admiral GILDAY. So it has informed our thinking.
Senator CAPITO. Okay. Thank you.
Admiral GILDAY. Yes, ma’am.
Senator CAPITO. General, let me ask you a question on fentanyl
use in the Navy and Marine Corps. It is a national problem. It is
reflected in your Force. I understand between the years 2017 to
2021, 332 of our men and women in uniform succumb to an over-
dose. Are you all focusing on this in the Marine Corps?
General BERGER. Absolutely, yes. I would say anywhere that you
travel in a Navy and Marine Corps, on any base, any station, you
are going to find fentanyl as a top-of-the-list discussion when it
comes to the drug issues that are difficult to detect, and readily
available and affordable, absolutely. And it is, to your point, it is
a killer. Every commander, every leader, enlisted officer, is focused
on it, to answer your question. Yes, ma’am.
Senator CAPITO. Well, thank you. Yes. And Mr. Secretary, I am
sure that would be the same. I am out of time, but I would say it
is such a different substance, and so lethal. You know, I think on
the prevention and education side, you can’t over-educate, and
over-emphasize, just because you are taking a little pill doesn’t
mean that this little pill is actually what they say it is.
Mr. Secretary, I am out of time but——
Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, it is a major crisis in our Nation,
and we, in the Department of Defense and the Department of the
Navy are paying tremendous attention to it, to ensure that our
troops understand that, and they should never be using drugs to
start with, but for them to understand the real danger and threat
that this immediately presents to one’s life, and that there is no
second chance, or it could be very little second chance——
Senator CAPITO. Right.
Secretary DEL TORO [continuing]. When it comes to the use of
fentanyl.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you. Thank you all.
Admiral GILDAY. If I could just?
Senator CAPITO. Yes.
Admiral GILDAY. We characterize it as a poison, yes.
Senator CAPITO. Good.
Admiral GILDAY. To your point.
Senator CAPITO. Good. It is.
Admiral GILDAY. You don’t know what you are putting in your
body, and it is killing people, 107,000.
Senator CAPITO. Yes, yes. Well, thank you all very much. It is a
tough fight. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Collins.

---

74

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Admiral Gilday, I was pleased that my colleague from New
Hampshire brought up the Shipyard and Infrastructure Optimiza-
tion Program, as she says, that is a mouthful, the SIOP Program.
And that is well resourced in the budget, which I am pleased to
see, not only because the work that we both are interested in, at
the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, is underway,
one phase has been completed, but there is more to come, but also,
because I am concerned about the number of submarines that
aren’t operational because they need maintenance, or refueling.
And that is a trend that we need to reverse. I am told that near-
ly twice as many submarines as planned were not deployable in re-
cent months because of maintenance or other issues. Are the in-
vestments in this budget sufficient for us to try to reverse that
trend?
Admiral GILDAY. I think so, ma’am. A lot of this is on us in terms
of process. There are three areas that we are really focused on.
One, is eliminating surprises for whether it is a private or a public
yard, in terms of what they need to do. It is just like doing a house
renovation. It surprises, drive your budget up, and they drive you
off schedule, so we have focused on that. And I will talk about
numbers in just a minute.
The second thing is material. So you have given us a pilot using
OPM (Office of Personnel Management) money, so multiyear
money, to not only put private yard availabilities on contract across
fiscal years, but to also use that money to frontload the material
so that the workers aren’t waiting for that to arrive, and it is miti-
gating the risks that we are seeing with supply chain
vulnerabilities.
The third piece is the workforce. And I know you are well-in-
formed about, you know, developing an experienced workforce. As
we continue to work with industry on that, based on those three
areas, and the work that we have been doing, we have seen delay
days out of shipyards come from more than 7,000 down 3,000. That
is not good enough.
I predict, that based on the track that we are on, will be less
than a thousand a-year-and-a-half from now. So by the end of fiscal
year 2024, our goal is actually below 900. I think we are on track
for that, but again the investments really in the material side, in
terms of money, there is a $0.5 billion in Virginia-class submarine
repair parts in this budget alone, to address some of that.
So I think we are on the right track we are not satisfied yet, but
the more operational availability that we return to fleet com-
manders, to your point about the submarines, the better off that
we will be in terms of having a Navy operating forward.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. With regard to the workforce, let
me just mention that the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard has one of
the best apprenticeship programs that I have ever seen. Each year
they bring in about a hundred new people into this apprenticeship
program, they train in very realistic conditions, and very confined
spaces, for example, and it really is a great program. And that is
what I think we need to do more of, in industry as well, so that
we have a pipeline of experienced workers.

---

75

Mr. Secretary, I just have—well, I have many final questions I
could ask, but I didn’t want you to think I was ignoring you by not
asking you a question today. And I do want to go back to the point
that I made about the budget’s assumptions on fuel costs, in my
opening statement, because the budget request assumes some fuel
price of only a $140 per barrel. And it was ironic that on the day
of the presentation of the budget the fuel costs, as measured per
barrel, was 20 percent higher than budgeted.
So my final question for this hearing is: Will you work with us
to make sure that we do have sufficient funding for fuel? And ex-
plain to the Committee, what would be the implications if we have
under-budgeted for fuel, in terms of flying hours, steaming days,
training exercises, and other readiness activities?
Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, ma’am. And it is a serious impact, be-
cause as the CNO said earlier, at any given day one-third of our
Fleet and Aircraft are operational, and therefore we use fuel quite
a bit. And so we are significantly impacted by the cost of that fuel.
It is important to estimate those costs appropriately.
And certainly, again, you know, we thank the Congress for the
support they gave us in 2023 by putting $9 billion towards infla-
tion, but it certainly makes it more difficult to be able to budget
properly, if we don’t have the budget perfectly aligned to inflation.
But that is a real difficult problem to do for OMB (Office of Man-
agement and Budget), and others, to be able to predict well ahead
exactly what inflation might be next year. However, I think the
greatest threat to our budget and the things that we are trying to
accomplish today, actually is if the Congress were not able to pass
an Appropriations Bill on time this year, and that will unquestion-
ably, threaten all the things that we have talked about at this
hearing today.
Senator COLLINS. Well, I certainly agree with you on that. And
I know that the Chairman does too. And that is why the sooner we
can get information back from you, including, June 10, seems aw-
fully far off for the plan, but the sooner we can get responses the
better off that we can be in getting our work done as well.
I want to sincerely thank all three of you for the time you have
spent with me, and also for your testimony today. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins. I will echo those re-
marks. We appreciate your service, we appreciate the folks that
you represent, and the commitment they have to keeping this coun-
try the country it is today.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

I appreciate your testimony. And Senators may submit additional
written questions, and we would ask that you respond to them, if
you get them, in a reasonable amount of time.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were
submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hear-
ing:]
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CARLOS DEL TORO
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. As part of its Fiscal Year 2024 budget request, the Navy plans to de-
commission 8 ships before the end of their service life, including 2 Littoral Combat

---

76
Ships. Mr. Secretary, you told us that you have enough LCS to cover your mission,
but these ships are newer than my tractor back home and still have plenty of life
left in them. There is no shortage of demand within the Department for additional
maritime assets-particular among the Combatant Commands. Further, you last year
mentioned the possibility of transferring LCS the Navy no longer wants to foreign
nations.
Have you made any progress in that regard?
Answer. We have made good progress. In February 2023, Navy International Pro-
grams Office issued correspondence soliciting interest from foreign governments on
potential transfer of decommissioned LCS. In response, we received formal Letters
of Request for the transfer of the LCS from five (5) countries. As part of the next
step, we are beginning the process of determining which interested countries can
effectively operate and sustain these platforms, with the ultimate goal of allocating
specific hulls for transfer.
Question. I want to ask about a pressing healthcare issue in Japan that is affect-
ing our military readiness. When we talk to Marines stationed, there, the top con-
cern we hear about is the lack of healthcare for their dependents and DoD civilians.
Constituents from Montana stationed in Japan and working for DoD have also con-
tacted my office voicing the same-concerns. I raised this issue during our recent
Subcommittee briefing with the Defense Health Agency, and while I understand
some policy changes have been made, concerns about Japanese hospitals denying
care remain
What are you doing to fix this problem?
Answer. Healthcare access issues impacting Sailors, Marines, families, and civil-
ian employees stationed in Japan is an important topic for the Navy. The Japanese
healthcare system operates fundamentally differently than in the United States, but
we are actively working with the Defense Health Agency and other DoD components
to address these issues and ensure our Sailors, Marines, families, and civilian em-
ployees get the support they need both in the continental United States and over-
seas, in locations like Japan.
Question. In February, the, Government Accountability Office reported that the
Navy is facing persistent and worsening sustainment challenges across its ten class-
es of surface ships. From data collected over a ten-year period, operating and sup-
port costs grew by about $2.5 billion, while the number of operating hours of the
ships actually decreased. We already have a smaller fleet than China, we can’t af-
ford ships to be stuck in port when they should be steaming. Unfortunately these
findings are not surprising. Your Fiscal Year 2024 budget request adds $1.9 billion
to the Ship Maintenance account, fully funding our-maintenance to capacity at the
public and private shipyards. This is a good thing, but I’m not sure money alone
will fix the issue.
What are some specific action items you have directed to improve fleet readiness?
Answer. I have directed Navy leadership to continue to evolve a myriad of endeav-
ors to improve fleet readiness. Two examples include: Naval Sustainment System-
Shipyards and Surface Warfare Enterprise Performance-to-Plan.
The Naval Sustainment System-Shipyards (NSS–SY) is the Navy’s approach to
identify and execute initiatives that reduce nuclear ship and submarine mainte-
nance durations. NSS–SY is focused on three critical levers: reducing unplanned
work, increasing throughput, and increasing material readiness. Each of these ef-
forts is analytically supported by Center for Naval Analysis. NSS–SY waterfront ef-
forts are focused on people-centric initiatives. NSS–SY will continue through the
end of 2023 targeting on-time delivery of all availabilities. Upon completion of the
NSS–SY contract, the government will assume control of all initiatives and continue
improvements to work towards meeting class maintenance plans by FY 26.
Surface Warfare Enterprise Performance-to-Plan (P2P) remains the key driver to
Get Rea1 on the Navy’s baseline readiness performance, identifying the most con-
sequential levers that move the needle on outcomes and communicating perform-
ance barriers to accountable supported commanders. Through P2P-Surface (focused
initially on DDG 51 Class availability performance), Navy is seeing positive results
in execution leading measures including planning, reduced growth work, early con-
tract awards, reduced contract change cycle time, and improved long lead time ma-
terial (LLTM) processes reducing DDG 51 Class Days of Maintenance Delay (DoMD)
by 27%, from 424 (QI FY 21) to 308 (Q4 FY 22).
Question. Nearly 1 year ago, three Sailors assigned to the USS George Wash-
ington committed suicide in the same week. The Navy’s initial investigation found
no correlation between these deaths, but found manning shortages, mental health
provider shortages, and quality of life issues to be contributing factors. The Suicide
Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee referred to these as ‘‘day-
to-day stressors.’’

---

77
We have heard alarming statistics about the Navy’s vacant mental health posi-
tions, and senior leaders receiving a dozen sailor suicide risk reports daily.
What reforms has the Navy implemented to respond to these suicides?
Answer. The Navy is focusing resources and action on areas with higher risk of
suicide, such as units that are in a maintenance phase.
The Navy is increasing the number of mental health providers and chaplains on
the waterfront. For Newport News Shipyard in particular, additional mental health
professionals are now assigned to Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) aircraft
carriers and have offices in close proximity to the ship. This increases accessibility
and reduces commute times.
In March, the Navy published the Mental Health Playbook to help normalize con-
versations around mental health and provide Sailors a roadmap to navigate care op-
tions.
The Navy is also overhauling the totality of its prevention programs through the
Advance Navy Culture initiative. This initiative will streamline and integrate re-
lated efforts and programs to enable on outcomes critical to readiness including in-
creased connection, cohesion, and inclusion within commands, more effective stress
management tools for Sailors in challenging environments, and an overall reduction
in harmful behaviors across the force.
At the Newport News Shipyard, the Navy has taken numerous actions to improve
the quality of life of Sailors. These include:
—Improving access to food options consistent with 24/7 work hours by bringing
in food trucks in the evenings, reopening the self-use kitchen in the unaccom-
panied housing, and opening a Navy Exchange-mini-mart within the confines
of the shipyard;
—Increasing Wi-Fi access, which is now available for Sailors’ personal use, to in-
crease connections to family’ and friends;
—Centralizing parking, increasing the number of shuttles from parking lots to the
shipyard and adding shuttle service inside the controlled industrial area;
—Implementing unit-level morale efforts on the USS George Washington by re-
opening retail sales, resuming monthly birthday celebrations of Sailors, hosting
therapy dogs onboard and increasing engagement with the command resilience
team.
More broadly, all aircraft carriers in RCOH have reviewed their sponsorship and
mentorship programs, incorporating changes that benefit first-term Sailors. Wel-
come handbooks have been rewritten to cover mental health and other critical re-
sources and information relevant for a first-term Sailor audience. First-term Sailors
also receive command handbooks that provide a broad overview of the ship and the
ship services tailored to a carrier in the shipyard.
The Department of the Navy (DON), in coordination with the Department of De-
fense (DoD) and the other Military Departments, is reviewing the 127 recommenda-
tions made in the Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Commis-
sion (SPRIRC) report from February 2023. Recommendations include policy reforms,
increased services, and overall improvements to quality of life for Service Members.
The DON submitted prioritization and implementation plans to the Secretary of De-
fense in June 2023, and anticipates further guidance upon his review.
Question. When will the final investigation report be released?
Answer. The Phase I investigation specifically looked into the contributing factors
and any causal links between the three tragic suicides in April 2022. Phase I is com-
plete and was briefed to the families in December 2022.
The Phase II investigation focused on the command climate and quality of life on-
board the USS George Washington including the availability of support services, the
challenging environment in the shipyard, lessons learned from past shipyard refuel-
ing overhauls, any possible effects of the COVID–19 pandemic and systemic chal-
lenges that impact aircraft carrier overhauls or construction in Newport News.
Given the breadth and complexity of the investigation, a review is underway to in-
form the prioritization and resourcing of the recommendations. The report was re-
leased on 18 May 2023.
Question. Does the Navy have the funding it needs in this budget request to make
the necessary quality of life improvements?
Answer. The DON is continuing to execute the President’s Budget 2023 and has
sufficient funding based on current requirements. The Navy is committed to improv-
ing quality of life for Sailors and has significantly increased mental health and sui-
cide prevention and response investments in out years. Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 in-
vestments totaled $62M. This increased to $74M in FY 2023, and the projected FY
2024 investment is $102M. These additional investments will expand clinical and
non-clinical mental health resources to support Service Members in:
—Offering programs aimed at strengthening resilience and well-being

---

78
—Increasing access to embedded mental health providers
—Providing reintegration support to Service Members after a suicide attempt,
and,
—Deploying rapid behavioral health support to units following a suicide.
The DON is currently assessing any need for additional funding and resources for
FY 2024 and beyond to support the implementation of the 127 recommendations
from the February 2023 Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Com-
mittee (SPRIRC) report on Preventing Suicide in the Military and the recommenda-
tions from Phase II of the USS George Washington investigation.
Question. The Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Report on Sexual
Assault in the Military found that the Department of the Navy had the highest
prevalence rate for sexual assault and unwanted sexual contact across all Services.
Female Marines and male Sailors had the highest rates overall. The Suicide Preven-
tion and Response Independent Review Committee visited with Sailors assigned to
a ship in drydock. Sailors were sleeping in cars to prevent being sexually assaulted
on the ship.
The recently released Annual Report for Sexual Harassment and Violence at the
Military Service Academies also found an alarming prevalence increase at the U.S.
Naval Academy, your pipeline for officers.
What is the Department of the Navy doing about these disturbing and unaccept-
able trends?
Answer. The Department of the Navy (DON) is continuing to implement the rec-
ommendations from the 2021 Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault
in the Military (IRC). In Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22), I released ALNAV 024122 Interim
Policy Governing Investigations of Formal Sexual Harassment Complaints under IO
US. C 1561. This interim policy requires that Investigating Officers charged with
investigating formal complaints of sexual harassment come from outside the com-
mand of the victim and the subject; creating an environment that encourages vic-
tims to come forward. Additionally, I released the No Wrong Door Policy and Safe
to Report Policy in June of 2022 that ensures victims receive care and support or
have a ‘‘warm hand,-off’ appropriate service providers, as well as assurance that
they will not be disciplined for minor collateral misconduct for filing an unrestricted
report of sexual assault.
The DON is continuing to make strides in removing collateral duty Sexual As-
sault Response Coordinators (SARCs) and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
Victim Advocates (VAs) by hiring personnel at the 0–6 command level. The addi-
tional personnel will increase a workforce specifically trained to assist victims of
sexual assault and sexual harassment. Hiring actions from both Navy and Marine
Corps SARCs and VAs are underway and expect to replace all collateral duty per-
sonnel by FY26.
After a review of the IRC recommendations, I directed the DON to prioritize five
recommendations that focused on developing, educating, and promoting our leaders,
to include those in the pipeline at the United States Naval Academy. These rec-
ommendations will equip leaders with the training and education necessary to deter
violence and set conditions for healthy personal and professional relationships,
thereby promoting protective command climates. These five recommendations are:

DEVELOPING, EDUCATING, AND PROMOTING LEADERS
3.3b Educate leaders on cyber harassment and technology-facilitated sexual harassment and sexual assault.
3.4d Review and revise Professional Military Education (PME) and Department of Defense (DoD) schoolhouse cur-
ricula to mainstream Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) priorities.
3.5a Use qualitative data to select and develop the right leaders.
3.6 Building a climate for the reduction of sexual harassment and sexual assault as a fundamental leader devel-
opment requirement.
4.4c Revise and update training modules on appropriate response to sexual assault and sexual harassment in PME
for Officers and NCOs.

In August 2022, the DON defined ‘‘cyberharassment’’ allowing the DON to develop
targeted training for Service Members and leadership on the prevention and appro-
priate response to harassing behaviors, including those of a sexual nature, that
occur online. The DON anticipates launching cyberharassment training modules and
webinars no later than (NLT) 30 September 2023 (Recommendation 3.3b).
The DON is reviewing all PME and DoD schoolhouses for WPS principles. The
Marine Corps has developed two MarineNet WPS courses: one for executives and
one for junior/general population to help establish a WPS baseline understanding
(Recommendation 3.4d).

---

79
To select and develop the right leaders, the Navy is implementing the Naval
Leadership Assessment Program (NLAP) to add more relevant and timely data to
the process of selecting leaders to include reliable, and valid cognitive and non-cog-
nitive data assessments, 360° evaluations, structured job-related psychological inter-
views, and formal board interviews with Navy leadership (Recommendation 3.5a).
The Navy and Marine Corps have conducted a comprehensive assessment to in-
clude a gap analysis of their leadership training curricula to ensure that the IRC
recommended elements are fully integrated into future training modules. Currently,
the Marine Corps Curriculum Review Board is in the process of approval for cur-
riculum design, course descriptions, assessment overview and special areas of em-
phasis. The Navy is addressing curriculum gaps by piloting specific training to
equip leaders to foster healthy climates (Recommendation 3.6).
The Navy and Marine Corps have evaluated their existing PME training. Both
Services are on track to design curricula that would eliminate reprisal, ostracism,
and retaliation for survivors that report their experiences of sexual violence. Addi-
tionally, newly formed curricula has specifically designed modules to support leaders
in helping survivors that are particularly vulnerable to sexual violence. All five of
these recommendations will be implemented NLT 30 September 2023 to aide in de-
veloping healthy climates and driving down the trends of sexual assault and sexual
harassment as highlighted in the 2021 report.
Question. Where is the Department in hiring its prevention workforce and imple-
menting the recommendations of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual
Assault in the Military?
Answer. The DON is continuing to implement the recommendations from the IRC.
In November 2022, I signed a memorandum formally establishing the DON’s Inte-
grated Primary Prevention Policy. The DON, Navy, and Marine Corps intend to hire
1,055 full-time prevention workforce personnel between Fiscal Year (FY) 2022–2028.
The Navy has hired and onboarded 43 personnel. The Marine Corps has hired and
onboarded 18 positions. Both Services have many hiring actions in progress and of-
fers waiting to be accepted as it begins to ramp up the workforce.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN
Question. The Navy has recently modernized its graving dock in San Diego and
is also planning for an additional auxiliary floating dock in FY 25. While we wel-
come the Navy’s investments in surge capacity, we also need to make sure that the
Navy isn’t discouraging the private sector from making and sustaining their own
investments.
What is the Navy doing to ensure that the ship repair industrial base remains
healthy in San Diego and that these public investments are not negatively impact-
ing critical, existing private sector capacity?
Answer. The Navy is committed to enabling a healthy industrial base in San
Diego and ensuring its actions do not have unintended negative consequences on our
industry partners. The Navy’s goal of utilizing the Naval Base San Diego (NBSD)
graving dock remains to foster a competitive private industrial base that enables the
Navy the opportunity to conduct all ship docking availabilities in ships’ homeports.
The NBSD graving dock was returned to service and certified to dock DDG 51 Class
ships in August 2022, and within a month, the additional capacity provided by the
NBSD graving dock was leveraged for an emergent docking. Had the government
facility not been available, the docking would have been either delayed by approxi-
mately 8 months or the ship would have been forced out of port for the docking
work, negatively impacting the crew and their families with next to no advance no-
tice.
In its efforts to mitigate any negative impacts to our industry partners, the Navy
has refined its solicitation considerations for use of the NBSD graving dock and has
implemented mechanisms that can allow for the place of performance to be changed
to a private dock post-award if the contractor’s dock would otherwise remain empty.
The Navy continues to engage private repair yards and solicit feedback and refine
its approach to maximize private dock usage and to use public docks to maintain
competition. The Navy remains committed to working with industry and Congress
to meet maintenance requirements while also promoting health of the industrial
base.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. I understand the Navy is collaborating with the Coast Guard in design-
ing the Polar Security Cutters.

---

80
Can you discuss how far along you are in the design process and elaborate on this
project?
What is the Navy doing to assist with the stopgap while we wait for the ice-
breaker?
Answer. The Navy is collaborating with the Coast Guard on the Detail Design and
Construction of the Polar Security Cutter (PSC), having formalized the relationship
with a Memorandum of Agreement signed in 2017 to define specific roles and re-
source contributions. The PSC program is managed by an Integrated Program Office
(IPO) comprised of Coast Guard and Navy personnel.
The PSC remains in the Detail Design phase. An Initial Critical Design Review
(CDR) was held in March 2022 and planning for the Final CDR is ongoing. The IPO
expects the Final CDR to be held within the next 8 months. Design efforts related
to the Final CDR directly support Production Readiness Review (PRR) milestones
and ultimately the start of construction.
Additionally, the IPO created a Prototype Fabrication Assessment (PFA) period,
which is projected to start this summer and will provide a ramp up period to facili-
tate a seamless transition to construction. This risk reduction effort will allow for
the construction of as many as eight PSC modules prior to PRR to accelerate indus-
trial learning, allow the shipbuilder to test its production processes, and train its
skilled workforce on the unique characteristics of the steel being used to construct
this polar icebreaker.
Question. There has been significant activity from our adversaries in the Arctic,
however I have noticed a significant lack of presence from our own Navy by com-
parison.
Do you have the shore side infrastructure to support a naval presence in the Arc-
tic?
Answer. Naval forces are unique in their ability to operate at sea away from fixed
land bases. The ability to sustain and replenish surface ships, at sea and the per-
sistent presence of our submarines gives the Navy a tremendous advantage in the
austere and remote regions of the Arctic. Following National Defense Strategy guid-
ance, the Navy accomplishes defense and protection of the homeland by using our
bases in the Atlantic and Pacific, along with the bases offered by our Allies and
Partners. The bases the Navy operates from are considered the fixed posture that
allows the Navy to have presence anywhere in the world. This is the same whether
the Navy operates in the lndo-Pacific, Atlantic, Caribbean, or the Arctic. Addition-
ally, Naval air presence is supported by Joint Force and Interagency partner shore-
side infrastructure. Of note, Naval Air Facility Adak was closed during the base re-
alignment and closure (BRAC) in 1997.
Question. Does this budget address the shore side needs of the Navy to have an
Arctic presence?
Answer. Navy does not currently have any specific military construction require-
ments in the Arctic; therefore, the budget does not address any shore side needs of
the Navy to have an Arctic presence.
Question. After WWII, the DoD dumped hundreds of tons of chemical weapons
(mustard agent and Lewisite) at 2,000 fathoms depth off Attu. DoD was required
by the 2007 Defense Authorization Act to conduct a survey of such sites in Hawaii
and Alaska, yet it only conducted such surveys in shallow, tropical waters of Hawaii
(two sites), and then argued that such a survey in Alaska was not needed, as the
Hawaii and Alaska sites were ’substantially similar.’ This is categorically not so.
Why the DoD decline?
Answer. The Navy respectfully defers to OSD to explain DoD policy for represent-
ative site selection in response to Sec. 314 of the FY 2007 NDAA.
Question. Will the Navy conduct a survey in Alaska?
Answer. The Navy reviewed the language in accordance with Sec. 314 of the FY
2007 NDAA, the Navy has and will comply with direction from the Secretary of De-
fense on locations to be surveyed.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Question. It is my understanding that the CDC-Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR) is on-site in Hawaii reviewing records of families who
were affected by the Red Hill water contamination, at the request of the Navy. I
think the ATSDR’s presence is a step in the right direction to find answers for the
93,000 affected individuals. I understand that Service Members do not need to grant
authorization for this type of review, but families of Service Members have reported
no communication or transparency relating to CDC–ARSDR’s presence in Hawaii.

---

81
What is the purpose of the review and when will you be communicating with fam-
ilies about this review and its purpose?
Answer. Defense Health Agency Public Health requested CDC/ATSDR epidemio-
logic assistance to better understand the illnesses reported by families impacted by
the Red Hill fuel release. CDC/ATSDR officers reviewed the medical records of 653
individuals potentially exposed to the fuel release. Defense Health Agency Public
Health will communicate the findings to the Red Hill community through multiple
platforms including a Red Hill Health e-update, website, and webinar.
Question. What guidance have you put out to commanders on the ground about
what to communicate to these families?
Answer. First and foremost, Navy leaders—at all levels—encourage individuals to
seek medical attention if they are experiencing symptoms. In January 2023, the De-
fense Health Agency established the Red Hi11 Clinic, which provides same-day con-
sultations for those experiencing symptoms potentially related to the Red Hill fuel
release. Regarding the CDC-Agency for Toxic. Substances and Disease Registry
(CDC/ATSDR), local Navy leadership and public affairs offices publicized the CDC/
ATSDR survey and strongly encouraged participation. The Navy has also hosted
town halls that included representatives from EPA, DOH and the CDC/ATSDR to
provide information and answer questions from military personnel, families and the
local community. The Navy will continue to coordinate closely with the Defense
Health Agency, the Hawaii Department of Health, and the CDC/ATSDR to share
information with the public as soon as it is available.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN
Question. Congress strongly supports increased funding to build, maintain, and
expand our naval fleet, While supporting the domestic American manufacturing
base. However, our defense manufacturing base is facing challenges from foreign
competition. For example, it is my understanding that the Navy’s Constellation
Class power systems upgrade was completed by a European manufacturer over a
domestic manufacturer because the Navy focused on cost instead of enforcing do-
mestic content requirements for power generation equipment.
Can you please share what the Navy is doing to ensure strong enforcement of do-
mestic content and Buy America standards, which will in turn support our domestic
manufacturers? Do you support stronger domestic content requirements for power
generation equipment?
Answer. The health of the shipbuilding industrial base and sub-tier suppliers is
vital to meeting our National Defense Strategy. Balancing imperatives such as stra-
tegic industrial base capabilities, supply chain resiliency, and affordability is a com-
plex task. Through collaboration and smart investments, the industrial base can
adapt and grow to build and maintain the fleet we need. The Navy is in compliance
with domestic sourcing requirements and continually monitors and works with in-
dustry partners, including sub-tier suppliers, to assess the general health of the in-
dustrial base and identify opportunities for strengthening areas in need of reinforce-
ment. This is almost always accomplished by encouraging competition while ensur-
ing key domestic suppliers have sufficient work to sustain themselves. The Con-
stellation Class power and propulsion systems are being manufactured to baseline
requirements and have not undergone an upgrade. Although Section 8113(b) of Pub-
lic Law 116–9:), the FY 2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act, directs all propulsion
engines and main reduction gears be manufactured domestically by the 11th ship,
the Constellation Class will deliver ship 2 with 100% domestically built power and
propulsion systems. Additionally, the power and propulsion equipment manufac-
turing transition has begun on the first ship with training United States workers
on foreign production lines. The Navy supports all current domestic content require-
ments and will continue to assess opportunities to strengthen the domestic ship-
building industrial base.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. All military Services are facing historic recruiting challenges. There are
many factors at play here, but notable causes remain a shrinking pool of eligible
candidates, and a competitive job market. Last year, the Navy took a significant
number of recruits from its Delayed Entry Program (DEP) Pool to try to meet its
recruiting goals, thereby significantly depleting the Navy’s accessions pipeline for

---

82
this year. The Marine Corps reduced the size of its force below its Force Design
2030 goal.
How is recruiting going for the Department of the Navy this year?
Answer. Navy Recruiting Command (NRC) continues to aggressively work towards
the Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) accession mission, but is experiencing challenges. The
previous FY was one of the toughest in recruiting history and NRC was unable to
refill the DEP pool back to a healthy level of 50 percent. The inability to rebuild
a healthy DEP created conditions for a contract-and- ship environment, which
places additional stress on achieving the required mission. Throughout this FY,
NRC has experienced great difficulty attracting Sailors in specific high-demand
fields (Nuclear Field, Information Warfare, Special Warfare/Operations, Submarine,
and certain aviation specialties), due to strong competition from the other Services
and industry, a decline in labor force participation rate, a decline/loss of relation-
ships and recruiter contacts, and a low market propensity among the target demo-
graphic. Propensity to serve declined from 13 percent to nine percent, which equates
to approximately 1.2 million fewer prospects. In order to be successful this year,
Navy will have to match or exceed the highest average contracting rate (927 Net
Contract Attained (NCA)/week) in more than a decade to make the accessions mis-
sion.
Question. Are you on track to meet your authorized strength levels?
Answer. The Navy is employing numerous recruiting, attrition, and retention miti-
gations to help mitigate the end strength shortfalls in FY23. However, due to the
challenging recruiting environment and the growing strength profile from FY22 to
FY23, Navy does not anticipate achieving authorized strength levels in FY23.
Question. In February, the Government Accountability Office reported that the
Navy is facing persistent and worsening sustainment challenges across its ten class-
es of surface ships. From data collected over a ten-year period, operating and sup-
port costs grew by about $2.5 billion, while the number of operating hours of the
ships actually decreased. We already have a smaller fleet than China, we can’t af-
ford ships to be stuck in port when they should be steaming.
The GAO report was specific to surface ship maintenance, but submarines are
also plagued with longer than expected repair periods.
What are we doing to increase readiness of the submarine force?
Answer. Navy leadership remains dedicated to reducing our submarine’s days of
maintenance delay and returning our fighting force back to the fleet as expedi-
tiously as possible. The Navy is executing multiple initiatives for improvement to
eliminate the root causes of the delays. These initiatives are part of the Naval
Sustainment System-Shipyard (NSS–SY) and referred to as Pillars of effort. Each
Pillar is led by a flag officer to ensure enterprise accountability. The Pillars include
Engineering, Inside Shops, Waterfront, People, Fleet Ops, Infrastructure, Informa-
tion Technology, Cost, and Planning. The Navy is engaged across the spectrum of
submarine maintenance and modernization and is targeting improvements that will
increase overall submarine readiness.
In conjunction with these Pillars, the Navy established several critical efforts to
drive change and improvements to the maintenance and sustainment periods
through the implementation of a VIRGINIA Class (VACL) Material Strategy as well
as additional focused efforts in the areas of Supplier Development, Shipyard Infra-
structure, Strategic Outsourcing, and Workforce Development.
VACL Material Strategy comprises four critical actions:
1. Ensure proper phasing of material funding to support having a majority of the
material at start of maintenance availabilities.
2. Ensure proper levels of material funding per availability.
3. Ensure the material funding is clearly separated/identified.
4. Develop and implement a Bill of Material strategy to increase material avail-
ability.
Key PB–24 investments in SSN maintenance are:
—Fully funds Submarine Maintenance (1B4B) which will improve confidence in
schedule execution and material availability for planned submarine overhauls.
($972M (FYDP))
—Invests in the long lead-time (LLTM) materials that are causing significant
delays in VCS availabilities. ($896M (FYDP))
—Addresses obsolete systems or components and invests in outsourced work to
enable shipyard worker focus on critical path work. ($761M (FYDP))
—Restores Navy Working Capital Fund investment in VCS material made in
FY23. ($350M (FYDP))
—Funds planning of a private shipyard VCS availability in heel-to-toe fashion fol-
lowing BOISE EOH, continuing Navy’s partnership with private industry.
($170M (FYDP))

---

83
The Navy is aggressively pursuing this VACL Material Strategy with all stake-
holders to address material issues impacting VACL maintenance performance. A
key focus is to bolster the industrial base in the following areas:
Supplier Development
Develop existing suppliers and expand the number of Submarine Industrial Base
suppliers to better support material needs. The Navy is working with stakeholders,
including the two prime submarine shipbuilders—General Dynamics Electric Boat
(GDEB) and Huntington Ingalls Industries—Newport News Shipbuilding (HII–
NNS), to improve oversight and assessment of the supply chain, including con-
ducting annual health and readiness assessments of the supplier base that supports
the submarine shipbuilding enterprise. Using a comprehensive risk management ap-
proach, critical suppliers are evaluated on their ability to meet current demand and
grow to meet future demand. This oversight and accountability model enables great-
er visibility of supply chain health and data informed decisionmaking that transi-
tion information to action.
Investments in the Submarine Industrial Base ultimately provide additional bene-
fits to sustainment, as beneficiary companies and suppliers supporting new con-
struction also manufacture spares used for submarine maintenance availabilities.
Shipyard Infrastructure
The Navy, GDEB, and HII–NNS, have each invested to expand and modernize fa-
cilities and shipyard infrastructure to support submarine construction capacity. The
Navy has primarily used capital expenditure (CAPEX) and Construction Readiness
Incentives (CRI) to support both shipbuilders’ capital investments. The Navy and
both shipbuilders have reached a common understanding of the current facilities,
fixtures, footprint, and resources needed to achieve the construction capacity to
reach the COLUMBIA SSBN and two VACL SSN (1∂2) serial submarine construc-
tion rate, as well as the risks and constraints as part of that baseline. Additionally,
the Navy is investing in the modernization and expansion of facilities and infra-
structure at the public shipyards through the Navy’s Shipyard Infrastructure Opti-
mization Plan (SIOP). Specifically, SIOP is designed to update the physical layout
of the four public shipyards, upgrade and modernize their dry docks, and replace
antiquated capital equipment. FY23 enacted appropriations included $1.8B for SIOP
efforts. PB24 continues SIOP investments requesting $2.7B in FY24 and $9.9B
across the FYDP.
Strategic Outsourcing
Strategic outsourcing provides the dual benefit of supporting increased production
at the public shipyards while leveraging existing capacity and stabilizing the work-
load for other industry partners. These efforts are focused on increasing depot-level
capacity and reducing CNO availability duration. This work includes a combination
of preservation, onboard ship system work, structural, electrical shop work, support
services, and component repairs.
At the private shipyards, GDEB is continuing to execute a combination of tradi-
tional ‘‘buy’’ purchase orders and the Focus Factory (FF) outsourcing concept, which
is a dedicated approach to allow the transfer of work and technical rigor to the in-
dustrial base using shipbuilder instructions, processes, and supervision. Newport
News Shipbuilding (NNS) is outsourcing approximately 1 million labor hours per
year to address footprint and work center capacity constraints. This work includes
a combination of large structural assemblies, steel fabrication, machining, and blast
and coat operations. NNS intends to maintain this level of outsourcing over the next
5 years based on current demand signals. An extensive amount of work has been
performed to assess and develop suppliers to support this workload. Suppliers are
beginning to demonstrate the ability to overcome the learning curve but workforce
development and employee retention remain challenging.
Workforce Development
To keep pace with the existential threat of shrinking manufacturing base exper-
tise and experience, the nation must view the generational increase in requirements
for submarine shipbuilding and maintenance as an opportunity to reimagine tradi-
tional approaches. These approaches must address skilled labor resource shortages,
bridge disconnects between school-based education and domestic defense manufac-
turing skillsets and reinvigorate community connection with the Navy mission. The
Navy is implementing a strategy in partnership with the Office of the Secretary of
Defense Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Program, industry, regional
trade associations, and state/local governments to address critical Submarine Indus-
trial Base workforce challenges in the attraction, recruitment, training and develop-
ment, and retention of the vital defense industrial base workforce.

---

84
Workforce Pay and Retention
NAVSEA is leveraging a three-pronged approach to address hiring challenges and
improve retention.
—Special Pay Rates: One of the leading indicators related to under performance
of hiring plans is the disparity of pay in comparison to private industry. Each
shipyard developed data-driven positions to be considered for Special Pay Rates
—Through the Naval Sustainment System-Shipyard (NSS–SY) People Pillar, the
Expert Tradesperson initiative creates a career path that incentivizes our best
and brightest mechanics to stay in the Wage Grade field. The Expert
Tradesperson position was established with a clear vision and intent to enhance
a career in trades and increase responsibilities and authorities within the pro-
duction department, thereby dramatically improving throughput and productive
capacity.
—Pursuing Exceptions to Pay Increase Limitations: Annual appropriations law
found in the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act
places limits on wage schedule increases for Federal Wage System positions.
This limitation does not provide parity with private industry and places undue
burden on the naval shipyards to recruit or retain qualified employees.
Strategic Submarines Sustainment Efforts
OHIO Class SSBNs remain the cornerstone of our national security. The Navy es-
tablished Program Management Office (PMS) 396 in October 2021 to focus on the
sustainment of OHIO Class SSBNs for fleet tasking and is taking a multi-pronged
approach to SSBN sustainment and readiness. This includes technical rigor and ad-
herence to requirements, proactive solutions to maintenance and material issues, in-
cremental modernization to meet future needs/threats, continuous data feedback
and analyses to routinely refine and improve maintenance requirements, work exe-
cution, and develop/execute depot maintenance schedule.
Similar to the VACL, the Navy remains dedicated to reducing our strategic sub-
marines’ days of maintenance delay and returning our fighting force back to the
fleet. We are ensuring VACL lessons are implemented and applied and have focused
efforts in the areas of Supplier Development and Sea-Based Strategic Deterrence In-
frastructure.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN
Question. Admiral Gilday, during the hearing, General Berger explained his jus-
tification for listing the LPD as his number one item on the Marine Corps Unfunded
Priorities List, can you please respond to his points?
If the Navy does not plan to purchase an LPD for the next 5 years, how will the
Navy fill that capability gap and/or mitigate associated risks with ceasing acquisi-
tion of the LPD?
Answer. General Berger and I agree on the requirement for 31 amphibious ships,
and we are committed to ensuring we meet this requirement and do so in a timely
manner, but with a capable, sustainable mix of ship classes that will support our
Marines and Sailors for decades to come. The FY24 budget reflects a pause in pro-
curing LPDs in order to conduct an LPD 17 Flt II amphibious ship cost/capability
study and complete the Battle Force Ship Assessment & Requirement (BFSAR) re-
port to Congress which will inform the FY25 budget’s way ahead for LPD acquisi-
tion.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. The Navy has conducted three surveys of WWII munitions and explo-
sives of concern (including Unexploded Ordnance, UXO) on the seabed at Unalaska,
and has identified several areas where these hazards may be. It has concluded that
risks to public safety are present in many of these areas. I, and I believe the Navy
view these seabed MEC/UXOs as a serious risk to public safety in the Unalaska/
Dutch Harbor area. Yet, the Navy does not plan to conduct another survey until
2027. To date the Navy has apparently only used Side Scan Sonar in its surveys,
but no underwater metal detectors, ROVs, Synthetic Aperture Sonar, to locate these
explosive hazards.
Why?
Answer. The Navy is committed to protecting human health and the environment
by investigating, remediating and implementing response actions at munition sites
on land and at sea. To protect public safety in the Unalaska/Dutch Harbor area, the

---

85
Navy is implementing response actions to include land use controls, notifying the
public, and conducting outreach to communities that might access the area.
While there have been great strides in the past several years to develop and ob-
tain technologies that can find munitions on the seafloor, there are currently no
technologies or equipment that can operate in the challenging sea conditions in
Alaska and provide high-fidelity information to identify and classify Munitions and
Explosives of Concern (MEC). The Navy has assessed the ability of other equipment,
such as Remotely Operated Vehicles and currently available metal detectors, to op-
erate in the Unalaska/Dutch Harbor area as well. Unfortunately, these technologies
do not generate data results that are superior to side scan sonar.
The planned MEC survey dates in Fiscal Year 2027 (FY 27) are based on the ex-
pected timelines to develop new technology through the Department of Defense’s
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) and the En-
vironmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). The Navy plans to
use synthetic aperture sonar along with other equipment FY27. The Navy remains
committed to moving forward on underwater investigation and remediation as soon
as possible, and will adjust timelines as suitable equipment is available.
Question. Will the Navy use all technologies at its disposal, to locate these MEC/
UXOs, and to the extent that is safe, remove or contain these munition hazards
such that they no longer pose a threat to the local public?
Answer. Yes, the Navy is committed to taking all actions necessary to protect
human health and the environment.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Question. The Skillbridge program is a valuable and effective program for
servicemembers to gain practical civilian work experience prior to separation. The
Navy recently released guidance restricting access to Skillbridge for its senior en-
listed and officers. While, the Navy’s recruiting challenges are not as drastic as oth-
ers, I believe the Navy should be prioritizing programs to stay ahead of this issue.
Can you share what specific information and factors influenced this guidance?
Answer. The Navy’s rationale for these program changes is to balance between
mission readiness and Sailors’ ability to improve post-service employment opportu-
nities, consistent with the MyNavy HR Strategic Goal to Build a Navy that can
Fight and Win.
The Navy understands the value of SkillBridge for transitioning Sailors. Our pol-
icy changes focus SkillBridge opportunities on junior Sailors who are less likely to
have extensive formal education, or highly developed skillsets, placing them at the
highest risk for post-service unemployment. These changes focus the program on
those whom it was intended to help, while also taking into account critical manning
needs and mission readiness.
The Navy is also mindful of the significant investment we make in officer edu-
cation. These policy changes ensure maximum return on that investment by requir-
ing officers to fulfill their commitments to the Navy before embarking on
SkillBridge.
Question. Did you consult with DoD before issuing these new guidelines?
Answer. Yes. We socialized our proposed policy changes with SkillBridge leader-
ship at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
Question. Private sector firms are providing incredible fellowships and internships
at no cost to the Services beyond sustaining the service members’ pay and benefits.
Does the Navy have an alternative program that costs less and delivers similar
outcomes while also improving the transition experience?
Answer. The Navy is fully committed to assisting our Sailors’ successful transition
to civilian life. It is our goal to enable former Sailors to become productive citizens
and ambassadors for the Navy in which they served. We fully support and encour-
age their participation in the Transition Assistance Program as required by law,
along with participation in other transition or internship programs, such as
SkillBridge, as the individual unit’s mission requirements allow.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN
Question. In a potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific region, the strength of our
Navy will be one of the key factors for control of the region. Given the current pace
of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) naval expansion, now more than ever we
must focus on improving and maintaining the readiness of our current fleet.
Admiral Gilday, I know that you understand this problem better than anyone.
Can you please talk to the initiatives that the Navy is implementing to modernize

---

86
and optimize our shipyards to ensure our fleet is prepared for the possibility of fu-
ture conflict?
Answer. The Navy’s primary initiative to modernize and optimize the four public
shipyards is the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP). Shipyards
with resilient facilities, efficient layouts, modernized equipment, and digital inter-
connections generate Fleet readiness and strengthen our Nation’s security.
With the support received from Congress—to include the $1.7 billion appropriated
in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023—SIOP is advancing three lines of effort (LOE): (1) deliver
required dry dock repairs and upgrades to support current and planned classes of
nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines, (2) optimize workflow within the
shipyards through significant changes to their physical layout and modernizing fa-
cilities, and (3) recapitalize obsolete industrial plant equipment with modern tech-
nology, substantially increasing productivity and safety. In addition, SIOP provides
a unique opportunity to address environmental stewardship, climate change, and
energy resiliency, while updating the shipyards to Navy criteria and industry stand-
ards.
SIOP has already achieved a number of accomplishments:
—Completion of the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (PNSY) Super Flood Basin con-
struction project and the modernized Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY) Dry Dock
4.
—Construction contract awards for the NNSY Dry Dock 8 Saltwater Upgrades
and the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard (PHNS) Dry Dock 3 Replacement.
—Preliminary design of a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier capable dry dock
at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS).
—Awarding multiple Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization
projects across all four shipyards.
—Making a of range of capital equipment investments to include delivery of a
175-ton portal crane to PNSY.
The foundation of SIOP’s optimization effort is made up of the industrial modeling
and simulation, engineering studies, and area development plans underway for each
shipyard. SIOP completed the first increment of industrial modeling in 2022, which
provided facility-level data describing optimized workflow among buildings and vali-
dated reductions in ship maintenance availability durations achievable by opti-
mizing facility layouts and infrastructure. The second increment of industrial mod-
eling started in 2022 and focuses on processes within each building to optimize shop
floor layout and equipment to further increase efficiencies. Using the modeled data
from the first increment of industrial modeling and data gathered from engineering
studies, area development plans are underway at all four shipyards. Leveraging a
SIOP-tailored major defense acquisition process, the Navy will make investment de-
cisions that will lead to design and construction of the preferred alternative at each
shipyard.
As the deliberate, long-term planning progresses that will create the efficiencies
and throughput needed in our public shipyards, the Navy is making significant
near-term investments in facilities and equipment to support the platforms in the
fleet and entering service. The Navy’s FY 2024 President’s Budget Submission con-
firms the Administration’s commitment to SIOP with $9.9B of funding across the
FYs 2024–2028 Future Years Defense Program.
Navy readiness demands that all SIOP investments are coordinated with fleet
operational commitments to ensure alignment of requirements, construction, and
ship maintenance, while remaining mindful of the impact SIOP will have on our
shipyard workers and our need for sustainable infrastructure. This includes ensur-
ing the program is integrated with the Naval Sea Systems Command Performance
to Plan, the Naval Sustainment System—Shipyards efforts, local communities and
regulators, and the Administration’s climate initiatives.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL DAVID H. BERGER

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. You recently quoted a 32 percent readiness rate for our amphibious
fleet. You’re not proposing to buy any new amphibious ships in the 2024 budget,
but at the same time are proposing to retire 3 amphibious ships, further shrinking
the fleet.
What size amphibious fleet do we need to support Force Design 2030?
Answer. We need no less than 31 Amphibious Warfare Ships to enable Marine
Corps Title 10 missions in support of the joint force while providing minimal ARG/
MEU presence globally in support of Combatant Commanders. This number is

---

87
threat informed and risk assessed. It is scenario based, and model driven through
a multiple phase event executed by the analytic arms of the Navy and the Marine
Corps. It is imperative for delivering our Marines and their equipment on time, at
decisive locations, to contest strategic areas in support of our Nation’s most demand-
ing war planning efforts. However, there is still significant risk with only 31 am-
phibious warfare ships due to readiness. Even with an inventory of 31, four of our
last five ARG/MEUs have been delayed, and one patrol executed with two ships in-
stead of three. This requirement is consistent with 11 amphibious warfare ship in-
ventory studies completed over the last 14 years.
Question. Is it accurate that last year, the Marine Corps was unable to support
certain recent deployment requirements from the Combatant Commanders?
Answer. The Marine Corps remains postured and prepared to serve as the Na-
tion’s crisis response force, providing credible forces where the Nation is least ready.
Last year, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022, Marines
stood ready to sortie to the U.S. European Command. However, due to readiness
issues of certain Amphibious Warfare Ships, we were unable to provide this option
to the EUCOM Commander and Secretary of Defense.
Then, in February of this year, when Turkey experienced one of the most dev-
astating earthquakes in the region’s history, Marines who are trained and prepared
to support humanitarian aid operations were once again ready to deploy. Due to the
availability of amphibious shipping, this deployment option was not available to the
Secretary of Defense. An amphibious ship with embarked Marines could have pro-
vided the Combatant Commander with capabilities such as a hospital, large berth-
ing spaces, water purification, heavy lift helicopters, debris removal, and transpor-
tation via MV–22 tiltrotor aircraft, and a landing force of 2,400 Marines trained in
Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief (HA/DR). Instead, Marines forward based
in Naples, Italy established a forward crisis response operations center at Incirlik
Air Base in Turkey. Without the organic and sovereign capabilities of an embarked
MEU aboard amphibious ships, this HA/DR response option was severely reduced,
and the nation was unable to support a NATO partner as we traditionally have in
a crisis.
Question. All military services are facing historic recruiting challenges. There are
many factors at play here, but notable causes remain a shrinking pool of eligible
candidates, and a competitive job market.
Last year, the Navy took a significant number of recruits from its Delayed Entry
Pool to try to meet its recruiting goals, thereby significantly depleting the Navy’s
accessions pipeline for this year. The Marine Corps reduced the size of its force
below its Force Design 2030 goal.
Is readiness now a concern for the Marine Corps?
Answer. The Marine Corps remains the Nation’s force-in-readiness—a postured
naval expeditionary force ready to deter adversaries, respond to crisis and conflict,
and contribute to Naval and Joint Force operations. Our identity as Marines centers
on being ready to deter, fight, and win. As individuals, as units, and as a Corps,
everything we do is in support of warfighting advantage and being most ready when
the Nation is least ready. This is our obligation to the American people.
Our FY23 end strength target is 172,300. While enlisted recruiting continues to
face unprecedented challenges, retention is responding positively across almost all
metrics. For both first term reenlistments and career-oriented Marines we have re-
tained over 104% of our goal. This retention rate of this magnitude is record setting.
Current plans achieve the Force Design 2030 floor of 174,600 by FY30; the intent
is to achieve the floor sooner if possible. The Marine Corps adjusted its Active Com-
ponent enlisted recruiting mission in FY22 by 1,500 to mitigate the effects of
COVID and new medical screening system implementation. Despite FY22 chal-
lenges, the Marine Corps achieved its enlisted recruiting goal. However, doing so re-
duced the Service’s delayed entry recruit pool from a historical average of over 50%
to approximately 30%. The FY23 Active Component enlisted recruiting mission was
modified in December 2022 from 31,900 to 28,900 to mitigate risk due to the current
recruiting environment and limit further delayed entry pool degradation.
Our Nation is facing a recruiting strain that is unparalleled in the All-Volunteer
Force era. All Services are affected by the current confluence of a stagnant youth
population, declining youth propensity to serve, declining percentage of qualified
youth, and fragmented advertising markets. This is a national problem requiring a
whole-of-nation dialogue. In keeping with the tenets of Force Design 2030, the Ma-
rine Corps is increasing retention of our highest performing Marines, especially
within leadership and highly technical billets. This will prepare our forces to suc-
ceed on dispersed, complex, distributed, and high-technology future battlefields. We
will continue to refine our policies consistent with Talent Management 2030 to best
align the innate aptitudes, unique skill sets, and personal and professional aspira-

---

88
tions of individual Marines to the warfighting requirements of the Marine Corps—
over the entirety of a Marine’s career. Young Americans who earn the title of ‘‘Ma-
rine’’ can expect to be challenged through higher quality, more intense, and more
sophisticated training and education than ever before.
Question. I want to ask about a pressing healthcare issue in Japan that is affect-
ing our military readiness. When we talk to Marines stationed there, the top con-
cern we hear about is the lack of healthcare for their dependents and DoD civilians.
Constituents from Montana stationed in Japan and working for DoD have also
contacted my office voicing the same concerns.
I raised this issue during our recent Subcommittee briefing with the Defense
Health Agency, and while I understand some policy changes have been made, con-
cerns about Japanese hospitals denying care remain.
Are you hearing the same from Marines and civilians stationed in Japan?
Answer. Yes, healthcare access issues impacting Marines, families, and civilian
employees stationed in Japan is an important topic for the Marine Corps. At the
recent Executive meeting of USMC 3 and 4 star Generals, this topic was prioritized.
The Japanese healthcare system operates fundamentally differently than in the
United States. There is a different mechanism for accessing care both in a
prehospital setting and specialty care. We are actively working with the Defense
Health Agency and other DoD components to address these issues and ensure our
Marines, families, and civilian employees get the support they need both in the con-
tinental United States and overseas, in locations like Japan.
Question. Last fiscal year, the Marine Corps did not spend all of its initial funding
to begin hiring its prevention workforce.
What is the status of the Marine Corps hiring for these positions?
Answer. To date, 85 positions are posted or have selected candidates with Ten-
tative Job Offers and 24 personnel have been hired. The Marine Corps noted in the
OSD Implementation Roadmap development that execution of IRC recommendations
require time for implementation planning and assessments, clarification of tasks,
and Service-specific input to support a phased, iterative approach. The accelerated
funding the Marine Corps received at the beginning of the 3rd quarter FY22 in sup-
port of the IRC was not obligated. Originally, the Marine Corps was planning for
FY23 implementation of the IRC recommendations. Since notification of FY22 fund-
ing, the Marine Corps has completed the necessary administrative actions and all
hiring/payroll processes to commence IRC hiring actions in support of IRC require-
ments. The full implementation of Marine Corps hiring, based on SAPR IRC rec-
ommendations, is in progress.
Question. Are you on track to fill these positions this fiscal year?
Answer. No. We are behind. That said, we are working to get on track with filling
these positions this fiscal year and are currently at 14 percent of our FY23 goal to
hire 369 positions worldwide, with new vacancy announcements being posted regu-
larly. These positions include 121 SARCs, 194 Victim Advocates, 23 Primary Pre-
vention Integrators, and 31 Equal Opportunity Advisors. Marine Corps implementa-
tion of all IRC requirements will require significant enduring resourcing, pro-
grammatic changes for manpower training, and military justice policy and authori-
ties.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN
Question. General Berger, I read in your written statement that you have invested
significantly in quality-of-life improvements for Marines living in the barracks.
However, I also saw that 16% of the facilities are in poor or failing conditions.
What investments can we make to ensure that Marines and their families have
the high-quality housing they deserve, and do you see a correlation between the
quality of your barracks and housing and the recruiting and retention issue?
Answer. The Marine Corps sees a direct correlation between the condition of our
quality of life (QOL) facilities with recruitment and retention. As stated in the Ma-
rine Corps’ Talent Management 2030 plan, ‘‘Quality of life is one of the leading rea-
sons Marines choose to depart our Corps. We must renew our focus on meeting Ma-
rines’ needs like high-quality barracks, family housing, and chow halls; adequate
childcare center capacity; and sufficient options for pediatric care.’’
To achieve these goals, the Marine Corps will invest $116M to renovate 13 bar-
racks in FY24, as well as over $201M in family housing construction and operations.
The Marine Corps strives to improve the QOL for its service members and their
families, and with these investments, hopes to increase retention and recruiting
measures.

---

89
Question. General Berger, I understand a large part of Force Design and the
stand- in forces concept is forward deployed Marines who are already in place when
the worst- case scenario unfolds. This plan requires resiliency, self-sufficiency, and
the ability to punch back, after taking a punch. It seems the MRIC, or Medium-
Range Intercept Capability system is important for this capacity.
Can you tell me about this systems progress and your planned investments for
FY24?
Answer. MRIC is an expeditionary, land-based, medium-range, surface-to-air fires
system that will enable Joint, Marine Corps, and partner forces to operate and per-
sist within contested areas by providing these forces with the capability to defend
against cruise missiles and other aerial threats. The Marine Corps is utilizing a
Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA) approach to procure an MRIC prototype system. The
MRIC rapid prototype effort began in FY21, demonstrated success against relevant
target profiles through a series of multiple live fire tests during FY22 and FY23,
and remains on track to deliver a prototype system to conduct operationally relevant
demonstrations by the end of FY25. This will inform the Marine Corps’ follow-on
materiel development decision in order to meet the Force Design requirement to
field an MRIC Battery to each of the three Low Altitude Air Defense (LAAD) Battal-
ions in FY26, FY27, and FY28.
The FY24 President’s Budget request $44M to support munition and component
level procurement of the prototype system, as well as the operation and mainte-
nance, and research and development requirements for the planned operational
demonstration and necessary preparatory events and activities. These include train-
ing Marines to operate the prototype system, performance of an operational dem-
onstration in Arizona, and conducting a quick reaction assessment in New Mexico.
The last event will be overseen by the Marine Corps’ Operational Test and Evalua-
tion Activity.

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. Look, I think predictability in the industrial
base is really, really important. And I think, making sure we are
getting the biggest bang for the buck, by getting folks to have com-
petitive contracts, and getting these out on time is also very impor-
tant.
And I look forward to working with all three of you, as do Sen-
ator Collins, to make sure that when this budget hits the ground,
we all know what is in it, and we all know what to expect the re-
sults of it are, because I think it is a critically important moment
in time. So thank you all for what you do.
This defense subcommittee will reconvene on Tuesday, April 18,
at 10 a.m., to hear from the Air Force.
We stand in recess.
[Whereupon, at 11:33 a.m., Tuesday, March 28, the sub-
committee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, April
18.]

---

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023

U.S. SENATE,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen Sen-
ate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Baldwin, Shaheen, Collins,
Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK KENDALL, SECRETARY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. Good morning, everybody. And I want to call
this committee meeting to order.
I want to welcome our witnesses; Secretary Kendall, General
Brown, General Saltzman, thank you for your leadership and com-
mitment to our Air Force and Space Force; I look forward to dis-
cussing your fiscal year 2024 budget, priorities today.
General Saltzman, this is your first hearing before this com-
mittee, and we look forward to continuing to work with you.
Secretary Kendall, I want to thank you for joining me to visit the
341st Missile Wing at Malmstrom Air Force Base, and the 120th
Airlift Wing of the Montana Air National Guard a couple weeks
ago tomorrow, I think it was. And I appreciate your visit. I look
forward to continuing our discussions to ensure that our service
members have the tools they need to protect this country’s free-
doms.
The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Department of the
Air Force is $215.1 billion, $9.3 billion more than fiscal year 2023,
and about $41 billion more than fiscal year 2022. With China’s pac-
ing threat, and Russia’s destabilizing actions, necessitated robust
National Defense budget. However, modernization efforts in the
fielding of crucial systems and aircraft are frozen unless we enact
the Defense Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2024.
We cannot allow CRs (Continuing Resolutions) to block our
progress towards a modernization, and robust, and capable Air
Force and Space Force, it is imperative that the fiscal year 2024
(91)

---

92

budget is enacted on time. And I look forward to working with Sen-
ator Murray and Senator Collins, to position us for success.
Our national security is equally undermined by leaks of classified
information, while the damage assessment of recent leaks by a
member of the Air National Guard is ongoing; I would like to hear
from you today why this individual had access to such highly clas-
sified information in the first place.
Until we can confidently guarantee that our folks receiving secu-
rity clearances will keep our Nation safe, I will continue to push
for commonsense reforms to the background check and security
classification process.
Further, while it was important to explore and invest in mod-
ernization improvements of our assets and systems, these efforts
fall flat unless they can be translated into capabilities delivered to
the warfighter.
As in previous years, your requests for modernization programs
grow significantly, while your procurement request remains rel-
atively flat. This is concerning because it implies that experiments,
prototypes, and modernization efforts are not transferring to a
large-scale production. We cannot let record high investments, and
innovation, and modernization go unrealized.
Once again, I want to thank you, each of you, for your service
to this country.
Before you make your opening statements, I want to turn it over
to my Ranking Member, Senator Collins, for any comments she
would like to make.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appre-
ciate your holding this hearing on the Air Force’s fiscal year 2024
budget request.
To our witnesses, thank you so much for your service and leader-
ship, and that of the Airmen and Guardians who serve our Nation.
Secretary Kendall, the seven operational imperatives that you
and the Chiefs have established for the Air Force and Space Force
provide a useful framework for our analysis this morning.
In many respects, the budget request reflects your continued
focus to implement them, such as proposals to double funding for
missiles, to increase funding for the Space Force by 15 percent, and
to accelerate the development of the Next-Generation Air Refueling
Systems optimized for the Indo-Pacific Theater.
Until that new system is in place, I welcome the Department’s
continued commitment to recapitalizing all of the legacy KC–135
aircraft across the Air Force, including the 60-year-old airframes
flown by the MAINEiacs of the Air National Guard in Bangor,
Maine. However, there is a lot in this request, or perhaps more ac-
curately not in it, that raises questions about whether the budget
will achieve the seven imperatives before our country faces the
challenges that you seek to address.
Let me highlight just three of them: First, the Department is
proposing to retire three times as many aircraft as it plans to buy
this year. If this request were to be enacted with no changes, by
my calculation, the Air Force would have 800 fewer aircraft in 2028
than it does today. Meanwhile, China continues to increase both

---

93

the number and the capability of its most advanced fighter aircraft,
the J–20 and the J–16.
Second, the mission-capable rate for the F–35 in February was
just 53 percent. It is not clear to me how this budget request will
tackle this problem. And the Air Force, obviously, is far less effec-
tive if many of its planes are grounded. I would like to know how
this budget request will improve the operational availability of the
F–35.
Finally, the Air Force is the largest consumer of fuel in the Fed-
eral Government, therefore, the Air Force has the greatest expo-
sure of budget shortfalls and readiness risks if the cost assump-
tions in this request understate the actual price of fuel. For 2 years
in a row that is exactly what has happened, the budget request has
underestimated fuel costs, and Congress has come to the rescue to
protect training and readiness. We were able to do that because of
a substantial increase in the Defense top line for the past 2 years.
So the question I will have for our witnesses is: What is the Air
Force doing to maintain its flying hours, programs, and operations?
What will it do if fuel costs, once again, exceed the estimate in the
budget request?
There are many issues for us to cover today, not the least of
which is, as the Chairman mentioned, the disturbing revelation
last week that a young Cape Cod-based Air National Guardsman
was, allegedly, able to remove, photograph, and disseminate many
classified National Security documents for months without notice
from the Office of Special Investigations, the Pentagon, or the In-
telligence Community.
I look forward to discussing these issues with our witnesses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins.
Next up, we have the Honorable Frank Kendall, Secretary of the
Air Force.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK KENDALL

Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, Members of the Sub-
committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Depart-
ment of the Air Force’s fiscal year 2024 budget submission.
Approximately 1 year ago, I began my testimony before this com-
mittee with a quote from General Douglas MacArthur reminding
us that ‘‘The history of failure in war can almost always be
summed up in two words: too late.’’ That warning is even more
valid today.
Over the past year, under the rubric of the seven DAF (Depart-
ment of the Air Force) operational imperatives, that Senator Col-
lins mentioned, the Department of the Air Force has worked to de-
fine the capabilities and technologies that we need, along with the
programs and resources required, to deter, and if necessary prevail
over our pacing challenge, China, China, China.
In fiscal year 2024, we are requesting approximately $5 billion
as a direct result of this work, and over $25 billion for operational
imperative-related investments. War is not inevitable, but success-
fully deterring conflict is heavily dependent on our Military capa-
bilities.

---

94

In our fiscal year 2024 budget request, there are approximately
20 completely new, or significantly rescoped program elements,
some of which are classified, that we must develop, produce and
field, if we desire to maintain the air and space superiority that
America and our allies have counted upon for decades. In order to
proceed with any of these programs the Department of the Air
Force needs timely authorizations and appropriations.
The Department of the Air Force is ready to move forward with
the next generation of capabilities we need. And there is no time
to lose.
In addition, to these new starts or enhanced efforts, the fiscal
year 2024 budget includes requests for additional resources to in-
crease production and accelerate development of programs essen-
tial to the Department’s missions, as defined in the National De-
fense Strategy.
For the Strategic Triad, we have fully funded the Sentinel ICBM
(intercontinental ballistic missile), the B–21 Raider Bomber, the
Long-Range Standoff Weapon, and our Nuclear Commander Con-
trol Programs.
For the Conventional Force, we are increasing production of both
the F–35 and the F–15EX. The Next Generation Air Dominance
Program is funded to move forward, and as indicated last year, an
Uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft Program of record, is fully
funded in our fiscal year 2024 request.
We are also continuing the acquisition of sensor programs, like
the E–7 Wedgetail, and the new resilient missile warning and
tracking space system. As we indicated last year, hard choices have
been required to move the Department into the future.
We deeply appreciate the support of the Congress and this Com-
mittee for the divestitures we requested last year. This year, we
must continue the divestment of the over-40-year-old A–10 Wart-
hog. This program has served us well, but it is absorbing resources
needed for higher priorities; we ask for Congress’ continued support
for this and other identified changes we must make to field the
forces we need to be successful against our pacing challenge and
other threats.
But of course it isn’t all about the equipment we need to perform
our missions; it is also about the men and women who serve in the
Total Force, Active, Guard, Reserve, and those who support them.
I recently returned from the Indo-Pacific where I met with a
number of armed teammates—excuse me—I think I may have
skipped a page.
We appreciate Congress’ support for 4.6 percent pay raise last
year. This year we are asking for our 5.2 percent pay increase. The
largest 1 year increase we have ever requested.
In line with Secretary Austin’s Taking Care of People Initiative,
we are continuing to invest in child development centers and hous-
ing to meet the highest priority needs of the Airmen, Guardians,
and their families.
Like the other Services, with the exception of the Space Force,
the Air Force faces challenges in recruiting in a generation where
the propensity to serve is the lowest that we have seen in decades.
We are removing barriers to ensure that anyone with a capability
and desire can serve to their full potential.

---

95

Under our National Defense Strategy, we are strengthening
teams, both in the Joint Force and with our allies and partners,
building these relationships, investing in our ability to work to-
gether is the essence of integrated deterrence. The effectiveness
and importance of these relationships are on display in Europe
today, where NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is strong-
er than ever.
I recently returned from the Indo-Pacific where I met with a
number of our teammates where I participated in a ground-break-
ing event for one of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement
bases in the Philippines. Our budget request also supports
strengthening our partnerships around the world, especially where
we confront our pacing challenge and most acute threats.
I started by talking about the value of time, and I will finish by
highlighting a legislative proposal that can save up to 2 years of
that valuable time. Our proposal would expand Rapid Acquisition
Authority so that Military Departments can more quickly respond
to emerging threats and take advantage of evolving technology.
Within reasonable constraints, this legislative proposal would
allow progress on compelling national security needs that would,
otherwise, be delayed, until the next submission and approval of
the President’s budget. I have been pushing this reform for many
years, and we look forward to working with the Congress on this
proposal.
In closing, I believe the Department of the Air Force is well pos-
tured to move into the future. Our work to define that future is not
complete, but it has produced compelling results that are reflected
in our fiscal year 2024 budget submission.
We look forward to your questions today; and would like to offer
a more complete briefing on the classified details of our submission,
at your convenience.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you Secretary Kendall.
General Brown, you have the floor.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR., AIR FORCE CHIEF
OF STAFF
General BROWN. Good morning, Chairman Tester, and Ranking
Member Collins, and distinguished Members of this Subcommittee.
I am proud to represent the 689,000 Total Force Airmen serving
our Nation. I want to thank you for your steadfast support to our
Airmen and their families.
It is an honor to join Secretary Kendall and General Saltzman
to testify in the fiscal year 2024 budget submission. This budget
builds on the progress made in fiscal year 2023, and marks the
next milestone towards the transformation of the Air Force to ad-
dress the evolving security challenges outlined in the National De-
fense Strategy.
As I emphasized last year: we must continue to accelerate change
or risk losing our strategic advantage. The Department of the Air
Force’s operational imperatives describe key capabilities that must
be attained to enable the Air Force’s modernization in the face of
a rapidly changing threat environment, remain dedicated to ensur-
ing our investments and resources outlining this budget submission

---

96

are aligned with the National Defense Strategy so the Air Force
can continue to deter our adversaries, prevail in conflict, and to
execute our mission to: Fly, Fight, and Win, Air Power Anytime,
Anywhere. Not sometime in some places, but Anytime, Anywhere.
This budget ensures the Air Forces continue to provide the Na-
tion the assurance of air superiority, the advantage of global strike,
the agility rapid global mobility, and you combine that with the
adaptability of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and
the authority in our command and control capabilities, providing
the ability to sense, make sense, and act. This is what we must do
today, and we must be prepared to do tomorrow.
In order to provide these core functions to the Nation, we must
accelerate development of programs essential to our mission with
this budget submission. The right of the assurance of air superi-
ority, we are increasing production of the F–35 and F–15EX, as
highlighted by the Secretary, while the Next Generation Air Domi-
nance Program continues development.
To provide the advantage of global strike, we fully funded the
Sentinel ICBM and the B–21 Raider Bomber. To provide the agility
of Rapid Global Mobility we must continue the recapitalization of
the KC–135 Fleet, while moving towards the Next-Generation Air
Refueling System. To provide the adaptability of intelligence, sur-
veillance, and reconnaissance, we are transitioning to the E–7A,
complemented by other persistent, connected, and survivable and
systems, and to provide the authority of our command and control
we continue to mature Advanced Battle Management System by in-
vesting in digital infrastructure and modernizing cloud-based com-
munications.
Last year’s budget has started our necessary transformation, as
we indicated, that hard choices would have to be made. Often,
these choices are between current capacity, readiness, and future
capabilities.
Our message this year has not changed. The Air Force must
modernize to counter strategic competitors, by balancing risk by in-
vesting in platforms and capabilities that have decreasing rel-
evance against our pacing challenge, investments in speed, agility,
and the lethality of the Air Force capabilities underwrites the en-
tirety of the Joint Force.
Our Airmen remain the backbone of our Air Force, and we are
committed to ensuring their well-being and development while pro-
viding them the resources and opportunities to reach their full po-
tential whenever and wherever the Nation calls.
The Air Force is dedicated to reducing barriers, improving qual-
ity of service, and quality of life for Airmen and their families. Ad-
dition to excess of air power doesn’t happen alone, the excess is
only possible through the collaboration with many of our stake-
holders and teammates.
I want to thank the Congress and this Subcommittee for their
past and continued support.
We look forward to working with you on our fiscal year 2024 leg-
islative priorities, like Expanding Rapid Acquisition Authority, fur-
thering modernization efforts at the Nevada Test and Training
Range, preventing encroachment on our nuclear launch and control

---

97

facilities, and supporting pilot production, through civilian con-
tractor position conversion.
While we remain the strongest Air Force in the world, we must
continue the change required to address both today and tomorrow’s
national security threats. We must have teamwork and collabora-
tion with all of our key stakeholders, to accelerate, providing our
Airmen the capabilities they need to deter, and project credible
combat power.
We must have on-time appropriations and avoid continuing reso-
lutions to stay ahead of the pacing, acute, and unforeseen chal-
lenges now, into the future. There is not a moment to lose.
Thank you for the opportunity to be here with you today. And
I look forward to your questions.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Brown.
General Saltzman.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN, CHIEF OF SPACE
OPERATIONS, UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE
General SALTZMAN. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins,
distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for your con-
tinued support and for the opportunity to testify on the Space
Force fiscal year 2024 budget submission.
As the Space Force enters its fourth year, we continue to mature
as an independent service, and are fully delivering on assigned
missions. Since assuming my responsibilities in November I have
traveled globally to engage with guardians, combatant com-
manders, and military service chiefs from partner nations to better
understand where the Space Force should focus our efforts.
Across the board, each of these groups emphasized the vital role
space plays in strategic competition and integrated deterrence.
As this committee well understands, competition and deterrence
require investment in and modernization of technology, training,
and partnerships. That is what the fiscal year 2024 budget submis-
sion for the Space Force does.
This budget submission is directly in line with the National De-
fense Strategy, and the Department of the Air Force operational
imperatives. As the fiscal year 2024 budget will allow us to further
efforts to develop a resilient Space Order of Battle, and preparing
for Rapid transition to a wartime posture against any potential ad-
versary to fight and win in a high intensity conflict.
In conjunction with ongoing modernization projects, the Space
Force has several new starts for fiscal year 2024 to support these
efforts. Investing in these modernization projects will allow us to
execute our assigned missions as we move forward to better pos-
ture for the emerging complexities of the space domain, and the
threat systems being fielded by strategic competitors.
Space is now undeniably a contested warfighting domain; China
and Russia define space as such, and are investing in technology
meant to undermine U.S. advantage in the domain.
China, our pacing challenge, is our most substantial threat into
and from space, but Russia also remains an acute threat. Both
present serious challenges with space capabilities that can track
and target U.S. Military Forces on land, at sea, and in the air.
Both can hold U.S. space assets at risk with cyber and electronic

---

98

warfare, lasers, ground-to-space missiles, and space-to-space orbital
engagement systems.
These systems threaten the space architecture the Nation relies
on for prosperity and security. To meet this challenge the Space
Force will prioritize three lines of effort: First, fielding ready, resil-
ient, and combat-credible Forces. Second, amplifying what I call the
‘‘Guardian Spirit’’; and three, partnering to win.
These are directly in line with Secretary Austin’s Mission, Peo-
ple, and Team priorities. In sum, this budget request is designed
to deliver the forces, personnel, and partnerships the Space Force
requires to preserve U.S. advantages in space.
To build resilient-ready, combat-credible Forces, we are accel-
erating the pivot towards modern, more defendable satellite con-
stellations, and support infrastructure. We are conducting trans-
formational Force design analysis based on threats, operational
needs, and costs, so that we can maximize our budget while invest-
ing in effective missile warning, space domain awareness, commu-
nication, and navigation systems.
Additionally, we are investing to ensure our networks are hard-
ened to defeat cyber threats and that we have the operational test
and training infrastructure necessary to prepare Guardians for
high intensity conflict.
With our second line of effort, we are amplifying the Guardian
Spirit by recruiting, developing, and retaining the best talent, and
empowering Guardians to succeed. Investment in space-centric cur-
riculum for entry-level schools will build Guardians laser-focused
on space operations in competition and conflict.
Guardians will be empowered through mission command to inno-
vate and execute in those scenarios. Notably, and with Congres-
sional support, we plan to integrate the space mission elements of
the Air Force Reserve into the Space Force to offer Guardians flexi-
ble career paths, including both full-time and part-time duty to re-
tain talent and bring private-sector experience to the Force.
The third line of effort acknowledges that the Space Force relies
on Partnerships to accomplish our mission. We are investing in
training, education, data sharing, and integrated capabilities with
our allies and partners. The Space Force will strengthen our pres-
ence in all combatant commands where Guardians are already
making solid connections with allies and partners.
Because of its critical importance, the Space Force is collabo-
rating with commercial partners to build resilient capacity and le-
verage emerging technologies. To enhance this partnership, the
Space Force is working to eliminate barriers to such collaboration
so that we can build enduring advantages, and field them more
rapidly.
In conclusion, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Space
Force’s fiscal year 2024 budget request. The Space Force continues
to be the preeminent military space organization in the world. Our
adversaries seek to challenge our advantage in space, but with the
support of this committee our Guardians will be able to outwork,
out-innovate, and out-compete our potential adversaries to ensure
that we maintain that advantage.
The fiscal year 2024 budget request will make this possible, but
only if the Congress passes timely appropriations.

---

99

I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANK KENDALL, GENERAL CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR., AND
GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN
OVERVIEW

The Department of the Air Force (DAF) remains focused on implementing the Na-
tional Defense Strategy (NDS) and the priorities of the Secretary of Defense: mis-
sion, people, and teams. Our ability to perform our missions comes first, and every-
thing we are doing to support and develop our people and build strong teams sup-
ports that goal. One year ago, we submitted a posture statement in which the need
to modernize the Air and Space Forces, especially to meet our pacing challenge—
the People’s Republic of China (PRC)—was highlighted. Over the past year, we have
provided threat briefings to Congress on the severity of that challenge. A year ago,
we also outlined seven operational imperatives the DAF must meet to be successful,
but we were only beginning our work to analyze and define the solutions to those
imperatives. We are pleased to report we have made significant progress in identi-
fying the capabilities the DAF will need to prevail against the PRC and in defining
new programs and resources to develop and field these capabilities. That progress
is reflected in over a dozen new efforts, including a mix of completely new or signifi-
cantly re-scoped program elements, in our Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) budget submis-
sion. With our budget submission, the DAF’s ability to execute these plans and to
keep pace with the threat is now in your hands, and we urge you to act promptly
on our FY24 request.
Within the NDS, there are four priorities: defending the homeland, deterring stra-
tegic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient joint force. The Nation’s
Air and Space Forces have key roles to play in each of these, and this is reflected
in our FY24 budget request.
The need to defend the homeland is paced with the growing threat from the PRC.
We have just seen a manifestation of this threat in the high-altitude surveillance
balloon destroyed by an Air Force F–22 fighter aircraft. While the recent high-alti-
tude balloon incursion into our airspace may have garnered significant attention,
there are other, more concerning threats to the homeland. PRC and Russian sat-
ellites observe the United States continuously. Cyber-attacks focused on intellectual
property theft, penetration of critical infrastructure, espionage against national se-
curity networks, and disinformation, from both the PRC and Russia, are a constant
reality. As the PRC increases the range of its conventional strike capabilities, the
potential for missile strikes of various types against the homeland is increasing. In
our FY24 budget, we are once again requesting F–15EX and F–35 fighter produc-
tion. We are also accelerating our acquisition of a new space-based missile warning
architecture to improve our warning and enable defenses against missile threats.
To deter strategic attacks against the United States, our allies, and partners, the
DAF continues programs to recapitalize the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)
and bomber legs of the nuclear triad. The Sentinel program, our ICBM replacement,
is continuing in development. The Minuteman III, first deployed in 1970, is the old-
est land-based strategic missile system in the world. FY24 budgets more than $4.4
billion for its replacement, Sentinel, which is critical for our nuclear modernization.
For the bomber leg, we recently rolled out the B–21 Raider, which is scheduled to
achieve its first flight this calendar year. Complementing our new bomber is the
modernization of the B–52 and development of the Long-Range Standoff Weapon.
Stable and consistent Congressional support remains vital to ensuring a safe, se-
cure, and effective nuclear deterrent. These programs and others that contribute to
this priority are all fully funded in the FY24 budget request.
Our biggest challenge is maintaining and strengthening our capacity to deter ag-
gression, and to prevail, if necessary, with priority to the PRC and the Indo-Pacific
followed by the Russian challenge in Europe. While there is overlap with other pri-
orities, the focus of our seven operational imperatives described in last year’s pos-
ture statement has been on this challenge. The Nation’s ability to project power, in
the western Pacific in particular, is being challenged aggressively. The FY24 budget
request includes approximately $5 billion in funding focused directly on achieving
the seven operational imperatives and includes several new initiatives. The DAF’s
Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) request includes nearly $35 billion in fund-
ing to continue our investments designed to address the operational imperatives.
The criticality of these efforts highlights the importance of an on-time appropriation.
Space has been recognized as a military domain of crucial importance to the joint
force, allies, and partners, and to our ability to project power. The first operational

---

100
imperative is to define the Space Force that we will need and to put the programs
in place to field that force. The Space Force has two fundamental missions: to pro-
vide essential services to the joint force and to protect the joint force from adversary
hostile uses of space systems. The ability to perform these missions is at risk today
and that risk is increasing over time. Our space systems are threatened by a variety
of growing anti-satellite capabilities, and the joint force is threatened by increas-
ingly sophisticated adversary space-based systems intended to target the joint force.
Our FY24 budget request continues the work on a resilient missile warning con-
stellation initiated last year. Our budget also builds out a more resilient space com-
munications capability for the joint force, based on diversity and dispersion of com-
munication satellites. This development work includes programs being managed by
the Space Development Agency (SDA), now a part of the DAF and the Space Force,
continuing to field distributed communications architectures. The total Space Force
budget in the FY24 request is $30 billion, 15 percent above the enacted Fiscal Year
2023 (FY23) Space Force appropriation. It includes over $2 billion and seven new
efforts for this imperative. Other initiatives in this portfolio can be discussed at a
higher level of classification.
The Air and Space Forces play crucial roles in Joint All Domain Command and
Control (JADC2). The second operational imperative is intended to ensure the total-
ity of DAF Command, Control, Communications, and Battle Management (C3BM)
programs provide an integrated capability with the resilience and performance need-
ed to provide the Air Force and Space Force, the joint force, allies, and partners,
with timely information and the systems to communicate, manage, and employ that
information. Providing this capability resiliently is critical to enable our warfighters
to make effective decisions in a high-speed, complex fight against our pacing chal-
lenge. The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) is one part of this overall
effort, which has now been brought under the technical management of a recently
created Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Integrated C3BM. Additionally, our
Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications (NC3) capability investments will
be synchronized with the PEO for Integrated C3BM efforts. The FY24 budget sub-
mission includes a net of roughly $500 million for DAF C3BM, including an addi-
tional $65 million for one new effort in this area.
If the United States is to deter aggression and prevail should conflict occur, we
must have the ability to track and engage advancing enemy forces in the air, on
the sea, and on land. The third operational imperative addresses this need with a
combination of space- and air-based systems. For space-based systems, the Space
Force is working in close collaboration with the intelligence community to ensure
that the joint force has the support it needs from integrated intelligence and oper-
ational support systems located in space. This will include operational space sens-
ing, coupled with tasking and data management, designed with joint tactical
warfighting as a primary mission. For airborne systems, the DAF is continuing the
acquisition of the E–7A replacement for the E–3 airborne warning and control sys-
tem. Other initiatives can be discussed at a higher level of classification. Overall,
the FY24 budget requests $431 million for moving target related systems (exclusive
of the Intelligence Community and classified funding) and includes six new efforts.
For over 75 years, the Air Force has dominated opponents in the air. The PRC
is challenging that dominance, and we cannot afford complacency, nor can we afford
Air Force capability and capacity composed largely of fighters that cost as much as
or more than the F–35. The fourth operational imperative addresses the family-of-
systems needed to sustain our dominance in the air. The centerpiece of this effort
is the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) platform, but this platform will be
too expensive to be purchased in large numbers. The FY24 budget enhances funding
to field uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) to complement the NGAD,
F–35, and possibly other current and new crewed platforms. Concurrent with CCA
development, the DAF will acquire assets for experimentation and testing to explore
organizational structures, maintenance concepts, and operational tactics. CCA in-
ventory goals have not been established, but for planning purposes, we are assum-
ing an initial inventory of 1,000 CCAs, with nominally two CCAs paired with each
NGAD aircraft, and a portion of the F–35 inventory. In addition to the CCAs, this
operational imperative has addressed other aspects of the NGAD family-of-systems.
In total, the FY24 budget submission requests approximately $490 million for air
dominance, with the entire CCA program and supporting elements encompassing
three new efforts.
The PRC and Russian investments in long-range precision strikes have put our
forward airbases at risk. The Air Force’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) concept
partially addresses this threat. The fifth operational imperative team analyzed addi-
tional steps to enhance forward air base availability and resiliency. In the FY24
budget request, the DAF prioritized actions that could be taken quickly to increase

---

101
the overall resiliency of our forward-deployed air assets, including building hard-
ened shelters and pre- positioning equipment and supplies needed to implement
ACE. The FY24 budget includes $1.2 billion to strengthen the resiliency and expand
the availability of our forward airbases in the Indo-Pacific region. While not a new
start, it represents a significant increase over FY23 funding levels.
The Air Force’s global strike capabilities provide a powerful conventional and stra-
tegic deterrent. The sixth operational imperative examined ways to improve the
cost-effectiveness of the family-of-systems surrounding the B–21 bomber. As noted
above, the B–21 Raider is fully funded in the FY24 request, and it continues to
make progress toward production and fielding. The Raider is more than a new plat-
form, and this imperative identified new weapons, sensors, and communications
that can make the B–21 more effective in the joint tactical fight. The fiscal year 24
request includes $80 million to modernize our global strike capabilities and includes
two new efforts.
Both the Space Force and the Air Force have a number of systems and facilities
on which they depend to mobilize and transition to wartime operations. The final
operational imperative addressed the need to ensure these systems and facilities
would function as needed in wartime. Much of the work to date under this impera-
tive focused on the cyber-security of our critical information systems and infrastruc-
ture, especially modernizing and hardening our network infrastructure and giving
our cyber operators new tools for cyber defense. Air and Space forces must also be
capable of operating in a contested cyberspace environment. Our current budget re-
flects initial investments to achieve these objectives by cyber hardening networks,
weapon systems, and priority defense critical infrastructure, and we recognize that
there is much work to do in this area. The FY24 budget request includes $613 mil-
lion in this area to strengthen the DAF’s cybersecurity posture. This represents a
significant increase in enterprise information technology and cyber defense funding
over FY23 levels.
The work on the operational imperatives over the past year has informed the
FY24 request, but it has also indicated some areas in which more effort is required.
In just the last year, the threat has become more severe. As a result, the DAF is
continuing and expanding our efforts to define solutions to the challenges we face.
We are continuing the work of the seven operational imperatives to refine resource
needs and plans across the lifecycle of these capabilities. In addition, we have start-
ed work on three cross-cutting operational enablers. These are mobility, electronic
warfare, and munitions. These combined efforts will inform our Fiscal Year 2025
(FY25) request, but they have already influenced our FY24 plans.
In the DAF mobility portfolio, the tanker recapitalization effort has been our high-
est priority. The KC–46 is still working to meet all its requirements, but we believe
they will be achieved. As the threat continues to increase the range at which it can
engage our aircraft, we are being forced to reexamine how we will operate these
platforms. The mobility study we have initiated will identify new ways to achieve
more mission resilience and effectiveness with existing platforms and will define the
requirements for the next generation of tanker and transport aircraft. While it is
too early to provide any results, one outcome seems probable: the next tanker must
be much more survivable than current designs and is unlikely to be a derivative
of a commercial aircraft design. The DAF will conduct an Analysis of Alternatives
to determine the requirements and concept for the Next Generation Air-Refueling
System and we will evaluate our future mobility platform needs.
Russia’s war against Ukraine, Korea Readiness Review, and the experience com-
bating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have taught us that munitions
planning, production capitalization, and stockpiling must account for the possibility
of a longer and more intense conflict than previously assumed. The munitions cross-
cutting operational enabler analysis will inform our FY25 budget, but we are not
waiting to address our highest-priority munitions requirements. The target set for
which we must be prepared is evolving. We must build a munitions inventory that
is more diverse with greater capacity while accelerating design and production capa-
bility, which includes advanced weapons. In the FY24 budget, we are increasing our
procurement of munitions and partnering aggressively with the other services, al-
lies, partners, and industry.
The combat support area of electronic warfare (EW) must be reevaluated in light
of emerging threats. Historically, EW development has been stove-piped for the sole
purpose of providing enhanced survivability of individual platforms. As our adver-
saries have advanced their long-range sensing and targeting capabilities, we need
to examine new ways to use EW as an offensive capability designed to defeat adver-
sary kill webs. While most of this analytical work is classified, we expect new pro-
grams as well as some program restructuring in our FY25 budget.

---

102
Last year we indicated that hard choices would have to be made. Often those
choices are between current and future capabilities. The DAF FY24 budget provides
an acceptable level of operational risk for the current force in order to fund the fu-
ture force. Affording the investments necessary to implement the operational imper-
ative-derived recommendations requires both divestitures from the current force and
an acceptance of risk in the level of readiness of the current force. Make no mistake:
your Air Force and Space Force are ready and able to confront and defeat any ad-
versary, but they are not being maintained at as high a level of readiness as might
be possible. The fact is that the threat is racing to make those existing forces obso-
lete. The DAF must move as rapidly as possible to the future set of capabilities we
need to sustain our deterrent and our ability to project power. There is not a mo-
ment to lose.
We deeply appreciate the support of Congress in FY23. Congress largely sup-
ported our divestiture requests in FY23 with one exception—the divestiture of 32
of our oldest and least capable F–22s. A year later, the threat is more severe, and
the need to modernize is more pressing. This year we hope to continue the
divestitures that were requested last year as we transition the force to one that is
relevant to the threat. In particular, we are requesting the retirement of an addi-
tional 42 A–10s. This 40-plus-year-old fighter has served the Air Force and the Na-
tion well, but it does not deter or survive against our pacing challenge, and we need
to move forward.
The Air and Space Forces are working to fulfill the NDS priority of building a
resilient joint force and defense ecosystem. All our mission capabilities rest on one
single foundation—our people. The hard work and dedication of over 700,000 mili-
tary and civilian Airmen and Guardians across the Active, Guard, and Reserve com-
ponents power our department. In fiscal year 24, we vow to continue supporting
them by ensuring they can serve to their fullest potential. We demand a culture of
respect, will promote accountability, and aim to end harmful behaviors, such as sex-
ual harassment, sexual assault, racial, ethnic, and gender disparities, domestic vio-
lence, domestic abuse, and suicide as well as hazing, bullying, and other forms of
discriminatory harassment. We will also promote initiatives that improve diversity
and inclusion, ensure quality healthcare access, advance recruitment and retention,
and improve our talent management processes to strengthen readiness. Every cur-
rent and potential Airman and Guardian should understand their value and the im-
portance of service to our Nation.
As we move forward to meet our challenges, we do so as members of a much larg-
er team. First, the Air and Space Forces are critical members of the joint team. We
are also members of an international team with our allies and partners who collec-
tively ensure our success at achieving integrated deterrence against any threat, but
first and foremost against our pacing challenge.
Our people and our missions are successful because of teamwork. The fiscal year
24 budget continues numerous investments, such as $194 million for Pacific Deter-
rence initiatives, to strengthen our relationships and interoperability with our joint
force, allies, partners, and interagencies. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) is stronger than ever, and the ever-increasing F–35 community provides
strong interoperability. In the Pacific, we are expanding our relationship with tradi-
tional partners like Japan, South Korea, and Australia, while strengthening our co-
operation with nations like the Philippines and other Pacific Island nations. Our
united resolve against Russian aggression and our combined focus on the pacing
challenge in the Indo-Pacific highlight the incredible partnerships we have with de-
mocracies around the globe that share our values. As we research, test, acquire, and
build the military capabilities of tomorrow, we strengthen and expand the Defense
Industrial Base, and we do so in concert with our allied and partner nations.

UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE
The United States Space Force was created in recognition of the space domain’s
critical importance to national prosperity and the need to contest the domain for na-
tional security purposes. Recently, the US has seen dramatic changes in the domain
with an exponential increase of launches, on-orbit active payloads, space debris, and
proliferation of counter-space threats. This reality presents new risks and opportuni-
ties to national objectives across diplomatic, information, military, and economic in-
struments of power. Consequently, ensuring our Nation’s ability to operate in, from,
and through a stable space domain is a vital national interest for the Space Force
to address.
Spacepower is not simply ‘‘important’’ in modern competition and conflict—it is
foundational. Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to validate this assertion in
several ways. First, Russian counterspace attacks since the outset of the war rein-

---

103
force the reality that space is a warfighting domain. Second, proliferating constella-
tions and disaggregating space missions are proving to be far more resilient and ef-
fective, especially with commercial augmentation. Third, equipment alone cannot
win in the modern fight. Winning takes space-enabled, multi-domain operations and
a joint force trained on the most current operational concepts. In this environment,
we must shift to a resilient and effective Space Order of Battle and ensure we have
the tools, talent, and experience to be ready to face the challenges to our missions
of providing space superiority so that we can enable and protect the joint force, our
allies, and partners.
SPACE FORCE’S ROLE IN DEFENDING THE NATION

A primary responsibility of the Space Force is to field ready, resilient, and com-
bat-credible forces. To be ready, Guardians must be trained, exercised, and pos-
tured. To be resilient, our architectures must be designed to render threats oper-
ationally impractical or self-defeating. And to be combat-credible, space forces need
systems for full spectrum operations utilized by competent warfighters practiced in
their tradecraft.
Through the operational imperatives, we are defining the space systems and capa-
bilities we need to prevail against the pacing challenges—the PRC and, secondarily,
Russia. Through the work in the first operational imperative, we are focused on in-
creasing resilience for space architecture by addressing the risks facing people, plat-
forms, and processes through systems proliferated across multiple orbits. Resilient
systems will allow us to prevent, respond, and campaign through competition and
aggression. When operated by a ready, combat-credible force, resilient systems will
disincentivize would-be aggressors.
The FY24 budget includes critical investments for meeting all four priorities de-
manded in the NDS and the DAF’s first operational imperative by evolving toward
more resilient space architectures. Building resilience must first consider the contin-
uous operation of over 50 legacy platforms, which necessitates investing $172 mil-
lion in FY24 for additional cyber protection, evaluating select legacy systems for up-
grades, and integrating space capabilities from several allies and partners. These
upgrades will broaden the resilience of several mission areas, including military Po-
sitioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT), Command, Control, Communications, and
Battle Management (C3BM) systems, and NC3 by migrating the Evolved Strategic
SATCOM (ESS) system to a proliferated architecture that will be more resilient dur-
ing a strategic attack.
Still, the surest way to lessen long-term risk is through the generational replace-
ment of legacy platforms. This year’s budget requests $102 million to continue our
analysis of the force design for how space-based systems support several critical
warfighter needs, including delivering communications to the tactical edge, pro-
viding secure PNT information, and enabling data links that connect sensors,
warfighters, and weapons. The insights gained from comprehensive force design
analyses ensure we make effective and cost-effective transitions from legacy to next-
generation space systems.
The first mission area to undergo this transformation will be Missile Warning/
Missile Tracking (MW/MT), with the last legacy Space-Based Infrared System
launch having occurred in 2022. In the FY24 budget, we turn the page into a new
era of MW/MT with over $2.3 billion to ramp up research, development, test, and
evaluation of the first tranche of proliferated satellites, ground segment develop-
ment, and interoperability testing which sets the way for a complete constellation
in the years to follow. Additionally, we are on track to deliver the first Next-Gen
Overhead Persistent Infrared geosynchronous space vehicle by 2025 to reduce risk
and improve the transitional resiliency and effectiveness of MW/MT, missile de-
fense, battlespace awareness, and technical intelligence.
Recognizing that joint warfighters need to sustain and expand SATCOM capabili-
ties, this budget pursues new solutions. MeshONE, for example, is a $151 million
effort that will deliver a novel approach to a modern, scalable, resilient, cyber-secure
Wide Area Network available to the joint force at the tactical edge. We are also
leading the transformation of communications via the emerging space data trans-
port layer. Beginning in FY24, our investment of $1.8 billion will deliver an initial
warfighter capability that will provide low-latency data transport and beyond-line-
of-sight targeting, with persistent regional access to the joint force. Once fully oper-
ational, this capability will serve as the backbone of data transport in support of
C3BM and JADC2.
We must also provide protection to the joint force and our allies from adversary
space systems that threaten our forward-deployed forces and those of our partners.
The FY24 budget includes funding for critical counter-space capabilities intended to

---

104
fulfill this mission need. Specific budgetary information is available at a higher level
of classification.
Our ability to use space effectively requires assured access, being first to field the
necessary capabilities, and the ability to reconstitute them, if necessary. This budget
ensures the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) program is equipped to place
essential capabilities in orbit when needed. The NSSL program is preparing for a
new phase in which we are pursuing a dual-lane, hybrid approach that maximizes
the use of the Nation’s robust commercial launch market. Recognizing the expo-
nential growth of the commercial space industry, we are investing $99 million in
FY24 and over $1 billion over the FYDP into the Range of the Future vision, which
aligns us with the accelerating domestic space launch market, and maintains safe
and assured launch for commercial, civil, and Department of Defense users.
SPACE FORCE’S ROLE IN TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE

The Space Force is implementing a more modern talent management approach
based on a competency framework that optimizes individual contribution. Over the
past year, we have made progress toward achieving our end state described in the
Guardian Ideal. The result has been tangible impacts on retention and the develop-
ment of Guardians of all ranks. Our future hinges on recruiting and retaining a di-
verse and innovative force of highly talented Guardians, and we are proud to have
met our recruiting targets. Guardians will soon be leading an innovative approach
to holistic health by emphasizing a continuously healthy lifestyle rather than epi-
sodic fitness testing. We are retooling how we measure healthy living and providing
Guardians and leaders with the resources they need to uphold the highest stand-
ards expected of military professionals.
We are also advancing opportunities and education for all ranks and phases of
a Guardian’s career. Starting with Basic Military Training, FY24 will see gradua-
tion standards fully established, with Guardians being held to service-specific re-
quirements, while Air Force Officer Training School and Reserve Officers’ Training
Corps Space Force cadets will see increased space-related academic content. This
budget will mature the University Partnership Program to inspire and recruit the
right talent and provide additional opportunities for Guardians to obtain advanced
academic degrees in essential Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math subjects.
Reflecting our continued commitment to professional military education, this budget
funds the program with our first graduates in 2024. With Congressional support,
we intend to innovate by pursuing a personnel system with full- to part-time fluidity
that will improve career flexibility and enhance retention tools.
Recruiting initiatives are only the beginning for Guardians as space professionals.
To develop professional warfighters, this budget commits to enhancing readiness by
increasing the quality and quantity of realistic testing of new systems and training
of Guardians on them. By incrementally instituting Operational Test and Training
Infrastructure and the National Space Test and Training Complex, FY24’s invest-
ment of $21 million will continue progress in delivering more realistic testing and
training against a thinking adversary, much like the high-end fight our Nation may
face in a future contingency. To do this, the Space Force will build agile operational
capabilities and execute orbital experimentation to rapidly expand our technological
prowess.
SPACE FORCE’S ROLE IN SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Teamwork for the Space Force starts internally within the DAF, where the Space
Force relies upon support from the Air Force. For example, the Air Force supports
the six Space Force Bases with over 8,000 Total Force Airmen providing numerous
activities to the Space Force. This includes, but is not limited to, finance, con-
tracting, education and training, child and youth services, dining, fitness, lodging,
manpower, logistics, communications, medical, emergency services, and base secu-
rity. Externally, the Space Force is building teams in four key areas: joint force,
commercial industry, the intelligence community, and internationally.
With Congressional support, the Chief of Space Operations is formally designated
as the Force Design Architect for Space Systems of the Armed Forces. This is impor-
tant because our closest partnering efforts are inside the joint team. We are exer-
cising our role as the integrator of all space requirements from and for the joint
force as we merge and integrate requirements through more-responsive processes
from sister services and Combatant Commands. Moreover, this budget requests to
restructure the Space Force’s organizations responsible for this important analytic
work, namely by redesignating the Space Warfighting Analysis Center as a direct-
reporting unit, which will increase responsiveness to warfighter needs.

---

105
In coordination with the Intelligence Community (IC), Guardians are also taking
the initiative and exploring joint service intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance,
and targeting needs and opportunities. Inherent coordination in integration with the
IC ensures that operational and intelligence requirements are being met efficiently,
especially when they overlap and use shared assets. For example, the IC and DAF
are similarly seeking new means for moving target engagement, the fourth oper-
ational imperative.
To best partner with our industrial base and commercial space, we must improve
space acquisition to be more dynamic, cost-sensible, and effective. In the past 3
years, several significant improvements have been made to the structure and rela-
tionships comprising space system acquisitions. For example, all major stakeholders
in space acquisitions are collaborating to define resilient architectures, assess risks
to identify needs, and drive rapid change that aims to deliver results faster than
the threats can react. The nine acquisition principles developed by the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration will revamp acqui-
sition strategy to epitomize responsive acquisitions that apply state-of-the- art com-
mercial best practices.
Expanding the use and future of the commercial space industry and academia
across all mission areas organic to the Space Force and the joint force remains crit-
ical. These include satellite communications (SATCOM), space domain awareness
(SDA), launch, PNT, and more. A strategic advantage for the United States is our
robust, innovative, and responsive industrial base, which includes the highly spe-
cialized traditional defense industrial base and the highly innovative new commer-
cial space industry segment. We are embracing a hybrid architecture of commercial
solutions across many mission areas. Our approach to hybrid architectures affords
several benefits including resiliency, cost competition, responsive surge capacity,
rapid technology refreshment, increased innovation, improved diversification to in-
dustry, and more expedient integration with international partners.
We continue to expand the team of allies we cooperate with across all mission
areas. Space Systems Command recently delivered two SDA sensors on Japanese
satellites to build SDA capacity and relations with a key ally in the Indo-Pacific re-
gion. In the European theater, our partnership with the Norwegian Ministry of De-
fense led to Enhanced Polar SATCOM payloads on two Norwegian satellites that
will provide communications from highly elliptical orbits. The Space Force continues
to address partnering challenges by implementing new classification guidance and
sharing agreements, investing in more accessible hardware and software such as the
Unified Data Library, and supporting DAF- and Department of Defense-wide solu-
tions, particularly the Mission Partner Environment. The Space Force recognizes
that the best solutions are preventative, such as the implementation of the Com-
bined Space Operations Vision 2031 and the successful maturation of the NATO
Space Centre. These structural improvements will help us to develop and operate
resilient, interoperable architectures by and for coalitions.

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
The United States Air Force is critical to our national defense, is committed to
Airmen and families, and succeeds by teaming with our joint teammates, allies, and
partners as we execute our mission to ‘‘Fly, Fight, and Win . . . Airpower Anytime,
Anywhere.’’ Our speed, agility, and lethality are exponential force multipliers to any
global military operation. Our capabilities underwrite the entirety of the joint force,
and we are uniquely suited to provide this cornerstone of the Nation’s defense.
To meet the threats facing the force of today and in the future, we must imple-
ment the programs that have been defined by the analysis of the seven DAF oper-
ational imperatives and continue the momentum of Accelerate Change or Lose. We
are orienting our decisionmaking processes and shaping investments around resil-
ience and lethality against the pacing challenge, long-range kill chains, and the ele-
ments supporting them. We remain dedicated to ensuring our investments and re-
sources are properly aligned with the NDS to deter our adversaries and prevail in
conflict. As the combat environment and the character of war continue to evolve,
our determination to be the leader in speed, agility, and lethality remains an irre-
placeable role for the joint team and our allies and partners.
AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN DEFENDING THE NATION

As stated above, we must continue to make hard choices in Airpower moderniza-
tion to keep pace with our strategic competitors while balancing risk. The difficult
decisions are far from over, and the measured near-term risk decisions which
prioritize essential modernization and acceptable current readiness continue. Air-
power modernization is critical to address the four NDS priorities: defending the

---

106
homeland, deterring strategic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient
joint force.
The NDS priorities depend upon platforms and capabilities that support effective
command and control and are survivable in the threat environment of both today
and tomorrow. In FY24, we continue our modernization efforts while divesting plat-
forms and capabilities that have decreasing relevance against our pacing challenge.
Current airborne platforms, such as the E–3 and E–8, are not adequately survivable
against emerging threats, are not optimal for joint or coalition operations, and need
to continue divestiture as we look to the future. These airborne capabilities play a
critical role in meeting the operational imperative to track and engage enemy forces
at scale. A combination of space- and air-based systems will be needed to maximize
lethality and close kill chains. We remain committed to balancing current, mid-term,
and longer-term capability and capacity by divesting the E–3 while rapidly acquir-
ing and fielding the E–7A to modernize efficiently.
A focused redesign of the C3BM network, being pursued under the second oper-
ational imperative, is overdue and a top-priority modernization effort that will de-
fine and field ABMS capabilities. The establishment of the C3BM Integrating PEO
will align command and control modernization efforts across the DAF and with the
joint force. ABMS will fulfill the Air Force’s integral contribution to JADC2 and the
FY24 budget focuses on building and maturing ongoing programs.
Air superiority for the joint force demands affordable Airpower modernization,
which includes NGAD. The FY24 budget continues NGAD development. The NGAD
family-of-systems operational imperative will provide an innovative suite of capabili-
ties that allow us to establish and maintain air superiority, a precondition for the
joint force’s freedom of maneuver. The uncrewed CCA program included in this
budget is a significantly enhanced activity for air superiority and is targeted to sup-
port both NGAD and the F–35. The CCA program will have three simultaneous
lines of development—the platform, autonomy, and unit construct.
In addition to the longer-term operational imperative programs described above,
the modernization decisions we are making consider the entirety of the Air Force’s
capability and capacity mix. As we work to develop a new generation of capabilities,
we are also working to improve current and mid-term capability and capacity. This
process includes replacing some legacy platforms, namely the MH–139A replacing
the UH–1N, and the Survivable Airborne Operations Center replacing the E–4B. It
also includes modernizing existing platforms that will remain in operation for many
years, including the B–1, B–2, B–52, C–17, C–5, F–16, F–15E, F–22, and F–35
fleets. Within the FY24 budget, we have committed over $12 billion to modernize
these existing platforms. These modernization efforts are designed to improve mid-
term capability and reduce risk while providing needed capacity to complement the
improved capabilities provided by the programs defined by the operational impera-
tives and the new families-of-systems such as the B–21 and NGAD.
As noted earlier, capable, improved, and complementary munitions are needed for
both our new and existing platforms. We are prioritizing investments in munitions
and technology to counter pacing threats in highly-contested environments. This in-
cludes investments in both air-to-air and air-to-surface capabilities to engage mobile
targets from standoff ranges in adverse weather. Investments into hypersonic muni-
tions will enable us to hold high-value, time-sensitive targets at risk in contested
environments from standoff distances. The FY24 budget invests over $5 billion to
support Small Diameter Bomb II, Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile, Hypersonic
Attack Cruise Missile, Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon, and more munitions’
facilitation across the defense industrial base. These investments will shorten the
kill chain while supporting the moving target operational imperative.
For the current force, we are pursuing improved readiness through multiple chan-
nels, including the Air Force Force Generation model (AFFORGEN). AFFORGEN
enables the presentation of sustainable, predictable capacity and capabilities while
ensuring operational preparedness and required readiness. AFFORGEN balances
risk between Combatant Command requirements, Air Force readiness, and mod-
ernization by deploying pre-identified units and/or teams who have trained together
to improve performance. AFFORGEN will meet initial operational capability in
FY24.
Agile Combat Employment (ACE) increases readiness by dispersing operations
from large bases to networks of smaller locations and provides the basis for the
operational imperative of resilient forward basing. We are standardizing the con-
cepts and terms of ACE in Air Force Doctrine as well as incorporating them into
ongoing exercises and worldwide training. There is $1.2 billion to fund the resilient
forward basing operational imperative this fiscal year in addition to funding for
ACE. Additional work is being done to identify and create capabilities and formal-

---

107
ized training programs to field an agile force that sets the theater and establishes
distributed command and control.
The Flying Hour Program (FHP) and Weapon System Sustainment (WSS) budget
requests ensure our Airmen have the training and equipment necessary to ‘‘Fly,
Fight, and Win.’’ The $9 billion in FY24 funds our FHP to levels that can be reason-
ably executed and meet our readiness requirements. Our WSS FY24 funding of over
$19 billion is aligned with our FHP but is challenged by requirements growth due
to an aging fleet, the fielding of more complex weapons systems, increasing oper-
ational requirements, and increasing organic and contract costs.
Execution of our mission requires appropriate infrastructure support and resilient
basing. The Facilities, Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM) efforts
focus on prioritizing existing quality-of-life requirements and maintaining our oper-
ational and training infrastructure. In addition to new mission builds for Military
Construction (MILCON) projects, we are pursuing improvements for our Airmen,
supported Guardians, and their families to our Child Development Centers (CDC)
and dorms with targeted investments totaling $107 million in FY24 MILCON and
$294 million in FSRM. Since 1990, we have 60 percent fewer fighter squadrons, 40
percent fewer Airmen, but only 15 percent fewer installations in the continental
United States. Our FY24 budget reflects our commitment to right-sizing our facili-
ties and infrastructure footprint through consolidations, demolitions, and optimizing
our space utilization.
AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE

Taking care of our people begins with recruiting the best military and civilian Air-
men of tomorrow. In FY23, the active-duty component of the Air Force is projected
to miss military enlistment requirements by about 10 percent, over three thousand
individuals. The Air Guard and Reserve components are projected to miss their
goals by even higher margins. To maximize our pool of eligible individuals and to
recruit the best our Nation has to offer, we are working to reduce barriers and con-
nect with young people and communities. While maintaining our established stand-
ards, we are reviewing and removing barriers to service and offering enhanced fi-
nancial opportunities to those who wish to serve. Additionally, we are taking a tar-
geted approach to open our bases to local communities to strengthen connections
and help influencers and potential recruits see the many possible opportunities we
have to offer for a rewarding career and personal development. We are also high-
lighting, particularly online, the positive experiences of Air Force veterans who have
moved on to successful careers outside the military.
Once Airmen join our team, the focus shifts from recruitment to retention. Con-
gress provided critical retention tools to the Services last year with increases in
basic pay, housing, and subsistence rates—providing a viable compensation package.
Our focus on improving the quality of life for our Airmen includes improving the
childcare availability for our members. The FY24 budget includes new CDC con-
struction, existing CDC facility improvements, staffing initiatives, and additional
childcare providers.
Military housing is another important way we have focused on retention. Our
FY24 budget includes funding for continued investment in DAF’s government-owned
and government-leased housing based on the need to support mission requirements,
address health and safety concerns, and modernize housing for unaccompanied per-
sonnel. Our FY24 budget also includes Family Housing Construction funds for
prioritized investments in DAF’s Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI)
portfolio to improve the safety, quality, and habitability of select privatized housing
projects and ensure their long-term financial viability. We remain committed to pro-
viding continued oversight of the private sector MHPI companies that own and oper-
ate privatized housing projects on DAF installations to hold MHPI companies ac-
countable for project performance, problems with property management, and inap-
propriate business practices. In addition, we will continue to engage with local civic
leaders to increase the availability of affordable, quality off-base housing options for
our servicemembers and their families.
Retention efforts must also ensure military members and families have access to
the care and support they need—including mental health. As the Nation struggles
with a shortage of mental health providers, we are employing various innovative
means to provide this care to Airmen and Guardians. The Targeted Care program
improves access to care by connecting people to the most appropriate resource given
their needs. Additionally, we are implementing the recommendations of the Inde-
pendent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, as approved by the
Secretary of Defense, and leaning forward on exploring the co-location of victim sup-
port services. Furthermore, we are implementing groundbreaking military justice

---

108
reforms to establish the Office of Special Trial Counsel, which will provide expert,
independent, and specialized support for the investigation and prosecution of serious
crimes such as sexual assault. We are also ready to begin implementation of the
Department of Defense’s Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review
Committee recommendations and have leaned forward on restructuring prevention
training, increasing emphasis on lethal means safety and behavioral health work-
force development.
Retention also requires that our talent management decisions are optimized for
both the member and the Air Force. The Airmen Leadership Qualities we value
must be reflected in our systems and transparent to our members. We are in the
process of categorizing 161 specialties and approximately 19,000 functional skills to
map flexible designs which align with the talent of our Airmen and are adaptive
to emerging technologies and threats.
To develop the Airmen of tomorrow, our evaluation systems and supporting data
systems must be modernized. FY23 saw the beginning of new officer and enlisted
evaluation systems which will generate over 17 million data points to drive en-
hanced talent management decisions and reduce administrative burdens in the fu-
ture. The new processes, enabled in part by the FY24 investments into digital infra-
structure and tech refresh, will increase agility and flexibility to build the talent
management structure we need. Concurrently, we are also implementing a dual-
track ‘‘Civilians We Need’’ career model identifying functional expert and enterprise
leader tracks on a model designed to allow flexible career paths based on the mem-
bers’ evolving needs.
AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Teamwork for the Air Force begins within the DAF, where the Air Force relies
upon and supports the Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force are inextricably
linked through shared history, current activities, and future operations. The Air
Force relies heavily on Space Force for the technical development and execution of
each of the operational imperatives and other necessary capabilities. Neither the Air
Force nor the Space Force alone has the situational awareness and decision support
tools to close hundreds of kill chains on relevant timelines in all domains in a highly
contested environment. We can only be successful through teamwork to provide sur-
vivable, long-range, persistent families-of-systems across multiple modalities and as
a part of a full joint and combined force. The Air Force depends upon a ready, resil-
ient, and effective Space Force.
Our teamwork extends to the entirety of the joint force and Combatant Com-
mands. Each of the operational imperatives and our broader capability investments
supports the joint force by providing the capabilities necessary to deter and, if nec-
essary, defeat any challenger. We play a vital role in homeland defense through air
domain awareness and the provision of Airpower. We are also leveraging the capa-
bilities of the mission and system level cyber risk assessment components of the
Strategic Cybersecurity Program, led by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisi-
tions and Sustainment, to help inform investments in cyber risk mitigation. The
joint force’s ability to effectively mobilize, deploy, and sustain forces cannot be ac-
complished without the mobility assets we provide. This FY24 budget includes $252
million of investment in support of the integrated priority lists of the Combatant
Commands. All our platforms and airborne capabilities contribute to joint force com-
bat power, and we remain committed to providing capabilities to the Combatant
Commands in the execution of their missions.
Beyond the joint force, we are seeking to expand how we team with our inter-
national allies and partners. Investments in readiness, human capital, infrastruc-
ture, and relationships with allies and partners remain foundational to balance
present-day demands and set conditions for the future. This budget request, coupled
with support from our allies and partners, enables responses to imminent threats
while also seeking to improve the teamwork and interoperability of the allied and
partner forces to win the fight of the future.
To ensure maximum teamwork with our allies and partners, we are seeking to
expand interoperability through an Integrated by Design process. Integrated by De-
sign is not a replacement for our current security efforts, but it ensures that we col-
laborate and make decisions together on interoperability, resource investment, infor-
mation sharing, force development, and strategy from the very beginning of our pro-
grams with the end state constantly in mind. Conversations with allies and partners
about developing capabilities that are complementary instead of competitive will
also better align us to face future challenges in unity. That unity will be a compara-
tive advantage against threats that seek military, technological, or economic means
to challenge our collective national security.

---

109
CONCLUSION

The Department of the Air Force FY24 budget prioritizes defending the Nation,
taking care of our people, and succeeding through teamwork by balancing the risk
between maintaining current readiness, mid- term improvements, and longer-term
modernization. Current readiness is being maintained at acceptable levels to sup-
port combatant commanders while investments are made in mid- and longer-term
modernization that is critical to developing, building, and fielding the force needed
for the future. The modernization efforts defined by the operational imperatives are
not optional; they are called imperatives for a reason. No one can predict when a
war with any potential threat may happen, and war is not inevitable. Nevertheless,
the PRC, our pacing challenge, is actively and effectively developing the capabilities
it believes are needed to defeat the American ability to project power. The PRC is
also expanding and improving its strategic forces and experimenting with desta-
bilizing novel concepts. The DAF must move forward as quickly as possible, or we
will fall behind. No one should doubt our current capabilities, which remain the
strongest the world has ever seen. Nevertheless, we are in a race for technological
and operational superiority more challenging than anything we have ever experi-
enced. In this environment, timely and soundly balanced investments in current,
mid-term, and longer-term Air and Space Forces are essential to our continued secu-
rity. Our most sacred duty to our Airmen and Guardians is to provide them with
the tools they need to be successful. We believe the budget we have submitted for
FY24 meets that need, but time is our most precious asset, and we urge Congress
to move quickly to fund and authorize our proposed budget to enable the new starts,
significantly rescoped program investments, and required capabilities that will allow
us to keep pace with the threat.
Senator TESTER. Thank you General Saltzman. I want to thank
all three of you for your testimony.
As I said in my opening statement last week, the FBI (Federal
Bureau of Investigation) arrested a 21-year-old Air National
Guardsman. He had access to highly sensitive information that we
can’t even talk about in this forum.
So General Brown, I have got three questions: Number one, why
did this individual have access to this classified information? Num-
ber two, how could this Guardsman take this information and dis-
tribute it electronically for weeks if not months, and nobody knew
about it? And number three, do we have protections in place, be-
cause we spend a lot of money trying to protect classified informa-
tion, do we have protections in place to stop this from ever hap-
pening again?
General BROWN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the question, and
let me go with your third question first. We do have protections in
place to protect classified information, and all of our members are,
as they get their security clearance, and then sign documents to
have the process to protect the information.
Obviously, in this case this process fell apart. And so the aspect
of this particular Airman for his particular job he had the access
for information but he didn’t actually have a need to know for some
of the information.
We are going through an ongoing investigation associated with
that, and then also determining how he was able to distribute. So
ongoing, we have an ongoing investigation, and we have a process
of looking at accountability, not only from the criminal standpoint
for the individual, but also as we look at the organization itself, we
are going to take a look at the overall processes across the Depart-
ment of the Air Force.
And that Secretary Austin also sent out a memo to the Depart-
ment of Defense, for us all to take a look at our processes, and then

---

110

we will look at how we review all of our processes across the De-
partment of the Air Force, to include a standout on security.
Senator TESTER. So I am going to flesh this out a little bit more.
You in your opening statement said that your oversight of 689,000
of some of the best people in the world that are under your com-
mand. How did this person even get access? Did he do it legally?
Did he do it illegally? How did he have access to this information?
General BROWN. Chairman he actually has, because of his duties
he has access to some aspects as he—based on his job as a cyber
administrator. He took advantage of that access, and I don’t want
to go into more detail——
Senator TESTER. Okay.
General BROWN [continuing]. In too much detail, but I can talk
to you in a closed session about that.
Senator TESTER. We will have a closed session with the Air
Force, and I am talking a little off script here, but we will, because
I think there are some things we need to talk about in the SCIF
(Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility), not only this, but
other things.
But this is very disturbing, and the fact that it happened is bad
enough, and we have just got to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
I think you are on the same page with that.
General BROWN. I am.
Senator TESTER. A few months ago we saw an incursion of a Chi-
nese spy balloon. I think Senator Murkowski would agree with me,
that I think it should have been shot over the Aleutians, but it
wasn’t. And it had the ability to gather intelligence from bases
across this country. The administration put in $90 million in this
budget to improve detection and assessment.
I assume this question is for you, Mr. Brown. Is there a point—
General Brown, I am sorry. Is there a point person within the Air
Force to improve our detection and assessment of the balloon issue,
because I don’t think it was the first one?
General BROWN. Chairman, we actually have an individual who
is, Kristen Baldwin, who is actually not only for detection, but we
are also looking at all the other aspects of detection, and tracking,
and how you negate that—future threats like that.
Senator TESTER. Okay. And can you tell me who that person is,
or?
General BROWN. Yes, sir. It is Kristen Baldwin. She works in our
acquisition peripheral. What we have done is that we had a team
that has come together to take a look at all the various capabilities
that we have as a Department, but also outside of the Department
of the Air Force, they are bringing in development to figure out
what the best tools are to counter threats like that in the future.
Senator TESTER. Okay. The NORTHCOM (United States North-
ern Command) commander has told us that he has additional un-
funded requirements for Air Force Over-the-Horizon Long Range
Expeditionary Radars. We need to provide the resources, and I
think this committee, on both sides of the aisle; wants to make
sure our Nation is safe, okay, and provides the resources to do that.
So why has the Air Force decided to put this on the unfunded
list instead of a higher priority?
Secretary KENDALL. Chairman, if I could?

---

111

Senator TESTER. Sure, Frank, go ahead.
Secretary KENDALL. We have funded two new Over-the-Horizon
Radars in the budget. There is quite a bit of money in the budget
to fill those, and get them in place. The money that I believe is on
that list for General Vanherck is to accelerate that process on the
margins. It is not a fundamental change; it just tries to move it a
little bit faster.
Senator TESTER. Okay. Let us talk about the industrial base, be-
cause it is a concern on all the branches of the Military. There was
about $900 million put into last year’s budget for the industrial
base and supply chain issues. Can you tell me if that money has
gone out the door, and what kind of benefits it has provided for the
Air Force?
Secretary KENDALL. Yes. I think a large fraction of that money
has gone out the door, but I will have to get that for you, for the
record.
Senator TESTER. Okay.
Secretary KENDALL. There are a number of things we do with
those funds, but essentially what we are trying to do is ensure that
our supply chains are healthy.
Senator TESTER. Yes.
Secretary KENDALL. Identify any gaps in our supply chains that
need to be addressed.
Senator TESTER. Yes. And does that include workforce?
Secretary KENDALL. Workforce in the industry?
Senator TESTER. In the industry, yes.
Secretary KENDALL. It can, but generally it has had some indi-
rect effect rather than a direct effect.
Senator TESTER. I got you. So I would really like to, before I turn
to Susan Collins, or Senator Collins. I would really like to get infor-
mation as to the money that we put in: Is it actually having an ef-
fect? Is it actually doing what we want it to do? And this, by the
way, will happen across the board for all the services. And is it ac-
tually making a difference?
Secretary KENDALL. Okay.
Senator TESTER. Because regardless of what number we put on
the Defense budget, if it is not being utilized in a way that makes
a difference for you then we have got to do something else.
Secretary KENDALL. It is fairly intensive work across the Depart-
ment to identify weaknesses in the industrial base, and to
prioritize the things that need some additional resources, you
know, in ways appropriate. In the past we have done some things.
In space, for example, we have already selected subcontractors in
space specific technologies. There are other things we funded, like
casting capabilities, and so on, where the return for industry isn’t
there to make those investments without the Department’s sup-
port, assistance essentially.
Senator TESTER. Okay. Senator Collins.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me just follow up, General Brown, with the questions that
the Chairman started with. As I read the press reports about the
Airman First Class, who allegedly took, perhaps, hundreds of sen-
sitive classified documents. The first thing that came to my mind
is: Whatever happened to ‘‘Need to Know’’? That is the principle

---

112

that is supposed to oversee and restrict access to sensitive classi-
fied information.
Instead, allegedly, this Airman First Class used the JWICS
(Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System) System,
the classified Internet system, to access all sorts of sensitive, classi-
fied documents that had absolutely nothing to do with his job. Is
the Need-to-Know principle still in place?
Secretary KENDALL. Chairwoman Collins, it is very much——
Senator COLLINS. Or, Secretary Kendall?
Secretary KENDALL [continuing]. In place. General Brown men-
tioned the letter that the Secretary of Defense had put out tasking
a review across the entirety of the Department, in very great de-
tail, of all of our security practices. The two Chiefs and I put out
a letter this morning which emphasized the point that you just
made about, ‘‘Need to Know’’.
We need to enforce it much more rigorously than it appears to
have been in this case. I will say that we don’t know all the facts
here yet. There is a criminal investigation going on, that has been
the first priority, to make sure that wasn’t interfered with. But we
have turned on three other things to look at this across the board.
I have tasked our Inspector General to go look at the unit, and
anything associated with this leak that could have gone wrong,
from the point of view of implementing our policies, to see what
things allowed this to happen, to get the Senator Tester’s initial
question.
We are turning on a complete review of our policies themselves,
within the staff, to make sure our policies are adequate, and that
will be illuminated by what we learn about what happened in this
instant. We are asking the entire Force to do a stand down, to re-
view their security practices, to conduct training as necessary, re-
spond to the Secretary of Defense’s guidance.
There is a full court press going on about this. We are all dis-
turbed about it. And we are working very, very hard to get to the
bottom of it, and take corrective actions.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. One follow-up ques-
tion for you on this issue, and that is, it appears that this was
going on for many months without the Airman, allegedly, being
caught and when he was caught, it was because of investigative
journalism, not the controls within the Air Force. That is equally
disturbing.
Secretary KENDALL. That is absolutely one of the things we will
be looking at. And apparently he shared it, from press reports, with
a group of friends in a chat group that was supposed to be isolated.
It got out of that group, and it was there for, as you say, for a pe-
riod of months. It got out of that group, and there is some press
reports more recently about it being disseminated by some other
people. And we are going to get to the bottom of all of that.
Obviously, we have to tighten up our processes and our practices
to make sure this doesn’t happen again.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. General Brown, last year I met
with Former Defense Secretary Gates, and I asked him: What was
the most important action that we could do to strengthen our na-
tional security? And I expected him to say: Have a larger Navy, or

---

113

improve recruitment; or answers like that. Instead, he said, ‘‘No
more continuing resolutions.’’
And you made a reference in your testimony. Could you, so that
everyone understands the harm, of putting the Department on a
continuing resolution, illustrate the problems that it causes for our
Military?
General BROWN. Sure. The key area is that if we have a pacing
challenge, we cannot outpace our pacing challenge if we have a
continuing resolution. Those aspects of lost buying power, in this
case, if we have continuing relations about $9 billion of lost buying
power.
The other aspect of the series of continuing resolutions we have
had over the past, probably 10n to 12 years, we have lost probably
about a quarter of that in continuing resolutions, which prevent us
from doing new starts, getting equipment into the hands of our Air-
men, and the rest of the Joint Team as quickly as possible. It im-
pacts our families because their pay raises, and/or their ability to
move to new locations and continue with their career, and their de-
velopment, and education of their children.
I think the key part is just the aspect of us not being able to
have a steady pace of acquisition and supporting—and to the
Chairman’s point, on the Defense Industrial Base; when we have,
what I would call, a bit of a rollercoaster ride, it is hard for them
to ‘‘facilitize’’, and get the workforce to be committed, and by hav-
ing continuing resolution, it just slows us down, and when we are
trying to accelerate, it is not helpful.
Senator COLLINS. I completely agree with you. And thank you for
your answer.
Senator TESTER. Chairman Murray.
Senator MURRAY. Well, thank you very much, Chair Tester, and
Vice Chair Collins. I am really glad to join both of you again as
we continue to hear about the resources that our Nation needs to
stay strong, and safe, and competitive on the world stage. And as
Vice Chair Collins just talked about, it is so important that we re-
turn to regular order and work to pass our funding bills in a time-
ly, bipartisan way, which is what we are really focused on doing.
These conversations also serve as a reminder to all of us about
how the investments and decisions we make here in DC, help
strengthen our country, and protect our families.
If we are going to keep pace with our adversaries like China, and
others; that means our investments have to keep pace too. We can’t
fall behind, and we certainly can’t fall into uncertainty due to par-
tisan gridlock. So I am really glad to have this opportunity today
on this committee to hear from our witnesses about what that
means for our Air Force and Space Force, and of course, how we
can support our service members and their families.
It is really important that we remember that includes getting our
military families support, like child care, mental healthcare, good
housing, schools, because really, at the end of the day, our best air-
crafts aren’t going to go very far without the brave and talented
men and women who pilot them and work to keep our country safe.
So let me thank all of you for your service to our country. This
committee and all of our members have a deep appreciation for ev-
erything our Service members do to keep us safe.

---

114

With that, Secretary Kendall, let me start with you. Quality of
life for our military families is a priority for me, and I am pleased
to see child care prioritized in this budget across all branches.
However, I consistently hear from families at Fairchild Air Force
Base about Child Development Center wait lists, and challenges
finding high quality and affordable childcare. I know those centers
struggle to keep staff because, in part, due to low wages.
The President’s budget seeks to address this critical issue, and
it includes a standardized Child Development Center employee dis-
count for child care workers. And the Air Force has previously, I
know, ran a pilot program to provide additional benefit to Center
employees, what other tools has the Air Force used to support cur-
rent employees and future hires to keep these Child Development
Centers fully staffed?
Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Senator Murray. As you indi-
cated, this is a major issue for those across the Force, and across
the country, actually, particularly after the pandemic. The biggest
problem, as you mentioned, is staffing, we do have some new facili-
ties that we are funding but the main problem we have right now
is staffing.
Secretary Austin is focused on this in his efforts to improve the
quality of life for our service members and their families, and the
Department of Defense put out a policy that could put a substan-
tial discount, 50 percent, for staff members’ first child in a child
care with us. The Air Force have gone farther than that, we have
gone to 100 for the first child, and then we do 25 percent for subse-
quent children. That has had an impact. We have gone from about
65- to 75 percent staffing overall, but there are still places where
there are difficulties.
We have a number of other efforts underway. We work very hard
to provide support for our men and women, and the hours that
they work, which are not always standard hours. So we would need
to have child care available more broadly. We are using child care
from individuals in their homes, and we are doing things to encour-
age that and incentivize that, financially and otherwise. So there
is a lot of effort going into this area. It is making a difference, but
we have more to do.
Senator MURRAY. Okay. This is such an important issue for those
families, and for recruitment, in general, for keeping those talented
people that we need in the military, so I will continue to work with
you this one.
Secretary Kendall, last year’s Defense Appropriations Bill di-
rected the Air Force to provide a plan to this committee on the
transfer of KC–135s to Air National Guard units, like the 141st Air
Refueling Wing in my State. We are still waiting for that plan. Can
you give me a timeline for when we expect to see that?
Secretary KENDALL. Senator, that plan should be available with-
in the next few weeks. And I will get a firm date for you after the
hearing and let you know when you can expect it.
Senator MURRAY. Okay. And you have you been coordinating
with the Air National Guard on the transfers?
Secretary KENDALL. We will definitely coordinate with the
Guard, and I want you to know that. There has been no decision
to make those transfers. It is an opportunity, we will look at them.

---

115

Senator MURRAY. Okay. I will look forward to hearing from you
on that soon then.
General Saltzman, as our competitors around the world continue
to closely link their space industries and militaries, they can quick-
ly put new technology into the field. We need to make sure we are
doing the same if we want to stay ahead of our adversaries. Wash-
ington State is home to a number of these cutting-edge commercial
space companies that are developing really revolutionary tech-
nologies, and I believe this is the kind of innovation that we should
be supporting.
How are you working with the rapidly growing space industry in
Washington State, and really elsewhere, to bring these new tech-
nologies and capabilities into the Military?
General SALTZMAN. Thanks Senator Murray. We are working
closely with industry. In fact, Secretary Kendall and I are leaving
this afternoon to go out to Colorado for a Space Symposium to con-
tinue to work with industry.
Fully support Honorable Frank Kendall’s—I am sorry—Honor-
able Frank Calvelli——
Senator MURRAY. He is sitting next to you, so.
General SALTZMAN [continuing]. Calvelli’s Go Fast formula,
which is buy small, have small requirement sets, small satellites,
to use existing technology to reduce nonrecurring engineering costs.
And then short-term, fixed-price contracts, 2 and 3 years, this al-
lows us to advance the tech refresh cycle that actually pulls more
contributors into innovating, and producing capabilities, that we
can rapidly deliver to our Guardians.
And so, we are seeing, even in the Space Development Agency,
that model play out very successfully. Putting satellites on orbit in
about 27 months, and so that is one of the key efforts that we are
taking to make sure we can deliver; work with industry and deliver
capabilities faster.
Senator MURRAY. I appreciate the answer to that. And again, you
just made the point that Senator Collins did, that a CR is not going
to work for those short-term contracts. So thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Moran.
Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you. Nice to know there is
more than one Honorable Frank, we need all we can get.
Let me start, though, with you, Secretary Kendall. I have heard
you say that the cost of hypersonics is a challenge that will drive
a smaller inventory. DOD (Department of Defense) investment into
hypersonics is primarily focused on capability with, in my view,
minimal attention to ability to scale production. Are you looking at
nontraditional suppliers, or commercial aerospace manufacturing
companies to leverage their expertise, to scale production and to
meet higher rate, needs?
Secretary KENDALL. Yes, we are, Senator. The components for
hypersonics, in particular, tend to be very specialized, they have to
endure very high temperatures, for example, and operate for a pe-
riod of time, and we need high reliability for any of our weapon
systems. But yes, we are always looking for suppliers outside the
normal traditional Defense primes, if you will.
Senator MORAN. Is manufacturing the—and I think you have to
answer this question, yes, but I want to highlight that manufac-

---

116

turing needs to influence the development of hypersonic tech-
nologies, right?
Secretary KENDALL. Absolutely, and our leading program, the
HACM program, the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile; there are
considerations being given in the design to manufacturability, and
to reliability, so that we have a design that meets the technical re-
quirements which are very stressing, but also is producible. So that
that is a factor that we take into account through the design proc-
ess.
We are about to transition that program which came out of a
DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Technology
Program, into a full-scale development program, and I can assure
you that manufacturability will definitely be part of that program.
Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. You may have answered this
when you responded to Senator Murray, but I am not sure it is the
same. What is the Air Force’s plan to recapitalize the National
Guard Fighter Fleet? And how does that impact the Guard’s ability
to complete its missions?
Secretary KENDALL. We are recapitalizing across the Force. The
Guard, of course, is an essential part of that. I think General
Brown mentioned, and I mentioned the additional production of F–
35s and F–15EXs. So we are bringing fighters into the Force faster
than we had planned a year ago, but still not at a pace that can
replace every fighter, one-for-one, as they retire.
We do need to retire some aircraft, like I mentioned, the A–10.
And what we are trying to do, wherever we are retiring aircraft,
particularly in the Guard, is replace programs with like programs,
fighters with fighters, where we can. And if we can’t do that, then
we try to bring in a flying mission so it is still a flying mission.
And if we can’t do that, then we want to bring in a mission that
is important to the Department and that the Guard can perform.
I think it is important to recognize that they are enduring mis-
sions, and missions that are critically important to the Depart-
ment, that don’t necessarily involve flying. ISR (Information, Sur-
veillance and Reconnaissance) is one, C3 battle management is one,
cyber is one, and electronic warfare is one.
So I think people need to be open to alternatives to what they
might have traditionally done, if that is what the country needs the
most. So we are working, as we lay out strategic plans for the dif-
ferent elements of the Force, including the Fighter Force, to try to
get to the Force that we are going to need to be competitive with
China. And it won’t look exactly like the Force that we have today.
Senator MORAN. Mr. Secretary, I would only highlight what I
think is, you know, when you talk about flying for flying mission,
the importance in today’s world of recruitment and retention, if we
are going to have retention within our Air Guard that, I think, is
an important component as you make these decisions: How do we
keep our professionals in place? And I saw you shaking your head,
so I feel comfortable——
Secretary KENDALL. I fully agree, Senator. Thank you.
Senator MORAN. Let me turn to General Saltzman for just a mo-
ment. You have testified about the Air National Guard’s existing
space capabilities as ‘‘must haves’’. In the context of establishing a
Space National Guard, I understand that you are evaluating sev-

---

117

eral options, and you mentioned this in your oral testimony, and
it is in your written testimony as well.
Can you explain to me the options that you are looking at, and
the costs associated with them? How do you avoid degradation of
readiness or capabilities with those options? And what is your best
military advice, or that is yet to come?
General SALTZMAN. Well, thank you, Senator. The three options
that we have looked at are, of course, our status quo. We can leave
things as they are. But I think this is the most problematic course
of action, because the capabilities that live inside the Air Force, in
the Air National Guard, General Brown relinquished those capac-
ities to train and develop those Airmen when the Space Force was
established, in those capacities for organized training and equip of
the space missions move to the Space Force.
And so we have a little bit of a disconnect between capabilities
inside an Air Force, when the capacity to organize, train, and equip
them are in the Space Force. So status quo is probably the most
problematic.
The other two options are to establish the Space National Guard,
which you mentioned, or reconstitute those capabilities inside the
Space Force. We are currently going through a detailed analysis of
exactly what the costs associated with each of those are, and there
are pros and cons of both.
And my best military advice would simply be, to make sure that
we choose the most cost-effective way of implementing, because we
have a lot of high priority projects that require a lot of money, but
also to minimize the operational impact in any kind of transition.
So whichever one maintains the operational capabilities that are
currently there in the most cost-effective way, would be my advice.
Senator MORAN. General, you mentioned earlier in your testi-
mony that you would take the possibility into account for a time,
different arrangements; is that a new opportunity within the Air
Force?
General SALTZMAN. So slightly. There are two different concepts
at play here. One is the legislative proposal that we have on the
table, which is about taking the Air Force Reserve component per-
forming space missions and integrate them into the Space Force,
because those are already Title 10 Forces in both sides, it was a
little easier to integrate in the near term, those capabilities. So
that is the current ledge proposal. And that would create a full-
time and part-time Force inside the Space Force. We think that is
tremendous for retention, for flexible career paths.
Secondarily, we would consider: What is the best disposition of
the capabilities in the Guard?
Senator MORAN. Thank you, all.
Senator TESTER. Senator Baldwin.
Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General Brown, in April of 2020 the Air Force officially selected
Truax Field in Wisconsin to receive the F–35 Mission. And I want-
ed to raise it again today because the F–35 aircraft will start arriv-
ing this month in Madison, and it will take roughly a year to get
the full squadron in place. But as we discussed during last year’s
hearing, even though there is significant support for the basing de-

---

118

cision, I do continue to hear concerns about the potential noise im-
pacts to residential areas in the flight path.
I worked with Senator Leahy to fund noise mitigation through
our annual appropriations, and the Department of Defense has pro-
vided the Wisconsin Department of Military Affairs a grant to con-
duct community outreach about noise mitigation planning, to be
followed by actual funding for that noise mitigation to begin to
occur.
Because the F–35s are arriving this month, and throughout the
next year, I am very anxious to be able to share with my constitu-
ents an update on that funding. Can you provide me with an up-
date on the implementation of the F–35 transition? And what
mechanisms are already in place to support these communities dur-
ing the transition process?
And in particular, what your outreach and communication efforts
are? Is the Air Force pursuing these outreach and communication
efforts to ensure that the public is knowledgeable and has access
to all of the relevant information about what is happening in their
community, and what assistance is available?
General BROWN. Senator Baldwin, first of all, we are happy to
have Truax join the F–35 community, it is a great capability. And
one of the things that we will continue to work on, is the Depart-
ment of Air Force will work very closely with the unit there, but
also the community on the noise impacts. And so part of this is,
as we bring in F–35s, and the warning of those noise impacts, but
also working with the Airport Authority, the Federal Aviation Ad-
ministration.
And then we will also put into place noise mitigation measures.
And having flown fighter aircraft throughout most of my career,
and having to do our departures and arrivals a bit differently just
to support the noise mitigation, this is something we will work very
closely with the community as we move forward.
I will have to get back to you and provide you a bit more details
on the exact funding and the time lines as far as the engagements,
but we will, you know, engage with the local community, and will
be available to the local community to answer whatever questions
they may have as we move forward.
Senator BALDWIN. Yes. Well, I will just share to underscore, that
there is widespread support for basing the F–35s at Truax, but par-
ticularly I don’t believe that the information about noise mitigation
resources are getting out to folks who will be most impacted in the
population centers, sort of immediately south of the airport. It is
rather rural on the northern part of the airport, but people really
are searching for information and need to be able to get that. So
I urge you to continue, and double up on those efforts.
General BROWN. Most definitely.
Senator BALDWIN. All right. General Brown, also for you; I want-
ed to talk about the retention and recruiting shortfalls that remain
an issue in all the service components, but of particular concern is
the shortage of pilots in both the Active component and Air Na-
tional Guard.
With a reported shortage of approximately 1,600 Active Duty pi-
lots, the reliance then on the Air National Guard to fill those gaps
is critical. However, the Air National Guard itself is short approxi-

---

119

mately 1,000 pilots, and this could have significant implications
both in the near-term and long-term readiness for the Air Force’s
mission.
So can you speak to how the Air Force plans to address this
shortage and attract more talent to the Active component, as well
as to the Air National Guard, particularly in light of the significant
competition for pilots from both the commercial sector, and other
branches of the Military?
General BROWN. Most definitely, yes. You know, one of the key
areas we focus on, as we do look at our shores, the first thing we
do is to put 100 percent of our manning into—our 100 manning
into our cockpits. It would take the shortage on our staff positions,
where it says, we are inclined to take up that gap, versus on the
flight line in the development of very young pilots.
We actually have a lot of young people that want to become pi-
lots, and so one of our key parts is how do we increase that produc-
tion, and would have some initiatives to do that. And one of the
legislative initiatives is to convert some of our civilian SIM instruc-
tors to contractors so we can actually get more of our uniform
members on a flight line to help the production and move that for-
ward.
We also actually have to balance between our Active and our
Guard, because if we retain a lot on the Active Duty, it impacts our
Guard and Reserve, because that is how they get many of their pi-
lots. So it is a combination of factors that we are working through
on the production, and then the absorption into the cockpits as
well.
So we have a number of initiatives in how we have adjusted our
pilot training to increase that production, and then at the same
time, as we take care of the Airmen, but also their families, also
impacts retention.
As you mentioned, there is competition with the commercial sec-
tor, and that is something we have got to pay attention to as well,
and how this is a national asset, from an aviation standpoint, both
for commercial, but also for our military.
Senator BALDWIN. Yes. Well, please if you can, and follow up,
point to any legislative measures or actions that this committee
could take to support these efforts to increase recruitment and re-
tention of pilots, please do let us know.
General BROWN. Will be happy to work with you. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven.
Senator HOEVEN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank all three of you for the work you are doing,
and your strong leadership with the Air Force and Space Force. It
is very much appreciated. And you are willing to be creative and
innovative as we need to be these days.
Secretary Kendall, I was just in South Korea and Taiwan, clearly
both want to continue to build their defenses, and work with us to
do so. In regard to Taiwan they have about $19-plus billion in
hardware, military hardware, that they have ordered, and that
they are paying for, and that they are waiting for, and they are,
obviously, anxious to upgrade their defenses, and to do it soon.
What can we do to help? And things like the F–16, obviously,
very important to them right now, what can we do to accelerate

---

120

getting them those weapon systems? And what can we do to work
together, jointly, to strengthen their defenses?
Secretary KENDALL. Good question, Senator Hoeven. The best
place to defend Taiwan from is Taiwan. And in having Taiwanese
have the capability to defend themselves against the threat that
they face I think is a high priority for us.
The F–16s are a program that we are trying to move through
some supply chain and some production difficulties to get into
place, getting through the bureaucratic pipeline would be very
helpful getting those sales approved. One of the things that we
have been working with Taiwan on is the mix of things that they
have in their military, to make sure that it is appropriate to the
mission, that they have their highest priority.
I think you may have seen in the press recently that they are
attempting to buy some Harpoon anti-ship missiles, which would
be very helpful actually.
Senator HOEVEN. Mm-hmm.
Secretary KENDALL. So we are working with Taiwan. It is not an
area that I am leading in, but it is one that we work very hard on
to make sure that their requirements are met. At the end of the
day, Taiwan has got to decide for themselves what they want to
have in their inventory. But once they do that, and we are happy
to advise them on that, then we need to do everything we can to
move that through as efficiently and effectively as possible. Appre-
ciate your support for that.
Senator HOEVEN. Absolutely and we want to work with you, and
with General Brown and General Saltzman to find ways to maybe
help our military-industrial complex respond faster, not only for
their needs, but also for yours, for ours.
Secretary KENDALL. Absolutely.
Senator HOEVEN. Along those lines, General Brown, in regard to
modernization in your comments—which all three of you had and
which I absolutely agree with, it’s vitally important. The effort to
modernize the nuclear mission which is incredibly important. It’s
certainly important to our Chairman, and myself, with bases at
Malmstrom and at Minot Air Force Base, Minot being the only
dual nuclear base.
How are we doing? And we have worked very hard to fund this.
How are we doing? Are we on schedule with modernization of both
the—not only the B–52, but the LRSO (Long Range Stand Off
Weapon) as a replacement to the LCM, and also with the GBSD
(Ground Based Strategic Deterrent) as a replacement to the ICBM?
General BROWN. Yes, Senator Hoeven, one of the things that has
been really helpful to maintain the time lines associated with these
programs and nuclear portfolio is the consistent funding and full
funding. And that has helped us move in a very positive way. What
I would tell you, as we look at, like Sentinel, for example, and the
B–52, we do know that as we go into these large programs that
there is potential supply chain and other issues, and we are work-
ing very closely, internally, with our industry partners to look
ahead and figure out how best to do long lead items well in ad-
vance.
And so we have been able to restructure some of our approaches,
acquisition approaches, with Dr. LaPlante from OSD (Office of the

---

121

Secretary of Defense), to help mitigate those areas so we can keep
everything on time, and in some cases we are moving things for-
ward. For example: some of our telecommunication lines, we will
move those forward so we actually can get ahead in certain areas,
and we don’t have anything on a critical path that is going to im-
pact the overall program; so good collaboration with—internal to
the Department of the Air Force, but also with OSD and our indus-
try partners.
Senator HOEVEN. Thank you.
General Saltzman, in regard to both the LEO Mission, which we
work with; are you on schedule for getting those Low-Earth Orbit
satellites into space for the Communications Mission; can you do
so under the budget you have? And also what is your plan for up-
grading PARCS in a timely way; obviously, highlighted by the re-
cent Chinese spy balloon?
General SALTZMAN. Thank you, sir. First, the Space Development
Agency is on track. We conducted our first launch of Tranche 0,
just a couple of weeks ago. The satellites are performing well. And
as I mentioned earlier, tremendous success, and I think it dem-
onstrates a new model for acquisition, 27 months from putting it
on order to being on orbit——
Senator HOEVEN. Wow.
General SALTZMAN [continuing]. Which is a pretty impressive ca-
pability.
Senator HOEVEN. Very.
General SALTZMAN. Especially for space acquisition. Congress
added 250 million, which we greatly appreciated, to accelerate
those. We are going to need the launch investment now to actually
pay for putting them on orbit, so I think there is some cleanup that
we are going to do across the program to make sure that happens,
but the good news is, we are on track to not only deliver those ca-
pabilities, but accelerate the delivery of those capabilities.
And with regards to the PARCS Radar we have, with the plus-
up, again, thanks to Congress, we are looking at, through RDT&E
(finances research, development, test and evaluation), what is the
most appropriate way to upgrade them, move them from analog ca-
pabilities into more digital, that includes data storage, some beam
forming. We are going to bring that radar into the 21st century,
and make sure that it can meet all those space situational aware-
ness, as well as missile warning responsibilities.
Senator HOEVEN. Thanks Chair. I want to thank the Chairman
and Ranking Member of this committee, too, for accelerating some
of that funding in the last go round, which I agree was very impor-
tant for that Low-Earth Orbit Satellite Mission, and we are seeing
how important that is with what is going on.
Thanks to all three of you again.
Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Gentlemen, thank you for being here today, and just—all, regard-
ing your leadership. I understand that in questions from Senator
Tester, he had acknowledged the NORAD, NORTHCOM, and the
Department of Air Force’s unfunded priority list. I am encouraged
that you have placed the number one request there as the E–7 de-
livery, and the acceleration of that. I think we recognize that it

---

122

cannot come soon enough, and we are urging it along as quickly as
we possibly can.
I want to ask about where we are with Long-Range Radars cur-
rently. They were fielded in the 1980s, to reach their life in 2025.
Right now there is no current program of record to replace the ex-
isting Long-Range Radars, making the 3DELLR the only viable op-
tion to maintain the required domain awareness for Homeland de-
fense there.
So this is directed to you, Secretary Kendall. Do you think that
the budget that we are looking at adequately funds this 3DELLR
System to include upgrades to the system, such as Over-the-Hori-
zon Radar, or the advancement of the Archer? So where are we
with the Long-Range Radars?
Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. If I could
just clarify, the Department of the Air Force does not have an
upper list, we support the President’s budget. General Brown has
an upper list, which I think includes the E–7 acceleration that you
are mentioning. We are funding the sustainment of the various
Long-Range Radars that you mentioned for a missile warning sys-
tem. Some of those Raiders, as you mentioned, are old. We just
talked about PARCS a moment ago. The BMU System itself is
quite old. We don’t have a program in place, as far as I know, to
replace that yet. We are sustaining it right now. But we are look-
ing at all that.
The major investment we have in our budget for 2024, is the
Over-the-Horizon Radars, that we talked about, as you mentioned
earlier. Those are focused mostly on airborne threats coming
across, particularly in the northern approaches. So we are looking
at that entire suite of capabilities we have, to protect the United
States against a variety of threats.
One of the things we are focusing on is the C3 battle manage-
ment and the integration—excuse me—of all those systems to-
gether, so that we can get the most accurate picture as possible of
any threats that emerge.
And I will be happy to get with you in a classified setting, and
go through the details of all that. Show you what we are investing
in, and what other things we are considering.
Senator MURKOWSKI. I would appreciate that, and I recognize
that the value of this integration, I had an opportunity, just last
week, to go out to Sparrevohn, in the center of Alaska, one of the
older sites, actually not that old, got built in the ’80s, but it seems
old. But recognizing the role that is played with Over-the-Horizon,
but also what we have had in place for it for some decades now.
And General Brown, we talk a lot in this committee about all
that we do to modernize our Air Force, everything that we need to
do to replace aging weapon systems, but we also know that the
ability to train, and to train well has got to be key. And we talk
about our exceptional training opportunity with the Joint Pacific
Alaska Ranch Complex, JPARC.
What more do we need to do to ensure that the JPARC remains
this extraordinary training asset for our Air Force and for those
who also come to share partnership in the training exercises?
General BROWN. As you highlighted, training is very important
to our Air Force, and the aspect of not only our Air Force, but the

---

123

Air Forces of other nations that come to participate with us and
also our joint teammates. And two of them are premier Ranges, one
of those is JPARC, and the other one is known as the Nellis Test
and Training Range.
In this particular budget, in fiscal year 2024, we have over $750
million that are placed into our Range infrastructure, to ensure
that we have the right threat emitters to support our Airmen as
they engage, so they have a threat emitter that replicates the
threat as well as the improvements on the targets that they are
able to go against it as well. And then on top of that it is the sup-
porting infrastructure to support the Ranges.
So we are on a good path, but we have got to continue to keep
focus on, and as we have this money into this year’s budget, just
continue to see that for both of those Ranges, JPARC and the
Range at Nellis, are two key Ranges that we are going to continue
to invest in to ensure we have the capabilities to train our Airmen.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. I want to note that we are going to
continue to place a priority on that.
Mr. Chairman, I have a question regarding the Combat Rescue
Helicopter, and the significance of that mission, particularly for the
176th Wing on JBER, that is the primary SAR Rescue Force there
in Alaska, but because my time has expired I will submit that
question; as well as one for General Saltzman for the record.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
And with that question and others, we would ask that you get
the response back as soon as possible.
Senator Boozman.
Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking
Member, for having this hearing. And we appreciate you guys very,
very much, and all you do and represent.
I have had the opportunity to visit with many of our Allied Part-
ners regarding training, the opportunity to train with our Airmen
as far as F–35 training.
General Brown, can you speak to the importance of pilots from
our partner nations training with our pilots here in the U.S., and
how crucial that is to national security?
General BROWN. Senator Boozman; thanks for the question. I
will tell you just from my own personal experience in my many
years operating with our allies and partners, most of my time as
general officer, working with allies and partners, and how much
they value the opportunity to train together, whether it is at loca-
tions overseas, but primarily here in the United States where they
can actually use some of our advanced Ranges like I just talked
about.
And so there is real value in the aspect of them being able to
train. And as we bring on the F–35, not only for the United States
Air Force, but with our allies and partners, their ability for us to
train very closely together as we bring in this new capability, it
helps provide additional capacity as we look at our collective secu-
rity, not just our security, but the security we share with their al-
lies and partners as well.
Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. And this is the cream of the crop.
So not only are they, you know, helping with defense, but also the

---

124

ability to develop those relationships with future leaders of their
countries.
The other important point I continue to hear from our allies is
the need for training to start on time. They have time lines and
commitments along with the need to be ready to fight if needed.
As we continue to build F–35 capacity, our U.S. bases are becoming
resource constrained and affecting our allies’ ability to train.
General Brown, with U.S. Air Bases becoming more crowded, can
you speak to why it is important to have the ability to invest in
future F–35 training centers?
General BROWN. What I would like to highlight to you, Senator,
one of the areas we have looked at is, overall, as we have more and
more countries that are interested in the F–35 and bring that in,
we also have to take a look at how we, across the board, have our
capability to not only train them but train ourselves, but as we re-
main our combat capability.
We have the locations where we have done traditional training,
are starting to get a bit more crowded, and so, as you know, we
have been looking very closely at Ebbing as a location, and we are
doing that work to get Ebbing up to speed, and a part of that is
also to meet the time line associated with the work we have done
with our allies and partners so they can get their training on time.
And in the big scheme of things it helps us all to get their train-
ing on time, to get certain capability, but that we appreciate the
support from your delegation. And we have done some really deep
work internal to the Department of Air Force to align things, to
make sure we get that capability on time at Ebbing.
Senator BOOZMAN. Good. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, do you feel like you have got all of the authorities
that you need regarding, you know, things going forward to help
build the training capacity that we need?
Secretary KENDALL. Senator, yes, I do. I am not aware of any-
thing that I need that I don’t have. But I will be happy to share
with you if I come to that conclusion.
Senator BOOZMAN. Good. We appreciate that. Let me just talk
about one thing that I think has already been talked about, but I
think it is so, so very important. Senator Tester, and I chaired a
roundtable regarding quality of life issues, and Mrs. Brown came
and, you know, she did a tremendous job, and could speak as some-
body, you know, that not too-too long ago, was in the situation of
our Airmen, Airwomen, you know, that are struggling now to start-
ing their careers, making ends meet, all of the challenges as you
move every 2 or 3 years.
So I guess what I would say, and it doesn’t matter if you are in
the Space Force, regular, you know, Reserves, whatever, but par-
ticularly, like I say, the challenge of moving, spousal, you know, op-
portunities regarding their ability to work, schools child care is
such a huge issue.
And I want to compliment you all, you all are doing a really good
job in those arenas. But also it is going to become more and more
important, from recruiting and a retention standpoint, those qual-
ity of life issues.
Looking back, you know, now that I am older and appreciate my
parents so much more than I did as a kid, as we all do, but my

---

125

dad doing 23 years as a Master Sergeant realizing that those were
the first things they looked at, you know, taking care of us.
So I guess what I am saying is, we do appreciate the fact that
you really are looking hard at those quality of life issues, and real-
ize how important they are, and doing your very best to take care
of the men and women that work for you, and we do appreciate
that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. The only thing I have to add to that is General
Brown is a fine outstanding man, but you obviously, married up.
Senator BOOZMAN. I agree with you.
Senator TESTER. Exactly.
Senator BOOZMAN. After getting to know her, I agree with you
totally. In fact, that is probably an understatement.
Senator TESTER. General Saltzman, and it was the same way in
last year’s budget, you submitted an unfunded priorities list that
includes classified, high priority space programs. It seems to me
that the decision did not include these programs in the budget, is
not driven by physical constraints, but by disagreements within the
administration over the future of our space architecture. Can you
please explain those different schools of thought?
General SALTZMAN. Well, you know, you say it is not about prior-
ities, but in the end I think all these resourcing issues do come
down to some level of priorities, and where we are willing to fall
in our sword or not. I am comfortable with the level of resourcing
we have, especially in the classified programs. I think there was
some back and forth towards the end of the budget submission that
maybe align funds in a way that we are going to have to figure out
other ways to manage the programs, for example.
But we have those ways. We can collaborate with the other
stakeholders, we can make sure that our concept of operations are
clean, and that we can put the right kinds of demand signals, for
example, on partners that are building capabilities for us. So I feel
like although it may not be the way we would have designed it, I
feel like I am comfortable that we have the kinds of mechanisms
in place to collaborate appropriately, and get what we need in
place.
Senator TESTER. This committee added significant funding for
your classified unfunded priorities last year. Can you give us some
insight on the return on that investment?
General SALTZMAN. I am happy to say that I expect; that by the
end of my tenure, if I make it all the way to 2026, that you are
going to see a substantial on-orbit capability that allows us to com-
pete in full spectrum operations.
Senator TESTER. Okay.
General SALTZMAN. I am not sure I could have said that 2 years
ago, but the fact that we have accelerated the programs, and we
have built a program that delivers in capability in terms of 3, 4,
5 years, I am very comfortable that we have a program in place
that will do just that.
Senator TESTER. Okay. Secretary Kendall, you made a decision
on a different power source for the F–35, and you chose the Pratt
& Whitney over the GE, and I have got no dog in this fight, I want
to just make sure we are doing what is right for the Air Force.

---

126

The question that I have was; that it is my understanding of the
Pratt & Whitney engine is on paper, and the GE engine is sitting
on a stand. Can you give me some of the thoughts, process that you
went through when you made that decision? And why you chose
one over the other?
Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, sir. That is a Department of De-
fense decision actually, and a decision I support. The competition,
essentially, was between an advanced technology that had been in
work for several years, I was part of the starting of that, and con-
tinuing, it is called the ATP, which provides a substantial improve-
ment in fuel efficiency, as well as other features.
The unfortunate thing about this is that it is a very expensive
program to continue. There is a large upfront cost associated with
engineering, manufacturing development for that program. And at
this point the only—of the three F–35 variants, the Marine Corps,
the Navy, and the Air Force, the only one that is definitely compat-
ible with that program is the Air Force.
So the Air Force sort of had to carry that entire cost, several bil-
lion dollars, to do development before you start production. So that
was just simply not affordable. The enhanced core upgrade that we
did fund; provides an acceptable level of improvement to meet our
known needs, and it is compatible with all three variants of the F–
35. So that was where we ended up.
Senator TESTER. So to add, the issue was compatibility?
Secretary KENDALL. Cost and incompatibility. I would say afford-
ability for us was the first concern.
Senator TESTER. Okay.
Secretary KENDALL. We couldn’t get past that threshold, and if
we had then it would have been probably a different answer.
Senator TESTER. Okay. Senator Shaheen.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all.
I am sorry I missed much of the questioning, for other hearings.
But Secretary Kendall, and I guess General Brown, both; we con-
tinue to be concerned in New Hampshire about the level of PFAS
(per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) that continues to contaminate
the former Pease Air Force Base. And I know that the Air Force
is taking steps to address that, and to plan for the aqueous film
forming foam, whatever is going to succeed that, in terms of being
able to fight fires.
Can you speak to where you are in terms of developing that al-
ternative, and what you expect to be a time line for when that will
be available?
Secretary KENDALL. Senator, we have been unsuccessful in find-
ing an equivalent alternative to the PFAS. So what we are doing,
basically, is going to water as the alternative for now. I think, as
you are aware, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has
come out with new criteria, which is in the final stages of regu-
latory consideration.
The Air Force has assessed our bases, including Pease, to under-
stand how much contamination we have, and once there is a final-
ization of that, then we will start looking at remediation, and mov-
ing forward to try to do something to clean this up.
You and I spoke about this before but you know it is something
of great concern. We want to make sure that nobody around any

---

127

of our bases is in an unsafe condition, particularly with regard to
their drinking water.
Senator SHAHEEN. I appreciate that. And I do appreciate very
much the cooperation that we have gotten from the Air Force in
New Hampshire. It has made a huge difference. One current chal-
lenge, that I think you are aware of, is there is a difference in in-
terpretation of something that was in the NDAA (National Defense
Authorization Act) about making information available to the local
public about contamination, and hopefully we will be able to work
that out in a way that is agreeable to both the Air Force and com-
munities.
Can you also speak to when the Remote Vision System—this
may be for you, General Brown, for the KC–46 is going to be oper-
ational?
General BROWN. What?
Secretary KENDALL. You go, yes.
General BROWN. If I have my facts right, I think it will be fiscal
year 2026, is when they will be operational, and will be able to
start cutting it in. But I will make sure I come back to you, and
get the answer.
Secretary KENDALL. I mean the current system is being used
now. It is cleared for all but one of our aircrafts. But the fixable
problems we have with the remote viewing system, as General
Brown said, will be coming in, and I think in 2026. We will confirm
that though.
Senator SHAHEEN. That has slipped again has it? It is my under-
standing that that was originally going to be fielded in 2025.
General BROWN. This may have slipped a little bit, but I think
we are on a good path. And as the Secretary highlighted, we were
able to, operationally, employ the KC–46 worldwide today, with the
only exception, the only airplane we can’t refuel with it is the A–
10.
Senator SHAHEEN. And I understand that there is also a recently
identified issue with the KC–46’s load guidance system. Is that af-
fecting the aircraft’s ability to carry cargo, in a significant way?
General BROWN. I am not aware of that issue, but I will look into
it, and I would be able to get back to you.
Senator SHAHEEN. I would appreciate that. Thank you.
General Saltzman, I know, I just had an opportunity to meet
with a number of National Guard members in New Hampshire,
and one of the things that they are still not clear about is how the
one-component proposal is going to operate in terms of National
Guard across the country. Can you talk about how you see that
working, and what you are doing to address the concerns of the
state adjutant generals on that issue?
General SALTZMAN. Yes, ma’am. Thank you. The legislative pro-
posal that we put forward for this year simply takes the Reserve
component and integrates them into the active Space Force. So
that is just the Title 10 Air Force Reserve aspect of this. It was
a simpler administrative lift to make sure that we understood ex-
actly how to do this. But it also set aside the discussion for the Na-
tional Guard at this point.
So it is a two-step process. I think if we get the legislative pro-
posal in and signed off in law, that will allow us to start looking

---

128

at how the Space Force can actively use both full-time and part-
time Guardians to do its Mission set. Then I think you have the
opportunity to open up and evaluate whether that same model
could be extensive—extensible out to the National Guard as well.
But it is a two-step process at this point.
Senator SHAHEEN. And do you anticipate any opportunity for or
adjutants general, or other representatives of the Guard to weigh
in with you as you are thinking about and have this second
iteration should go?
General SALTZMAN. I talk to Dan Hokanson all the time, he is
of course the Chief of the National Guard Bureau. He reflects the
opinions of all of those tags that are out there. And so I would say
that, at least from a space perspective, we are engaged already to
make sure we understand what the requirements are, what the
limitations are, what the opportunities are to better integrate.
We are a little bit stuck, as I said, with the status quo, where
the Air Guard has responsibility for training a space mission, but
we don’t really have the capacity on the Air Force side to do that;
and so we have got to come up with some solution, and the tags
are fully engaged in helping us do that.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Capito.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all,
here, and it is nice to see you again. And we had our meeting sev-
eral weeks ago, and I appreciate that.
Secretary Kendall, as you know, the conversion of the Air Na-
tional Guard C–130 units to the J models has been ongoing. And
I am pleased to say that I have seen the impressive J model myself
while visiting the West Virginia Air National Guard’s 130th Airlift
Wing, in my hometown of Charleston. But they made us aware
that the aircraft our Guard units are receiving may be behind in
some of the modification processes for Tactical Data Link capabili-
ties, an upgrade that is necessary to integrate with the rest of the
Joint Force if we found ourselves in a combat environment. I am
wondering: Does the fiscal year 2024 budget address this Tactical
Data Link deficiency?
Secretary KENDALL. Yes, I believe it does, Senator. I think we
are doing that. There was a period of time over which we were
going to do that with some of the fleet. I can get the details to that,
too, for the record though.
Senator CAPITO. Okay. So General Brown, how does improving
that Tactical Data Link, what kind of difference does that make in
a combat environment, and how important is that?
General BROWN. What the Tactical Data Link does is really in-
creases situational awareness for the air crew. And so they have,
not only a better sense of where they are, but a better sense of the
other activities that is going on around their aircraft, and how they
can help contribute to the mission. And so, you know, having flown
with Tactical Data Links in Fighters, personally, it really does help
your situational awareness to have a good understanding what is
going on in the environment.
Senator CAPITO. So it was the goal to transition? I mean, you
said ‘‘most’’. Secretary Kendall, is the goal to transition all of those
to that more advanced data link; or some, or what?

---

129

General BROWN. Yes, Senator.
Senator CAPITO. Oh.
General BROWN. I mean, that the goal is to actually move as
many of those as we can as the—as those aircraft have service life,
and wanted to put the Tactical Data Link into.
Senator CAPITO. Okay. Good, that is good news.
Secretary Kendall, again, a more technical question here; and we
know that range would mean everything if we ended up in an Indo-
Pacific situation, and also have the 167th Airlift Wing in Martins-
burg, West Virginia, which operates the C–17 Globemasters. But
they are not equipped right now with the extended fuel range tank,
which would make a big difference if we found ourselves in the
Asia Pacific. How does the budget deal with that? Is that some-
thing that you are planning to transition all the C–17s to?
And then General Brown, I am going to ask you, too, what kind
of impact that would have?
Secretary KENDALL. Yes. We are transitioning C–17s. I don’t
think the entire fleet will transition, the largest fraction, it will
split among the parts of the Fleet that are in the Active Guard and
Reserve.
Senator CAPITO. Mm-hmm.
Secretary KENDALL. Roughly equivalent percentages of each I
think.
Senator CAPITO. Okay.
Secretary KENDALL. We can give you the exact numbers for that.
Senator CAPITO. Okay. Yes, we will follow up with that, and ap-
preciate that.
General Brown, do you have a comment on that, what that could
mean and what difference it makes?
General BROWN. You know, as the Secretary said, that modifica-
tion is roughly equivalent across the Active Guard and Reserve,
and what it does do is provide options as far as being able to go
further in different locations.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
General BROWN. And be able to break capability and capacity.
Particularly in the Indo-Pacific where, again, having served there
as the Commander of Pacific Air Force, is just, you know, the ex-
tended ranges that we have to operate in, this is where that capa-
bility will be very helpful.
Senator CAPITO. Well, I mean, you won’t find any better Airlift
Wings than I have in West Virginia, I can tell you that. I have to
put that advertisement in. I might have some disagreement here,
but——
Senator COLLINS. I beg to differ.
Senator CAPITO [continuing]. I will say that. Secretary Kendall I
know that—and I haven’t been here for the whole hearing—but
certainly the data breach and the leak of the classified information
I think was alarming to everybody. And I could maybe even put
you in that category, who are concerned about the damage that has
been done. But I mean I think we need to look forward here.
I understand that DOD is conducting a review of the processes
at the DOD level. Are you doing the same at the—within the De-
partment of the Air Force?

---

130

Secretary KENDALL. Absolutely. And ‘‘alarming’’ I think is as
good a word as any to describe what has happened. We are doing
a number of things, and I discussed some of them earlier, but we
are investigating to see what errors might have occurred, or
breaches of policy, and so on, that could have allowed this to hap-
pen, in addition to, obviously, whatever wrongdoing by the indi-
vidual.
We are looking at the unit, we are looking beyond the unit, other
things that could have influenced this. We are reviewing all of our
policies, and we have direction from the Secretary of Defense to do
a review across the Department of a whole number of things that
have to do with information protection, basically.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
Secretary KENDALL. So Secretary Austin signed out a memo yes-
terday on that, with a lot of detailed guidance, and a fairly quick
suspense to come back. The two Chiefs and I signed out a memo
this morning amplifying on what the Secretary had said, but also
emphasizing some areas such as Need to Know, and enforcing
Need to Know.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
Secretary KENDALL. This individual, whatever else was true, had
no reason to be looking at, or having possession of those docu-
ments. And we have to do a better job of that. That is clear, if noth-
ing else is from this.
Senator CAPITO. Well, we will be interested in hearing what the
results of that are. I think that is important for not just system-
wide, but for us to know, and the American public to know, so a
transparent process there.
Just a quick comment on the information that has come out
about this individual that was arrested, I think there is a lot of dis-
couraging things about it, but for me, I was just sitting here think-
ing about it, thinking: it is almost like it was a game. You know,
it was a—you are in this chat room with—supposedly, with small
amounts of people. And, you know, all this kind of chatter.
It is not a game. You are endangering lives. You are endan-
gering, you know, freedoms, just eroding trust. And so I think that
that is one aspect of it that is incomprehensible, I think, to many
of us. And I will put myself in that boat. You don’t need to com-
ment on that. I just wanted to make a quick comment.
Secretary KENDALL. I agree with you. What you described it ex-
actly the same way that any Airman, or Guardian, or anyone in
uniform could not appreciate the seriousness of this material, and
how damaging it would be to have it get out into public domain.
That is a fundamental problem of its own, right. That is what the
appearance is in this case. It is a criminal investigation.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
Secretary KENDALL. So we don’t want to say too much about the
case itself.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
Secretary KENDALL. But that appearance is very disturbing.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. We have saved the best for last. Senator Collins.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

---

131

Mr. Secretary, I want to return to the F–35 engine issue. As I
understand it, there are two factors driving the administration’s
decision. And I support that decision.
One, is the Adaptive Engine Transition Program was not compat-
ible with the Navy and Marine Corps variants of the F–35. The
second factor, as I understand it, is the Joint Program Office did
a business case analysis which described stark differences in the
overall lifecycle costs between proceeding with the engine core up-
grade path chosen by the administration, compared to the more ex-
pensive engine replacement.
As I understand it, the engine core upgrade would actually de-
crease the overall costs of the program while the engine replace-
ment option would have the opposite effect, it would, substantially,
increase the cost of the program well into the billions of dollars
even after you account for fuel cost savings. Is my understanding
correct?
Secretary KENDALL. Roughly, let me just tell you my view on
this. I have seen a number of business analyses, but basically there
is a large upfront cost associated with the ATP engine. You have
to go through an engineering development program that is going to
cost several billion dollars and take several years. So that upfront
cost, the affordability of that, for the Air Force at least, it was a
major factor.
There is a return. There is a value to having that enhanced per-
formance. You get more range, you get more capability out of the
aircraft, and you get more power off of the engine that you can use
to drive all the things on the aircraft. So there is a judgment call,
if you will, about the value of those things relative to their cost.
The fuel savings, over time, would take a very long time to pay for
themselves. So that is really not, I think, at the end of the day, in
terms of financial impact, a major factor.
The fact that the ATP would not fit in all three, and it certainly
will not fit in the Marine Corps version, there is some disagree-
ment about whether it would fit in the Navy version, or could be
made to fit in the Navy version. And I will defer to the Navy to
give an opinion on that.
So at the end of the day, when you looked at the needs of the
whole, Department of Defense, the decision was made, and I sup-
ported, was to go ahead with the engine core upgrade. It is not
quite as mature, so there is a little bit of risk in that, but it gets
us to our known requirements. And so that is the path that we are
on right now.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. In my opening statement I men-
tioned my concern about fuel costs. In the last 2 years the budget
requests greatly underestimated fuel costs on the very day the
budget was released, the fuel costs were already much higher, they
appear to be going up again. Do you anticipate requesting a supple-
mental to cover increased fuel costs?
Secretary KENDALL. If we have to we will. Mike McCurdy, Under
Secretary for Financial Management communicated earlier to the
Congress about how we deal with inflation, or things like this. I be-
lieve the budget includes an assumption of fuel cost inflation be-
tween 3- and 4 percent, so what we will do, as we did last year,
is we will watch and see what happens with fuel prices, and if nec-

---

132

essary we will work with the Congress to try to solve that problem,
if it emerges.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. General Saltzman, I applaud the
Space Force’s effort to develop a more resilient space architecture.
However, we in Congress often hear complaints and concerns about
how long it takes to develop new capabilities, especially for those
in space.
The Space Development Agency recently launched the first set of
its satellites in less than 3 years from contract award. Could you
tell the committee, what other steps you are taking to accelerate
the development and delivery of space-based capabilities?
General SALTZMAN. Yes, Senator. To some degree that is just a
mindset shift. Instead of developing large exquisite satellites, and
developing, and pulling in requirements from a myriad of stake-
holders; because we know that when we launch a satellite we want
it to last 10, 12, 15 years, that is what extends the length of the
program; Mission Assurance that we have to layer on to those kind
of programs.
We are taking a wholly different approach: smaller satellites,
smaller requirement sets allow us to go faster, and the contracting
piece of that, put something on orbit, recognizing that we may have
to do some tech refresh on a faster time line but that will actually
have better capability, and even more cost effective over the long
run.
And so I think that what Frank Calvelli has done by establishing
this formula for going fast, is effective and paying off, existing tech-
nologies, small contracts, fast contracts, fixed price, we are deliv-
ering the capability in much faster time lines.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. Mr. Secretary.
Secretary KENDALL. If I could add to that. One of the things that
we are taking advantage of is that the transformation of the com-
mercial world in space to a much more efficient, much more cost-
effective designs, and engineering practices that support the busi-
ness case that commercial firms have. So we are basically able to
capitalize on that in things that we are building for Military pur-
poses. So it is a nice synergy there between the commercial world
and the Department of Defense’s world now.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins.
And I want to express my appreciation to all three of you for
your testimony here today, and the questions that you have an-
swered.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may submit additional written questions, and as I said
earlier, we would ask you to respond to all of them as quickly as
possible.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were
submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hear-
ing:]

---

133
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO FRANK KENDALL
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons so that our
weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies. In this year’s budget, the
Air Force is requesting $1.0 billion to achieve time and cost savings via multi-year
Procurement contracts for the production of several missile programs. This includes
significant investments by the Government to increase industry’s production capac-
ity. However, it is not yet clear what the private sector investment will be in return
for this procurement predictability from the Government.
Secretary Kendall, what industry investments are you expecting in return for
these Government investments? General Brown, are these programs fully funded
across future budgets and is the Air Force committed to protecting those invest-
ments in future years even as the Air Force seeks to increase procurement of newer,
more modern missiles?
Answer. The FY24 budget request shows a renewed commitment to munitions pro-
curement throughout the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) by the Depart-
ment. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) worked closely with industry partners
while building this plan and does not foresee any additional or separate industry
investment is necessary to ensure that our procurement profile is executable. In-
creasing industry production capacity and providing procurement predictability will
benefit the DAF by maximizing procurement quantities and stabilizing the indus-
trial base.
Additionally, the Air Force is pursuing a multi-year procurement strategy for our
most critical munitions such as the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile
(AMRAAM), the Joint Air- to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), and the Long-
Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM). We are fully funding these programs through the
FYDP to their current maximum production capacities, which will protect these in-
vestments and ensure a stable industrial base over the next four to 5 years.
Question. In the last five budget cycles, the Air Force’s request for research and
development funds compared to the request for procurement funds has doubled. The
Air Force has invested heavily in the development and testing of important systems
and capabilities, but it is a disservice to the taxpayers if these investments don’t
translate into fielded systems.
Secretary Kendall, does the Department of the Air Force have a plan to combat
this trend of funding disparity between R&D and Procurement? Why are programs
not transitioning from the research, development, and prototyping phase?
Answer. The DAF increased its Research and Development (R&D) budget by $20.0
billion from the FY20 budget request to the FY24 budget request. This is principally
due to the stand-up and resourcing of the Space Force, but also driven by a shift
in investments to address the pacing challenge, as well as ensure Air, Space, and
Cyber mission dominance. The DAF is taking a balanced approach to implement the
National Defense Strategy (NDS) by procuring capabilities that deliver this mission
and making necessary R&D investments to transition technology to deliver future
capabilities. The strategy includes modernization and pivots to address the China
fight including Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), Command, Control, Commu-
nication, Battle Management (C3BM), and resilient space architectures. While the
Department begins R&D investments with the general intent to procure systems,
each system is evaluated on its merits against cost, schedule, and performance re-
quirements, as well as resource constraints. In limited cases, the outcome may re-
sult in a decision not to continue to procurement. DAF prioritization of Operational
Imperatives facilitates a sharp focus on technology transition. This is complemented
by a series of enabling initiatives including digital transformation, facilitating inno-
vation pathways for small businesses and ensuring acquisition, requirements, as
well as resourcing processes are integrated and tailored to accelerate capability de-
livery.
Question. Due to this large increase in R&D over the previous fiscal year, I pre-
sume a Continuing Resolution (CR) would have a significant impact on the Air
Force modernization budget. What areas are most at risk in the event of a CR?
Answer. Modernization of the Air Force and Space Force is critical to DAF imple-
mentation of the NDS. At the forefront of the FY24 DAF budget request are the
Operational Imperatives, modernization efforts intended to close key capability gaps
and directly address our pacing challenges. A CR would further erode our competi-
tive advantage to China by stopping the investment of at least $2.0 billion in 88
new modernization efforts including 20 aligned to critical capabilities within the
Operational Imperatives, including 71 Air Force new starts totaling $1.4 billion and
17 Space Force new starts totaling $595.0 million.

---

134
Further, during a CR, the DAF is limited to operating at FY23-enacted funding
levels resulting in $9.3 billion of lost buying power. The DAF would be forced to
delay on-going development, stop work, or terminate programs to remain within
funding limits if a CR extends into FY24 for a long period. These programs are key
to the high-end fight with a near-peer competitor. Modernization is necessary to not
only keep pace with our strategic competitors but required if we are to establish a
new high ground in the Air, Space, and Cyberspace domains.
Question. The Air Force is requesting $9.0 billion to continue modernizing the nu-
clear enterprise. For the air- and land-based legs of the nuclear triad, we are run-
ning out of time to replace existing, aging systems.
Secretary Kendall, we discussed the ongoing modernization of the ICBM fleet ex-
tensively during your visit to Malmstrom Air Force Base earlier this month. This
is more than a missile program. We’re talking about significant infrastructure and
construction investments, too. Are we sufficiently tapping into our existing manufac-
turing workforce to achieve our ambitious construction goals for ICBM moderniza-
tion?
Answer. The construction goals for ICBM modernization are ambitious. To best ac-
complish those goals, the Air Force is accelerating some initial construction efforts
at FE Warren AFB, WY to begin in FY24 instead of FY26. The Air Force is also
managing construction and transition risks from the industrial base, the age of the
launch facilities, and the need to maintain Minuteman III operations while fielding
LGM–35A Sentinel. Congress can help address these issues by supporting our re-
quest for contract type flexibility for the early construction lots.
Question. In January, we learned that former missileers at Malmstrom Air Force
Base in Montana are dying of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma at rates higher than the
national average.
Secretary Kendell, you recently joined me at Malmstrom—along with the Air
Force Surgeon General, Lieutenant General Miller—to discuss the Air Force’s re-
sponse to this crisis.
As a follow up, can you tell us what the Air Force is doing to reach out to former
missileers whose information is not captured in electronic health records?
Answer. The DAF has taken many steps to reach out to former servicemembers
and other populations who have worked in missile fields to better understand the
extent and severity of the issue, as well as track population trends over time. Lead-
ership has been using townhalls, open forums, and webcasts to communicate up-
dates to the impacted communities and leveraging installation Public Affairs offices
to communicate directly to local communities.
Additionally, the Department is working with the Director of the Air Force Asso-
ciation of Missileers to amplify Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) and Air
Force Surgeon General communications on this issue. The Department of Veterans
Affairs and other veteran service organizations have assisted in expanding outreach,
as well.
Finally, AFGSC has consolidated pertinent information on a public-facing website
which provides the most updated information on the progress of the ongoing study
and addresses questions from the impacted community. The website can be accessed
here: https://www.airforcemedicine.af.mil/Resources/Missile-Community-Cancer-
Study/.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. In the FY23 NDAA, SEC. 603 authorized several policies that will dras-
tically improve the quality of life of Airmen stationed in Alaska. After making in-
quiries with the Air Force leadership in the state, I understand that there has been
no guidance released for how these new policies should be implemented. Because of
this, servicemembers in Alaska are missing out on time-limited incentives to help
alleviate the unique hardships of serving in Alaska, as well as improve the recruit-
ment and retention of Airmen.
What is the status of the implementation of Section 603(a) of P. L. No. 117–263
regarding pay for cold weather special duty pay? What is the status of the imple-
mentation of Section 603(b) of P. L. No. 117–263 regarding the requirement that the
Secretary of the Air Force reimburse eligible servicemembers for the cost of airfare
for that member to travel to their home of record while assigned to a duty location
in Alaska? When should Airmen expect to begin receiving a cold weather duty pay
and reimbursements for eligible travel to their home of record?
Answer. Alaska has several unique bases and missions vital to the Air Force. We
understand the importance of providing quality-of-life improvements to our Airmen
stationed there. The FY23 NDAA expanded our capabilities to offer additional bene-

---

135
fits for this initiative. AF/A1 is working closely with the Pacific Air Force team to
request Cold Weather Special Duty Pay, under the authority created by Section
603(a), on behalf of Alaska. Then it will be routed through the Secretarial process.
The travel reimbursement incentive for service members who travel to their home
of record from Alaska is near the end of the Per Diem Travel and Transportation
Allowance Committee process. The final steps are to receive the Committee prin-
cipal’s signature, followed by the Joint Travel Regulations update. Once approved,
the Air Force will implement the incentive. The Air Force has been monitoring both
guidance initiatives closely and works diligently to implement these new authorities
as soon as possible and continues to look for new, effective ways to improve the
quality of life and the unique hardships for Airmen stationed in Alaska.
Question. Alaska provides the only location capable of supporting both short- and
long-range hypersonic weapons testing within the United States. This unique geo-
graphical location offers the only location where hypersonic testing can be conducted
without overflying populated areas and provide the DoD, with unrestricted flexi-
bility to meet hypersonic mission objectives.
The Pacific Spaceport Complex.—Alaska (PSCA) provides an unparalleled test
range for hypersonic vehicles and other advanced aerospace systems. Specifically,
PSCA’s launch site on Kodiak is ideally located to serve as the anchor for the Aleu-
tian Test Range (ATR) stretching westward to Shemya Island. Through instrumen-
tation strategically placed throughout the Aleutian Islands, AAC could provide te-
lemetry data and vehicle safety throughout extended flight profiles.
Currently, the most feasible long-range capability for hypersonic testing requires
the use of ships and aircraft positioned along the flight route of the hypersonic vehi-
cle to track and receive data. This is a logistics challenge that is extremely expen-
sive to mobilize for each test. Land-based instrumentation provides higher reliability
and lower cost than ships and/or airborne platforms. Furthermore, the ATR can sup-
port air-, sea-, undersea- and land-launched systems to provide maximum test flexi-
bility.
Additionally, the Federal Government and State of Alaska have jointly invested
over $120.0 million of capital improvements at PSCA. As only one of two U.S.-based
spaceports that can launch into high-inclination and polar orbits, PSCA is a na-
tional asset to provide critical resiliency for U.S. access to space and to facilitate
keeping national security space payloads launching from U.S. soil. This FAA-li-
censed commercial spaceport is a low-cost operation, capable of launching solid- and
liquid-fueled rockets and has supported numerous government orbital, suborbital,
and test missions since 1998. In recent years, Kodiak was the only spaceport able
to support DARPA’s Launch Challenge to demonstrate agility and flexibility key to
military missions. However, the Space Force has not recently used PSCA.
SEC. 237 of the FY23 NDAA includes a provision directing the Secretary to iden-
tify non-DoD test facilities to expand testing of ‘‘operationally relevant, live-fire’’
hypersonic weapons. What steps has the Air Force taken to evaluate the PSCA and
the Aleutian Islands for the potential to support hypersonic weapons testing? Do
you support such an effort, and if so, when will we see a commitment to move this
forward? What are the Space Force plans to make PSCA, and other orbital capable
commercial spaceports, part of the USSF launch architecture and regularly fund
missions at these locations to demonstrate critical resiliency capability for national
security space, Responsive Space Launch, and Rapid Launch missions?
Answer. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Test Resource Management
Center (TRMC) has an extensive existing hypersonic test infrastructure road map
and is the lead with oversight over all Department of Defense (DoD) hypersonic test
infrastructure investment across the Major Range Test Facilities Base (MRTFB) in
order to avoid duplicative Service investments. The Department of the Air Force
supports any DoD efforts to expand hypersonic test infrastructure that will enable
more rapid fielding of hypersonic weapons or vehicles.
The Space Force is seeing unprecedented demand for launch capacity from both
government and commercial sectors. We are working hard to expand access to exist-
ing U.S. spaceports and increase the number locations available via a National
Spaceport Interagency Working Group (NSIWG). The NSIWG is led by the FAA Of-
fice of Commercial Spaceports and has membership from the Space Force, OSD Pol-
icy, Department of Commerce, Department of State, and NASA. The NSIWG is
drafting a National Spaceport Strategy that seeks to encourage the growth of space-
ports nationwide and interoperability between them, all in an effort to expand resil-
iency to space access and ensure U.S. leadership in this domain.
Additionally, the Space Force recognizes that increased access to space by space-
ports in diverse locations is important to our resilience and national security. The
Rocket Systems Launch Program has used PSCA for several of their small-launch
missions and continues to execute contracts to invest in PSCA. The Space Force also

---

136
plans to take advantage of the increased capability offered by new vendors in Na-
tional Security Space Launch (NSSL) Phase 3, Lane 1. The Space Force procures
commercial launch services and we are limited to locations where launch providers
have established capabilities. Additionally, four locations in the U.S. can address
high inclination launch: Cape Canaveral SFB, FL; Vandenberg SFB, CA; NASA
Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), VA; and PSCA, AK.
Question. I understand the Air Force has had to make difficult budget decisions,
but in my view, a top priority should be the capability to rescue our men and women
in harm’s way. I am concerned about the Service’s decision to terminate the Combat
Rescue Helicopter (CRH) program. I believe the moral imperative to ‘‘leave no one
behind’’ is critical to show our commitment to the men and women who risk their
lives to protect and defend us in all theaters of operation. It also concerns me that
of the existing CRHs, the Air Force’s current fielding plan places the National
Guard at the lowest priority.
As you know, the 176th Wing on JBER is the primary Search and Rescue (SAR)
force in Alaska. They have the Air Force’s highest tempo and utilization rate (UTE).
The Wing reports that their HH–60 Fleet has the highest UTE average at 130 by-
month hours per tail over the last 6 years, with the next highest being Moody at
115 and Patrick at 107. Our footprint in the Arctic will only grow; the 176th must
be better outfitted to support the AORs SAR requirements. Last year alone, they
conducted 106 sorties and had 62 rescues. Further, I understand the additional 10
CRHs Congress added last year are planned to be Attrition Reserve aircraft, so you
really only have 75 helicopters to accomplish what the original program of record
says is 113 aircraft.
How does the Air Force plan to address this capability shortfall for the rescue
mission?
Answer. The Air Force remains committed to the Joint Personnel Recovery (PR)
mission and its own Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) fleet, forces, and supporting
architecture. The Air National Guard is a key component of the Total Force and will
be recapitalized at all locations with HH-60Ws. The reduction in procurement of
HH–60W will not result in a near-term capability shortfall, but will limit the capac-
ity for dedicated CSAR forces available to the Joint Force. This will require the
Joint Force to carefully adjudicate use of Air Force-dedicated CSAR forces and make
use of other assets for less demanding PR missions. The Air Force recognizes the
HH-60W’s inherent capability limitations in the future threat environment and
plans to mitigate this by modernizing how it trains and equips personnel for ex-
tended survival, improving communications architectures for distributed operations,
enhancing its Find-Fix-Track capabilities in support of isolated personnel, sup-
porting science and technology efforts to mature technological solutions that may
provide enhanced capability, and layering PR forces to include traditional, non-tra-
ditional, Joint, and partner-nation capabilities.

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Question. Last fall, the administration released a draft regulation that would re-
quire contractors to report on any greenhouse gas emissions they make that can be
linked to the work they perform on DoD contracts. Further, it would make contrac-
tors set emissions reduction targets. This will severely impact oil and gas companies
that are major contractors.
What is your plan to continue to procure fuel if this regulation makes it impos-
sible to offer contracts to oil and gas companies?
Answer. The DAF and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which procures most
of the fuel on behalf of the Air Force, procure fuel in full compliance with all appli-
cable laws, rules, and regulations. The DLA will continue to comply with all applica-
ble laws, rules, and regulations when procuring fuel on behalf of the military serv-
ices. If there is a regulatory change that impacts how we or DLA procures fuel, the
DAF will work closely with DLA and in coordination with our industry partners to
determine how to best meet all operational requirements for the military services.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. General Brown, we have very little margin in the modernization sched-
ule for the land and air legs of the nuclear triad. Are you concerned about the mod-
ernization strategy?

---

137
Answer. As you point out, there is very little margin in our modernization sched-
ule for the land and air legs of the nuclear triad. In the FY24 budget request, nu-
clear modernization remains the DAF top priority. Our acquisition professionals,
working with our industry partners, are proactively identifying and looking for ways
to mitigate potential schedule challenges and/or program risk. Also critical to suc-
cessfully executing our modernization strategy will be on time and fully funded
budgets and we greatly appreciate Congress’ support for these programs.
Question. The Air Force has requested congressional support for the divestment
of 310 aircraft in the FY24 budget request. However, you are only procuring 96 re-
placement aircraft. Furthermore, some of these divestments are planned to be re-
placed with modernized aircraft that are still in development and not yet ready for
production.
General Brown, I’m all for getting rid of older systems that aren’t relevant to cur-
rent and evolving threats, but how do we avoid a capability gap if we’re retiring
more aircraft than we’re able to field?
Answer. There are several challenges within our fleet today, many stemming from
the age of our fleet and the number of missions performed over the past 20 plus
years of continuous conflict in the Middle East and the relevance to the evolving
threat. The FY24 budget request balances between current risk and future risks.
While divesting older systems reduces current inventory numbers in some cases, di-
vestment allows for procurement of new and more capable aircraft to address the
current and future threat in a high-end conflict.
The Air Force endeavors to procure a modern force while remaining ready for to-
day’s challenges. We received great support from Congress for the last several budg-
et cycles to move beyond legacy force structures that are not supporting the current
defense needs for the Nation. These divestments free up dollar amounts and, most
importantly, manpower to operate and maintain new aircraft. The transition from
legacy aircraft to modernization requires a balanced risk and the Air Force is taking
deliberate steps to manage near term capacity risk. Specifically, the FY24 budget
requests to divest legacy A–10 and F–15 aircraft that would not contribute lethality
in a high-end conflict, as well as balances risk across the Joint Force along with
allies and partners.
In order to provide maximum capacity across the spectrum of conflict, the DAF
is increasing its force mix of multi-role platforms while divesting older platforms de-
signed for narrow mission sets.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Question. You’ve described the importance of domain awareness for both air and
space. After the Chinese flew a spy balloon over the US earlier this year, the com-
mander of Northern Command described how this revealed gaps in our domain
awareness.
With atypical threats like high-altitude balloons, does the line between air and
space responsibilities create a gap in our domain awareness investments?
Answer. Our acquisition model has been focused on specific platforms operating
in specific domains. The shift to multi-domain operations has highlighted our need
to reevaluate our approach to platform and domain integration. The DAF is recon-
ciling that through the standup of the DAF Program Executive Officer (PEO) for
Command, Control, Communications, and Battle Management (C3BM), which
serves as an integrating PEO for DAF capability and system requirements. In par-
ticular, the PEO’s Architecture and System Engineering Division is tasked with
architecting solutions that work both in, and across, domains to architectural needs.
Question. The Air Force did not include Air National Guard Federal Tuition As-
sistance in its budget request. This continues to be a benefit only afforded to the
Army National Guard. In your written testimony you acknowledged that in fiscal
year 2023, the active-duty Air Force is ‘‘projected to miss military enlistment re-
quirements by about 10%, over three thousand individuals’’ and that ‘‘the Air Guard
and Reserve components are projected to miss their goals by even higher margins.’’
Do you agree that Air National Guard Federal Tuition Assistance could be an im-
portant tool in helping the Air Guard and Reserve and meet its recruitment and
retention goals? Will this be prioritized in future budget requests?
Answer. Air Force Tuition Assistance (MilTA) is funded for those Air National
Guard service members on Title 10 active-duty status and those on Title 32 Active
Guard Reserve (AGR) orders under Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 2007. MilTA re-
mains an important retention tool for those already serving on active-duty status.
All Air National Guard States and Territories (except Guam) offer State Tuition As-
sistance programs and many Air National Guard service members qualify for Post-

---

138
9/11 GI Bill benefits. Considering these other opportunities members have, and due
to competing budget priorities, the Air Force does not plan to budget for the Na-
tional Guard Federal TA program (FedTA). The Air Force Recruiting Service con-
tinues to pursue accession goals by offering targeted enlistment incentive programs.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO.
Question. Does the FY24 Budget include funding for Tactical Data Link upgrades
for Air National Guard C–130J units? Will all Air National Guard C–130Js receive
this upgrade? If not, how many? What is the projected timeline for these upgrades?
Answer. In FY24, 15 additional Active Component C–130J aircraft will be up-
graded with Block 8.1, which includes the tactical data link (TDL) capability. Older
C–130Js in the Air Force Reserve (AFR) and Air National Guard (ANG) are pro-
jected to begin receiving upgrades in FY28. The Mobility Air Force (MAF) fielding
plan, approved in 2015, upgrades one Airlift Wing at a time. Air Mobility Command
(AMC), ANG, and AFR Command concurred with the 2015 modification plan. ANG
and AFR elected not to expend National Guard Reserve Equipment Appropriations
(NGREA) on modifications and agreed Block 8.1 funding is an AMC responsibility.
The Block 8.1 modification includes TDL (Link-16) and many other upgrades.
Block 8.1 is incorporated in aircraft production lines. All Air Force aircraft starting
with FY20 congressional adds will be delivered in a Block 8.1 configuration. The
165th Airlift Wing, located in Savannah, GA, will begin receiving C–130Js in Block
8.1 configuration from the production line in December 2023. There are 48 Congres-
sionally-added C–130J aircraft between FY20 and FY23. The ANG is expected to re-
ceive 40 Block 8.1 C–130Js directly off the production line by the second quarter
of FY28.
The Block 8.1 system complexity impacts crew qualifications and the associated
training pipeline. Factoring Congressional additions and established training pipe-
line limitations, the current phased approach addresses urgent operational needs
while incrementally building qualifications across the total force.
Question. Will all U.S. Air Force C–17s, across components, receive the Extended
Range modification? If not, how many Active, Guard, and Reserve C–17s, respec-
tively, will receive the upgrade?
Additionally, what is the projected timeline for these upgrades? How would the
cost and time schedule of these upgrades be affected by combining modifications for
the Extended Range Fuel Tank with the On-Board Inert Gas Generation System
(OBIGGS) II System upgrade?
Answer. The C–17 Extended Range (ER) modification provides additional fuel for
increased range but does not increase aircraft efficiency. The Air Force is not plan-
ning to modify the remaining aircraft to ER configuration since the C–17 ER modi-
fications provide minimal impact to pacing scenarios and we have higher priority
modernization requirements. Ability to aerial refuel the entire C–17 fleet mitigates
the mission completion risk. Currently 69% of the AFR fleet, 62% of the ANG fleet,
and 79% of the Active Component fleet have received the upgrade.
The C–17 OBIGGS II System upgrade is a modification to correct a safety of flight
issue known as ‘‘C–17 OBIGGS II Filter Fire Mitigation’’ on only those 112 aircraft
equipped with the OBIGGS II System. This mod will continue to be installed until
FY29. Additionally, to restart the C–17 ER production line would take an extensive
reinvestment of Non-Recurring Engineering costs and would be executed separately
from the current OBIGGS II program so as not to delay delivery.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. Alaska is home to one of nation’s few state spaceports on Kodiak Island.
It is a national asset and I think it’s not utilized as much as it should be. According
to a recent FAA report—the National Spaceport Policy—the number of launches will
increase from 74 last year to 186 in 2026, a nearly 300% increase. Meanwhile, ac-
cording to the same report, 4 out of every 5 of these launches takes place either
at Cape Canaveral or Vandenburg. Last year during Space Symposium you stated,
‘‘the United States Space Force must transform its space capabilities to increase our
resiliency against these and other threats—and we must do so quickly.’’ Meanwhile,
RocketLab—a U.S. company—recently shifted a pair of NASA launches to New Zea-
land. This is in addition to the 4 launches that USSF/NRO has already allowed
RocketLab to launch from foreign soil.

---

139
Should the Space Force make more of an effort to launch from U.S. spaceports
instead of foreign ones? Without greater use of and investment in our state space-
ports, is our domestic space launch infrastructure resilient and ready for a future
conflict? Shouldn’t we invest more in alternative spaceports to ensure we’re not
wholly dependent on a couple Federal space ports, one on each coast?
Answer. The Space Force is working hard to expand access to U.S. spaceports and
increase the number of them via a National Spaceport Interagency Working Group
(NSIWG). The NSIWG is led by the FAA Office of Commercial Spaceports and has
membership from the Space Force, OSD Policy, Department of Commerce, Depart-
ment of State, and NASA. The NSWIG is drafting a National Spaceport Strategy
that seeks to encourage the growth of spaceports nationwide, and interoperability
between them, all in an effort to expand resiliency to space access and maintain
U.S. leadership in this domain.
The Space Force recognizes the importance of strong domestic spaceports, as well
as the value of having access to diversified launch locations to increase resilience,
including utilizing launch facilities available to us through our allies. In addition,
launch locations are assigned to missions based on optimizing the path from launch
to the desired destination of the satellite or spacecraft. These factors are each con-
sidered as the NSWIG develops their strategy.
The current Space Force OSP–4 launch contract enables launch from any of the
U.S. ranges. Additionally, the intended Phase 3 dual-lane strategy extends the abil-
ity to launch NSSL Lane 1 missions from launch complexes other than those associ-
ated with the two Space Force-managed ranges.
Question. Phase 2 of the National Security Space Launch Program was designed
when space was far less contested, congested, and competitive. In Phase 2, the De-
partment chose just two providers in a 60%/40% split for 34 launches and this deci-
sion is proving to be, at best, minimally sufficient to meet the Department’s space
launch needs. Phase 3, which is currently being developed for a highly contested,
competitive, and congested domain, includes 39 launches in the ‘‘block-buy’’ lane and
66 or more throughout Phase 3.
If two providers are just barely sufficient for Phase 2, how are the same two pro-
viders, 60%/40% split sufficient for Phase 3’s block buy? How is this acquisition re-
silient if two providers just barely meet the need now and the need increases dra-
matically in Phase 3?
Answer. The NSSL Phase 2 acquisition strategy was designed to end U.S. reliance
on Russian-made engines, drive competition, and deliver assured access to space for
the Nation through two qualified launch service providers. Phase 2 does not restrict
the number of missions the Space Force can order from each of its two contracted
launch service providers and both providers have the required capacity to meet all
NSSL needs. The Phase 2 Request for Proposal (RFP) forecasted about 34 missions
across the five-year ordering period and is projected to end with a total of about 47
missions ordered.
For NSSL Phase 3, the Space Force selected an approach that aims to take full
advantage of the United States’ robust and evolving commercial launch market. The
draft NSSL Phase 3 acquisition strategy proposes a dual-lane contracting approach,
allowing access to an unlimited number of qualifying providers to promote resiliency
through diversity and best meet Space Force and National Reconnaissance Office
(NRO) requirements for launch. To meet this intent, the Space Force divided the
66 projected missions in the Phase 3, five-year ordering period between two contract
lanes:
—Phase 3 Lane 1 (∼27 missions): Designed to provide access to multiple launch
system providers, systems, and launch sites, allow on-ramp of new launch sys-
tems and technology when ready, and offer tailored mission assurance based on
a satellite’s risk tolerance.
—Phase 3 Lane 2 (∼39 missions): Designed to secure launch capacity and provide
assurance and stability for our most stressing National Security Space missions
through two qualified launch service providers. Lane 2 also garners economic
order quantity savings. Lane 2 is projected to have approximately the same
number of missions projected for NSSL Phase 2; therefore, two launch service
providers can provide sufficient capacity to meet the Phase 3 projected mission
count.
The projected 66 missions to be ordered in the NSSL Phase 3 enables the Space
Force to employ a flexible acquisition strategy to meet multiple objectives and pro-
vide the warfighter more resilient launch capability.
Question. Space is more contested that ever, and the Department’s need to access
space has also radically increased with both proliferated constellations and exquisite
needs. As you also know, and has been reported widely, you are also seeing dra-
matic increases in launch demand—commercial, civil, and national security. Even

---

140
ULA’s CEO Tory Bruno has stated, ‘‘There is a worldwide shortage of
launch . . . There’ll be more missions than both [ULA and SpaceX] are really able
to fly and that’ll be for a number of years.’’
So why, in a supply-constrained environment of space launch would the Depart-
ment further constrain supply by artificially limiting the numbers of providers in
Phase 3 of the National Security Space Launch program to just two? Wouldn’t a
three-provider block buy promote additional competition, drive down launch costs,
and be more resilient and redundant for the Department, especially if something
bad were to happen to one of the launch vehicles or one of the space companies were
to happen to one of the launch vehicles or one of the space companies were to be
sold?
Answer. The draft NSSL Phase 3 acquisition aims to take full advantage of the
United States’ robust evolving commercial launch market. The draft NSSL Phase
3 strategy proposes a dual-lane contracting approach, allowing access to an unlim-
ited number of qualifying providers to promote resiliency through diversity and best
meet Space Force and NRO requirements for launch.
—The draft Phase 3 strategy fully supports the expected increase in launch de-
mand and launch providers while simultaneously fostering greater competition.
—Phase 3, Lane 1 is designed to capitalize on emerging launch capability for
our more risk- tolerant missions and provide annual on-ramp opportunities
for the Space Force to tap into new launch technology as systems are ready.
—Phase 3, Lane 2 is designed to secure launch capacity and provide the full
mission assurance required by our nation’s most stressing NSSL missions.
—The Phase, 3 Lane 2 strategy is a full and open competition and the 60/
40 allocation split incentivizes launch service providers choosing to compete
to provide their most competitive pricing to meet all NSSL requirements.
—With only three potential bidders for Phase 3 Lane 2, awarding three con-
tracts is likely to disincentivize launch providers to bid competitively and
will drive increased costs.
—The Space Force estimates that carrying a third launch service provider in
Lane 2 could drive a $1.0 billion increase or more due to additional launch
service support (NSSL-unique costs not directly associated with any one
mission), and space vehicle integration costs across three different launch
vehicles versus two.
Question. I understand the Air Force has had to make difficult budget decisions,
but in my view, a top priority should be the capability to rescue our men and women
in harm’s way. I am concerned about the Service’s decision to terminate the Combat
Rescue Helicopter (CRH) program. I believe the moral imperative to ‘‘leave no one
behind’’ is critical to show our commitment to the men and women who risk their
lives to protect and defend us in all theaters of operation. It also concerns me that
of the existing CRHs, the Air Force’s current fielding plan places the National
Guard at the lowest priority.
As you know, the 176th Wing on JBER is the primary Search and Rescue (SAR)
force in Alaska. They have the Air Force’s highest tempo and utilization rate (UTE).
The Wing reports that their HH–60 Fleet has the highest UTE average at 130 by-
month hours per tail over the last 6 years, with the next highest being Moody at
115 and Patrick at 107. Our footprint in the Arctic will only grow; the 176th must
be better outfitted to support the AORs SAR requirements. Last year alone, they
conducted 106 sorties and had 62 rescues. Further, I understand the additional 10
CRHs Congress added last year are planned to be Attrition Reserve aircraft, so you
really only have 75 helicopters to accomplish what the original program of record
says is 113 aircraft.
How does the Air Force plan to address this capability shortfall for the rescue
mission?
Answer. The Air Force remains committed to the Joint Personnel Recovery (PR)
mission and its own Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) fleet, forces, and supporting
architecture. The Air National Guard is a key component of the Total Force and will
be recapitalized at all locations with HH–60Ws. The reduction in procurement of
HH–60W will not result in a near-term capability shortfall, but will limit the capac-
ity for dedicated CSAR forces available to the Joint Force. This will require the
Joint Force to carefully adjudicate use of Air Force-dedicated CSAR forces and make
use of other assets for less demanding PR missions. The Air Force recognizes the
HH–60W’s inherent capability limitations in the future threat environment and
plans to mitigate this by modernizing how it trains and equips personnel for ex-
tended survival, improving communications architectures for distributed operations,
enhancing its Find-Fix-Track capabilities in support of isolated personnel, sup-
porting science and technology efforts to mature technological solutions that may

---

141
provide enhanced capability, and layering PR forces to include traditional, non-tra-
ditional, Joint, and partner-nation capabilities.

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. This Defense Subcommittee will reconvene on
Tuesday, May 2, at 10 a.m., for a Hearing with the Department of
the Army.
We stand in recess.
[Whereupon, at 11:39 a.m., Tuesday, April 18, the subcommittee
was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, May 2.]

---

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

WEDNESDAY, MAY 2, 2023

U.S. SENATE,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:01 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Schatz, Shaheen, Murphy,
Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTINE WORMUTH, SECRETARY
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. I call the subcommittee to order.
I want to thank Secretary Wormuth and General McConville for
being here. Welcome back to both of you. We appreciate your lead-
ership of our Nation’s Army and look forward to discussing the
Army’s budget priorities for fiscal year 2024.
Before we begin, I’d like to express my condolences to the entire
Army family following last week’s tragic death of three soldiers in
a helicopter accident in Alaska and that comes on the heels of the
recent death of nine soldiers following a midair collision of two heli-
copters in Kentucky.
Ensuring our brave men and women in uniform have access to
the best training and equipment they need is the Number 1 pri-
ority of this committee. I will want to hear more from you about
your order for Army aviation units to complete a 24-hour safety
stand-down and any corrective actions that you plan to take.
The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Department of Army
is a $185.5 billion, which is $300 million below the amount enacted
in fiscal year 2023 and nearly $11 billion more than enacted in fis-
cal year 2022.
So let me repeat that. $185.5 is $300 million below last year’s
but $11 billion more than the year before that.
Worldwide challenges and threats are constantly evolving. The
Army’s response to increasingly complex battlefield of the future is
to transform the Army into the Army of 2030. This transformation
includes investments of people, the reorganization of forces, the de-
(143)

---

144

velopment of new equipment, and adoption of new concepts to de-
feat our adversaries.
We can best help the Army on its path to transform to the Army
of 2030 through the timely enactment of a defense appropriations
bill for fiscal year 2024. On-time appropriations provide the re-
source predictability that enables the Army to execute training and
operate plans effectively and efficiently for the entire fiscal year.
Let me put it this way. In order for the Army to be all it can
be, we, Congress, must do our jobs.
I look forward to working with Senators Murray and Collins, the
Chairman and Ranking Member of the Full Committee, for putting
us in a position for success in getting the budget passed on time.
The Army’s biggest military advantage is its people but these are
difficult times. We look forward to hearing more about how you’re
tackling recruiting challenges. Given the need to modernize in light
of an ever-evolving threat, we also look forward to an update about
the pace of modernization.
You all have my full support to develop and field modernized ca-
pabilities, but I’m growing increasingly worried about repeated pro-
posals by the Army to break production lines and destabilize indus-
trial base when we need them most.
Once again, I want to thank you for your service to the country.
Senator Collins is not here, as you can see. She has a Health, Edu-
cation, Labor, and Pensions Committee markup this morning. She
may arrive later, but before we get to your opening statements, I
have one quick statement. Then I want to turn it over to Senator
Moran.
We heard yesterday that the moment in time we default on our
debt is coming up in 1 month, June 1. I talked about getting a
budget out on time. I do not know what the people in this Senate,
House are thinking. The truth is, is the deficit needs to be dealt
with in a common sense way. What the House has done last week
is not a common sense way and it makes us a weaker country.
If we continue down this line, I’m very concerned about funding
for the military, funding for Homeland Security, funding for every
agency that we have within the government, and so hopefully,
hopefully common sense will prevail here and we’ll be able to con-
tinue on the path of getting a budget out, a defense budget in this
case, by the end of September so that you guys have the cer-
tainties, not to waste a lot of taxpayer dollars, and the military in-
dustrial base has the certainty to know what we need and are able
to deliver it on time.
With that, I’ll turn it over to Senator Moran.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN

Senator MORAN. Chairman Tester, thank you.
I would add my support for all of our efforts in this committee
to make certain that we get our appropriations process completed
and done on time and that we avoid a continuing resolution that
would be very damaging to lots of aspects of government but par-
ticularly to our national security.
As I begin my opening statement, I’d like to take a second to rec-
ognize the three Army aviators who lost their lives in a training
accident over the weekend in Alaska. Another solemn reminder of

---

145

the sacrifices servicemembers and their families make every day,
whether deployed or at home.
Thank you both for your service to our Nation and for being here
today to discuss the United States Army’s budget request for fiscal
year 2024.
General McConville, it’s my understanding that this will be your
last posture hearing. While that saddens me, it may be a pleasur-
able thought for you. This is your last posture hearing as Chief of
Staff for the Army. I’d like to especially thank you for your decades
of service in uniform to the defense of our Nation.
I’m grateful for the relationship, the friendship that we’ve had,
the conversations that you’re willing to engage with me, and I’m
especially grateful for your visits to Fort Riley and Fort Leaven-
worth last summer.
Kansans take a lot of pride in the Army’s presence in our State
and in these installations’ role in the defense of our Nation. Kansas
communities are engaged and supportive of the soldiers and their
families who call these posts home.
Secretary Wormuth, as we discussed recently, in fact as recently
as 5 minutes ago, I look forward to hosting you in Kansas in the
near future to showcase the capabilities of Kansas military posts
and the support of our Army’s soldiers.
The United States is in the midst of one of the most challenging
national security situations of my lifetime and the Army is critical
to the support of the security of our Nation. The Army is critical
to the future of our country.
This Administration’s Army’s budget request for fiscal year 2024
does not adequately address these concerns. Assuming the best in-
flation estimates, the Army’s fiscal year 2024 request represents a
real growth rate of a negative, a negative 2.4 percent.
As Co-Chair of the Senate Army Caucus and a Member of this
subcommittee, it is my priority that the Army have the resources
necessary to fill the national security obligations.
We continue to hear of the ongoing recruiting crisis within the
Army. The force will look different from just 2 years ago, roughly
35,000 below its fiscal year 2022 authorized end strength of
485,000 soldiers.
Congress should be informed of all the alternatives as the Army
considers options to manage this significant reduction. Let’s work
with you, let’s work together to find satisfactory solutions and help
the Army in its recruitment efforts. We need to overcome this def-
icit of soldiers.
No one, I think it’s true in this room, wants to see the Army re-
turn to a tiered readiness model. I believe the retention of Army
force structure is critical. While force structure reductions may be
a quick fix solution, it will set the Army back at a time when the
need for a ready Army is as essential as ever.
Army senior leadership should keep Congress aware of any
changes under consideration. I want to be your ally, not your critic.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted deficiencies in the
U.S. industrial base, particularly as its ability to produce an ade-
quate munitions stock and supply.
American and Kansan workers stand ready to support the U.S.
warfighter. I support the Army’s recent investment into the muni-

---

146

tions industrial base. I recently had a chance to visit the former
Kansas Army Ammunition Plant, which will have a vital role now
re-engaging and supporting the increased munitions production
needs.
I also want to applaud the Army’s recent selection of the V–280
to be the Army’s future long-range assault aircraft. This aircraft
provides the needed speed and distance to support the Army 2030.
I will continue to use my position on this committee to help sup-
port the modernization of the Army aviation fleet to keep pace with
our challenges.
The Army is the backbone of the Joint Force. If the United
States is in conflict, our Army answers the call. While air and Ma-
rine superiority are essential, this is only possible with the Army’s
presence.
The U.S. ability to project power, to hold critical ground relies
upon the Army’s ability to compete in the Pacific Theater.
I highlight just at least from my own perspective that our coun-
try faces real and serious challenges. We need to do the things nec-
essary to make sure we counter those circumstances. The Army has
a significant role. This Congress has a significant role in sup-
porting that effort.
I look forward to your testimony and your responses to the ques-
tions.
Thank you both.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Moran.
We’ll start with you, Secretary Wormuth. You have the floor.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTINE WORMUTH

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Tester, Senator Moran, and Distin-
guished Members of the Committee.
Thank you for your ongoing support as we continue to build the
Army of 2030 and thank you in particular for your condolences for
our Army aviators. It has been a difficult several weeks for our
aviation community and as soon as we got the word about the inci-
dent in Alaska, I asked the Chief to look into making sure that we
were going to do a stand-down to make sure that we understand
exactly what’s going on here and that we can make sure that our
aviators share lessons learned from these recent incidents.
We’re both very pleased to appear before you today. I want to
thank General McConville for his decades of service and leadership
in the Army. This is indeed his last hearing and it has been a
pleasure to do three cycles of budget hearings with you, Chief. So
congratulations.
We’ve accomplished a lot in the last year but we still have a lot
of work ahead of us. We remain focused on our three priorities:
people, modernization, and readiness. The fiscal year 2024 budget
enables us to support the National Defense Strategy, provide ready
forces to our combatant commanders, and take care of our people.
By investing over $39 billion in procurement and RDT&E (re-
search, development, test, and evaluation), we are maintaining our
momentum on our modernization programs and are largely on
track to bring 24 systems across the finish line in 2023.

---

147

This is a big year for long-range precision fires. Prototypes of the
precision strike missile, the mid-range capability, and the long-
range hypersonic weapon will be in the hands of soldiers in this fis-
cal year.
It’s also a big year for next generation combat vehicles. Mobile
protected firepower is in production and the AMPV (Armored
Multi-Purpose Vehicle) is also being fielded, and it’s a big year for
our Integrated Air and Missile Defense Programs and the Future
Vertical Lift Program, as well.
As we shift from two decades of counterinsurgency and counter-
terrorism operations to large-scale combat operations, we’re also
transforming our force structure. We are going to need to adapt our
force structure to make room for things like the multi-domain task
forces as well as other new units, like the indirect fire protection
capability and our M–SHORAD battalions.
We are a ready Army and we continue to emphasize readiness
in everything we do. We’re funding 22 combat training center rota-
tions. We have a robust exercise program, and we’re implementing
our new readiness model which helps us balance modernization,
training, and ongoing missions.
We’re also investing in preposition stocks which have served us
very well in Europe and will continue to serve us well in other the-
aters.
To assist Ukraine in fighting Russia, the Army has provided over
$20 billion in lethal assistance, including a wide range of muni-
tions, radars, and combat vehicles, just to name a few items.
One of the most important lessons we’ve learned from the situa-
tion in Ukraine is the need for a more robust defense industrial
base. So in our budget this year, we have $1.5 billion to invest in
arsenals, depots, and ammo plants.
We’re also working very closely with our Defense partners and
industry to increase munitions production so that we can continue
to help the Ukrainians but also very importantly to replenish our
own stocks.
Even as our soldiers provide lethal assistance and train the
Ukrainian Armed Forces, we haven’t taken our eye off of the pac-
ing challenge of China. INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command) may
be a theater named after two oceans, but the Army does have an
important role to play there.
The best way to avoid fighting a war is to show that you could
win any war you might have to fight. So the Army is contributing
to strengthening the deterrence in INDOPACOM every day as we
campaign in the region through our exercises and partnerships and
if deterrence fails, the Army will be a key player on the Joint Force
Team if there’s a conflict.
As important as it is to build new weapon systems and maintain
our readiness, people are the strength of our Army. This budget in-
cludes a 5.2 percent pay raise and funds important quality of life
improvements, like family housing, childcare initiatives, and new
and renovated barracks.
We also, of course, want to build cohesive teams of soldiers that
are trained, disciplined, and fit. So the Army is committed to posi-
tive command climates across the force where our soldiers can be
all they can be.

---

148

We’re also continuing to strive to prevent suicide in our ranks.
Suicide is a national challenge, of course, but we have to do every-
thing we can to reduce suicide in the Army.
So we’re pursuing a range of initiatives to help our soldiers be
more resilience. One of the most important things we can do is
make sure that we have engaged leaders at every level who know
their soldiers and make sure that their soldiers are connected to
their leaders, to their buddies, and to their families.
Our Army is the greatest Army in the world but to keep it that
way, we have to solve our recruiting challenge. The difficult re-
cruiting landscape we face didn’t happen in a year and it’s going
to take us more than a year to turn this around. We are laser fo-
cused on this challenge and we are not going to lower our stand-
ards to solve the problem.
We are generating positive momentum from initiatives, like our
Future Soldier Prep Course, our Soldier Referral Program, and our
new advertising campaign Be All You Can Be.
Our efforts are geared towards one thing: reintroducing the
Army to the American public and inspiring a renewed call to serv-
ice. We very much need your help to be successful in that effort.
I’m proud of everything our soldiers do to protect our country
and look forward to your questions this morning.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
Next up we have General McConville.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL JAMES C. McCONVILLE, CHIEF OF STAFF OF
THE ARMY
General MCCONVILLE. Secretary, thank you for your leadership.
Chairman Tester, Senator Moran, and Distinguished Members of
the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to be here today
and for your continued support. We appreciate your condolences
and certainly, our condolences go out to the families of our fallen
aviators in Alaska.
The United States Army exists for one purpose, that is, protect
the Nation by being ready to fight and win our Nation’s wars as
a Member of the Joint Force. To do this, the Army has set three
clear priorities: people, readiness, and modernization or, in other
words, future readiness.
We have remained aggressively committed to these priorities
while answering the Nation’s call during every crisis and every
challenge.
This year the Army continues to undergo its greatest trans-
formation in almost 50 years and we are delivering on moderniza-
tion because we have been consistent and we have been persistent
on our modernization priorities.
Last year we officially updated our capstone warfighting doctrine
to Multi-Domain Operations, which incorporates emerging lessons
from Ukraine. We continue to stand up new organizations to sup-
port our new doctrine.
Last June we reactivated the historic 11th Airborne Division in
Alaska. In September, we stood up the third of our five multi-do-
main task forces. As the Secretary noted, we are on track to field
24 signature weapon systems in fiscal year 2023.

---

149

But at the end of the day, we must get the right people in the
right place in order for any of these initiatives to be successful.
This is why people remain the Army’s Number 1 priority.
We want every young person and every parent to know that serv-
ice in the Army is a pathway to success both in and out of uniform.
Whether you serve for 4 years or you serve for over 40 years, the
Army offers endless possibilities. We are not only a profession of
arms but we are a profession of professions. You can be whatever
you want to be in the United States Army. In fact, you can be all
you can be.
I’m often asked how people can help us and my answer is inspire
young men and women to serve because when we get the call, we
go with the Army we have. The Army we have is the world’s great-
est fighting force because we serve with the world’s greatest sol-
diers. With your continued support, we’re going to keep it that way.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHRISTINE E. WORMUTH AND
GENERAL JAMES C. MCCONVILLE
ENDURING ARMY PRIORITIES

For nearly 248 years, the United States Army has dedicated itself to fighting and
winning the Nation’s wars. As old threats evolve and new ones emerge, the Army
is making decisions and prioritizing investments that not only contribute to current
readiness but will also pay dividends on the battlefields of 2030 and beyond. That
is why we are especially grateful to Congress for providing the funding necessary
to produce highly trained and lethal forces ready to meet an array of challenges at
home and abroad. Our ability to maintain continuity through crisis is a testament
to our solemn commitment to the Army’s three enduring priorities: people, readi-
ness, and modernization. The Army’s Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 of
$185.5 billion supports these priorities and will enable us to deliver the Army of
2030 in support of the National Defense Strategy.
READY TO FIGHT AND WIN

America’s Army exists to protect the Nation by fighting and winning our wars as
a member of the Joint Force. There is nothing more reassuring, and no greater de-
terrent, than American soldiers on the ground, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with
our Allies and partners.
Linchpin of the Joint Force in the Indo-Pacific. From Washington and Alaska, to
Hawai‘i and Guam, to Japan and South Korea, there are currently 71,000 soldiers
serving in the Indo-Pacific theater. The Indo-Pacific is not just an air and maritime
theater, but a joint theater with joint problems that require joint solutions. The
Army is the linchpin Service, enabling and sustaining our joint and Allied partners.
Our fundamental goal is to deter conflict in the region. Thus, the best way to avoid
fighting a war is to make it very clear that the Joint Force, in concert with our Al-
lies and partners, can and will win such a war. To that strategic end, the Army con-
tributes to deterrence by campaigning, which plays three important functions in the
Indo-Pacific: complicating Chinese decisionmaking; enhancing U.S. access to the re-
gion; and placing combat-credible and interoperable land forces forward to create in-
terior lines for the Joint Force.
This year is going to be one of historic modernization for our force posture in the
Indo-Pacific. We are working closely with our regional Allies and partners to secure
greater operational access and basing arrangements in strategic locations to enable
adversary-focused training and exercises. In terms of logistics, the 8th Theater
Sustainment Command in Hawai‘i will oversee the delivery of supplies, fuel, muni-
tions, and activity sets for U.S. Army Pacific’s (USARPAC) joint and multinational
training and exercises. Strengthening our ability to operate across the theater re-
quires not only logistics at scale, but also the resiliency to operate in contested envi-
ronments.
It has been a consequential year for the Army in the Indo-Pacific. USARPAC com-
pleted its inaugural iteration of Operation Pathways, representing the Theater
Army’s new posture paradigm to build and thicken Joint Force interior lines. This

---

150
gives USARPAC the operational endurance to see, sense, and understand regional
threats; sustain, protect, and command and control (C2) large-scale operations; and
conduct maneuver and fires. USARPAC demonstrated those capabilities by off-
loading APS afloat in support of exercise Salaknib in the Philippines. USARPAC,
alongside our Indonesian partners, expanded exercise Super Garuda Shield from a
modest bilateral venture to a major regional undertaking with 14 partner nations
and 4,000 combined forces. Next, we established the Joint Pacific Multinational
Readiness Center, bringing the first combat training center to the Indo-Pacific with
inaugural rotations at our Hawai‘i and Alaska campuses, along with an exportable
capability we employed in Indonesia.
Capitalizing on that momentum, the 5th Security Forces Assistance Brigade
(SFAB) persistently trained and advised 12 of our Allies and partners across the re-
gion. The Army also activated the 11th Airborne Division in Alaska—a unit with
an historic Indo-Pacific lineage that provides our soldiers with a clear purpose, iden-
tity, and mission. As part of our Arctic Strategy, the 11th Airborne Division is being
tailored as a rapidly deployable operational command headquarters. Finally,
USARPAC initiated the Unified Pacific Wargame Series, offering key insights on
Army capabilities, posture, and contested logistics for a protracted conflict in the
Indo-Pacific. In October 2022, America’s First Corps certified as a Joint Task Force
as part of the Mission Command Training Program Warfighter Series, with partici-
pants from Washington, Hawai‘i, Colorado, and Kansas. I Corps’ experimentation
with distributed C2 will enable commanders to present multiple dilemmas to a po-
tential adversary. We also activated the third of five planned Multi-Domain Task
Forces (MDTF), task-organized to provide anti-access, area-denial capabilities
through long-range precision fires and effects. The 3rd MDTF at Fort Shafter,
Hawai‘i joins the 1st MDTF at Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington as the sec-
ond MDTF supporting U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.
Tip of the Joint Spear in Europe. Since Russia’s unjust and unprovoked invasion
of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. Army’s tactical readiness and strategic readi-
ness have been on full display across continental Europe. The 43,000 American sol-
diers in Europe underscore our ongoing commitment to the region, further bolstered
by President Biden’s force posture announcement at the NATO Summit last June.
In Germany, we are forward stationing an air defense artillery brigade head-
quarters, a short-range air defense battalion, a combat sustainment support bat-
talion headquarters, and an engineer brigade headquarters. In Italy, we are forward
stationing a short-range air defense battery. In Poland, the Army has forward-sta-
tioned the V Corps Headquarters Forward Command Post—the first permanent
U.S. forces on NATO’s eastern flank. We are maintaining a substantial rotational
force in Poland, including an Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), combat avia-
tion brigade, and a division headquarters. In Romania, we have headquartered a ro-
tational brigade combat team, supporting an additional maneuver force on the east-
ern flank. In the Baltics, we have enhanced our rotational deployments—which in-
clude armored, aviation, air defense, and special operations forces—to reinforce Bal-
tic security, enhance interoperability, and demonstrate the flexibility and combat
readiness of U.S. forces.
We have been able to demonstrate our steadfast support to NATO thanks to years
of investments in setting the European theater, where we continue to invest in and
modernize a robust set of Army Prepositioned Stocks (APS). Importantly, we are
moving some of our APS into Poland this year to reinforce NATO’s eastern flank.
We are also leveraging NATO Common Funding to build a new equipment complex
in Poland to house, maintain, and issue an ABCT equipment set. The XVIII Air-
borne Corps—America’s Strategic Response Force—similarly highlighted the Army’s
investments in rapid power-projection capabilities. The XVIII Airborne Corps’ nine-
month deployment to Wiesbaden, Germany built upon years of cooperation with the
Ukrainian military, providing the training and support required to aid the heroic
defense of their homeland. These investments in strategic readiness would not have
been possible without congressional foresight and support. This is especially true for
the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI). Total EDI funding for the Army in FY
2023 is $2.8 billion to support 9,800 rotational Army forces in Europe, and enhance
our forward posture, training, and interoperability.
The United States remains committed to supporting Ukraine’s near-term combat
needs and its long-term defense requirements against future Russian aggression.
The Department of Defense (DoD) has established Security Assistance Group—
Ukraine (SAG–U), commanded by an Army three-star general under U.S. European
Command, in Wiesbaden, Germany. SAG–U is purpose-built to execute the full
range of our security assistance activities in a more efficient and sustainable man-
ner. SAG–U will reach full operational capability in Q3 FY 2023. The lessons we
observe in Ukraine underscore our Army’s greatest strengths: combined arms ma-

---

151
neuver at scale; the importance of empowered leadership through mission command;
and the immeasurable value of a professionalized Non-Commissioned Officer corps.
The Army continues to supply critical weapon systems, equipment, and munitions
to Ukraine, including Stinger anti-aircraft systems, Javelin anti-armor systems,
155mm artillery rounds, and other items. We have provided billions of dollars of
Army materiel to Ukraine through the Presidential Drawdown Authority. We are
also working to execute billions in procurements for Ukraine through the Ukraine
Security Assistance Initiative.
The Army will initiate multi-year procurement contracts for artillery rounds and
artillery charges in FY 2023. For FY 2024, the Army will work with Congress to
explore additional multi-year procurement contract opportunities for critical muni-
tions. In addition to these potential multi-year contract efforts, the request includes
additional funding for a range of munitions, including Javelin and Stinger missiles,
and artillery, combat-vehicle, and small-arms ammunition.
We were able to fill critical gaps in Ukraine’s defense thanks to our comprehen-
sive modernization initiatives, but we must be able to replenish these stocks. Rus-
sia’s war in Ukraine is further highlighting lessons from the pandemic that military
readiness depends upon a robust and modern Organic and Defense Industrial Base.
The Army is working closely with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and
our industry partners to rapidly increase production capacity and transform our
processes from vulnerable supply chains to a more resilient supply fabric.
Readiness is our most effective form of deterrence. The best way to win without
fighting is by demonstrating our ability to win decisively by fighting. Forward de-
ployed combat capability, prepositioned stocks, and a resilient sustainment infra-
structure will be key to future deterrence. One of the many ways we showcase our
combat-credible forces in Europe is through DEFENDER-Europe, the Army’s annual
joint and multinational exercise series. Last year, concurrent with our support to
Ukraine, and alongside our NATO Allies, DEFENDER-Europe 22 stretched across
nine European countries, featuring 3,450 American troops and 5,200 multinational
service members from eleven Allied nations. DEFENDER-Europe 23 will include
over 7,800 U.S. troops, training alongside 15,000 multinational forces from 26 Allied
and partner nations. National Guard units from 10 U.S. states will also participate,
marking the 30th anniversary of the National Guard State Partnership Program.
DELIVERING THE ARMY OF 2030

The Army continues to progress through our greatest transformation in almost
half a century. Fifty years ago, Army senior leaders closely observed the 1973 Arab-
Israeli War and incorporated its lessons into the emerging AirLand Battle doctrine,
the creation of new Army organizations, and the development of the ‘‘Big 5’’ weap-
ons systems. Today, we are not only supporting Ukraine but paying close attention
to the characteristics of modern warfare as they unfold, and incorporating those les-
sons into new doctrine, organizations, training, and materiel. Last October, the
Army officially adopted Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) as our official capstone
doctrine, the most significant shift in warfighting doctrine since AirLand Battle.
MDO acknowledges that the Army of 2030 will be contested in every domain—air,
land, sea, space, and cyberspace. Our soldiers must be ready to fight and win in
multiple domains simultaneously to get from fort to foxhole in a contested environ-
ment.
The Army has been consistent and persistent in pursuing our modernization ini-
tiatives as we work to deliver the Army of 2030 and design the Army of 2040. We
remain aggressively committed to our six modernization portfolios—long-range pre-
cision fires, next generation combat vehicle, future vertical lift, the network, air and
missile defense, and solider lethality—and are on track to deliver 24 new systems
into the hands of soldiers by the end of FY 2023. That includes eight fielded sys-
tems, six systems issued for testing, and ten systems undergoing soldier
touchpoints. Our annual Army Futures Command-hosted experiment, Project Con-
vergence, continues to evolve and expand from the Army-centric inaugural event in
2020 to last fall’s combined, joint series of experiments with the entire Joint Force,
the United Kingdom, and Australia.
To succeed on the future battlefield and continue to dominate the land domain,
there are six operational imperatives the Army of 2030 must do. First, we need to
see and sense more, farther, and more persistently at every echelon than our en-
emies. That is why we are modernizing our aerial intelligence, surveillance, and re-
connaissance capabilities, to include the Multi-Domain Sensing System, Terrestrial
Layer System, and the Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node, or TITAN.
Second, we have to concentrate highly lethal, low signature combat forces rapidly
from dispersed locations to overwhelm adversaries at a time and place of our choos-

---

152
ing. To do this, we are investing in a faster, more survivable armored fist. Upgraded
tanks and Bradleys will be joined by Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicles, or AMPVs,
which are already in production. The Mobile Protective Firepower System, which
was just awarded for production, will provide greater protection to infantry forces
without sacrificing speed or mobility.
Third, we must win the fires fight by delivering precise, longer-range fires as part
of the Joint Force to strike deep targets and massing enemy forces. Since 2016, the
Army has invested significantly in fire support systems, and we have made long-
range precision fires a top modernization priority. We are working tirelessly to en-
sure that we have multiple options to service targets at ranges from 40 miles (Ex-
tended Range Cannon Artillery) to over 1,700 miles (Long-Range Hypersonic Weap-
on).
Fourth, we need to protect our forces from air, missile, and drone attacks. We are
continuing to field Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense, or M–SHORAD, to protect
our maneuver forces against a wide range of air threats. The Army is also devel-
oping an enduring Indirect Fire Protection Capability, or IFPC, that will work to-
gether with the Army’s Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System
to provide an unparalleled ability to identify, track, and defeat aerial threats. Cur-
rent events also highlight the proliferation and significance of enemy Unmanned
Aircraft Systems (UAS). To address this threat, we are investing in counter-UAS di-
vision sets that place fixed, semi-fixed, mobile, and portable counter-UAS capabili-
ties in the hands of our maneuver forces.
Fifth, we must rapidly and reliably communicate and share data not just with
ourselves, but with our Sister Services, and Allies and partners. The Army has dem-
onstrated how to rapidly combine targeting data from our joint teammates and pass
that information to the correct Army fires element—reducing the targeting cycle to
mere minutes. The Integrated Tactical Network architecture, in fielding now, en-
hances classified data transfer with both better network bandwidth efficiency and
resilient relay links to ensure persistent connectivity for our warfighters.
Finally, we must sustain the fight across contested terrain for both short, sharp
operations as well as for protracted conflict. This will require not only standard
equipment, like field kitchens, fuelers, and trucks, but also the niche, often over-
looked capabilities like Army watercraft and Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore, or
JLOTS. Sustainment must be at the forefront of our planning, preparation, and
training—not something that we can assume will always be readily available. Army
logisticians are the best in the world, and they are up to the task.
PEOPLE ARE OUR GREATEST STRENGTH AND FIRST PRIORITY

Recruiting Initiatives. We are experiencing the most challenging recruiting land-
scape in a generation. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. Nevertheless, we are
committed to tackling these problems head on by recruiting a force that looks like
the Nation it serves. All our recruiting initiatives will be informed by first prin-
ciples: (1) we will not sacrifice quality for quantity; (2) we will not lower our stand-
ards; and (3) we will invest in America’s young people so they can meet our stand-
ards. The Regular Army Accessions Mission for FY 2023 is 65,500. While we are
singularly focused on meeting this mission, we need help from community leaders,
parents, educators, coaches, and influencers to inspire young people to serve.
The Army is implementing several important changes to improve organizational
understanding, recruiter management, regional awareness, marketing, and appli-
cant eligibility. First, we established the Army Recruiting Task Force, under the di-
rection of a two-star general, to examine the current state of the Army’s recruiting
enterprise and to make recommendations to Army senior leaders for action. Second,
we are overhauling how the Army recruits by selecting recruiters differently, im-
proving recruiter training, increasing recruiter resources, and creating new incen-
tives for high-performing recruiters. For instance, the Army recently launched a
‘‘Recruiting Scholars’’ program to identify, incentivize, and send top-notch captains
to graduate school after completing a recruiting-company command. There are 21
talented captains in the first cohort.
Next, the Army designated 15 major cities as priority markets for FY 2023. With
help from community partners, including Veterans Service Organizations, Military
Support Organizations, and our Soldiers for Life, we are saturating these markets
with activities and initiatives to maximize awareness regarding the benefits of Army
service. Fourth, we established the Future Soldier Preparatory Course (FSPC) pilot
program in July 2022 at Fort Jackson, South Carolina to support the accession of
recruits who are inclined to serve but might need help improving their test scores
or physical fitness. As of March 22, 2023, 4,219 FSPC recruits have graduated and
moved on to Basic Combat Training (BCT). This represents a 98 percent success

---

153
rate. FSPC recruits improved their Armed Forces Qualification Test score by an av-
erage of 18.5 points. Similarly, 97.6 percent of FSPC recruits achieved the Army’s
accessions body composition standards. Most importantly, FSPC graduates are per-
forming very well in BCT with just a 4.8 percent attrition rate, as compared to the
average BCT attrition rate of 6.1 percent in 2022.
Be All You Can Be. On March 8, 2023, the Army officially reintroduced ‘‘Be All
You Can Be’’ as our marketing slogan. ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ featured prominently
in Army advertisements and marketing materials from 1981 to 2001. After a two-
decade hiatus, we are excited to introduce ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ to a new generation
of young people. The Army Enterprise Marketing Office hosted numerous in-person
focus groups and tested ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ against 18 other taglines, eventually
surveying 20,000 people across five target audiences: prospects, soldiers, veterans,
influencers, and engaged citizens. Our extensive market research revealed that the
‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ slogan, once popular with Generation X, resonates with Gen-
eration Z by signaling a sense of purpose, passion, possibility, community, and con-
nection unique to the Army. With support from Congress, the Army will spend
$116.7 million in FY 2023 to launch this rebranding campaign across multiple
media platforms. Additionally, we believe that the ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ narrative
will help veterans and retirees tell their Army stories and inspire a new generation
of young people toward military service.
Quality of Life. Recruiting and retaining the next generation of the All-Volunteer
Force requires sustained investment and quality-of-life improvements in Army hous-
ing, barracks, child care, spouse employment, healthcare, and the exceptional family
member program.
High-quality housing and barracks are key to ensuring overall health and
wellness, thereby contributing to readiness and critical for retaining Army soldiers
and their families. First, the Army supports DoD’s continuous assessment of Basic
Allowance for Housing (BAH) rates, ensuring military paychecks keep pace with
market conditions across the country. Average BAH rates have increased 12.1 per-
cent since 2022. Personnel in 291 of 300 military housing areas received a BAH rate
increase. Second, privatized housing companies began a six-year, $3-billion invest-
ment plan in 2020 to improve the Army’s housing inventory, to include new builds
and major or medium renovations through 2026. The Army has programmed $1.6
billion for FY 2024–2028 to improve the government-owned Army Family Housing
inventory. Third, the Army historically invests an average of $1 billion per year in
barracks for construction, restoration, and modernization across all three Army com-
ponents. In FY 2024, the Army is requesting support for permanent-party barracks
in Fort Wainwright, Alaska; Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington; Fort Bragg,
North Carolina; and Natick Soldier Systems Center, Massachusetts. Importantly,
Army senior leaders remain vigilant in their housing and barracks oversight respon-
sibilities.
With congressional support, the Army has expanded on- and off-post child-care op-
tions by increasing staff compensation and benefits, investing in facilities, growing
family child care, and extending care hours. Entry level salaries are now $17.39 per
hour. We are offering recruiting and retention bonuses for child-care staff and pro-
viding them with a 50 percent child-care discount for the first child and a 15 percent
multiple-child discount for additional children. In terms of off-post care options, we
continue to provide Army Fee Assistance to approximately 10,000 children of the ac-
tive and reserve component per month, all while exploring new initiatives and part-
nerships. We also increased the provider rate cap to $1,700 per month, thereby re-
ducing out-of-pocket expenses for hard-working Army families. Since FY 2021, Con-
gress has funded seven new Child Development Centers (CDCs) in Alaska, Hawai‘i
(2), Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana. The Army is planning to fund more
CDCs in the out years.
Army spouses—over 431,000 across all three components—play an important role
in soldier and family readiness and soldier retention. Leveraging both Army and
DoD programs, and partnerships with other Federal and non-governmental organi-
zations, we remain committed to improving spouse employment and career opportu-
nities. When spouses are satisfied with their careers, employment options, access to
services, and overall quality-of-life, they are far more likely to support their soldier’s
continued service.
There are 46,000 active-component soldiers—nine percent of the force—with fam-
ily members enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP), totaling
55,000 family members. We are committed to reforming the EFMP and to providing
comprehensive and all-inclusive support to Army families with a family member
with a qualifying condition. In August 2022, we launched the Enterprise EFMP sys-
tem to improve enrollment, transparency, assignment coordination, and access to
support. We have also created a centralized EFMP office within the Headquarters,

---

154
Department of the Army to coordinate healthcare services, reassignment processes,
and education support services. Taken together, these initiatives will help reduce
the bureaucratic burden on Army families. Moreover, the Army continues its close
partnership with the Defense Health Agency to ensure access to high-quality
healthcare for our soldiers and their families.
Reducing Harmful Behaviors. People are the Army’s number one priority. We take
care of our people by building cohesive teams that are highly trained, disciplined,
and fit, that are ready to fight and win, and where each person is treated with dig-
nity and respect. Leaders across the Total Army are steadfastly committed to reduc-
ing the harmful behaviors that break trust with our soldiers and the American peo-
ple—including sexual assault and harassment, acts of extremism, and racism,
among others. To reduce harmful behaviors, we are shifting the paradigm from fo-
cusing on intervention and response to prioritizing integrated prevention activities.
Integrated prevention activities address the conditions that lead to harm by reduc-
ing risk factors and increasing protective measures to preclude harmful behaviors.
To that end, we are aggressively implementing the FY 2022 Independent Review
Commission’s recommendations to counter sexual assault and sexual harassment
within our formations, to include realigning Sexual Assault Response Coordinators
(SARCs) and Victim Advocates from the operational chain of command to the Lead
SARC at each installation. This independent reporting structure will enable Sexual
Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention, or SHARP, professionals to advocate
for victims more effectively.
The Army is committed to working with Congress and the OSD to effectively im-
plement the military justice reforms directed by the FY 2022 and FY 2023 National
Defense Authorization Acts. In July 2022, the Army issued a General Order estab-
lishing the Office of the Special Trial Counsel (OSTC) as a field operating agency.
The Senate confirmed our nominee for Lead Special Trial Counsel in November
2022 and set his subsequent promotion to brigadier general in January 2023. The
Army expects the OSTC to reach full operational capability by December 27, 2023,
as required by law.
Every single suicide is one tragedy too many. Exposure to harmful behaviors, such
as sexual assault, harassment, or other acts of violence, may increase the risk of
suicide. The Army is committed to supporting those exposed to harmful behaviors
and doing everything we can to address this critical issue. Fortunately, we saw sig-
nificant decreases in suicide across all Army components in 2022. The Army is
leveraging a new public health approach to prevent and respond to suicide at the
individual and community levels. We will publish a comprehensive suicide preven-
tion regulation to define this new approach for the force by the end of Q3 FY 2023.
Army leaders continue to employ the Health Readiness and Suicide Risk Reduction
Tool across our formations. Last year, we introduced the ‘‘Stories of Hope’’ podcast
to raise awareness, reduce stigmas, and increase help-seeking behaviors.
50 YEARS OF THE ALL-VOLUNTEER FORCE

As we commemorate 50 years of the All-Volunteer Force, it has never been more
important to recruit and retain the talented individuals who make our Army the
world’s greatest fighting force. We win through our people—our active duty, Guard,
and Reserve soldiers; our families; Army civilians; and our veterans and retired Sol-
diers for Life. We need every American to know that the U.S. Army is an organiza-
tion of endless possibilities that provides a pathway to success both in and out of
uniform. Our message is clear: if you want to serve something greater than yourself,
if you want to belong to the world’s greatest team, if you want to BE ALL YOU
CAN BE, then join us. With the limitless talent our Nation has to offer and contin-
ued support from Congress, we will remain ready to fight and win, against any ad-
versary, anywhere in the world.
Senator TESTER. Thank you each for your testimony.
Last week, as I said in my opening statement, the three soldiers
were tragically killed when the helicopters collided during a train-
ing mission in Alaska, and as I also pointed out, this is on the
heels of another fatal helicopter accident in Kentucky that cost
nine lives on February 2. Two soldiers lost their lives in a heli-
copter accident also in a training mission this time in Alabama.
So, General McConville, you issued a stand-down order to the
Army Aviation Units last week and directed additional safety train-
ing.

---

155

Would you please give us an update on what you will be review-
ing specifically?
General MCCONVILLE. Thank you, Chairman, and, you know, last
year for Army Aviation was the safest we’ve had in the history, but
we’re only as good as our last flight and as you mentioned, we’ve
had two tragic flights in the last month and as a result, the Sec-
retary and I directed a safety stand-down.
That’s an opportunity for all our aviation commanders and senior
commanders to bring their aviators together to take a look at the
procedures that they’re using, to take a look at crew mix, to under-
stand the type of training they’re doing, and making sure that we
have the right crews in place, that we’re taking the proper steps,
crawl, walk, run, to get after some of the maneuvers we’re going
after, and to realize that this is a very dangerous business.
Unlike maybe operating a vehicle close to a curb, with aviation
if you make a mistake or something happens it can be very cata-
strophic and we need to bring that safety philosophy we’ve had for
the last couple of years back into the cockpits and make sure we’re
able to do that.
Senator TESTER. So assuming that the stand-down will result in
some solutions to the problem, whether it’s in safety or whether it’s
in crew training, how long do you think it’ll take to implement any-
thing that comes out of this stand-down?
General MCCONVILLE. Well, I think it’s going to be over the next
couple of days. So they’ll bring it back and we’re expecting imme-
diate results.
Senator TESTER. All right. Secretary Wormuth, in addition to the
lives that were lost, those accidents also cost—aviation accidents
since 2020 have cost the Army about $600 million in equipment.
Are you appropriately funding for some of the training the Gen-
eral just talked about for spares, for simulators?
Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, we have been fully funding our flying
hours for the last two budgets that we’ve submitted, for example,
and so, you know, we have put investments into making sure that
we have sufficient resources for our simulators, for our flying hours
for all of our pilots.
You know, there are challenges, of course, in terms of looking at
spare parts and maintenance on all of that. So I think one of the
things that we need to look at is are our pilots actually getting
enough flying hours but to do that, we’ve got to make sure that the
aircraft are ready to fly and so there’s sort of a lot of pieces that
fit together in that, but we are definitely investing fully in that in
my view.
Senator TESTER. Any of the money in this budget to be able to
continue to invest fully in that?
Secretary WORMUTH. Yes.
General MCCONVILLE. Yes.
Senator TESTER. Thank you.
A little over a year ago you informed this committee of the deci-
sion to reduce end strength from 485,000 to 476,000 in order to
maintain what you talked about in your opening statement, a high
quality Army.
Now based on the latest recruiting data that number looks to be
further reduced to about 452,000 which, by the way, we should

---

156

have an exact number on that, but around 452,000 for this fiscal
year, and we understand that that goal may not be reached.
So where do things stand with Army recruitment? Are you seeing
a positive connection between additional advertising and recruit-
ment bonuses resulting in more men and women signing up for the
Army?
Secretary WORMUTH. Chairman, we are seeing improvements in
our recruiting situation. We are in a better position, for example,
at this time last year than we were in the previous year.
At the same time, the Chief and I set a very ambitious goal of
65,000 new recruits this year and we are not going to make that
goal. We are doing everything we can to get as close to it as pos-
sible but we are going to fall short of that, and as I said in my
opening statement, you know, we didn’t get into this situation in
a year and I think it’s going to take us more than a year to in-
crease recruiting and we are going to have to look at, as I also
mentioned in my opening statement, that for our (audio glitch.)
Senator TESTER. This is not a good thing and it’s not a good
thing for a couple reasons.
First of all, this is information that a new system should be able
to do without a lot of screwing around and, quite frankly, it’s not
giving you the numbers to be able to track and have solid data on
recruitment. You get soldiers that are booted off of Tricare because
of a glitch in a damn program. That’s a problem.
How are you able to track needs without solid data?
Secretary WORMUTH. It took us 6 years to build IPPS–A and it
brought together 40 different systems. So it was very complicated
and that’s why we had glitches, for example, like the soldiers with
Tricare, but we have worked through that. We have a Tiger Team
that is working all of the specific, you know, problem areas that
have emerged as we’ve gone live with IPPS–A (Integrated Per-
sonnel and Pay System—Army).
The challenge with our recruiting numbers, frankly, is more that
our models don’t incorporate some of these new initiatives that
we’ve undertaken, like the Future Soldier Prep Course, but we
know how important it is to this subcommittee to get that data and
we will work with you to get it to you as soon as possible.
Senator TESTER. I appreciate that. I would just tell you that Sen-
ator Moran and I serve on the VA Committee as the Chairman and
Ranking Member, too, and if I have one major main in my behind
it’s computer systems and it doesn’t matter if it’s military, it
doesn’t matter if it’s VA, it doesn’t matter if it’s Montana State Tax
System. There’s always something wrong, and, I mean, it’s just not
something that can make the Army all it can be or the VA all it
can be either.
So with that, I’ll turn it over to Senator Moran.
Senator MORAN. Chairman Tester, thank you for concluding that
conversation by indicating that pain was the computer system. The
way you started I wasn’t certain where you were going to go.
Let me start with really both of you. So if we’re not going to meet
our recruitment goals that means consequences in a practical way
to how the Army operates.
What can you tell me first as someone who’s interested in the
overall well-being of the Army what you are thinking, what are

---

157

your plans that will alter the structure of our Army across the
country and around the globe and then as a Senator from Kansas
tell me what concerns, if any, I should have about what those
changes mean to installations and the assignment of soldiers to
places, to bases, to forts, to posts across the country?
Is this a consequence that will have a modest impact across the
board or a consequence in which you will be making decisions
about who stays the same, who gains, and who loses?
Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Senator Moran. Let me try to
answer that concisely.
We do not want a hollow Army, as you indicated. You know, we
do not want to have tiered readiness. So part of the hard work of
the Army in the next couple of years is going to be bringing down
that over-structure, you know, what we call the spaces, to be closer
to the actual amount of spaces, soldiers that we have.
We are—and, frankly, we have to undertake that transformation
in any case because we have to make room for some of the new
types of structure we need for the Army of 2030.
So what we’re trying to do is basically spread out some of those
changes really and so, for example, we did sort of what I would call
a people night court where we basically went and looked at all the
different types of soldiers in units and said do we need to have 60,
you know, cooks or can we use 40 cooks? So we’re doing that.
We have looked at what we call unit priority and we’ve looked
over the years at the units that we have used very heavily as op-
posed to those that we may have used much less frequently and
those are areas where we can probably do some thinning out.
So the reality is, you know, our end strength right now is about
455,000. So at most large installations around the country right
now the number of actual soldiers is fewer than the authorizations
that are there. So I think, you know, we’ll be able to make many
of these changes without it having large impacts to any of the
major installations.
But if we don’t turn our recruiting situation around, I can’t guar-
antee you that the Army won’t have to make some more substan-
tial potential force structure reductions because we’ve got to make
sure that our units, for example, that are on the immediate re-
sponse force are manned adequately so that they’re ready to go.
Senator MORAN. Your planning and your conversations, have
they gone to that point in which you are discussing about what sig-
nificant changes might take place if recruiting doesn’t turn around?
Secretary WORMUTH. We are looking at that right now, Senator,
but we haven’t come to any firm conclusions. I think, you know, we
would very much obviously like to avoid making any large force
structure changes because it can be hard sometimes to reverse
that.
Senator MORAN. It can be very hard to reverse that. What kind
of timeframe—when could this committee have a view as to what
your thinking is in a more formal way?
Secretary WORMUTH. I think, Senator, we will probably be able
to come to you in the next few months and talk with you about how
all of that is looking for us.
Senator MORAN. And that would be before a decision is made?

---

158

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, we have a document called The
ARSTRUC (Army Structure Memorandum) which essentially does
look at finalizing the changes and I think we would want to come
and talk to your staffs, for example, about how that’s looking.
Senator MORAN. And when does the decision have to be made in
order for this to really live up to the consequences of the less end
strength?
Secretary WORMUTH. Well, the ARSTRUC looks 5 years out and
we do one every year. You know, I think major—we won’t have to
make final decisions probably about any significant changes until
2025, but we need to start thinking about that because again we
want to make sure that our brigades are adequately manned.
Senator MORAN. Madam Secretary, you understand why this is
such a significant topic of conversation for the country, for this
committee, for you.
Secretary WORMUTH. Of course.
Senator MORAN. I appreciate that.
General McConville, anything you would want to add to that re-
sponse?
General MCCONVILLE. I think, you know, one of the concerns
why we really need to increase recruiting is because I think as we
take a look at, you know, getting ready for the next fight that we
see is we’re moving from counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, ir-
regular warfare. So those type systems that would be more valu-
able in large kill combat operations, like some of the systems that
you have at Fort Riley and other places are going to be more im-
portant, but we’re also developing long-range precision fires, air
and missile defense, counter UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems)
systems, and we’re going to do this on pretty much a flat budget
and flat end strength. So there will be some decisions eventually
what that looks like.
The concern we have right now is on end strength is, you know,
it may not be a structure change, but if we can’t fill the actual
units, you know, they may be at 70 percent strength and so, you
know, the structure still there but you don’t have the soldiers fill-
ing those ranks and that’s what we’re concerned about.
Senator MORAN. Let us know how we can help recruit.Thank
you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Schatz.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you both for being here. I want to start with the status
of the lease negotiations with the State of Hawaii.
In 1964 the United States military was awarded a 65-year lease
for 23,000 acres of Hawaii State lands for $1. We are now coming
up on the potential renewal of that lease and I think we’re all in
agreement that the people of the State of Hawaii are entitled to a
fair deal on all leasing moving forward.
Many of these leases do expire in 2029. That includes Pohakuloa
Training Area, Kakaaho Training Area, Makua Valley, and I think
where we are all landing is that promoting our national security
and treating the citizens of the State of Hawaii with fairness and
respect are not mutually exclusive. In fact, at this point they’re
completely intertwined.

---

159

So, Secretary, could you just give me an update on the status of
the negotiations?
Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly, Senator Schatz. As you know, we
have two environmental impact statements that are underway
right now that are relevant to looking at the lease agreements and
those I believe will be completed at the end of this year and then
the next step would be for, you know, the Army to be looking at
what we would come forward with as a proposal for what the final
agreement would look like and that record of decision won’t come
forward until 2025.
So we have some time to be talking with—you know, when I was
last in Hawaii I met with Governor Green, had a very productive
discussion with him. I met with leaders from the Native Hawaiian
community, and we are very much now trying to engage—you
know, as the environmental impact statements work their way
through the process, we are trying to engage with all of the dif-
ferent stakeholders in Hawaii to understand, to help us understand
what the shape of an arrangement might look like.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you.
General McConville, we all agree Hawaii is entitled to the same
guarantee of homeland defense as every other State.
Army’s IBCS (Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Com-
mand System) expands the line of sight for defensive launchers to
better our odds of intercepting missile threats.
Are there considerations for how the IBCS Program could apply
to the defense of Hawaii?
General MCCONVILLE. Well, right now it just is a potential con-
sideration. I’m not aware of anything right now that put IBCS, but
as you said, it’s a game-changing technology that allows us to inte-
grate sensors and shooters for air missile defense and that does
give us that capability and if we lay out that requirement, then we
can take a look at it.
Senator SCHATZ. There’s a lot of talk about Guam and the de-
fense of Guam. I completely support that. I want to just remind ev-
erybody that Hawaii is the homeland. Hawaii is not an insular
area. It is the 50th State. It is the home of INDOPACOM. It is the
home of U.S. Army Pacific. It is the home of Marine Forces Pacific,
and even if it’s difficult, even if it’s expensive, we still need to
have—and I get that HDRH (Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii),
you know, was abandoned and perhaps for legitimate reasons, but
I just want to flag for you that as we’re gaming out our scenarios
that we are focusing right now on the kind of Central and Western
Pacific and then the Continent and Hawaii deserves protection, too.
On recruiting, just following up, Secretary, on what Senator
Moran talked about, you know, you’re going to fall short and I
think you are doing what is necessary to try not to fall short, but
I think it’s fair to say that the Pacific is the priority area and al-
though I know you’re kind of pre-decisional here, I’d like you to
kind of talk at least in conceptual terms about how you’re going to
absorb some reduction in the number of Army soldiers in a way
that is consistent with our Indo-Pacific strategy.
Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly. And I’ll maybe draw again a lit-
tle bit on what I said before.

---

160

One, I think it’s important to realize that the actual number of
soldiers that are at places like, you know, 25th ID at Fort Riley,
for example, at Fort Bragg, at Fort Hood,——
Senator SCHATZ. Fort Humphreys.
Secretary WORMUTH. Exactly. Is below the number of authoriza-
tions that are on the books. So, you know, we have the soldiers
that we already have.
What we’re trying to do is look at—you know, as we think about
the new kinds of force structure that we need to build, as the Chief
mentioned, the multi-domain task forces, the indirect fire protec-
tion capabilities, a lot of the integrated air and missile defenses, for
example, we are looking at where can we shed maybe some types
of structure that was very useful for COIN and counter-terrorism
but we don’t need as much of right now to make room for new
structure and the way we’ve gone about that, among other things,
is we’ve looked at, as I said, what we’re calling people optimization.
So there’s places where we can just kind of thin out across the
whole force structure and then we’re also looking at the types of
units that are maybe under-utilized. Those are obviously can-
didates for elimination, for example.
So, you know, I think all of this will be spread around our major
installations and, you know, National Defense Strategy require-
ments are primary. We’ve got to be able to have the readiness lev-
els and the structure that we need to execute the strategy and cer-
tainly paying attention to the Indo-Pacific is core to that.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Murphy.
Senator MURPHY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you both for being here today.
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to take my time to ask a few questions
about the Future Vertical Lift Program.
First of all, this is the first opportunity to talk about this in this
subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, as you know, I made, along with
Senator Blumenthal, a series of requests of the Army to get a brief-
ing on a Flora Award and was denied that briefing by the Army
multiple times.
I think this subcommittee and more broadly the Appropriations
Subcommittee has to pretty rigorously guard our equities when it
comes to getting information from the Army and from the Adminis-
tration when it comes to contract awards.
In fact, the regulations governing the awarding of contracts
carves out a very specific role for Congress to be briefed on these
matters even while the award is pending, and I hope this com-
mittee will continue to work on what I think is a misaligned equi-
librium right now between the Administration, the Department of
Defense, and this committee when it comes to how much informa-
tion is shared.
Ms. Wormuth, I wanted to talk to you about this specific award.
I understand I have parochial interests, right? This was a contest
between Bell, Textron, and Sikorsky, and the award went to the
Bell Program, but I guess I want to talk to you a little bit about
my concerns regarding Tilt Rotor Aircraft.
My understanding is that past performance did not factor in to
the contract award and this committee is going to be charged with

---

161

picking up the full cost of this new program. Tilt Rotor Aircraft,
like the V–22 Osprey, have a pretty miserable performance, reli-
ability, and safety record over the last 30 years.
The V–22 is supposed to have a mission readiness of 82 percent
but over the last 5 years the Osprey has been at 56 percent. The
procurement cost went from $33 million to almost a hundred mil-
lion. Today, the cost per flight of the V–22 is $10,000 an hour
which is double the initial estimate.
You know, what was interesting about this particular contract
award is that the bid that came in from Textron was twice, twice
the amount of the bid that came in from Sikorsky. Layered on top
of that, this history suggesting that the Tilt Rotor is going to end
up costing our taxpayers inordinately more than even the initial
bids and I worry that we’re going to have a hard time being able
to fund the full cost of this award.
So I guess my question is do you have any information as to why
the Army did not take past performance of Tilt Rotor Aircraft into
account when awarding the Flora contract, and what do you say
about my concerns that if the cost curve on this new helicopter,
which is obviously a foundational program for the Army is any-
thing like what we saw for the Osprey, then we’re in for some pret-
ty big unexpected costs that we’re going to have to bear on this
subcommittee?
Secretary WORMUTH. Senator Murphy, first of all, I want to say,
you know, of course, I completely support and value the important
oversight role of Congress in these matters. So we want to be good
partners with you in terms of being transparent and if you have
not already, you know, received a detailed briefing now that the
GAO (Government Accountability Office) has issued its decision, if
you will, on the competition, I certainly will make sure that Mr.
Doug Bush and their team get up to talk with you about that.
My understanding is that the things that were valued or empha-
sized, if you will, in the selection process did include looking at
lower technical risk precisely because of the fact that in the past
if the technical risk is higher, a lot of times that means the costs
in the out years are higher. The sustainment costs can be higher
because they’re not appropriately baked into the competitive proc-
ess.
So one of the reasons, as I understand it, that we selected the
Bell-Textron aircraft was because it was assessed to have lower
technical risk, even though the bid that came in from Sikorsky
from an overall dollar amount was lower. You know, it was a best
value competition. It wasn’t strictly based on price, and we in the
Army had some considerable concerns about our visibility into the
design process that came from Sikorsky.
So I can get back to you in more detail in terms of how exactly
we incorporated past performance of the Osprey into the calcula-
tions, but we absolutely emphasized the importance of having
lower technical risk in the program.
Senator MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, I will just note that our sub-
committee has a GAO report on this very specific question of
whether risk is being properly calculated when awarding programs
within the Future Vertical Lift Aircraft process and what this GAO
report comes to the conclusion is that right now the Army is not

---

162

properly identifying sort of long-term risk on these programs and
so look forward to being in a dialogue about some of the rec-
ommendations in this GAO report and getting a better holistic
sense of how much this is going to cost the taxpayer in the long
run.
Thank you very much.
Senator TESTER. Very quickly, Senator Murphy, have you been
briefed by the Defense Department?
Senator MURPHY. And I have, I have, and I thank you for arrang-
ing for that.
Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven, would you yield to the Chair-
man of the Full Appropriations Committee?
Senator HOEVEN. Absolutely.
Senator TESTER. Thank you.
Senator Murray.
Senator MURRAY. Thank you so much, and I do have to get back
to a markup. So I really do appreciate that.
But, first of all, let me just say, Chairman Tester and Vice Chair
Collins, who is being filled in by Senator Moran today, I’m really
glad to join both of you to keep talking about the investments that
we’ve got to make to support our troops and keep our country safe.
These hearings that we’re having are so important to remind us
that we need to return to regular order and pass our Nation’s fund-
ing bills in a timely bipartisan way and I will keep saying that till
we get back to regular order.
Now if we are going to stay ahead of our competitors, like China
and others, that means that our investments have to keep up, not
fall behind or fall into uncertainty because of partisan gridlock.
So I’m really glad we have this opportunity today to hear from
our witnesses about what that means for the Army and, of course,
how we support our servicemembers and their families, like the
troops at Joint Base Lewis McCord and Yakima Training Center in
my home State of Washington.
It’s really important to me that this conversation also focuses on
getting our military families the support they need, like childcare
and mental healthcare and good housing and schools, and we also
have to make sure we’re keeping men and women in uniform safe.
My heart goes out to the families of the soldiers we lost in the re-
cent helicopter crashes. I expect to hear more following the Army’s
review of the safety procedures about how we are preventing future
tragedies because at the end of the day the heart of our military
isn’t our weapons or our equipment, it is the brave and talented
men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line to
keep our country safe.
So before I ask my questions, I just want to thank each of you
for your service to this country. This committee has a deep appre-
ciation for everything our servicemembers do to keep their mem-
bers safe.
With that, let me just ask a few questions. Secretary Wormuth,
in my home State of Washington we are still seeing issues with the
availability of suitable and affordable housing, especially at JBLM
(Joint Base Lewis-McChord), and I’m hearing that as many as 250
servicemembers and their families spend from three to 4 months
in hotels or other accommodations while they wait for a home on

---

163

base to become available. These servicemembers and their families
have to have a safe and reliable and affordable place to live, period.
I wanted to ask you what you were doing to make sure that
housing needs are being met both on and off base.
Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Chair Murray.
Availability of housing is a challenge around JBLM and in a
number of other locations around the country. We’re doing a few
things to try to work on that.
First of all, this budget has $690 million in it for family housing
and then we also obviously have our privatized housing that we
work with the five different companies that provide that housing.
So we are constantly looking at how can we invest more, how can
we encourage those companies to invest more so that we’re able to
generate more inventory at places like JBLM.
Another thing that we’re doing, I think, is we are really pushing
OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) to reopen how they cal-
culate the basic housing allowance and this goes to obviously being
able for our soldiers and families to afford housing off post and I
think the way that we have calculated—I personally am not fully
comfortable with how we’re doing BAH (Basic Allowance for Hous-
ing) and I think we’re going to look at that, open it up, look at the
anchor points that we use, look at the utilities, the cost factors that
we’re using because in some cases I think we may need to raise the
BAH rates to allow our soldiers and families to be able to afford
housing off post. So that’s some of what we’re trying to do.
Senator MURRAY. Good. I look forward to hearing more about
that. Thank you.
A Department of Defense review that was finished last year
found that the drinking water supplying 24 installations exposes
about a 175,000 servicemembers a year to dangerous levels of
chemicals linked to cancer and other illnesses.
The presence of these environmental contaminants, including
PFAS (Army Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances), on installations
and their surrounding communities continues to be a huge concern
of mine and I know many others here in the Senate, especially with
some of the worst contamination levels at JBLM and Yakima
Training Center.
Are there barriers you have identified in cleaning up these con-
taminants on active installations?
Secretary WORMUTH. Chair Murray, to my knowledge, there are
not barriers to cleaning that up. I mean, you know, if there are
cases where drinking water is not found to be safe, we will imme-
diately work with the affected areas to get, you know, access to
safe drinking water, whether that’s by looking at, you know, new
wells or other ways to solve that problem.
I am aware that I think the EPA (Environmental Protection
Agency) is contemplating making some changes to how it assesses
what is a safe level of PFAS and I think that will have potentially
very substantial——
Senator MURRAY. So are you coordinating with the EPA to make
sure the Army is testing at the most recent recommended lifetime
drinking water health advisory levels?
Secretary WORMUTH. I’m sure that we’re coordinating with the
EPA. If the EPA changes what they determine to be a safe stand-

---

164

ard that will have implications for us that I think will be signifi-
cant financially.
Senator MURRAY. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman, and thank you, Senator Hoeven. I appreciate it.
Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven.
Senator HOEVEN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
First, thanks to both of you for your service. Secretary Wormuth,
are you aware that the Administration has released a draft regula-
tion that would require contractors to report—defense contractors
to report—on their greenhouse gas emissions for the weapon sys-
tems they make and also set emission reduction targets? Are you
aware of that regulation?
Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I don’t think that I’m aware of
that specific proposal at this time. It hasn’t come to my attention.
Senator HOEVEN. It’s a draft proposal, but essentially if we’re
going to make contractors track their emissions on the weapon sys-
tems they make as well as from their suppliers, aren’t we starting
to prioritize, I guess, emission standards over weapons perform-
ance?
Secretary WORMUTH. Well, Senator, without seeing the specifics
of the draft, I can’t really speak to the implications of it. I mean,
for example, if contractors are being asked to just track their emis-
sions and maybe report them, that’s different from having some
sort of a consequence if their levels are deemed to be, you know,
not acceptable. So I think I would just need to know a little more
about the proposal.
Senator HOEVEN. So the tracking the emissions and setting
standards for things like munitions and bombs and things like
that, we’re going to now make that a factor in deciding which ones
that the military procures? And won’t that affect both the effective-
ness of those weapon systems for our warriors as well as the cost?
Secretary WORMUTH. Well, Senator, again I haven’t seen the pro-
posal, so I hesitate to comment on it. What I will say is obviously
our soldiers need to have the best possible equipment to defend
this country and I would want to make sure that that’s what we
would put our emphasis on.
Senator HOEVEN. Thank you. Thank you.
And then, General, so I was just in South Korea and Taiwan.
Taiwan’s ordered and is paying for I think on the order of $19.5
billion worth of military hardware that they want to use obviously
to counter aggression by the PRC (People’s Republic of China),
China, in the Taiwan Strait and obviously we’re working with
other allies in the Indo-Pacific, Japan, Philippines, the South Ko-
rean President is here now and so forth, to deter China’s aggres-
sive behavior.
One of the issues is getting those munitions. So it’s not just
about modernizing our forces, which we must do and obviously this
committee funds that effort and is working with you to do it, it’s
also providing those enhanced armaments to our friends, our allies,
partners and friends—that should sound familiar to you—in the
Indo-Pacific.
By the same token, we need to and are providing assistance to
Ukraine but they’re needing to procure these weapon systems, as

---

165

well, and we’re modernizing our forces. That puts a real strain on
the supply chain.
What are we doing, what can we do to expedite that which is cru-
cially important in Ukraine right now, it’s crucially important in
the Indo-Pacific right now, and it’s crucially important to our own
forces and making sure they have the very best armaments?
General MCCONVILLE. Well, Senator, I think it’s really important
that we invest in our organic industrial base and, you know, as we
talk about—and for the long term, and as we——
Senator HOEVEN. Sir, I agree with the investment, but my ques-
tion is we need to expedite the production now. That’s—what can
we do to expedite the production now with the investment we’re
making is my question, sir.
General MCCONVILLE. Yes. I guess, you know, my response, hav-
ing watched this, is, you know, the defense industry doesn’t operate
on enthusiasm. They want contracts. They want long-term con-
tracts they can invest in their systems and when they see that, you
know, we’re starting to ramp up. We’re doing 155 rounds. We’re
doing it on some of the systems that we’re doing right now and I
think it’s very, very important that we project outwards in some
cases with multiyear contracts. That helps. They know that when
they invest this year, they’re going to have a 3- or 4- or 5-year
funding stream that’s going to allow them to invest and ramp up
these capabilities.
We also need to work with our allies and partners to make sure
they’re doing the same thing in their organic industrial base be-
cause these countries need to have the capabilities with the weapon
systems. They need to have the capacity, which is enough of them.
They need to have the confidence in those weapon systems and
their soldiers need to have the will to fight if they’re going to de-
fend their country.
Senator HOEVEN. For both of you, are we providing the assist-
ance in terms of the weapon systems requested by Ukraine to end
the conflict so they can be successful rather than stalemate? I
would ask first you, Secretary, and then you, General.
Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I believe that we are providing the
Ukrainians with what they need to fight against the Russians. So,
you know, we are giving them systems and certainly the Army is
giving them systems——
Senator HOEVEN. Win versus stalemate now.
Secretary WORMUTH. I think we——
Senator HOEVEN. Win versus stalemate.
Secretary WORMUTH [continuing]. Want to see the Ukrainians
prevail obviously. I think that is in the national interests of the
United States to do more than achieve a stalemate. You know, we
can’t let the—there can’t be a precedence of being able to just de-
clare that a country doesn’t exist.
So we need to give them the equipment they need to defeat the
Russians and I think that we are doing that.
Senator HOEVEN. General?
General MCCONVILLE. I would add it’s not just the equipment,
it’s the training, and we’re seeing and there’s a lot of higher level
combined arms training up to the brigade level and, you know, in
another venue we can give you the exact numbers, but we have sig-

---

166

nificantly increased their capability to do combined arms oper-
ations at the brigade level and above.
Senator HOEVEN. Again, thanks to both of you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen, 20 minutes ago you were one
minute away from asking questions. It’s your turn.
Senator SHAHEEN. Finally. Well, it was worth waiting for.
Secretary Wormuth, I’m sorry Senator Murray isn’t here because
your response on the testing of our servicemembers I think was not
totally accurate. I’ve been trying to get that done through the
MBAA for several years now and in fact what we’re being told by
DOD (Department of Defense) is that we don’t have the lab capac-
ity to do that and there’s been opposition from the Department of
Defense to actually get that done.
So, Mr. Chairman, I intend to share that with Senator Murray
so that she knows that in fact we are not doing that.
Secretary WORMUTH. Well, I’m happy, Senator Shaheen, to look
into that and do what I can.
Senator SHAHEEN. That would be great. Your advocacy would be
very much appreciated.
For both of you, when you appeared before the Armed Services
Committee earlier this year, I asked why the Army had once again
failed to include full funding for the enhanced night vision goggles
binoculars, ENVGB. Congress stepped in last year to restore the
full $300 million.
Senator Murphy talked about the GAO report on the Vertical
Lift. There’s also a GAO report on the potential impact of what will
happen if an IVAS (Integrated Visual Augmentation System) Sys-
tem gets fielded before it’s ready and the potential for men and
women in the military not to actually make use of that because
there’s so much concern about it.
So again how do we explain the fact that you haven’t requested
funding for the ENVGB? We’ve seen just last week another 2-year
delay in terms of fielding the IVAS System. So do we not think the
ENVGB is working well, and as we’re talking about Senator
Hoeven’s question about the defense industrial base and as you re-
plied, General McConville, very appropriately, they’re concerned
about contracts.
Well, when we say to companies we want you to produce these,
they gear up to do that and then the contracts aren’t forthcoming.
It sends a message that we can’t be counted on and we don’t really
need what’s being proposed.
So tell me again because I don’t feel like I’ve gotten an adequate
answer on why you’re not requesting funding for the ENVGB Pro-
gram in this year’s budget.
Secretary WORMUTH. Okay. Senator Shaheen, I will try again.
First of all, I want to emphasize that the ENVGB is a great sys-
tem. This may surprise you, but the Pentagon had take your child
to work day last week and in our courtyard the Army had many
of our systems that kids could look at and the ENVGB was one of
them.
Senator SHAHEEN. Doesn’t surprise me at all because I think it
is a great system——
Secretary WORMUTH. It is.

---

167

Senator SHAHEEN [continuing]. And that’s what we’ve heard from
you.
Secretary WORMUTH. It is a very good system. Our soldiers like
it and they’re very comfortable with it.
I think (1), you know, we have a finite amount of resources that
we can apply to modernization. So we are having to make choices
and that is, you know, relevant whether it’s about JLTV (Joint
Light Tactical Vehicle) and other kinds of vehicles or whether it’s
about, you know, what I would call wearable tech for our soldiers.
What we’re trying to do with ENVGB and IVAS is strike a bal-
ance. IVAS, as I know you know, does more than what the goggles
do. It is a system that allows our soldiers to train, rehearse, and
then fight in a synthetic training environment.
Senator SHAHEEN. But it’s not ready yet. Our soldiers——
Secretary WORMUTH. We are working on it. You are absolutely
right. We are still working on it and I think if Congress gives us
the money that we’ve requested for IVAS in this year’s budget, we
are going to use that to work with Microsoft to get the system to
a place where our soldiers will want to use it and if Microsoft isn’t
able to do that, we will not develop the program further.
You know, we are not—I know the GAO report, you know, talks
about $22 billion. That assumes fully——
Senator SHAHEEN. And the IG report. I mean,——
Secretary WORMUTH. Right.
Senator SHAHEEN [continuing]. It’s not the only report, and the
Army’s own report all said the same thing.
Secretary WORMUTH. We’re not going to spend $22 billion on a
system if it doesn’t work, but I think the Chief and I both believe
that this is important wearable technology for our soldiers. We
want to see if we can get it to a place where it is going to be desir-
able for our soldiers. We think it can be, but I think Microsoft
knows that this is it. They either get it done and get it to a place
where our soldiers want to use it or we will move on and I don’t
know, Chief, if you want to add to that.
General MCCONVILLE. I think, you know, first of all, the en-
hanced night vision goggles bravo (ENVG–B) is a cutting edge tech-
nology.
Where we are today, I would say that is—you know, if you go
back when we first started flying goggles with PVS–5s, they were
big clunky things you wore on your head and how far we’ve taken
the technology is great, but to me IVAS is transformational. It’s
going to fundamentally change the way our soldiers operate in the
battlefield and when we take a look at where we are with resources
is we want to give the next 3 to 5 years to get that edge that’s
going to transform how our soldiers are going to fight and that’s
the trade-off that we’re trying to make right now.
Senator SHAHEEN. And I understand that aspiration, but it’s not
working yet and until it works, it seems to me that we are short
changing those people who need the current system that does work
in a way that is not acceptable as we’re looking at warfighting.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

---

168

Thank you both for being before the committee here. I join other
colleagues in expressing sadness and condolences at the loss of life
with the helicopter crash in Alaska this week. Families are griev-
ing, the community is grieving, and I know for Army all are griev-
ing, and there is a great deal of review that will come forward as
a consequence of this.
General McConville, I’m looking forward to being with you in
Alaska on Friday, hopefully the opportunity to be up there at Fort
Wainwright.
Secretary Wormuth, I know we have in place now this stand-
down for a period of time. I am hoping that this stand-down will
achieve the desired outcome which is really to really determine the
safety there and not just a messaging tool that we’re kind of look-
ing at this, but I think we recognize that not only this horrible
tragic incident but that this follows others that we have seen unfor-
tunately.
So if you care to comment very quickly on that?
Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, Senator. The safety stand-down, as the
Chief and you have discussed, will, you know, allow all of our avi-
ators to focus on safety, to review their procedures, you know,
make sure that they are doing everything that they should be
doing and that absolutely will involve more than just messaging.
And then, of course, you know, there will be investigations.
There’s already an investigation underway at the crash that we
had at Fort Campbell, and we will probably learn additional in-
sights from those investigations that we will also make sure the
aviation community has and can make any changes that are need-
ed.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you for that.
Let me ask a couple questions about provisions within the 2023
NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) and this is under Sec-
tion 603. We authorized some policies that we’re hoping will im-
prove the quality of life for the soldiers that are stationed in Alas-
ka.
I have been told that right now there has been no guidance re-
leased for how and when these new policies are going to be imple-
mented and my concern is, is that we have servicemembers that
are missing out on some of these time-limited incentives that are
again designed to help alleviate some of the hardships that are just
inherent with being in the North.
One is the provision that allows for cold weather special duty pay
and the second is the requirement that the Secretary reimburse eli-
gible servicemembers for the cost of airfare to travel to their home
of record when they’re assigned to Alaska as a duty station.
Can you give me any information in terms of when soldiers can
expect to receive either the cold weather pay or again receiving the
reimbursement for eligible travel?
Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, on the cold weather pay, the Army has
actually been providing cold weather pay to soldiers since 2020
through our Remote and Austere Location Incentive Pay. I don’t
quite have the acronym off the top of my head, but basically if
you’re above 63 degrees North, so if you’re at Fort Greeley, for ex-
ample, or Fort Wainwright, single soldiers get $2,000 and soldiers

---

169

with dependents get $4,000. So we have been paying that since
2020.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Right. But this provision in NDAA was ad-
ditional to that.
Secretary WORMUTH. My understanding, and I’m not an expert
on this, Senator, so I may have to get back to you for the record,
I think there’s concern with OSD that somehow we will be double
counting. So, you know, I would be happy to work with you and
your office if you think that the amount of the current incentive
isn’t sufficient, but I think there’s concern from OSD about creating
a second incentive.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. Well, then we need to talk about this
and do so quickly because this is not about double dip. This is truly
about addressing some of the realities that come when you are in
these cold weather environments and the ability to take care of
yourself and your family with that.
How about on the travel piece of it?
Secretary WORMUTH. The travel piece is in draft right now and,
frankly, when I learned that it’s in draft because I’d heard person-
ally from soldiers how important it is to be able to fly home some-
times and I know how expensive those are.
So I will commit to you to sort of look to see if we can speed that
up. There’s no issue with it. It’s just sort of going through the staff-
ing process.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. I know that when I’m up there this
weekend, these will be questions that I will be asked and I’m sure,
General McConville, you will, as well. So the more information we
have on that the better.
Thank you.
Senator MORAN [presiding]. Senator Murkowski, thank you very
much.
Senator Capito.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you all both
for being here, very much appreciate not just being here but your
service and appreciate all the men and women that serve with you.
I would just add my voice of concern to the accidents that we’ve
seen. Obviously you’re working very affirmatively, too. I’m sure it
hurts everybody’s heart and the hearts of the folks that you serve
with probably more than others with the families.
I wanted to ask about munitions, General McConville. How has
the observing the Ukraine conflict helped the Army assess the per-
formance of existing Army munitions and assumptions about our
requirements for the future fight?
General MCCONVILLE. Yes, Senator. First of all, you know, as far
as our performance, I think it’s showing. You know, things like
HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) become game
changes. We look at the amount of 155 rounds that are being uti-
lized. They’re very, very effective and, quite frankly, you know,
U.S. weapon systems across the board have been in great demand
and are working extremely well, but the usage rates have gone be-
yond what we, you know, historically have used.
So we have been at war, you know, 20 years. We’ve never used
the amount of, you know, 155 rounds doing that. So, you know, at
the Secretary’s directive we are doing that right now but really

---

170

standing up our organic industrial base so we can manufacture and
have the capability to do it in a timely manner to get our stockage
rates up to what we think we may have to use in large-scale com-
bat operations.
Senator CAPITO. Madam Secretary, would you say in terms of
what our capacity is now—let’s just say we were to be engaged—
I know hypotheticals are terrible, but be engaged in something
where we would need those munitions for our own purposes, are
we ready to do that? I mean, I know we’re not bleeding ourselves
down to a point where we would not be ready, but we need to re-
plenish. Is that the case?
Secretary WORMUTH. As we’ve looked at the Ukrainian request
for support, we’ve weighed that very carefully. So we are not, you
know, giving away more than we can afford to, if you will, although
I think we’ve been very creative at finding ways to be able to give
them as much as we possibly can without going too low in our own
stockpiles.
But we have a lot of work to do, I would say, Senator, in regen-
erating our industrial base and that’s why we’re investing $1.5 bil-
lion in this budget to invest in our own organic industrial base.
You know, we’ve made, I think, very good use of the resources Con-
gress has given us through the supplementals to get that on con-
tract quickly and get our partners in industry, like Lockheed-Mar-
tin and Raytheon, to increase their production, and I think we are
rebuilding that capacity now and that will, I think, serve us quite
well in the future.
Senator CAPITO. Good, good. In West Virginia, we have some
good resources that can help with that.
Let me switch gears and talk about recruitment. I understand
that in August you stood up a pilot program, the Future Soldier
Prep Course, to help those individuals, in other words, improve up
to the standards rather than lower your standards.
So, General, how is that working? Are you getting a lot of uptake
on it? Is it making improvements? I know you’re having recruiting
issues. How do you see that program?
General MCCONVILLE. Yes. I think it’s transformational, Senator.
You know, I think the one thing the Secretary and I’ve done is
made a blood oath. We’re not going to lower standards and I think
this is really important.
Senator CAPITO. Right.
General MCCONVILLE. So we’re going to invest in young men and
women and as we talked, recruiters, they said they were having
challenges passing what we call our Armed Forces Vocational Apti-
tude Battery Test, which is like an SAT for the military and also
having challenges meeting the physical requirements because of
body weight.
So we’ve stood up the program and with that a little over 8,000
actually go through the program right now. We’ve seen a 95 per-
cent success rate. I think there’s something there. I think it’s the
future and it’s amazing. Not only are they meeting the standards,
in many cases they’re exceeding and they’re going on to do really
good things in the Army.
So I think this is something we really need to take a hard look
at and is a potential for expansion.

---

171

Senator CAPITO. So when you’re looking at, say, a high school
graduating class that’s interested in pursuing the Army as a next
step, how does somebody find that? I mean, do you have to be in
a recruiting program to be able to access that? Is it generally acces-
sible?
General MCCONVILLE. Well, the best way—it’s very accessible,
you know. You can go on the Internet and contact a recruiter. You
can go to a local recruiting station and then what happens, you
start taking the tests and if you’re having challenges, we can help
you get into the program.
Senator CAPITO. So the best way to access that is through a re-
cruiter, an actual recruiter?
General MCCONVILLE. Sure. On the Internet or through a re-
cruiter.
Senator CAPITO. Yes. Okay. A couple weeks ago, hundreds of sol-
diers for the 101st Airborne and the 82nd Airborne came to Rural
West Virginia for a unique training experience. They were able to
get their hands on developmental technology, use it in a realistic
training environment and provide real feedback that will impact
the final product.
I don’t know if you’re aware of that training exercise and if you’d
have any comment on what that looks like in the future.
General MCCONVILLE. Well, you know, firstly, I’m a little privy
to 101st Airborne. It has a special place in my heart. But having
units go out in places like West Virginia and work with people is
really important for the work they’re doing but also for the expo-
sure.
One of the things that we need to work on is making sure that
people get exposed to our soldiers so they know what the military
is about and that type of training.
Senator CAPITO. I think one of the values in this particular exer-
cise is for the soldiers to get ahold of some of the newer technology
or the breaking technology so that it’s not stuck in this develop-
mental phase and you can actually see what’s in a simulated real
situation, see what’s going to work and what isn’t so we can get
them into the actual production phase.
Thank you very much.
General MCCONVILLE. Thank you, Senator.
Senator TESTER [presiding]. Senator Boozman.
Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Chairman Tester, very, very much
for having this important hearing, and it’s good to be with you all.
We appreciate all of your hard work.
I understand, General, that you’re retiring and we appreciate
you, appreciate your service. You’ve had more than an outstanding
career and we also appreciate your family. These are certainly fam-
ily affairs and the sacrifices that they’ve made through the years.
It’s always good to talk about the budget, talking about the fiscal
year 2024 budget, trying to figure out what your priorities are, and
then again how we can help you, Madam Secretary and General,
as you work through this.
General, you’ve been focused on maintaining readiness and mod-
ernizing the Army to ensure it has the tools needed in future con-
flict in the Pacific. After recently visiting with Army leaders in the
Pacific and visiting with Army personnel in Singapore, I learned

---

172

the importance the Army plays in supporting the Joint Force in the
Pacific.
Can you highlight the importance of the Army’s future role in a
Joint Fight in the Pacific?
General MCCONVILLE. Yes, Senator. I think the Army has a crit-
ical role in the Indo-Pacific along with our joint partners. Some of
the things that we do, the long-range precision fires, air and mis-
sile defense, contested logistics, and then certainly providing
ground troops and, more importantly, working with our allies and
partners on the ground to increase their capabilities, capacities,
and competence so they can defend their countries. That is very,
very important and where the American soldier goes it really reas-
sures those armies that we deal with and they have the confidence
to fight. So I think it’s very, very important.
Senator BOOZMAN. What in the budget specifically supports the
Army’s role in Joint Force and where does it assume risk regarding
the Indo-Pacific?
Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I’m happy to speak to that a little
bit. We are making a lot of investments in this year’s budget aimed
at the Indo-Pacific.
So, for example, the Chief talked about contested logistics. We
have over $850 million in this year’s budget for Army pre-posi-
tioned equipment. Also, for contested logistics, we are investing in
new composite watercraft that will allow us to take supplies and
move it around, you know, that very large theater, and then, of
course, in terms of our RDT&E Programs, we are investing in the
long-range precision fighter support portfolios, so things like the
precision strike missile, the mid-range capability, the long-range
hypersonic weapon.
We are investing over $550 million in integrated air and missile
defense programs, things like Patriot, the indirect fighter protec-
tion capability which will be able to intercept advanced cruise mis-
siles, and then we’re also looking at deep sensing capabilities,
things like HADES (High Accuracy Detection and Exploitation Sys-
tem), which is our airborne ISR, (Intelligence, Surveillance, Recon-
naissance) sensing and then the Titan network and so that’s an-
other about $300 million for deep sensing in that theater.
Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. I want to touch on something I
think Senator Moran touched on earlier, but the Army’s fiscal year
2024 budget request is a $185.5 billion short of the 2018 National
Defense Strategy’s recommendation of three to 5 percent real
growth. When adjusted for inflation, the Army’s fiscal year 2024
budget is actually a rate of negative 2 percent growth over fiscal
year 2023.
Madam Secretary, moving forward, how can we help you? Can
the Army afford to continue its 2030 modernization strategy with-
out increased top lines or reducing force structure?
Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I feel that our budget of a $185
billion, as I said in my opening statement, allows us to do our part
in the National Defense Strategy. It allows us to keep our momen-
tum on modernization, keep investing in readiness, and to take
care of our people.
I think the challenge for us is going to be as we look to the out
years, frankly. You know, the Future Vertical Lift Programs, for

---

173

example, are very, very expensive. You know, the Optionally
Manned Fighting Vehicle Program is very expensive, and as we
look at, you know, trying to—as those become programs of record
and the Army needs to start fielding them at scale, that is going
to get very expensive and so where I worry under the current budg-
et is how are we going to manage all of this in the out years and
still take care of our people.
We have a lot of infrastructure bills, frankly, not just associated
with our housing for soldiers and families but also power projec-
tion. If Senator Schatz were here, he knows all about the infra-
structure situation in Hawaii.
So it’s looking more to 2030 and beyond where I think it gets
challenging.
Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator TESTER. I will turn it over to Senator Moran for his
close.
Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you.
I’ll submit for the record this question to both the General and
the Secretary. The unfunded priorities list includes $530 million to
bring the total procurement of Abrams Tanks to a full brigade
level.
I’d like to hear why that’s not included or why it’s important and
see if we can be of assistance in that regard.
And then so much of what we’ve talked about and so much of the
capabilities of the Army is dependent upon this issue of recruit-
ment. It strikes me as at least interesting and maybe there’s a good
explanation why is recruitment so difficult when retention is so fa-
vorable.
One would think that those who are serving, who are making the
decisions to re-enlist have encountered a good experience but it’s
not translating into people who have not yet served.
Is there some analysis or a way to take advantage of the cir-
cumstance in which people are reupping to get people to up for the
first time?
Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I would say that’s part of what our
Soldier Referral Program is aimed at is you’re right. We’ve got real-
ly good retention, historically good retention. So people who are in
the Army, you know, many of them are having good experiences.
So we’re asking our soldiers then to turn around and take that
good news story to their communities and then if they’re able to,
you know, bring forward people who sign up and go to basic, they
get points towards promotion.
So, you know, I think some of it is again about re-introducing the
Army to the American public and really, you know, addressing le-
gitimate concerns that parents have sometimes about what kind of
housing their kid is going to be in or concerns about sexual harass-
ment. I think there’s some misperceptions sometimes about the
Army, that it’s somehow slowing people down, when in fact I would
argue it can accelerate kids towards college degrees, but we need
to do a better job of telling our story and we’d welcome your help
with that.
Senator MORAN. Thank you. Thank you both.
General McConville, thank you for your service to the country.

---

174

Senator TESTER. I’ve got to ask a real quick question, too. This
is on modernization programs and the transition.
The Army is going to invest in six modernization portfolios to
build the Army of 2030. This requires sufficient funding for re-
search, technology, maturation, prototype development, and experi-
mentation of advanced military systems to meet future operational
force requirements. However, the Army also is slashing enduring
programs and hot production lines while undergoing this mod-
ernization. The impact on the defense industrial base and suppliers
and workforce is significant and I would tell you after all we’ve
heard in this committee about our industrial base and predict-
ability, it is somewhat contrary to that and that’s being kind.
So what are you hearing from the defense—this is for you, Sec-
retary Wormuth. What are you hearing from the defense industrial
base and our critical suppliers in response to repeated proposals to
terminate hot production lines of enduring programs?
I don’t mean that to be a pointed question. I mean that to be a
question that I’m very concerned about our supply chains, very con-
cerned, and I think one of the questions we’ve tried to do on this
committee and all branches of the military and the defense budget
overall is to make sure there is predictability in purchasing.
That being said, there are antiquated programs that need to go
away and that’s perfectly acceptable and good business, but the
question is, is I don’t want this to impact critical supply chain
bases. So tell me what you’re doing.
Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly, Chairman. First of all, it’s very
much in the Army’s interests to have a robust and healthy defense
industrial base.
Senator TESTER. Agreed.
Secretary WORMUTH. So we share that. With finite resources, we
are constantly, the Chief and I, having to strike a balance between
putting resources towards the new systems that we’re developing
in those six modernization portfolios that you mentioned but also
trying to maintain our enduring programs, things like Abrams,
things like PIM (Paladin Integrated Management), things like
Striker, for example, and we, in making those choices and in set-
ting that balance, do weigh the health of our industrial base.
So my view is we’ve tried carefully to not make any decisions
that severely damage our industrial base and we are also—you
know, the supply chain, that goes well beyond obviously the Army’s
organic industrial base and what we’re trying to do there is work
with our partners in industry, the big primes, to help them rebuild
their supply chains.
Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen for one question.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I’m sorry I didn’t realize things were going to move so fast, but
I wanted—because so much of the hearing has focused on recruit-
ment and the challenges with recruitment, I wanted to raise a
question that was presented to me last week. I had a chance to
meet with members, former members of the Afghan female tactical
platoon who are here and as you know, there are a number of Af-
ghan former servicemembers who worked with us during that con-
flict.

---

175

I was interested to hear them say they would very much like the
opportunity to continue to serve the United States. So as you think
about recruitment challenges, are there ways in which we can en-
able people like these women who have honorable service who want
to continue to support this country to serve?
Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, Senator. I actually met with those
women, as well. They were incredibly inspiring and a number of
them, when asked, held up their hand and said they’d like to join
the United States Army.
We are looking—we do have pathways for folks who do not have
U.S. citizenship to join the Army. You know, we have green card
holder pathways, lawful permanent residents. My understanding is
that the current immigration status that those women have, you
know, may not be high enough, if you will, to allow them to join
the Army at this time, but I offered, for example, to write a letter
to Secretary Mayorkas at DHS (Department of Homeland Security)
to try to help with their political asylum proceedings, but if they’re
able to, you know, be granted asylum, for example, assuming they
meet our requirements and I think they will, these women are very
skilled, if anything, the biggest issue for them will be the language
requirement, but we are ready and able to receive them as soon as
they’re able to come through the process.
Senator SHAHEEN. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would urge the com-
mittee to think about what we can do to help advance that because
we have a number of committed people who want to serve this
country and we should give them the opportunity.
Senator TESTER. I appreciate you bringing up that point, Sen-
ator, and I think it’s certainly worth considering and finding out
how we can add to making the Army all it can be or all it wants
to be or all it will be or all it is. Okay.
General McConville, I, too, want to add my voice to the folks say-
ing thank you for your service. Thank you for what you’ve done.
Thank you for being very professional in front of this committee.
I might add I think your testimony took about 3 minutes. We like
that. Get to the point.
I would also say that you may not be able to retire this summer.
There is a hold on all flag officers right now, you know. So your
placement is not confirmed and may not be confirmed unless we
get a level of common sense around here to allow you to be able
to go to Montana and retire like I’m sure you’re going to do.
But we do appreciate what you’ve done and what you’ll continue
to do even in retirement.
We appreciate both of your testimonies. Secretary, thank you.
General, thank you.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may submit additional written questions and we would
ask that you respond to those questions as soon as possible within
a reasonable time.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were
submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hear-
ing:]

---

176
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CHRISTINE WORMUTH
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons so that our
weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies.
In this year’s budget, the Department is proposing to lock-in procurement quan-
tities for 9 different weapons programs over the next 3–5 years to provide a predict-
able demand signal to industry.
This proposal includes two Army programs: the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket
System, and Patriot missiles.
However, it is not yet clear what the private sector will invest in return for this
predictability from the Government, nor is it clear that industry can actually ramp
up and build the weapons at a rate that Army desires.
Secretary Wormuth, what industry investments are you expecting in return for
this multi-year predictability? Have you directly engaged with the defense industrial
base to ensure they can get you what you need when you need it?
Answer. The Army is confident industry can meet the demands of both the Guided
Multiple Launch Rocket System and PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3 multiyear
contracts if they are approved by Congress. Prior to requesting them, the Army did
extensive reviews of both programs to ensure the targets required under the pro-
posed contracts are achievable.
With regards to industry investments, Army acquisition leaders have been in dis-
cussions with the related companies concerning their intended investments related
to the proposed multiyear contracts. However, the information about industry in-
vestments is proprietary in nature. The Army can provide information in a separate
briefing to you facilitated by the committee.
Question. For several years, this Subcommittee has criticized the Department for
not having a robust plan to defend Guam against high-end air defense threats. So
I am pleased that this year’s budget includes a total of $1.5 billion to accelerate this
capability.
However, we need people and infrastructure to get this done right, and these ef-
forts need to be coordinated across all the military services and with the Missile De-
fense Agency.
Secretary Wormuth, the Army has a growing presence on Guam, but our under-
standing is that you have not yet signed a Memorandum of Agreement with your
sister services regarding the use of resources. Why are the obstacles here?
Answer. The Army is developing elements to incorporate into the Joint Memo-
randum of Agreement (JMOA) with sister services for support of Guam. The process
to develop, review, and evaluate the JMOA will involve stakeholders throughout
DoD and could take several months to finalize. The JMOA lists how 44 distinct
services will be delivered. Army support requirements for people, facilities, and sites
where Army assets will reside are among the elements the Army is assessing. As
part of this process, the Army will carefully assess the personnel requirements and
phasing timeline for arrival of units in Guam. The requirements assessment will be
informed by whether tours will be accompanied or not. If tours are accompanied,
myriad support facilities will be required, such as schools, child development cen-
ters, healthcare facilities, family housing, etc. Existing support facilities are under-
sized for the current population, so even if tours are unaccompanied, support facili-
ties will need to be expanded. Finally, Joint Region Marianas anticipates it will take
10 months to a year before the Secretary of the Navy conveys permanent basing/
stationing decisions.
Question. When Congress provided authorities and funding for rapid prototyping,
the intent was to rapidly develop, try out, and field initial capabilities that would
inform future requirements before committing to large-scale programs.
We have supported this approach in the past in order to accelerate fielding deci-
sions, and will continue supporting funding for prototypes where it makes sense, so
we can see what works and want doesn’t.
However, it appears the Army now wants to just continue buying prototypes well
after initial prototypes have been fielded instead making substantial acquisition
commitments.
This is concerning: it circumvents the spirit of the law; fails to field capabilities
at scale; and does not provide a predictable and stable path for industry with re-
spect to the Army’s needs.
Secretary Wormuth, what steps are you taking to comply with the law, which pro-
hibits funding excess prototype quantities that aren’t specifically needed?
Answer. Middle Tier of Acquisition (MTA) Rapid Prototyping (RP) programs are
required to create test strategies or plans that clearly identify the number of devel-

---

177
opmental items needed to support developmental testing or operational assessments
and must seek written approval to purchase quantities that exceed those needed.
This direction will be formally documented in the upcoming update to the Army’s
MTA policy. The Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) personally approves any effort
seeking entry into MTA RP. This authority is not delegated below the AAE. Quan-
tities required to fulfill the MTA RP are included as part of the program initiation
decisions.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles and the Defense Industrial Base
Question. Wisconsin is home to Oshkosh Defense, a company that is a global lead-
er in the design, production, and sustainment of military vehicles. In particular,
Oshkosh specializes in manufacturing the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), the
Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV), and the Family of Heavy Tactical Ve-
hicles (FHTV).
Army recently awarded the JTLV contract to AM General, after years of procuring
that vehicle from Oshkosh.
Additionally, year after year the budget request includes procurement amounts for
the FMTV and FHTV that are well below the minimum sustaining rate necessary
to keep the production line running and skilled workers in place.
What is the Army’s plan for managing the health of the defense industrial base
for tactical wheeled vehicles?
Answer. A healthy and competitive tactical wheeled vehicle industrial base is key
to controlling costs, enhancing innovation, and improving quality. The Army exer-
cises frequent and deliberate engagements with industry to identify and address
risks and issues that affect the industrial base with a focus on, minimum sustaining
rates, potential production breaks, and supply chain impacts. The Army is balancing
Tactical Wheeled Vehicle modernization by prioritizing Light Tactical Vehicles in-
vestments, by maintaining warm Heavy and Medium Tactical Vehicles production
bases, and by increasing competition across the industrial base for programs such
as the Common Tactical Truck (CTT) and electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle
(eLRV).
Question. I am concerned that when work for tactical wheeled vehicles is divided
between two manufacturers, the budget request will not provide enough work for
both companies to sustain their workforce and supplier networks. As such, how does
Army plan to sustain the workforce and supplier networks?
Answer. The Army continues to assess the health of the industrial base to under-
stand its ability to support military demands. In the case of the Joint Light Tactical
Vehicle (JLTV), the Army planned for a multi-year transition phase. As the Army
ramps-down the JLTVA1 production with Oshkosh through Fiscal Year (FY) 2025,
the Army will ramp-up production of the JLTVA2 with AM General. The Army
plans to award split procurements in FY 2023 and FY 2024 between Oshkosh and
AM General and in FY 2025, all JLTV procurements are scheduled to be through
AM General.
Additionally, Oshkosh will continue to produce Heavy and Medium Tactical Vehi-
cles and AM General will continue to produce High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled
Vehicles.
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles and the future of logistics
Question. Tactical wheeled vehicle modernization programs—like FHTV, FMTV,
and JLTV—with the latest advancements in payload, safety, and mobility are essen-
tial to supplying combat vehicles with fuel, ammo, and spare parts to take and con-
trol ground. In other words, tactical wheeled vehicles are a critical backbone of the
logistics needed to sustain and win a fight.
Would you agree with this statement?
Answer. As the Army looks toward the future, multi-modal distribution is essen-
tial as is reduction in supply requirements within the tactical force. No single do-
main of transport will meet the distribution requirements of the Joint Force. An-
other key to this problem is human-machine integration that may allow for reduced
manning in multi-modal transport systems providing reduced risk and higher effi-
ciency to meet the Army and Joint Force supply requirements.
Question. With the Army developing a new Cross Functional Team focused on
Contested Logistics, will Tactical Wheeled Vehicles be a focus area of the CFT?
Answer. The Contested Logistics (CL) Cross Functional Team (CFT) is still final-
izing an approved portfolio. AFC will assign three to five modernization efforts to
the CL CFT, focused on tactical level logistics. Multi-capable or multi-modal dis-

---

178
tribution platforms, which includes tactical wheeled vehicles, is one area that is
being considered as an area of focus for the CL CFT.
Question. Will future Army budgets start to reflect Tactical Wheeled Vehicles’ role
as critical and primary enabling warfighting capabilities?
Answer. The Army is updating the Tactical Wheeled Vehicle (TWV) strategy with
expected completion next year. In FY 2024, the Army is investing $1.31B in the
TWV fleet including FMTV, FHTV, JLTV, High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Ve-
hicle (HMMWV), Palletized Load System (PLS), and the development of the Com-
mon Tactical Truck. The Army will continue to invest in a mix of vehicles within
the TWV fleet in future budget submissions as we build the Army of 2030 and de-
sign the Army of 2040.
Future Army budgets will continue to take a fiscally responsible approach to pro-
curement that minimizes risk while providing balanced modernization to our units.
The Army recognizes the challenges of a contested logistics environment, and the
Army addresses that challenge in the FY 2024 budget submission by continuing in-
vestment in Army watercraft, modernized fuel and water storage and distribution
systems, and enhancing our aerial delivery capabilities.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM
Question. The Scales Child Development Center (CDC) at Fort Jackson is the in-
stallation’s largest CDC and supports 313 children ranging from 0 to 5 years of age.
This 34-year old facility is in poor condition and experiences frequent failures of the
air conditioning and sewer systems. These failures result in extreme heat and sew-
age backup within the building. Additionally, the facility has multiple line of sight
issues that make it challenging for staff to properly supervise the children. Given
this:
Can you provide an update regarding the Army’s plans to replace this structure?
Answer. There is a 338-child capacity replacement Child Development Center
(CDC) for Fort Jackson in the FY 2024–2028 Future Year Defense Program (FYDP)
for construction in FY 2025.
Question. What is the current design percentage of the new structure?
Answer. The project is at 35% design.
Question. Will this project be eligible for authorization and funding in FY25?
Answer. Yes.
Question. How has inflation impacted the projected cost of the project?
Answer. The current estimate for the total project cost is now $41M. There has
been an increase due to inflation and cost escalation.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Question. You mentioned a challenge for the Army in the coming years is to re-
duce structure to better align with manning. You also answered that the Army is
currently considering options but has yet to make any conclusions on the best path
forward.
When should we expect implementation to begin on these changes? You men-
tioned the Committee can expect a formal briefing within the next few months.
Please specify a target date.
Answer. The Army continues to conduct analysis on the transformation to the
Army of 2030 and will formally brief the committee at the earliest possible oppor-
tunity.
Question. You stated the Army must make force structure changes regardless of
the end strength deficit to make room for the new structure needed for Army 2030.
Some of this structure is already established or will be soon. This analysis should
have included reductions to offset the new structure.
What changes is the Army considering to establish this new force structure?
Answer. The Army is moving to a Multi-Domain organizational design, this re-
quires re-orienting from Brigade Combat Team (BCT) centric operations tailored for
counterinsurgency (COIN) to division centric operations tailored for Large Scale
Combat Operations (LSCO) against peer/near-peer adversaries operating in a multi-
domain environment, naturally resulting in smaller, but more mobile, lethal, and
agile formations to account for the pace of future warfare. Additionally, the Army
seeks to grow capabilities that enable it to see and sense farther, mass highly lethal
forces, win the first fight, protect the force, communicate, and sustain the fight in
LSCO.
Question. Are any decisions final on force structure changes to manage the addi-
tions of new units?

---

179
Answer. The Army is still developing the plan for how these changes will be im-
plemented by looking carefully at our operational requirements as well as military
and community value analysis. Certain force structure changes will be needed to
shed capabilities no longer needed for large scale combat operations and to make
room for new capabilities, while other reductions due to decreasing end strength
could be avoided if recruiting improves.
Question. Please provide a complete assessment of specific units and MOSs im-
pacted by reductions if the end strength deficit is unresolved.
Answer. The Army must transform its force structure to make room for new capa-
bilities relevant to current and future threats. The Army is in the process of deter-
mining how and where to make these changes. To make room for the new capabili-
ties and shed over-structure at the same time, the Army will thin out various Mili-
tary Occupational Specialties, reduce numbers of lower priority unit types, and di-
vest some structure optimized for COIN and counter-terrorism missions. This will
ensure Army units are modernized and sufficiently manned so they are ready to
fight.
Question. To spread out these changes, you highlighted the Army’s ‘‘people night
court’’ and evaluation of ‘‘unit priority.’’
What were the findings of this night court?
Answer. These sessions sought to adapt branches and functional areas to support
Army 2030 based on the National Defense Strategy and Defense Planning Guidance.
This included creating new capabilities in some branches, while reducing or reallo-
cating capabilities in other branches. These sessions were a component of how the
Army is transforming from a COIN fight to support LSCO and the Army continues
to conduct analysis on the transformation to the Army of 2030. The Army looks for-
ward to briefing Congress on force structure changes later this summer.
Question. What were MOSs identified by the Army as ones who could handle re-
duced structure?
Answer. The Army continues to conduct analysis on the Transformation to the
Army of 2030 and will brief the committee at the earliest possible opportunity.
Question. When evaluating ‘‘unit priority,’’ which units were identified as low-
usage units whose force structure could handle reductions?
Answer. The Army utilized an extensive modeling process to determine the most
highly used and needed units relative to total Army inventory in Large Scale Com-
bat Operations examining 8 years of recent deployment data. However, this is a
component of the Army’s Transformation to Army 2030 and the Army is still devel-
oping the plan for how these changes will be implemented. It is too early to make
commitments on changes. The Army looks forward to briefing Congress on force
structure changes later this summer.
Question. Please provide a complete list of assessed units and the Army’s recent
and projected usage determination.
Answer. This is a component of the Army’s Transformation to 2030 and the Army
is still developing the plan for how these changes will implemented. The Army looks
forward to briefing Congress on force structure changes later this summer.
Question. It has been several years since the Army signed a new ARSTRUC.
Why has the Army not signed an Army structure document in recent years?
Answer. The Army signed Army Structure Memorandum 2024–2028 on 12 Janu-
ary 2022. The Army is currently conducting analysis for Army Structure Memo-
randum 2025–2029.
Question. Force structure reductions will impact the quantity and types of equip-
ment procured each year. As was mentioned at the hearing, the Army is managing
the transition to Army 2030 amidst a flat budget—the Army must effectively
prioritize the acquisition and fielding of equipment based on the future structure
of the service.
Is a reduced force structure a consideration when scheduling modernization prior-
ities and Army procurement?
Answer. The Army must transform its force structure to make room for new capa-
bilities relevant to current and future threats. Guided by the National Defense
Strategy, the Army is in the process of determining how and where to make these
changes. Once analysis is complete, the Army will assess impacts to modernization
priorities and Army procurement.
Question. Are these assumptions already built into Army MTOEs?
Answer. The Army is still developing the plan to transform to Army 2030. Once
finalized, those decisions will be built into an Army MTOE.
Question. Can the industrial base adapt to a potentially lower Army demand
quantity?
Answer. The industrial base has the flexibility to accommodate the demand profile
based on the level of funding. Communicating with the organic and commercial

---

180
partners early and often is critical to managing the industrial base to ensure bal-
ance between requirements and capacity.
Question. The Army communicated to our office last June there is no operational
need for a Multi-Domain Task Force to support a Division HQ.
Has this changed?
Answer. The Army does not have an operational need for MDTFs to support Army
Divisions. The Army 2030 concept does make the Division the tactical unit of action
and through our annual Total Army Analysis process we are reviewing options that
build multi-domain capabilities to enable the division to fight and win in Army
2030.
However, over the past 12 months, the Army’s considerations for MDTF locations
have evolved to allow for options to make efficient use of CONUS facilities while
providing combatant commanders flexibility to employ all or part of MDTFs from
CONUS locations.
Question. What criteria is the Army considering for each of the remaining MDTF
pending basing decisions?
Answer. MDTF stationing is a decision reserved for the Secretary of the Army.
The Headquarters Department of the Army HQDA develops options to station our
limited resources based on operational requirements found in the National Defense
Strategy (NDS) and the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG). The Army Staff is cur-
rently assessing those requirements in our annual Total Army Analysis (TAA) that
will be approved by the Secretary of the Army.
The Army makes stationing decisions for new formations under Army Regulation
5–10. The Army’s primary consideration for stationing is operational need informed
by guidance from the NDS and DPG. The Army assesses installations that satisfy
operational needs using Military Value Analysis (MVA) and Community Support
Value Analysis (CSVA). Lastly, no decision is final until the Army completes assess-
ments in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
The following is a summary of the MVA attributes the Army considers for sta-
tioning.
a. Training
(1) Total Maneuver Land: total acres of maneuver land.
(2) Accessible Maneuver Land: the amount of usable maneuver land with a
factor applied for soil resiliency
(3) Training Facilities: ranges, battle command centers, and training support
centers
(4) Airspace: area of largest single restricted airspace and total of all re-
stricted airspaces
(5) Dudded Impact Area: size and number of impact areas
b. Power Projection
(1) Surface Deployment Infrastructure: rail loading and classification tracks,
rail marshaling area, truck loading ramps, unit cargo stationing, and truck
loading area
(2) Air Deployment Infrastructure: Aerial Port of Embarkation (APOE) run-
way length, Max Aircraft on Ground, and hot cargo pads
(3) Deployment Support Infrastructure: container transfer pad, inspection
lanes, vehicle scales, and inspection staging area
c. Well Being
(1) Access to Medical Care: assessment of the Medical Treatment Facility
based on bed capability, out-of-area capability, case mix index, market share,
and supported population.
(2) Soldier and Family Support Facilities: Army Community Service, Child
Development Service, Fitness Center, Chapels, Youth Service.
(3) Family Housing: number of houses and the quality of those houses based
on age and recent renovations
(4) Brigade Complex: quantity, quality, and functional assessment of facilities
for a brigade headquarters
d. Expansibility
(1) Developable Area: total of all the buildable acreage on the installation not
counting training land.
(2) Population Impact: density of people in a 10-mile zone outside the installa-
tion, plus a growth factor.
(3) Connectivity: long haul network, computing capacity, and critical infra-
structure.
The following is a summary of the CSVA attributes the Army considers for sta-
tioning.

---

181
e. Professional License: This attribute assesses spouse license reciprocity using a
weighted sum of three metrics: state policy, implementation, and interstate com-
pacts.
f. Housing: This attribute assesses the private sector shortfall, which gives the
number of families likely to be unable to find suitable off-post housing.
g. Schools: This attribute incorporates data from public sources that assess
schools at more local levels using a weighted sum of high school graduation rates,
3rd–8th grade learning rate (the change in test scores among a cohort of students
from 3rd grade through 8th grade), and student to teacher ratios.
h. Medical: A measure, for each of a list of weighted specialties, of the percent
of patients seen in under 28 days.
i. Intergovernmental Support Agreements (IGSAs): This attribute considers effi-
ciencies in Joint Basing through the number Common Levels of Support (CLS) serv-
ices at an installation under an IGSA.

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Question. The Army’s unfunded priority list includes a number of cost-to-complete
projects. These projects have already been authorized and appropriated for, but ad-
ditional funding is needed in order to account for inflation, which has increased the
cost of materials, and supply chain disruptions. Many of these projects are Army
National Guard readiness centers, which play an integral role in ensuring the joint
readiness of the Total Force.
Why didn’t the Department prioritize these projects in its fiscal year 2024 budget
request?
Answer. These cost increases emerged too late in the budget submission process.
To the extent possible, the Army will program future existing project funding short-
falls in its base budget. Waiting for the next budget cycle to program these projects
would delay the construction of the critical infrastructure, as well as cause further
cost increases.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN
Question. I anticipate the demand for munitions to remain high due to the war
in Ukraine having no end in sight. Manufacturers in places like Camden, AR, are
rapidly expanding and increasing their capabilities to meet demand. I saw in this
year’s budget it substantially expands investments in critical munitions through
taking advantage of multi-year procurement authorities.
What concerns you most about the industrial bases capacity to meet increased de-
mands for production?
Answer. A significant concern the Army has is that historically the Department
of Defense (DoD)’s policy has been to operate effectively and efficiently and utilize
competition to drive cost-effective solutions which necessitated lean manufacturing
and lean capacities. Now, the Army is pivoting to rapidly expand capacities at or-
ders of magnitude not seen in decades. This rapid expansion requires acquiring
unique manufacturing equipment that can have long lead times of up to one to 2
years and the manufacturing locations are sometimes in remote locations that
present significant workforce hiring challenges to meet the second and third shifts
necessary to meet maximum production quantities.
In the area of artillery, a very large consumption item in Ukraine, the required
volume of projectiles, propellants, explosives and the Load, Assemble and Pack
(LAP) function are of concern. With the assistance of Congress, the resourcing being
provided is enabling us to ramp up production as quickly as possible; however, re-
quired quantities of propellants and explosives are commodities to which the Army
still needs to pay close attention. Global capacity for propelling charges and their
associated supply chains have been taxed given the Ukraine demand signal and as-
sociated Army replenishment efforts. To that end, Multi-Year Procurement author-
ity is being implemented in Fiscal Year 2023 that will help provide the Modular Ar-
tillery Charge System (MACS) LAP and MACS Metal Containers contracts with pre-
dictable and stable requirements.
Question. What measures does the Army propose to expand the supply and indus-
trial base to support increased production of critical munitions?
Answer. The Army has three key lines of effort to increase production and deliv-
eries of critical 155mm munitions. They are: (1) modernize the Organic Industrial
Base; (2) expand and accelerate the commercial industrial base production capacity;
and (3) leverage our foreign partners’ capabilities and manufacturing capacities.

---

182
Also included in these lines of efforts is the on-shoring of select critical precursor
energetic material that is currently only obtained through foreign sources.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO
Question. What is the Army’s plan to field hard-kill active protection systems
(APS)?
Answer. The Army has fielded four Brigade Combat Team (BCT) sets of Trophy
hard kill Active Protection Systems (APS) (Israeli, Rafael Systems) for Abrams plat-
forms. The Army is also continuing with the platform integration and testing of the
Iron Fist Light Decoupled (IF-LD) hard kill system (Israeli, Elbit Systems) for Brad-
ley to support fielding one BCT set and are completing characterization of two other
hard-kill APS solutions (Trophy MV, Rafael-ISR; and Strikeshield, Rheinmetall(GE)/
UBT (US, Michigan)) on test rigs to determine suitability for future ground combat
vehicles. Further development of advanced active protection is continuing in the
Science & Technology arena under the Combat Capabilities Development Command,
which is the appropriate place for development, given the maturity levels of the
technologies involved.
Question. Did the Army hold a competition for Abrams and Bradley APS capabili-
ties, or was this a sole source award? If sole source, what was the rationale?
Answer. In 2016, a Department of Army memorandum provided a directed re-
quirement to procure, and rapidly field Non-Developmental APS. To execute this,
the Army leveraged existing competitive Science and Technology Other Transaction
Authority APS proposals that had already been competed and selected under the
National Advanced Mobility Consortium to begin characterization work of three sys-
tems for Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker. Additionally, a market survey was posted
on FedBizOpps in 2017 to determine if other sources capable of satisfying an APS
requirement on the Abrams and Bradley existed. Platform integration of the sys-
tems was subsequently performed either by government integration, or by the plat-
form’s Original Equipment Manufacturer on a sole source basis where insufficient
technical data was available for competitive integration. The only system to enter
production, Trophy, was awarded via a sole source contract to DRS SSI (St Louis,
MO) based upon the sole responsible source exemption to the Federal Acquisition
Regulation (6.302–1).
Question. Has the Army only proceeded with testing of foreign-made hard-kill
APS solutions? If so, has this potential reliance on foreign sources raised concerns?
Answer. No, the Army has performed testing of numerous U.S. and foreign (indus-
try and government) developed systems. Recent interim efforts associated with the
Expedited Active Protection Systems (ExAPS) effort were informed by an extensive
Office of the Secretary of Defense live fire evaluation of all available systems foreign
(Trophy, Iron Fist) and domestic (Iron Curtain) that concluded in 2012. Subsequent
development of hard-kill active protection systems under the Combat Capabilities
Development Command’s Ground Vehicle System Center is using U.S. sources
where available.
Question. Is the Army open to further testing of a U.S. industry-developed hard-
kill APS capability?
Answer. The Army has completed its assessment of available mature off-the-shelf
active protection systems for Abrams and Bradley, having qualified installations for
two systems and procured one (Trophy). The Army has yet to identify a system that
is both suitable and mature enough to support Stryker. Continued development of
advanced active protection is continuing in the Science & Technology arena under
the Combat Capabilities Development Command. The Army is interested in indus-
try solutions and test results; however, it is not currently resourced to test and
verify every industry-claimed APS capability.
Question. Has observing the war in Ukraine raised any concerns about the vulner-
ability of U.S. armor to top attacks?
Answer. The Army Vehicle Protection community regularly collaborates with the
Intelligence community to understand the threats observed in the Ukraine War (and
elsewhere). Ongoing efforts exist within the development and acquisition commu-
nities to address a wide variety of top attack threats and those efforts continued
to be informed by current world events.
Question. Does the Army plan to halt testing and development of hard-kill APS
with industry partners in favor of a government-developed solution?
Answer. The Army remains committed to the development and testing of a Hard-
Kill APS system, run by Combat Capabilities Development Command’s Ground Ve-
hicle System Center, in partnership with several companies from across the U.S. in-
dustrial base. Additionally, the Government continually evaluates available APS

---

183
technologies based upon their maturity, capability, and ability to support platform
requirements in the full relevant environment.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL JAMES C. MCCONVILLE
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. For several years, this Subcommittee has criticized the Department for
not having a robust plan to defend Guam against high-end air defense threats. So
I am pleased that this year’s budget includes a total of $1.5 billion to accelerate this
capability.
However, we need people and infrastructure to get this done right, and these ef-
forts need to be coordinated across all the military services and with the Missile De-
fense Agency.
General McConville, The Army is requesting well over $600 million this year for
its portion of air defenses for Guam. Has the Army budgeted for the personnel to
operate these systems as they arrive on the island? How is the Army coordinating
its efforts with the Missile Defense Agency? How is the Army coordinating its efforts
with the Missile Defense Agency?
Answer. Yes, the Army has incorporated the personnel requirements into our
Total Army Analysis planning and will man and operate the Defense of Guam sys-
tems.
The Army and the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) have been coordinating the De-
fense of Guam efforts every step of the way since the 2022 National Defense Author-
ization Act. The Army and MDA co-led last year’s Office of the Secretary of Defense,
Defense of Guam Operational Planning Team that helped formulate Presidential
Budget 24 and have continued to meet on a regular basis. The MDA participates
in the biweekly program.
Executive Office (Missiles and Space) Defense of Guam Integrated Planning Team
and the weekly U.S. Army Pacific (USARPAC)-led All Things Guam Operational
Planning Team. The Army Staff and USARPAC Senior Leaders participate in MDA-
led Senior Executive Review Group and MDA planning charrettes. The Army Staff
also provides input to MDA’s quarterly report to Congress and its in constant com-
munication at the action officer and Senior Executive level.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN
Question. The Army’s Unfunded Priorities list accompanying the FY24 budget re-
quest includes a compelling argument for adding $530M to bring the total procure-
ment of tanks to the full brigade level while lowering the unit cost of each tank
greater than $4.3M.
Please explain why the Army didn’t include such funding in its budget request
for this enduring platform.
Answer. The Army made the difficult choice to fund modernization efforts re-
quired to face near peer threats on the multi-domain battlefield. The base budget
request maintains the production line and funds facility improvements at the Lima
Tank Plant. The request included $800.3M for 34 tanks (a battalion set) and
$105.8M for industrial base updates to facilitate production for a total of $906.1M
in procurement and an additional $96.2M in Research Development Test & Evalua-
tion (RDT&E) in FY 2024. The Abrams tanks we currently have in our formations
(M1A1 SA, M1A2 SEPv2 and M1A2 SEPv3) remain the best in the world. The Un-
funded Priorities List provides an option for the government to take advantage of
the best available price point on Abrams if funding becomes available.
Question. We understand from the Department that the initial estimates for deliv-
ery of M1A2 Abrams tanks to Ukraine were about 1 year, but that will be sooner
now that they have decided to ship M1A1 Abrams tanks instead.
Can you confirm whether the specific Abrams tanks have been identified?
Answer. Yes, the specific Abrams tanks that will eventually be provided to
Ukraine have been identified. Additional details can be provided in a classified
briefing.
Question. Please provide an update on the overall timeline for transfer, including
where those tanks are and how the movement to Ukraine aligns with the training
of Ukrainian troops.
Answer. The Department will begin delivery of the 31 tanks to Ukraine this fall,
and earlier if possible. The tanks are now in the maintenance and conversion proc-
ess to the proper combat configuration. The tanks are on schedule and their delivery
is being synchronized to align with the training of Ukrainian forces.

---

184
QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Question. We want the best individuals to serve in the military and, as you know,
educational benefits are one of the most effective ways to attract, retain, and de-
velop outstanding Soldiers. Amongst many competing priorities, I applaud the Army
for making tuition assistance a priority, including for those serving in the Army Na-
tional Guard and Reserves.
How important is the Tuition Assistance Program to meeting the Army’s recruit-
ing and retention goals?
Answer. For many years, the Tuition Assistance (TA) program has consistently
played a major role in supporting Army’s recruiting and retention missions. In re-
peated surveys of new recruits, a majority report that education benefits, including
Tuition Assistance (TA), are ‘‘very’’ to ‘‘extremely’’ influential on their enlistment de-
cision. The Army knows from additional surveys and internal analyses that edu-
cation benefits are repeatedly cited as a top reason for Soldier reenlistment. A 2021
study conducted by the Army’s Office of Economic and Manpower Analysis (OEMA)
found that TA usage is associated with a 9.5% increase in reenlistment among first
term Soldiers.

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. This Defense Subcommittee will reconvene next
Thursday, a week from this Thursday, on May 11, at 11 a.m. for
a hearing with the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. That will be an interesting hearing.
Until then, we stand in recess.
[Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., Tuesday, May 2, the subcommittee
was recessed, to reconvene at 11 a.m., Thursday, May 11.]

---

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

THURSDAY, MAY 11, 2023

U.S. SENATE,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9 a.m. in room SD–124, Dirksen Sen-
ate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Tester, Durbin, Murray, Reed, Schatz, Sha-
heen, Murphy, Collins, Murkowski, Graham, Moran, and Boozman.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III, SECRETARY
ACCOMPANIED BY HON. MICHAEL J. McCORD, UNDER SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE (COMPTROLLER)/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. I want to call this hearing to order.
Good morning. I want to begin by welcoming our witnesses, Sec-
retary Austin and General Milley. We appreciate your willingness
to be in front of this committee this morning.
General Milley, this will be your last appearance before this sub-
committee. I want to go off script here a little bit. You are the ulti-
mate professional. You are somebody that has been very good for
me and, I think I can say this for the whole committee, to work
for with. You’re a straight shooter and you’ve done a hell of a good
job and I appreciate that and I just hope that the Senate will be
able to find some common sense to be able to confirm your suc-
cessor so that the department isn’t forced to rely on an interim
placeholder for your position because it’s simply too important for
that.
This is an unprecedented indefinite hold on military promotions
that has frozen over 60 nominations and can affect as many as 650
by the end of the year.
I will tell you the people on this committee know what the
threats are in this world, we need to be able to assist the military
in being successful and this is not assisting the military to be suc-
cessful. It is plain dangerous.
We are meeting today to discuss an $842 billion budget request
for next fiscal year. A few months ago, we passed the overdue
(185)

---

186

budget for this fiscal year of $816 billion, which provided a $74 bil-
lion increase over fiscal year 2022.
I bring up fiscal year 2022 because there are some who advocate
for keeping all government spending at fiscal year 2022 levels.
In light of China’s continued military aggression, that sounds
plain irresponsible to me, but a majority in the other chamber pro-
poses that.
It is my hope that today you can detail for us what such a drastic
funding reduction would mean to our national defense.
Of course, all bets are off if we don’t reach a bipartisan agree-
ment on the debt soon. We have yet to deal with the debt in a re-
sponsible and a common sense way. I am hopeful that bipartisan
talks can get going in earnest and that cooler heads will prevail be-
fore we come to a default.
The challenges we face are numerous. We need to solve the debt.
We need to agree upon a top line for government spending. We
need to agree on a top line for defense. We need to get qualified
people into their jobs.
The risk of a government default is real. The risk of a govern-
ment shutdown is real. The risk of a long-term CR (Continuing
Resolution) is real, none which are good, by the way, and while
we’re busy fighting amongst ourselves, the Chinese continue their
military buildup and aggressive behavior. The Russians continue
their unjust war against Ukraine. Iran is continuing its malign in-
fluence in the Middle East and violent terrorist organizations plot
to do us harm.
We have to get the budget done so that the men and women in
uniform supported by the tireless civilians at the Department of
Defense can go about their business of keeping us safe.
I support the ongoing efforts of Senators Murray and Collins who
will work with anybody to get the job done. We will get to the spe-
cifics of your budget request here shortly, but my main question is
are our troops getting what they need when they need it? Are we
keeping up with our military modernization? Is industry spending
taxpayer dollars wisely and delivering as promised because the
truth is we can’t afford to waste time and we can’t afford to waste
money.
Once again, I want to thank the witnesses for their testimony
today. Before you make your opening remarks, I would turn it over
to Senator Collins for her statement.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Chairman Tester, for
holding this hearing on the fiscal year 2024 budget request for the
Department of Defense.
General Milley, let me echo the Chairman’s thanks and praise of
you as you approach your retirement. Thank you for your more
than 40 years of service to our country.
I am, however, not as confident as the Chairman that this is
your last appearance before our subcommittee. So don’t take any
hope in that statement.
The Administration’s 2022 National Defense Strategy rightly
captures the importance of deterring China. I strongly support that
objective and know that you both, the Secretary and General

---

187

Milley, have worked hard to develop a strategy-driven request
within the top line that you were provided.
I also agree with Chairman Milley’s written testimony that com-
pleting appropriations bills on time is a necessary condition to
credibly deter China.
I would, however, suggest that it is not a sufficient condition and
that the President’s budget is inadequate to achieve this goal.
No matter how talented, innovative, and hard working our
Armed Forces are, no matter how good their leadership, the mili-
tary must also have a sufficient budget top line, and I have serious
doubts that the Administration’s budget request provides all of the
resources necessary to deter an aggressive China and to deal with
other global threats.
For example, the budget request would result in a smaller Navy,
a fleet of 291 ships. This is five ships fewer than today’s fleet of
296 ships and further from the Chief of Naval Operations’ require-
ment which is informed by the INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Com-
mand) scenarios.
Moreover, China has the largest Navy in the world and is grow-
ing to 400 ships in the next 2 years. The story is very similar for
the Air Force.
In the absence of a higher defense budget, this committee will
have to fill in the gaps to deter China and to maintain readiness.
Let me highlight a few examples of what from my perspective is
missing from the budget request. $3.5 billion in INDOPACOM un-
funded priorities, $266 million to fund NORTHCOM (Northern
Command) unfunded priorities to detect airborne targets, such as
Chinese spy balloons, funding to replenish $1 billion in presidential
drawdown authority for Taiwan that Congress authorized last year.
The costs to fully implement what the Administration’s own zero
trust architecture policy to protect against insider cyber threats,
the costs for the deployment of 1,500 Active Duty troops sent to the
Southwest borders just this week, security assistance for Ukraine
beyond September, and $1.6 billion in under-budget fuel costs ac-
cording to the Government Accountability Office analysis. That fig-
ure is 20 percent more than the budget request.
I recognize that fuel cost assumptions are driven by the White
House, but last years’ experience is instructive. If Congress had
funded the department at the level that was requested last year by
the Administration, our troops housing, food, healthcare, fuel, and
readiness would be facing an $8 billion inflation hole. That hole
does not exist today because Congress insisted upon a higher and
more realistic funding.
One final point on Ukraine about which I share the Chairman’s
commitment. It is critical that the Administration provide Ukraine
with what it needs in time to defend and take back its sovereign
territory. We expect the Administration not to wait until the 11th
hour if the Ukrainians need more before the end of the fiscal year.
There are many issues for us to discuss today. Again, I thank all
three of your witnesses for their extraordinary service and I look
forward to discussing these issues with them.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins, for your statement.
Secretary Austin, you have the floor.

---

188

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III

Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Tester, Vice Chair Collins, and Distinguished Mem-
bers of the Committee, I’m glad to be here with you to testify in
support of the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2024.
I’m joined as always by General Milley, and I remain grateful for
his leadership and I’m also glad to be joined by the department’s
Comptroller and CFO (Chief Financial Officer) Mike McCord.
This is a strategy-driven budget and one driven by the serious-
ness of our strategic competition with the People’s Republic of
China.
At $842 billion, it is 3.2 percent increase over fiscal year 2023-
enacted and it is 13.4 percent higher than fiscal year 2022-enacted,
and this budget will help us continue to implement our National
Defense Strategy and the President’s National Security Strategy.
Now I have three key priorities at the Pentagon: to defend our
Nation, to take care of our outstanding people, and to succeed
through teamwork.
The PRC (People’s Republic of China) is our pacing challenge and
we’re driving hard to meet it. Our budget builds on our previous
investments to deter aggression and we’re investing in a more re-
silient force posture in the Indo-Pacific and increasing the scale
and scope of our exercises with our partners.
This budget includes a 40 percent increase over last year’s re-
quest for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and it’s an all-time high
of $9.1 billion. That will fund a stronger force posture, better de-
fenses for Hawaii and Guam, and deeper cooperation with our al-
lies and partners.
I look forward to being back next week before the full Senate Ap-
propriations Committee to go into more depth on how we’re work-
ing with our interagency partners to continue to outpace the PRC.
Now this budget also makes the department’s largest-ever invest-
ments in both R&D (Research & Development) and procurement.
We’re requesting more than $61 billion to sustain air dominance.
That includes funding for fighters and extraordinary B–21 Stra-
tegic Bomber that I helped unveil last December.
We’re also seeking more than $48 billion for sea power, including
new construction of nine battle force ships, and we’re boosting ca-
pacity at America’s shipyards to build the ships that our strategy
demands.
We’re investing a total of $1.2 billion in the submarine industrial
base and we’re buying two Virginia Class attack submarines and
one Columbia Class ballistic missile submarine.
On land, we’re investing in air and missile defense and defenses
to counter unmanned aerial vehicles. We’re also requesting $11 bil-
lion to deliver the right mix of long-range fires, including major in-
vestments in hypersonics. We’ll also continue to modernize all
three legs of our Nuclear Triad and bolster our strategic deter-
rence, and we put forward the largest space budget in Pentagon
history. We’ve requested $33.3 billion to improve our capabilities
and our resilience in space.

---

189

Now let me again thank Congress for providing the department
with multiyear procurement authorities and appropriations for crit-
ical munitions.
In this budget, we’re requesting more multiyear procurement au-
thorities and we’re asking for more than $30 billion to further in-
vest in the industrial base and to buy the maximum number of mu-
nitions that American industry can produce.
This budget also moves us away from aging capabilities that
aren’t relevant to future conflicts so we can focus on the advances
that our warfighters will need.
Now our National Defense Strategy calls out Putin’s highly-ag-
gressive Russia as an acute threat and under President Biden’s
leadership, the United States has rallied the world to help Ukraine
fight Russia’s indefensible invasion.
We reinforced NATO’s (North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s) de-
fense and deterrence on Eastern Flank and our allies and partners
have provided crucial security assistance, coordinated through the
Ukraine Defense Contact Group that I lead.
We will support Ukraine’s defense for as long as it takes and
meanwhile the department remains vigilant against other per-
sistent threats, including North Korea and Iran, and we will take
all necessary measures to defend our troops and our interests over-
seas as seen from our air strikes in March against facilities linked
to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
We’re also investing in over-the-horizon counter-terrorism capa-
bilities. Now I know that you have been following the reports of un-
authorized disclosure of sensitive and classified U.S. material.
I take this issue very seriously and I’ve ordered a comprehensive
review of the department’s security programs, policies, and proce-
dures for safeguarding classified information. I’ve also discussed
this issue with our allies and partners around the world. I’ve been
struck by their solidarity and their commitment to reject efforts to
divide us and we will not let anything fracture our unity.
Our Joint Force stands ready to meet any challenge. You could
see the force’s readiness after Russia’s unprovoked invasion of
Ukraine when we swiftly deployed elements of the 3rd Infantry Di-
vision to Poland to show up on NATO’s Eastern Flank.
We closely monitor radios at the unit level and maintain re-
sponse forces at our highest states of readiness while the rest of
the force by design is preparing for future contingencies.
So this budget will help us maintain our readiness with a $146
billion in funding for operations, training, and maintenance. This
budget also invests in improving our readiness and resilience in the
face of climate change and other 21st Century threats, and we are
going to remain the strongest military in the world.
As we mark the 50th Anniversary of our all-volunteer force, I am
enormously proud of the brave men and women who choose to wear
the cloth of our Nation. We owe it to them and to their families
to take the best possible care of our people and over the past 2
years we’ve made moves easier. We’ve cut commissary prices.
We’ve made childcare more affordable, and this budget funds other
key steps to increase the quality of life of our teammates, including
the largest military and civilian pay raises in decades.

---

190

Now we’re also pushing hard to eliminate suicide in our ranks,
including immediate steps to hire more mental health professionals
and improve access to mental healthcare.
Meanwhile, we’re working toward a military that’s free of sexual
assault and we work with Congress to improve the response to sex-
ual assault and related crimes under the Uniform Code of Military
Justice and those reforms will be fully implemented by the end of
this year.
And the department is also investing in a specialized workforce
to combat sexual assault, harassment, suicide, and more.
Now the department’s third priority is succeeding through team-
work. Our unrivaled network of allies and partners magnifies our
power and expands our security, and in recent months our friends
in the Indo-Pacific have taken major steps forward.
The Philippines has agreed to nearly double the number of sites
where we cooperate together. Japan committed to double its de-
fense spending and through the historic office partnership, we’ll
work with our Australian and British allies to build game-changing
defense advantages that will deter aggression and boost our de-
fense industrial capacity.
In sum, this is the budget that will meet this moment and I re-
spectfully ask for your support and the single most effective way
that this committee can support the department and our out-
standing troops is with an on-time full year appropriation.
So I look forward to working with all of you so that we can con-
tinue to defend our democracy and support the forces of freedom
in this hour of challenge.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LLOYD J. AUSTIN III
Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, distinguished members of the com-
mittee: thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of the President’s budget
request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024.
On behalf of Deputy Secretary Hicks, the leadership of the Department of De-
fense, and our Service members, civilian workforce, and their families, let me also
thank you for your continued support and partnership as we work to defend the
United States. I also want to thank the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen-
eral Mark Milley, and the Department’s Comptroller, Mike McCord, who are both
testifying with me and are vital partners in realizing the Department’s priorities.
The President’s $842 billion defense budget request for FY 2024 provides us with
the capabilities and investments to advance our three key priorities: defending the
nation, taking care of our people, and succeeding through teamwork.
This is a strategy-driven budget that provides the resources to continue to imple-
ment our 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the President’s National Secu-
rity Strategy. This budget will also enable us to strengthen our deterrent and defen-
sive capabilities across domains, informed by our 2022 Nuclear Posture Review and
our 2022 Missile Defense Review.
As President Biden has said, we are in a ‘‘decisive decade,’’ and the choices that
we make today will set our course for generations to come—not just for the United
States but for the world. So the Department is rising to meet this moment, seizing
on opportunities to outpace our competitors, strengthen our security, and move our
world toward a more secure future.
As our National Defense Strategy makes clear, the People’s Republic of China
(PRC) is the Department’s pacing challenge. To meet this challenge, the Department
is honing new operational concepts, deploying cutting-edge capabilities, and making
essential investments for the long term. This budget request shows it, including re-
quests for the Department’s largest procurement and R&D budgets ever—$170 bil-
lion and $145 billion respectively. And our budget request will also help us meet

---

191
the acute threat from Russia, as Russia’s unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine
is now in its second year.
To maintain our edge, this budget will invest in vital technological advancements
for the Joint Force, while also reflecting the need to eliminate capabilities that no
longer best serve our national defense. Such decisions can be difficult, but they will
enable us to invest in the advanced programs that our security demands.
The Department is also intensely focused on taking care of our people, who re-
main our greatest asset. This budget invests in significant quality-of-life improve-
ments, including the largest military pay raise in 22 years and the largest civilian
pay raise in 43 years. We remain focused on continuing to recruit, retain, and de-
velop the best talent from across the country to serve in both uniformed and civilian
roles.
We owe it to our outstanding Service members, civilian employees, and their fami-
lies to provide the support that they need to thrive. We also owe them environments
that reward excellence, promote teamwork, and are free from harassment and
abuse. So, we are implementing military justice reforms, fighting sexual assault,
and redoubling our efforts to end suicide in our ranks. These challenges are per-
sonal priorities for me, and this budget paves the way for even more progress.
We rely on teamwork within our Department and beyond it—including with our
interagency colleagues, Congress, the defense industrial base, and our peerless net-
work of Allies and Partners worldwide. That network is a strategic advantage that
no competitor can match. From rallying the world to support Ukraine’s fight for
freedom to conducting joint exercises in the Indo-Pacific with like-minded countries,
our Allies and Partners are a huge force multiplier. They magnify our power, ad-
vance our shared security interests, and help uphold a world that is free, open, pros-
perous, and secure, and this budget will support the security partnerships that
make America even stronger.
I have never been more confident in the power of our fighting force and the tal-
ents of our civilian workforce. The FY 2024 budget request will help ensure that
we meet America’s national security challenges and use this decisive decade to de-
fend our democracy and forge a world of greater security, prosperity, and liberty.
I therefore ask for your support of our budget and our mission as Congress writes
authorizing and appropriations bills in the months ahead.
DEFENDING THE NATION

We are deeply aware of our responsibility to be responsible stewards of taxpayer
dollars. This budget request has been carefully prepared to provide the resources
for the objectives laid out in our 2022 NDS, Nuclear Posture Review, and Missile
Defense Review.
The NDS directs the Department to act urgently to sustain and strengthen U.S.
deterrence, with the PRC as our pacing challenge. The NDS also directs the Depart-
ment to tackle the acute threat of Russia, as well as the persistent threats from
Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and global terrorist groups.
The NDS clearly articulates our priorities: defend the homeland from the growing,
multi-domain challenge posed by the PRC; deter strategic attacks against the
United States, our Allies, and our Partners; deter aggression, while preparing to
prevail in conflict if necessary, by prioritizing the PRC challenge in the Indo-Pacific,
followed by the Russian challenge in Europe; and build a resilient Joint Force and
defense ecosystem.
Within the Department, the NDS is our North Star, and we have aligned our
processes, policies, and plans to implement it. The FY 2024 budget is the latest con-
crete manifestation of our strategy—and its deep recognition that the PRC presents
a challenge now and in the years to come.
Prioritizing the PRC as Our Pacing Challenge
In recent decades, the PRC has demonstrated both the will and, increasingly, the
economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to reshape its region and the
international order to suit its preferences. The United States will not let that hap-
pen. This budget will enable us to continue executing our strategy and outpacing
the PRC, across all timeframes and domains.
Through the FY 2024 budget, we will strengthen U.S. deterrence and continue ad-
vancing new operational concepts, deploying cutting-edge capabilities across all do-
mains, and investing in the innovations that we will need in the future. Through
a $9.1 billion request for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, the largest ever, the De-
partment is expanding the scope and scale of our activities to reinforce security and
stability in the Indo-Pacific region, strengthen deterrence, and bolster our advan-
tages and those of our Allies and Partners.

---

192
The Department is also investing in a more resilient posture across the Indo-Pa-
cific region. For example, in Japan, Australia, Guam, and the Compact of Free Asso-
ciation States, we are forward-stationing and deploying more capable forces even as
we make major infrastructure investments in airfields, logistics, domain awareness,
and resilience. In addition, throughout Southeast Asia, we are executing rotational
deployments, logistics cooperation, and targeted security assistance to strengthen
our partnerships, deepen our interoperability, and enhance our collective readiness.
This budget allows us to continue to support Taiwan’s self-defense, consistent with
our longstanding commitments enumerated in the Taiwan Relations Act, the three
U.S.-PRC Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances.
Across the Indo-Pacific region, we have increased the complexity and scale of our
exercises and operations. In addition to building interoperability with our Allies and
Partners, we are experimenting to build our warfighting advantages, which will help
us further refine our operating concepts and investments. This budget request will
enable us to continue that crucial work.
Meeting the Acute Threat of Russian Aggression
Russia’s unprovoked further invasion of Ukraine poses a historic challenge to Eu-
ropean and global security. Russia’s campaign of conquest is also an attack on the
rules-based international order that has helped to make the world safer and more
secure since its creation in the aftermath of World War II. If Russia succeeds, it
would send a message to other aggressor nations that they can attack and conquer
their neighbors. With U.S. leadership, a broad coalition of Allies and Partners have
rallied to help support Ukraine’s defense of its sovereignty.
Over the past year, the United States has committed more than $32 billion in
game-changing security assistance to support Ukraine’s fight against Russian ag-
gression. This has helped meet Ukraine’s most urgent needs—including for air de-
fense, artillery systems, tanks and other armored vehicles, and other crucial capa-
bilities—and it has translated to tangible gains on the battlefield. In the year since
Russia’s unjust war of aggression began, Ukraine’s military forces have won the bat-
tles of Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Kherson—and they have inspired the world with their
courage and resilience.
We will continue to support Ukraine’s fight for freedom for as long as it takes.
To keep pace with Ukraine’s urgent security needs even as we maintain our own
readiness, we are pushing to expand production from the defense industrial base.
We are focused on increasing the resiliency of supply chains that are critical for na-
tional security. And we are focused on accountability of the security assistance that
we have provided.
Our NATO Allies face a historic challenge from Putin’s aggressive Russia, and we
are making significant investments in bolstering European security. Those build on
foundational investments in posture and presence that we have made in Europe
since Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine and seizure of the Crimea region. These in-
vestments paid dividends in 2022 when we rapidly surged an additional 20,000 U.S.
forces into the European theater to deter Russian aggression and reassure our
NATO Allies. With little advance notice, the United States deployed additional com-
bat power, repositioned U.S. forces already in Europe, and integrated deploying
forces with prepositioned stocks of munitions and supplies. Our continued invest-
ments in posture and presence in Europe help deter Russian aggression against
NATO—now and in the future.
Tackling Advanced and Persistent Threats
We remain vigilant against the advanced and persistent threats from the DPRK,
Iran, and global terrorist organizations.
We continue to shore up security on the Korean Peninsula despite the DPRK’s
provocations, including through bilateral and trilateral cooperation. We will con-
tinue to stand with our Allies, the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Japan. We remain
steadfast and ironclad in our extended deterrence commitments to the ROK and
Japan, and we continue to demonstrate our ability to respond rapidly and firmly to
any DPRK provocation. We are working to strengthen and modernize our alliances
with the ROK and Japan and will continue to ensure that our forces in and around
the Korean Peninsula are ready to ‘‘Fight Tonight’’ in the event of DPRK aggression.
Iran’s nuclear program, its dangerous proxies, its support for terrorism, its cyber
threats, and its proliferation of one-way attack unmanned aerial systems (UAS) all
undermine Middle East security and threaten U.S. forces and Partners. We have
acted decisively when Iran-backed militia groups have attacked U.S. forces in Iraq
and Syria. As Iran deepens its partnership with Russia, including Russian military
support to Tehran in return for Iranian one-way attack UAS to deploy in Ukraine,
we are developing and fielding effective approaches to counter the proliferating

---

193
threats from Iran’s UAS. This budget request seeks to tackle these persistent chal-
lenges through investments in integrated air and missile defense, maritime domain
awareness, and counter-UAS systems. We have repeatedly demonstrated our ability
to deploy combat-credible forces into the region to deter potential Iranian aggres-
sion, and we will continue to take necessary and proportionate military action to
defend U.S. forces and facilities from attack, or threat of attack, from Iran or Iran-
backed proxies. The United States will support and strengthen partnerships with
countries that subscribe to the rules-based international order, and we will make
sure those countries can defend themselves against foreign threats. These actions
have the added benefit of demonstrating our commitment to the region’s security
that will offset the efforts by external powers to reshape the region in their interest
and to our detriment.
Meanwhile, ISIS, al-Qa’ida, and other terrorist groups continue to threaten the se-
curity of the United States, our citizens, and our Partners in the Middle East, Afri-
ca, and South Asia. We are investing in a modernized, over-the-horizon counterter-
rorism architecture to prevent future attacks on our citizens and the U.S. homeland,
and we have proven our continued ability to remove the most threatening al-Qa’ida
and ISIS operatives from the battlefield.
One legislative authority that is key to our ability to tackle these advanced and
persistent threats—Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—expires
at the end of this year. Section 702 provides essential, irreplaceable insights on the
activities of critical foreign targets. The loss of this authority, or its renewal in di-
minished or unusable form, would profoundly damage the Department’s ability to
see and mitigate some of the most profound threats against the United States as
well as its Allies and Partners. Reauthorization is therefore a matter of utmost pri-
ority. Along with our colleagues in the Intelligence Community and the Department
of Justice, we look forward to working with this Committee and others, in order to
secure Section 702’s extension.
Innovating and Modernizing
The FY 2024 budget request will enable the Department to develop, acquire, and
modernize across all domains to address all the above challenges, especially our
competition with the PRC.
To maintain and expand our advantage over the PRC, we need to modernize not
just our weapons systems but also our operational concepts and the ways that we
do business. To operate effectively in a dynamic security environment, the Depart-
ment is prioritizing investments to maintain a ready warfighting capability, build
a skilled defense workforce, and work more effectively with our Allies and Partners.
A safe, secure, and effective U.S. nuclear deterrent is the ultimate backstop to
deter strategic attacks on our country and our allies. The Department is committed
to maintaining and modernizing our nuclear triad, while seeking to reduce the role
of nuclear weapons in U.S. national strategy. The FY 2024 budget request, including
an investment of $37.7 billion in FY 2024, fully funds the nuclear triad and nuclear
command, control, and communications, demonstrating our commitment to maintain
reliable and effective legacy systems while pursuing their timely replacements.
The Department is also accelerating investments in cutting-edge defense capabili-
ties, such as uncrewed systems that can operate on the water, underwater, in the
air, and on land. Integrating human-machine teaming, autonomous systems, and re-
silient networks will make our operations significantly faster, more lethal, and more
survivable.
The FY 2024 budget request includes $30.6 billion specifically for our munitions
enterprise. It invests in modernizing and growing our munitions industrial base and
expanding production capacity and procurement quantities. The Department is
seeking to use the unprecedented multiyear procurement authorities provided by
Congress to affordably acquire critical munitions, while bolstering our inventories
and providing our industry partners with a more predictable ‘‘demand signal.’’
The FY 2024 budget request makes long-term investments of $33.3 billion in the
resilience of our space architecture in the event of an attack. These investments will
further expand and diversify constellations for space sensing and communications
resilience, as well as augmenting our space warfighting capabilities. These steps
will drive even deeper cooperation with the robust American commercial space sec-
tor.
In the cyberspace domain, this budget request makes targeted investments to
speed the development and management of new cyber tools. This will help us inte-
grate our sequentially developed Cyber Mission Force capabilities. It will also aid
our transition to, and sustainment of, advanced cyber capabilities from the Depart-
ment’s Science and Technology (S&T) activities. These efforts will enhance the inter-
operability and effectiveness of our Joint Cyberspace Warfighting Architecture and

---

194
maintain an efficient pipeline from America’s world-class cyber- innovation work-
force into the Department’s cyberspace operations forces.
The Department is also adapting to America’s changing labor market to ensure
that we have the right team to execute the NDS. This budget funds a new civilian
cyber workforce-incentive program to target skill gaps, and it develops a curriculum
of advanced cyber training for our military. We are also increasing investments in
international research partnerships on critical technologies with our Allies and Part-
ners.
Our technological superiority is not a given; we have to work for it every day.
That includes rapid prototyping and commercial integration. So, the Department is
investing in tomorrow’s technology, such as responsible cutting-edge artificial intel-
ligence, enhancing our critical supply chains, and modernizing our testing and train-
ing capabilities.
The Department continues to vigorously develop and test advanced weapons pro-
totypes. Against the backdrop of our recent successful flight tests, the FY 2024
budget request expands the development of several hypersonic weapons programs,
as well as demonstration and testing activities. This budget will also improve our
subsonic cruise missiles to ensure their effectiveness against rapidly changing
threats and targets.
The Department is pursuing a range of initiatives to harden U.S. basing and en-
sure that it is resilient against air and missile attacks. For example, we have made
major investments in missile defenses for Guam and Hawaii, as well as infrastruc-
ture improvements across the entire Indo-Pacific region.
This budget request also funds the advancement of our joint warfighting concepts
and the rapid experimentation and fielding of emerging capabilities across all do-
mains. Ultimately, these initiatives will ensure a Joint Force that is increasingly
agile, innovative, interoperable with allies and partners, and resilient.
After decades of combat and coalition experience for our Special Operations Forces
(SOF) in recent conflicts, we are pioneering new SOF approaches to help meet to-
day’s primary challenges. This budget enables our SOF enterprise to continue to
modernize its crisis-response capabilities, while developing creative, adaptable, and
asymmetric options that ensure our Joint Force will present a range of dilemmas
to our adversaries.
The Department will also expand the Pacific Multi-Domain Training and Experi-
mentation Capability, which will help our forces train in the ways and places they
may be called upon to fight. These investments boost our readiness and lay the
foundation for advances in sensor-to- shooter networks that will multiply our forces’
lethality. To improve the speed and global integration of our operational decision-
making, we will deliver proven Joint All Domain Command and Control enhance-
ments to our warfighters by 2027.
The FY 2024 budget is rooted in the recognition that our competitors and adver-
saries are not standing still, and we must make the right investments now to retain
our technological advantages in the decades to come.
The Department will continue to draw on America’s longstanding strategic advan-
tages by investing in critical innovations—such as quantum computing, advanced
materials, renewable energy projects, integrated networks, and future-generation
wireless technology. To maintain the United States’ position as the global leader in
research and development, we are cultivating a strong, adaptive, and highly skilled
workforce of scientists and engineers through programs like the Science, Mathe-
matics, and Research for Transformation scholarship-for-service program.
Investing to Win Across All Domains
On land, the FY 2024 budget continues to build a combat-credible, ready, and le-
thal Army that can tackle challenges around the world. Our budget request seeks
to strengthen Army capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region, with significant invest-
ments in our air and missile defenses as well as land-based long-range fires. We
are also revitalizing and strengthening the Army’s Organic Industrial Base by mod-
ernizing the Army’s arsenals, maintenance depots, and ammunition facilities.
The FY 2024 budget builds on past investments in the Marine Corps Force Design
2030 concept, which focused on fielding capabilities and updating the Corps’ force
structure in the Indo-Pacific region. It also makes important new investments in
electronic-warfare capabilities, command and control systems, air and missile de-
fenses, and ground-force survivability, as well as in training and exercises.
At sea, this request helps deliver a ready and formidable naval force focused on
deterring potential aggression from the PRC. The budget request continues the tran-
sition of our naval force to Distributed Maritime Operations, with an increased focus
on uncrewed surface and underwater vehicles. Our request expands investments in
long-range fires, more advanced weapons systems, and next-generation platforms,

---

195
including development of the COLUMBIA-class submarine. The Department also
continues its critical investments in the submarine- construction industrial base; we
will begin investing in better submarine-maintenance capacities, and we will in-
crease our investments in the optimization of our shipyard infrastructure to make
our industrial base healthier and more capable of meeting future needs. The budget
request continues to move the Navy away from systems that are ill-suited for oper-
ations in highly contested environments.
In the air domain, the FY 2024 budget request makes significant investments to
ensure air dominance in future conflicts. This includes F–35 and F–22 aircraft mod-
ernization, next-generation fighter development, and autonomous combat collabo-
rative aircraft. These investments complement global strike capabilities such as the
B–21 family of systems. The budget request invests in the development of strategic
nuclear capabilities, such as Sentinel and the Long-Range Stand Off weapon. It also
prioritizes long-range fires like hypersonic weapons, as well as a modern air com-
mand-and-control framework, rapid global mobility, and improved electronic warfare
capabilities. To fully realize the tremendous advantages offered by our next-genera-
tion fighter and bomber platforms, we are investing in air-launched weapons that
offer greater range, speed, precision, flexibility, and lethality. We are also closing
shortfalls in supplying critical munitions by accelerating procurement where fea-
sible, as well as expanding and procuring additional production capacity for our top-
priority air-launched weapons. Moreover, this budget request continues to respon-
sibly make the transition away from air- weapons systems that do not support our
strategy, even as we invest in the maintenance and development of more advanced
systems.
In the space domain, we continue to build our advantages over our competitors
by investing in missile warning and tracking, data transport, communications, and
space sensing. This budget request also funds upgrades to our launch infrastructure
to support more government and commercial launches. Consistent with our recently
completed Space Strategic Review, additional investments will deter hostile uses of
space, and if deterrence fails, ensure that we can prevail in conflict in this domain,
too.
This budget also strengthens our cyberspace operations force, which persistently
engages both state and non-state cyber actors seeking to harm the United States,
its interests, and its Allies. It upgrades our cyber operations training platform, ac-
celerates the use of cloud-based capabilities, and invests in rapidly modernizing the
software and hardware needed to further fortify our cyber posture.
Finally, over the past 3 years of the COVID–19 pandemic, we have seen the mas-
sive impact that biological threats can inflict on our country. Accordingly, the Presi-
dent’s FY 2024 budget will enhance our ability to address any future pandemics or
other biological threats.
Meeting the Climate Crisis
As the NDS makes clear, climate change is increasingly shaping the context in
which the Department operates. That places new demands on the Joint Force, with
implications for our readiness. Climate change is also creating new potential points
of friction in places such as the Arctic, while affecting security relationships with
Allies and Partners around the world. We are determined to ensure that the United
States can meet and deal with these challenges.
This budget therefore invests in enhancing operational capability, mission resil-
ience, and readiness. This includes programs that mitigate the risk of energy supply
disruptions to critical military facilities—whether caused by extreme weather, cyber
operations, or kinetic attack. The budget request also includes funding to improve
the energy efficiency of combat operations and platforms while deploying new tech-
nology to improve lethality and mitigate logistics risk in contested environments.
Throughout, our focus is on building our operational advantages. These are not only
essential steps for the climate of the world that we share, but also strategic moves
to defend our country and strengthen our military.
TAKING CARE OF OUR PEOPLE

The U.S. military is without a doubt the strongest fighting force in human his-
tory, and we remain determined to keep it that way. The foundation of that strength
is our people. The Department is deeply committed to taking care of our total work-
force by growing our talent, building resilience and readiness in the force, ensuring
accountable leadership, and tackling even the most difficult workforce challenges.
This budget prioritizes our ongoing actions to take care of our outstanding Service
members, and their families, including by increasing Service member and civilian
employee compensation, raising housing allowance, and improving military housing.
The budget also helps make quality childcare more accessible and affordable, includ-

---

196
ing through the launch of universal pre-kindergarten at all Department of Defense
Education Activity schools. We are also making investments to fight a range of prob-
lematic and harmful behaviors. That includes continued efforts to combat sexual as-
sault and sexual harassment, reform the military justice system, and prevent sui-
cide in the Force.
Growing Our Talent
To defend our Nation’s security, we must tap into the talent that exists all across
our Nation. We must recruit and retain the best of America, building pathways of
opportunity for all qualified patriots who seek to serve. In this budget, we continue
to provide our force with exceptional opportunities for service and professional de-
velopment. This means being the employer of choice for personnel with technological
skills, mastery of foreign languages, and more. We are also investing in training and
education, as well as creating scholarships for science, technology, engineering, and
math. We will continue to deepen the Department’s partnerships with America’s
best universities, paving the way for the next generation of leaders. I am proud that
the Department recently established its first university-affiliated research center at
an Historically Black College and University—just one of the many ways that we
are building new ways for talented Americans to join our team.
Building Resilience and Readiness
Ensuring the safety, health, and well-being of our Service members is a sacred
trust—and a matter of readiness. We know that when economic challenges hit our
teammates where they live, it can make it even harder to serve. However, we also
know that when we take care of our Service members and ensure they are well
trained and well equipped, they continue to serve.
So, in addition to robustly funding the factors that immediately contribute to
readiness—training, equipping, and maintaining—we have made continued invest-
ments to support our Service members and their families, launching targeted initia-
tives to bring down daily costs for Service members. Those efforts have made
childcare more accessible and affordable, lowered prices in the commissary system
and made access to affordable food easier through online ordering, eased moving
costs, and increased opportunities for spousal employment and career mobility in-
cluding through the launch of the Military Spouse Career Accelerator Pilot, a paid
fellowship for military spouses that allows employers to connect with this diverse
and talented pool of talent. We have also raised pay and allowances across the
board. The FY 2024 budget will support a 5.2% pay raise for our Service members
and our civilian employee workforce—the largest pay raise in decades. The FY 2024
budget also invests in full day pre-kindergarten at all Department of Defense Edu-
cation Activity schools, providing our military children an essential head start on
their education. There is no greater testament to the resilience and readiness of our
force than the historically high retention rates across the Services.
Ensuring Accountability
The Department of Defense is committed to the health, safety, and well-being of
our Service members and will not tolerate prohibited harmful behavior. This is a
leadership issue, and we will lead. In February 2021, I ordered the creation of a
90-day independent review commission (IRC) on sexual assault in the military. The
Department, including the Military Services, are now implementing the IRC rec-
ommendations that I approved.
The Department also worked with the President and Congress to enact historic
legislation improving the response to sexual assault, domestic violence, and related
crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Offices of Special Trial
Counsel, newly established to prosecute these crimes with independence and spe-
cialized expertise, will reach full operating capability in December 2023.
We will continue to work relentlessly to end sexual assault and related crimes,
including through investments in a specialized prevention workforce and through
important tools like the On-Site Installation Evaluations, which help us identify
where our efforts are working and where more support is urgently needed.
The Department remains focused on efforts to eliminate suicide in the ranks and
to respond better when these tragedies occur. This budget makes a significant in-
vestment in suicide prevention, and we are accelerating efforts to expand and in-
crease access to mental healthcare, to including increased hiring and training of
mental health professionals, to ensure that our Service members can access the help
they need when they need it.

---

197
SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Our world is increasingly defined by strategic competition, profound technological
change, and 21st century challenges that pay no heed to borders. In this changing
strategic environment, the United States is far stronger because of the power of our
like-minded Allies and Partners, the improvements in industrial exchanges with our
friends, the integration and development of innovation, and the interoperability of
our forces. Our cooperation with Allies and Partners is central to co-developing ad-
vanced capabilities and rushing tangible improvements to our warfighters. These
are strategic advantages that no rival can match. The Department is deeply com-
mitted to further strengthening our work with the Allies and Partners who magnify
our might.
The AUKUS Partnership
The historic AUKUS partnership breaks new ground in working with two of our
closest Allies—Australia and the United Kingdom—to take on the threats of the
21st century, just as we did together in the 20th century. As the President outlined
in his State of the Union address, we are building bridges between Partners in the
Pacific and those in the Atlantic, and AUKUS is a generational opportunity at the
center of this change. This initiative translates our strategy into action, and it helps
to forge a more advantageous balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, where the United
States, Australia, and the United Kingdom are actively strengthening deterrence
across the region. AUKUS will enhance our collective military capabilities, espe-
cially in the advanced technologies that we believe will be critical for security and
stability in the future.
On March 13, 2023, the President announced our plans for the first major initia-
tive of AUKUS: providing Australia with a conventionally armed, nuclear powered
submarine capability. This phased approach will allow us provide this capability on
the fastest possible timeline, while upholding the highest standards for nuclear
stewardship and setting a precedent that strengthens the nonproliferation regime.
As the President made clear, our three nations are making concrete commitments
to each other, and we are backing these commitments up with significant invest-
ments to strengthen the industrial bases of each of our nations.
Allies and Partners in the Indo-Pacific Region
In the Indo-Pacific region, we continue to build and strengthen our peerless net-
work of alliances and partnerships. Recent progress only underscores the enormous
value of our Allies and Partners in the region.
For example, we are working closely with Japan to expand the roles and missions
of our alliance. We are forward-deploying more versatile, resilient, and mobile U.S.
capabilities even as we enhance Japan’s capabilities, including in counterstrike, un-
manned vehicles, and counter- hypersonic weapons. We are also increasing our tri-
lateral cooperation among the United States, Japan, and Australia, further dem-
onstrating regional commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.
We are working with the ROK to ensure that our combined forces are able to
deter the DPRK and help ensure peace and stability in Northeast Asia, including
by returning our defensive exercises to historical norms.
In Australia, we have built a deep partnership on technology and the development
of advanced capabilities, including space cooperation and space domain awareness.
We are continuing the rotational presence of U.S. capabilities through Australia,
across the air, land, and maritime domains. Working alongside our ally, we are
identifying locations to support enhanced U.S. presence with necessary infrastruc-
ture improvements. In 2022, we also announced that we will preposition munitions
and fuel to support U.S. capabilities in Australia.
In the Philippines, we are modernizing the U.S.-Philippine Alliance by enhancing
maritime cooperation, improving interoperability and information sharing, and add-
ing four important new locations under the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agree-
ment. These steps underscore our unwavering commitment to the Mutual Defense
Treaty with the Philippines.
In Thailand, we are continuing to strengthen the long-standing U.S.-Thai alliance.
Our annual Cobra Gold exercise, for example, contributes immeasurably to peace,
security, and stability in the Indo-Pacific, while ensuring we are prepared to re-
spond rapidly and effectively to a humanitarian disaster.
Meanwhile, with India, we are advancing our Major Defense Partnership and
launching a new chapter in U.S.-India ties. The Department is bolstering the Indian
military’s deterrent capabilities to ensure that India remains the preeminent power
in the Indian Ocean and can help uphold a favorable balance of power across the
wider Indo-Pacific region. We are committed to working closely with India on tech-
nology cooperation; deepening our interoperability across key defense and security

---

198
domains, including space and cyberspace; and ensuring that the U.S.-India partner-
ship supports the efforts of our broader network of like-minded Allies and Partners,
especially the Quad.
European Security Cooperation and Support to Ukraine
Under President Biden’s leadership, the United States has changed the course of
history by surging critical security assistance to Ukraine over the past year. With
the support of Congress, our response to Russia’s full-scale reprehensible assault on
its peaceful and democratic neighbor has provided historic levels of security assist-
ance to Ukraine through a combination of Presidential Drawdown Authority and the
Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. The United States has also rallied like-mind-
ed countries around the world to support Ukraine’s brave defenders. The engine of
our efforts is the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, the coalition of some 50 countries
that I convene regularly to spur and coordinate support to Ukraine. Our Allies and
Partners have collectively committed approximately $20 billion in security assist-
ance to Ukraine, including hundreds of tanks, thousands of other armored vehicles,
vital air-defense systems, hundreds of artillery systems, and other crucial capabili-
ties.
In the face of the biggest threat to European security since the height of the Cold
War, the NATO Alliance is more united than ever. We have moved urgently with
our Allies to further fortify NATO and bolster its defenses on its eastern flank. Our
commitment to Article Five of the North Atlantic Treaty remains ironclad. We will
not be dragged into Putin’s war of choice, but we will stand with Ukraine as it
fights to defend itself, and we will continue to strengthen NATO’s collective defense
and deterrence.
Building Teamwork at Home
Our partners at the Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial levels provide es-
sential support for our Service members and their families, caregivers, and sur-
vivors at military installations and communities around the country. The Depart-
ment is committed to working even more closely with these vital partners. Mean-
while, our Service members continue to proudly support our fellow Americans in
times of crisis, as they have this year during natural disasters and amidst the lin-
gering COVID–19 pandemic.
At the same time, we are supporting our Federal, state, local, tribal, and terri-
torial partners’ efforts to become more resilient and less reliant on Department of
Defense support. Increased national resilience will ensure that America stands
ready should an adversary choose to test our will with cyber or kinetic attacks on
the U.S. homeland.
In addition, our partners in industry remain an engine of innovation—one that
ensures that our warfighters remain ready to tackle the security challenges of this
century. Our budget request will shore up our defense industrial base, strengthen
its ability to produce the capabilities that we need, and develop critical technologies
for the future.
It is the honor of my lifetime to lead our exceptional and dynamic team at the
Department of Defense. We continue to strengthen our internal processes to ensure
that we make timely decisions based on rigorous cooperation among civilian and
military teams across the Department and with our interagency partners. We will
demonstrate that spirit of partnership at the highest levels, and we will expect it
from every person in the Department.
CONCLUSION

The way that we respond to today’s challenges will help determine America’s
course for generations to come. The Department is seizing this inflection point in
history. We will never flinch in the defense of the democracy that we have vowed
to protect, and we will take care of all of the extraordinary patriots who comprise
the world’s strongest fighting force.
The FY 2024 budget enables us to deliver on these priorities, and we ask for your
support as we build the Department of the future. We remain deeply committed to
working with Congress on oversight and appropriations to ensure that we have the
resources that our Total Force needs and deserves—today, tomorrow, and in the fu-
ture.
We will be good stewards of those resources, for both warfighters and taxpayers.
Defense reform will ensure that we use taxpayer dollars efficiently by modernizing
our business processes, improving our financial and contract management, and com-
pleting the Department’s audit. Above all, our accountability to both our own forces
and the American public is core to our democracy and sets us apart from our com-
petitors on the world stage.

---

199
Finally, we are grateful for our extraordinary Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines,
Guardians, their families, caregivers, and survivors, and civilian employees. They
are the foundation of America’s strength, and we are honored to serve alongside
them. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Secretary Austin.
General Milley, you have the floor.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT
CHIEFS OF STAFF
General MILLEY. Chairman Tester and Vice Chair Collins, and
Distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for the oppor-
tunity to testify before you today.
I’ve been privileged to defend this country for 43 years in uni-
form and next month I’ll start by 44th year and hopefully, Senator
Collins, this is my last posture hearing.
I thank Congress for your support to our military for the last
four decades, not just for this budget but for four consecutive dec-
ades you’ve given great support to our military and I thank you all
for that.
We could not be the military we are today without the support
of the American people and the American people’s representatives.
So what I ask for you today is that once again you approve an
on-time budget.
I’m honored to represent the Joint Force and their families
alongside the leadership of Secretary Austin and Under Secretary
McCord both. I’ve been working with them both for many, many
years and their leadership has been superlative.
Our Joint Force today is the most lethal and capable military in
the world because of your support. The military’s purpose is simple.
It’s to defend the United States against all enemies foreign and do-
mestic and there is no other purpose for our military.
Fundamental to this is deterrence. More specifically, to deter
great power war. To do this, our Number 1 priority is readiness
now and readiness in the future and there is no other Number 1
priority.
The Joint Force will accomplish this with the fiscal year 2024
budget request of $842 billion. Right now, the international system
is under increasing stress. Both China and Russia have the means
to threaten our interests and our way of life but war with China
or Russia is neither imminent nor inevitable.
The PRC remains our Number 1 long-term geostrategic security
challenge and it’s been pointed out in our National Defense Strat-
egy as the pacing challenge. The PRC has publicly stated that it
intends to be the regional hegemon in Asia within the next 10
years and to exceed the United States overall military capability by
mid-century.
Chinese actions are moving it on a path toward potential con-
frontation with its neighbors or the United States, but again war
with China is neither inevitable nor imminent.
Additionally, Russia is an acute threat and remains very dan-
gerous, especially under current conditions. Over a year ago, Rus-
sia undertook a war against Ukraine, threatening peace on the Eu-
ropean Continent and global stability for the first time since the
end of World War II.

---

200

We are supporting Ukraine to protect its sovereignty and sup-
porting NATO with a force presence in every single nation on
NATO’s Eastern Flank.
Iran threatens to push the Middle East yet again into instability
by supporting terrorists and proxy forces and they continue to im-
prove their capability to produce a nuclear weapon.
From the time of Iranian decision by the Supreme Leader Iran
could produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in less
than 2 weeks from time of decision and it would only take several
more months to produce an actual nuclear weapon.
The United States policy remains the same and the United
States remains committed that Iran will not have a nuclear weap-
on.
North Korea’s continued ballistic missile testing and nuclear
weapons development also pose threats to our homeland and our
allies and partners, but we stand with the Republic of Korea shoul-
der to shoulder to deter North Korean aggression as we have for
70 years.
Terrorists continue to operate around the globe, threatening fear,
destruction, and destabilization.
In short, the United States military stands ready to protect our
Nation’s interests and the American people.
We are currently standing watch on freedom’s frontier with near-
ly a quarter of a million, 250,000, deployed troops around the world
today, 5,000 sorties of United States Air Force and Naval and Ma-
rine aircraft and Army aircraft per day, a hundred ships at sea on
a given day, and we never fight alone.
A key source of our strength is our large network of alliance and
partnerships, and lastly our operational readiness rates are higher
now than they’ve been in many, many years.
Currently, 60 percent of our Active force is the highest states of
readiness and could deploy to combat in less than 30 days, well ex-
ceeding the minimum one-third standard we established many
years ago.
Ten percent of our force, 10 percent of the United States military
could deploy to combat in less than 96 hours. Examples of that, the
President of the United States a year ago ordered the United
States military to react to the unprovoked aggression by Russia.
We deployed one core, two divisions, three brigade combat teams
under the Army. We doubled the amount of fighter squadrons, and
we doubled the amount of ships and submarines in the European
theater of operations and we did that in 35 days. That doesn’t hap-
pen by accident.
Another example just a few weeks ago, the President ordered the
United States military to evacuate more than 70 governing per-
sonnel from Khartoum in a joint operation and so far the United
States along with our allies and partners have facilitated the de-
parture of more than 1,300 American citizens out of Sudan. That
operation put Naval Special Operations forces on the ground, deliv-
ered by Army Special Operations aircraft, with U.S. Air Force sup-
port above with fixed wing fighter bombers, Army Rangers and a
Quick Reaction Force, United States Marine Corps, and Vertical
Lift and Reserve, and five U.S. Naval vessels off the coast along
with National Guard in Djibouti ready to go.

---

201

That was a joint operation in support of 18th Airborne Corps and
the AFRICOM (Africa Command) Headquarters as part of a whole
of government effort to support the Department of State alongside
many of our allies.
All of that was planned, coordinated, synchronized, and executed
from a cold start. Our force can rapidly project flexible, responsive
power anywhere around the globe and no adversary should ever
doubt that.
Your military, the United States military, is ready. However, the
Joint Forces are at an inflection point and we must balance oper-
ations, readiness, and modernization. We must not allow ourselves
to create the false trap that we can either modernize or focus only
on today. We must do both. We must integrate advanced tech-
nologies, including precision long-range fires, hypersonic weapons,
quantum computing, artificial intelligence, robotics, and all the
main sensors.
The time is now. We have very little margin to wait and the com-
mon thread critical to all of this is our people. We must continue
investing in their training, their education, and their talent man-
agement.
I urge Congress to support this budget significant pay raise,
healthcare, housing, and childcare initiatives.
The only thing more expensive than preparing for war is actually
fighting a war. It is much cheaper to prevent war. This budget will
significantly improve our military’s current and future readiness in
order to prevent war. We must act with a sense of urgency to deter
war.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY
After 43 years in uniformed service, 4 years as Chief of Staff of the Army, and
3.5 years as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, this will be my last set of posture
hearings. I want to thank the Congress up front for your continued support to our
military, not only this year but every year for the last 4 decades. We would not have
a military without the generous support of the American people and their elected
representatives. Thank you for what you have done and, yet again, I ask that you
support this year’s request with an on-time budget approval.
I am honored to represent the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Guardians, and
their families of the United States Joint Force. They are the most lethal and capable
military in the world. Our troops are the best led, best equipped, and best trained
force anywhere because of your support. Side by side with our allies and partners,
250,000 American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Guardians are standing
watch on land, sea, air, and space in 158 countries and conducting operations every
day of the year to keep Americans safe.
The United States military is a key component of our national power. In concert
with our diplomatic corps, economic organizations, and democratic institutions, we
support efforts to sustain a stable and open international system. This hard and soft
power provides a range of options to this legislative body and the Commander-in-
Chief. Our strength deters adversaries and preserves peace. Although, if deterrence
fails, the United States military is prepared to fight and win against those who at-
tack the United States or our vital interests.
The Joint Force appreciates the work that our elected representatives do to en-
sure that we have the resources needed to train, equip, and man the force in order
to be ready. The increased level of military funding beyond last fiscal year will en-
sure we continue future modernization while simultaneously meeting the national
security readiness requirements of today.
The Joint Force will deliver modernization of our armed forces and security to the
people of the United States at the FY 2024 budget request of $842 billion. The peo-
ple of the United States, through this body, have committed significant funding and

---

202
we will work diligently to ensure it is spent prudently in the best interest of this
Nation. This budget will enable the investments and transformations necessary to
build the Joint Force of 2030 and beyond.
In alignment with the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and National Military
Strategy (NMS), this budget delivers a ready, agile, and capable Joint Force that
will defend the Nation, while taking care of our people, and working with our part-
ners and allies. There are direct linkages from the NDS and NMS to the Joint
Warfighting Concept (JWC) which describes how we will employ and succeed as a
Joint Force. The JWC is threat informed and fully integrated into our resourcing
and requirements processes to build the force required for the future.
Stable, predictable, and timely budgets are critical for this Nation’s defense. The
passage of these budgets enables proper planning, prioritization, and programmatic
investments necessary for continued progress. Continuing resolutions risk future
modernization and impair our ability to meet our missions.
Preventing great power war through readiness and deterrence is very expensive
but not as expensive as fighting a war and the only thing more expensive than
fighting a war is losing a war. This budget is a significant step in the right direction
to ensure that the United States military maintains the current readiness and de-
velops the future modernization necessary to deter war and, if deterrence fails, to
fight and win.
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT

The People’s Republic of China (PRC): War with the PRC is neither imminent nor
inevitable, however the potential for armed conflict is growing. The PRC remains
our #1 long-term geostrategic security challenge. Since the reforms of Deng Xiaoping
in 1979, the world has witnessed the greatest geopolitical shift in economic power
in over 100 years. In the wake of the PRC’s economic growth has come a rapidly
increasing PRC military capability. Using economic and military hard power, the
PRC’s goal is to revise the global international order by midcentury, and it intends
to be the regional hegemon in Asia within the next 10 years. Its intention is to ex-
ceed the United States’ military capability within the Western Pacific in the next
decade and to exceed the United States’ global military capability by 2049.
The PRC continues to take increasingly aggressive actions to reshape the Indo-
Pacific region and revise the global order. It is making significant economic invest-
ments in its military to improve technology and modernize its military forces. The
PRC continues to challenge the stability and security in the Pacific as well as across
the globe. Through economic coercion, the PRC is expanding its global footprint and
increasing its ability to project military power at range and scale. It is aggressively
modernizing its military in order to protect its authoritarian interests and are pre-
pared to use force if required. The PRC seeks to strengthen its hard power enabling
the PRC to coerce others with militarily might. These PRC actions continue to move
it down the path towards confrontation and potential conflict.
The PRC remains focused on revising the global international order by
midcentury. In short, the PRC continues to develop significant nuclear, space, cyber,
land, sea, and air capabilities. It is working every day to close the technology gap
with the United States and our allies. We must maintain our military superiority
over the PRC in all the domains of war if we are to preserve the great power peace
of the last 80 years. The PRC represents a real and growing national security chal-
lenge. This is a matter of national urgency.
History is not deterministic and war with the PRC is not inevitable. While the
PRC is clearly an increasingly capable strategic competitor, it is imperative that we
keep our relationship in competition and not in conflict. By maintaining a strong
military with overmatch against the PRC, we are postured to deter conflict with the
PRC. Through integrated deterrence, we will raise perceived costs to the PRC and
deter aggression. If deterrence fails, then we will end the conflict on terms favorable
to the United States.
Russia: Over 1 year ago, Russia undertook an illegal and unprovoked war against
Ukraine threatening peace and stability on the European continent—a peace that
ensures global stability and an international order where all nations can prosper.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in complete contradiction to the basic rules that un-
derline the United Nations Charter established at the end of World War II. Russia’s
war is a brazen assault against the free people of Ukraine and threatens to desta-
bilize all of Europe and beyond.
In response to this Russian war of choice, we are supporting Ukraine as it fights
to protect its sovereignty and supporting our NATO allies with a United States force
presence in every single nation on NATO’s eastern flank. Putin’s war of choice has
caused untold human suffering and terrorized a free country and its people. Putin

---

203
attempted to seize Kyiv, overthrow its government, and fracture the NATO alliance.
NATO remains more unified than ever, and Ukraine remains free and independent.
The Ukrainian people have demonstrated immense bravery and resilience and in-
spired the world. The international community has come together to ensure that
this unambiguous act of aggression by Russia does not go unanswered. This fight
is not just in Ukraine’s interests, it is in the global interest to protect the system
and rules that have prevented great power war since the conclusion of World War
II.
With the backing of the United States Congress, the United States is determined
to continue to support Ukraine with the means to defend themselves. The United
States has committed to provide Ukraine 160 155mm Howitzers, over 1,000,000
155mm artillery rounds, 38 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), a
Patriot air defense battery, 8 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems
(NASAMS), 31 Abrams tanks, and 109 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles.
A broad mix of air defense systems protect the skies over Kyiv and the cities of
Ukraine. Armor systems strengthen Ukrainian front lines enabling offensive and de-
fense operations. Ukrainians employ long range fires to challenge Russian command
and control and its ability to sustain Russian aggression. These systems will enable
Ukraine to ensure that Russia does not achieve its strategic objectives. Russia failed
in its initial war aims and continues to revise its strategic goals due to its sustained
operational failures. Russia continues to pay extremely heavy costs on the battle-
field.
Last year, in Poland, we established the first permanent United States installa-
tion on NATO’s eastern flank. The United States maintains significant numbers of
combat capable forces in Europe to deter aggression and to stand shoulder to shoul-
der with our allies and partners.
Russia retains a large nuclear capability to threaten the United States, Europe,
and the globe. Vladimir Putin and his regime continue to use irresponsible nuclear
rhetoric and posturing. Russia has repeatedly demonstrated its capability and will
to conduct complex malicious cyber activities targeting American digital infrastruc-
ture, both military and commercial.
Through private military companies, Russia continues to undermine other na-
tions’ sovereignty and create unstable security situations. Aside from its brutal war
in Ukraine, Moscow’s actions in Africa and the Middle East demonstrate its aggres-
siveness, resourcefulness, and opportunism. Russia is an immediate acute and very
dangerous challenge to the United States’ national security.
North Korea: Its continued weapons testing and development pose real threats to
our homeland as well as allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific. North Korea’s rhet-
oric is becoming increasingly aggressive as it is growing more confrontational and
continues to enhance its ballistic missile capability and capacity. Pyongyang shows
no signs of relenting in its focus on its Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) pro-
gram at the expense of its citizens and the peace of the Korean Peninsula as well
as the entire region. Readiness of United States military forces on the Korean Pe-
ninsula and our ability to rapidly respond to provocation ensure stability and pre-
vent war.
Iran: Iran’s support for and involvement in conflicts in the region and its neigh-
bors threaten to push the Middle East into broader regional instability and chaos.
Through its funding of terrorist activities and support to partner and proxy forces
inside the borders of its neighbors, along with its ballistic missile programs, Iran
seeks to revise the regional order and balance of power in its favor. Iran’s prolifera-
tion of UAVs across the region and into Russia pose critical security challenges for
the United States and our partners. Iran is taking actions to improve its capabilities
to produce a nuclear weapon, should it make the decision to do so, while continuing
to build its missile forces. From the time of a national decision, Iran could produce
enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in approximately 10–15 days and it
would only take several months to produce an actual nuclear weapon. The United
States remains committed, as a matter of policy, that Iran will not have a nuclear
weapon. The United States military has developed multiple options for our national
leadership to consider, if or when Iran decides to develop a nuclear weapon.
Violent extremist organizations: Terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, ISIS,
Al-Shabaab, and others continue to export terror, destruction, and destabilization.
Unless the root causes of instability that give rise to these types of groups are re-
solved, terrorists will continue to take root around the globe, threaten others with
attacks, and undermine legitimate governments. The root causes can only be effec-
tively addressed by including governments of the region and we can best influence
outcomes with diplomatic, economic, information, stability, and counterterrorism ef-
forts. Through coalition efforts to train, advise, and assist partners and allies as
well as intelligence sharing, we will continue to ensure that terrorists do not possess

---

204
the capacity and capability to exert their will. Our counterterrorism strategy is to
work by, with, and through our regional allies and partners and to conduct direct
action counterterrorism strikes when necessary to protect the United States or our
interests.
Allies and partners: Our alliances and partnerships are key to maintaining the
rules based international order and a stable and open international system pro-
moting peace and prosperity. This budget allows us to build our partners’ and allies’
capabilities, foster interoperability, and strengthen relationships. Doing so allows
us, our allies, and our partners to counter the coercion of our strategic competitors,
oppose the malign activity of regional threats, and meet the varied security chal-
lenges posed by state and non-state actors. We are stronger when we operate closely
with our allies and partners.
READINESS AND MODERNIZATION

Right now, we are experiencing a fundamental change in the character of war.
The character of war—how, where, and with what weapons and technologies wars
are fought—is changing significantly. We must fully integrate developing tech-
nologies including precision long range fires, hypersonic weapons, quantum com-
puting, artificial intelligence, robotics, and pervasive all-domain sensors.
The current rapidly changing technology will provide decisive advantage to the
nations that can integrate and optimize the capabilities into military weaponry, doc-
trine, training, organization, and professional development. The future operating en-
vironment will be highly lethal and will be characterized by the ability to see and
sense the environment like never before. The attributes of the future Joint Force
will be characterized by stealth, resilience, and speed with agile, adaptive units op-
erating in a constant state of motion. Most importantly, the Joint Force will be high-
ly lethal. Our leaders and forces will operate independently and distributed in de-
graded communication environments with mission type orders and austere logistics.
Continued modernization is imperative for the Joint Force. Building the Joint
Force required to implement our National Defense Strategy demands modernizing
our capabilities, design, and employment. We must not allow ourselves to create the
false trap that we can either modernize or focus only on today. We must do both.
The United States has always had the advantage of time to conduct a long build
up prior to the beginning of hostilities. Our fortunate geography with oceans on our
east and west borders and friendly neighbors to our north and south have given us
the strategic advantage of buffer zones to threats. With advances in technology and
a growing global interconnectedness, we will no longer have the luxury of a long
protected buildup prior to conflict. It is imperative that we have a modern advanced
force in sufficient size and readiness to enable sustained deterrence and, if required,
to be able to fight and win. We must make some fundamental changes to our Joint
Force in order to leverage our military overmatch to deter conflict in a future oper-
ating environment.
Our strategic competitors are modernizing their militaries, weapons, and capa-
bility. We must continue to modernize ours; we have no choice. We must divest leg-
acy systems to enable our modernization.
In the fall of 2019, the Secretary of Defense tasked the Joint Staff to develop the
Joint Warfighting Concept (JWC) to address strategic conflict. This year, after ex-
tensive wargaming, the Joint Staff published the third iteration of JWC and will
integrate the ideas into new joint doctrine, Joint Publication 1 to be published this
summer. Today, JWC is the unifying vision to guide future force design, force devel-
opment, and force employment to ensure we have the right people, equipment,
training, roles, and doctrine. It will continue to incorporate evolving threats to help
us shape our strategic environment and future operations. JWC 3.0 contains an up-
dated description of the overarching military challenges facing the Joint Force, a re-
fined explanation of the military solution—expanded maneuver—and a detailed de-
scription of how the Joint Force will apply this solution. This version of the JWC
includes greater fidelity on key warfighting concepts and more precision on the oper-
ational approaches that will enable the Joint Force to gain positions of advantage
against peer adversaries.
Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2) is a warfighting capability to
sense, make sense, and act at all levels and phases of war, across all domains, and
with partners, to deliver information advantage at speed to our forces and decision
makers.
We are revising our leader development Joint Professional Military Education
(JPME) to support the JWC. We are modernizing our JPME curriculum to develop
strategically minded joint warfighters, who think critically and can creatively apply
military power. Our focus remains on instructing mission command, operational

---

205
agility, and ethics to ensure our military leaders can effectively employ forces at all
levels of warfare and respond to a dynamic battlefield. Additionally, we are increas-
ing the amount of JPME devoted to the study of the changing character of war and
Great Power Competition.
We are focused on building a more lethal Joint Force by ensuring that we con-
tinue to modernize our concepts, doctrine, training, and military education. We must
continue to invest in capabilities that sustain our military overmatch, while
strengthening alliances and attracting new partners. Investments in this budget en-
sure the Joint Force can execute all requirements leveed by our Nation. The invest-
ments made in this budget will ensure that we remain a capable and ready force
while funding our priorities of nuclear modernization, long range fires, hypersonic
technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, shipbuilding, space, and cyber.
Nuclear modernization: The nuclear triad is the foundation of our strategic deter-
rent. Our adversaries are improving their nuclear posture and potential nuclear
threats continue to emerge. It remains critical that all three legs of the triad—
bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarines—remain a viable deter-
rent and allow us to hedge against geopolitical, technological, operational, and pro-
grammatic risks. Our legacy systems have been extended well beyond their original
service lives and we must recapitalize our nuclear enterprise. Modernizing the nu-
clear triad will cost 3.7% of the Defense budget at its peak not including DOE/
NNSA warhead modernization. Costs will be significant but relatively less burden-
some on the overall Defense budget relative to previous recapitalization efforts.
Modernization of our nuclear forces, weapons complexes, and requisite nuclear com-
mand, control, and communications (NC3) capabilities are a high priority.
Long range fires: The war in Ukraine highlights the strategic and devastating ef-
fect provided by long range fires. The Joint Force must have a long range strike
capability without having to also maintain air superiority. Long range fires provide
significant offensive capabilities that are both cost-effective and cost-imposing
means of improving deterrence. By enabling power projection from standoff ranges,
the risk to critical United States assets decreases while the defensive burden im-
posed upon the enemy increases. These fires challenge an adversary’s logistics, com-
mand and control, and basing forcing them to choose between increased risk or de-
creased effectiveness. The PRC has thousands of ground-launched theater-range
missiles in its arsenal that would be difficult for the United States to counter given
its current inventories. Investments in long range and hypersonic missiles launched
from ground, sea, and air platforms are a cost-effective strategy that improves our
ability to compete with the PRC. Recent budget requests have enhanced the
lethality and resilience of the Joint Force by developing and expanding the long-
range fires portfolio.
Hypersonic technology: Our adversaries are undertaking hypersonic weapons test-
ing and development from a variety of delivery platforms. These weapons operate
at speeds greater than Mach 5 and are maneuverable, which make the weapons
challenging to detect and defeat. Weapons operating at these speeds will provide
significant offensive capability that will challenge an opponent’s decision timelines.
We must invest in this technology to provide a suite of capabilities that provide
transformational warfighting capability to our Joint Force.
Artificial intelligence and robotics: Decision making in warfare is fundamental to
the outcome. Militaries must be able to collect, analyze, and assess vast quantities
of data in order to make effective decisions. The military that can iterate through
the decisionmaking framework fastest will have decisive advantage. Artificial intel-
ligence has the potential to reform military decisionmaking processes at the tactical,
operational, and strategic levels of war to enable rapid assessments and decisions
that outpace human abilities. Additionally, artificial intelligence combined with new
military platforms could enable the proliferation of robots across the battlefield. Ro-
bots in the land, sea, and air domains could provide significant quantities of fire-
power, logistics, and communications capabilities while decreasing risks to our mili-
tary forces. Through human-machine teaming, each human warfighter would have
exponentially increased abilities to shoot, move, and communicate in battle to pre-
vail over the enemy.
Legacy platform divestment: Maintaining and operating weapons that are not rel-
evant in the future fight and whose capabilities are matched by superior technology
need to be divested. Continuing to purchase and maintain legacy equipment takes
needed Defense dollars away from the acquisition of higher priority systems nec-
essary for modernization. I strongly urge Congress to enact legislation that author-
izes the Department to divest select legacy platforms to ensure that every Defense
dollar spent on programs and equipment is relevant for the next fight. We must not
be influenced by a sunk cost bias, and we cannot continue to mortgage our future
by being wedded to technology of the past.

---

206
Shipbuilding: The United States Navy must always be the world’s most powerful
naval force in capacity and capability. We must never accept 2nd place in naval
power. We are a maritime nation and the vast majority of international trade moves
across the world’s oceans. The United States is committed to a free and open global
maritime common. Manufacturing our warships overseas is a strategic risk and is
not in our national interest. Our shipbuilding and supporting industrial base are a
national security capability that needs support to grow and maintain a skilled work-
force. The FY 2024 President’s Budget reflects the Administration’s strong commit-
ment to continued American naval dominance, including improvements to our in-
dustrial base to meet the demands of our current and future defense needs. This
Nation must have the right ships, with the right crews, and the right capabilities
on the right timelines in the theaters where they matter. This budget specifically
procures warships and submarines with credible combat power to deter the PRC.
We must continue to invest in the industrial base to support remotely operated ship
development, fleet modernization, on time delivery of the COLUMBIA class sub-
marine, and to accelerate production and maintenance of VIRGINIA class sub-
marines to support both the United States and AUKUS needs.
Recapitalization of the sealift fleet is necessary to enable joint power projection.
Sealift ships transport 90% of war material and supplies in support of major combat
operations. The DoD sealift fleet is approaching the end of its useful life with an
average age of 48 years. Our overall sealift readiness rate is consistently below our
stated requirements. I urge Congress to remove all limitations on the Department’s
ability to procure additional used vessels to replace these aging ships.
Space: Space is essential to our way of life. Space capabilities are vital to our
economy, quality of life, exploration initiatives, and national security. Every year we
see additional commercial space launches and increased competition for lower earth
orbit.
Our adversaries view space as a warfighting domain and believe that achieving
supremacy in this arena will be a decisive factor in winning future conflicts. The
exosphere is already contested as Russia has tested both a ground-based anti-sat-
ellite missile and an on-orbit anti-satellite weapon prototype, which threaten our
space capabilities. Both the PRC and Russia view counterspace capabilities as a
means to reduce United States and allied military effectiveness. Additionally, our
adversaries have demonstrated space-jamming capabilities and maintain inde-
pendent launch capabilities. Left unsecured, our capabilities in space will become
strategic vulnerabilities. I urge Congress to support the significant increase in this
budget for United States space capabilities.
Cyber: Adversaries continue to use operations in the cyber domain to compete
with the United States and attempt to gain an information advantage. Malign cyber
actors exploit commercial software vulnerabilities to gain network access and con-
duct cyber operations against United States citizens, organizations, and institutions.
The low-cost barrier to entry and attribution deniability make this a priority method
for adversaries to compete below the level of armed conflict while minimizing risk
of escalation. The PRC, Russia, Iran, and North Korea use a range of cyber capabili-
ties from information operations (IO) to cyber-attacks to collect intelligence, position
for future operations, impose costs, and signal to the United States and adversaries.
Therefore, we must increase our ability to compete and prevail in cyberspace
while ensuring all elements of informational power are integrated into operations,
activities, and efforts to deter our adversaries and protect the United States home-
land. This requires investments in technology, building and maturing cyber readi-
ness and operations, reducing risk to weapon systems and critical infrastructure,
strengthening cybersecurity, and improving network resiliency.
Advanced Capabilities: The changing character of war necessitates that we con-
tinue to modernize and innovate our technology, capabilities, and training. Data and
communication networks are fundamental to how the United States trains, plans,
and employs force. We must have rapid and robust linkages from sensors to shoot-
ers in a networked information environment. This will require investments in micro-
electronics and quantum computing to ensure we maintain a technological edge over
our adversaries. The current globally distributed supply chains as well as access to
critical materials and rare earth metals present vulnerabilities to the Joint Force’s
ability to acquire necessary parts and technology in the event of crisis. We must also
find ways to deepen collaboration on advanced capabilities with our closest allies
and partners, such as our trilateral cooperation under AUKUS.
TAKING CARE OF OUR PEOPLE

People are our most important resource in the Joint Force. We must ensure that
we are doing all that we can to take care of and guard our most critical resource.

---

207
Taking care of people is a critical readiness issue and it decisively impacts unit co-
hesion, recruitment, retention, and confidence in leadership.
To attract, grow, and retain the best talent in the world, we must ensure that
we are always taking care of our people. I urge Congress to support this budget’s
significant pay raise, healthcare, and housing initiatives. Additionally, this budget
strengthens our accountability and prevention measures for sexual harassment and
sexual assault. Finally, this budget supports improving our mental health and sui-
cide prevention programs. Each of these initiatives is fundamental to taking care
of our troops and their families.
We are ensuring that the military departments increase their childcare capacity,
and the DoD system remains the gold standard of childcare. The DoD operates the
country’s largest employer-sponsored childcare program, with over 27,000 staff
members providing daily care for more than 160,000 children from infancy up to age
12. This fiscal year, the DoD is making a significant investment in constructing new
child development centers as well as repairing, renovating, and maintaining existing
child development centers to ensure our children are in safe and well-maintained
facilities. Funding support from Congress is vital for fully staffed military childcare,
and to support efforts to expand capacity in the community. Childcare is key to
keeping working families working, reducing the high unemployment faced by mili-
tary spouses, and ensuring the safety of our military children. Despite the childcare
capacity and quality provided by the DoD there are still challenges for military fam-
ilies to access that care or quality care in the community.
This budget equips our service members and families with the tools, skills, and
resources necessary to ensure their health and well-being. The health and wellness
of our force is a readiness, retention, and recruitment issue.
The Joint Force is committed to growing our talent and ensuring that all who
meet the requirements to serve are able to serve. The Joint Force competes for the
talent of America’s youth along with every other business and organization who
seeks our Nation’s best and brightest. The Joint Force’s objective is to field the most
lethal and combat effective fighting force in the world. We will continue to support
the accessions of all qualified people to all jobs and positions within the Joint Force.
CONCLUSION

The United States Joint Force is a flexible and adaptable force ready to deter,
fight, and win our Nation’s wars. Significant threats exist across the globe and the
United States is ready to respond to these challenges. The PRC continues its aggres-
sive attempts to revise the global order for its own benefits. It is building up its
military might to achieve its goals through the use of force. With its illegal and
unprovoked war in Ukraine, Russia attempted to overturn the rules based inter-
national order and fracture NATO. Russia’s war of aggression and nuclear rhetoric
is irresponsible and risks miscalculation and escalation.
International aggression, where large countries use military force to attack small-
er countries and change recognized borders, cannot be allowed to stand. The Joint
Force will continue to work with the interagency and in cooperation with our allies
and partners to deter aggression and threats to the free world. America’s network
of allies and partners is a strategic source of strength. It is this robust network, this
team of teams, that stands against those autocratic, revanchist, and revisionist re-
gimes that are uninterested in a connected and prosperous world.
It is within this framework that it is imperative we modernize our force, training,
and doctrine to remain the most capable and ready force on the planet. The United
States has been challenged before by many other adversaries. Yet, conflict is not in-
evitable—our military might makes war less likely by allowing us to deter across
the spectrum of conflict. Our contract with the American people is that we, the
United States military, will always be ready to protect the Constitution and the fun-
damental principles of what it means to be American. We will always protect and
defend this experiment in liberty, to deter our enemies, and, if deterrence fails, then
to fight and win.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Milley.
To the members of the committee, everybody, almost everybody
on this committee is going to participate today. So there will be 5-
minute rounds. I would ask you to keep it as close to 5 minutes
as you can.
I would ask the distinguished panelists to be as thorough and
succinct with your answers as possible.

---

208

I’m going to start talking about continuing resolutions and their
ineffectiveness. No corporation in the world would restrict their
cash flow for the development or production of programs at the
start of a fiscal year. Yet, in the business of national security some
would say for our most important business we do just that.
So, Secretary Austin, if another CR is enacted for this fiscal year
2024, what programs are you most concerned about?
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly I’m concerned about all of the
new starts that we won’t be able to perfect because of a CR.
You lose time, Chairman, under CRs and you can’t—no amount
of money can buy back time. Again, you can’t start new programs.
I would point out that the PRC is not waiting. They will execute
on their own timeline. I pointed out earlier, Chairman, that our
budget is directly linked to our strategy and, of course, if we don’t
have a budget, we can’t effectively execute that strategy.
So if we look at the investments that we’re looking to make in
fighter aircraft, you know, I mentioned earlier there’s the $61 bil-
lion in our investment in our Air Force, what we’re asking for $48
billion in our Naval Forces, those kinds of things we won’t be able
to get after because of continuing resolution.
So I think the best way that the Congress can support us in our
efforts to execute our strategy is an on-time appropriations.
Senator TESTER. Inflation is real and it’s a concern. This is an
$842 billion budget.
Have you guys been able to put any sort of numbers to determine
how much a CR would cost us?
Secretary AUSTIN. Certainly, it would depend on how long that
CR is in effect, Chairman, and I defer to Mike McCord there for
any concrete numbers, but this is something that we’ll continue to
evaluate on a daily, weekly, monthly basis if we have to go to a
CR, but it will cost us money.
Senator TESTER. Okay. Mike, would you like to comment to that?
Mr. MCCORD. Chairman, we’ve built significant funding into this
budget to account for the inflation we project, including the pay
raises the Secretary described, and that approach is $40 billion. A
CR, by definition, doesn’t give us any of that, right. It keeps our
top line where it was last year which is about a $25 billion reduc-
tion and inflation is a significant hit there as are things like the
Columbia and all three legs of the Triad.
Senator TESTER. Secretary Austin, I want you to talk about how
a potential government default would impact your ongoing efforts.
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly it would impact our reputation
worldwide. You know, we are known for being very dependable,
paying our bills on time, and a source of stability globally.
What it would mean realistically for us is that we won’t in some
cases be able to pay our troops with any degree of predictability
and that predictability is really, really important for us.
But this would have a real impact on the pockets of our troops
and our civilians.
Senator TESTER. General Milley, some would say that the depart-
ment has gotten used to dealing with CRs, so they’re no big deal.
How do you respond to that?
General MILLEY. Thanks, Chairman. There’s several key things
to that. First is current operations and readiness. I think you’d see

---

209

it and we’ve done this drill many times, run the numbers, you’d see
a significant degradation in the readiness of the force. The force
that I just rattled off to you that’s ready today, you’d see that de-
preciate over time. So your numbers of rotations at the CTCs (Com-
bat Training Center), for example, for the Army here in D.C., the
number of Red Flags, the number of Top Guns, all of those events
would start being attrited over time.
You’d start seeing the number of flying hours, the 5,000 sorties
I mentioned upfront per day, that would be cut down by a certain
percentage, depends on how long the CR went. So you’d see flying
hours for both rotor wing and fixed wing helicopters go down.
You’d see sailing time, those hundred ships that I said are sail-
ing the seven seas right now, you’d have to cut that back because
of fuel costs. So there’d be significant current operations and then
for future readiness, future modernization, the Secretary men-
tioned the new starts. You’d also probably see some delays in some
of the nuclear recapitalization. The Columbia could be at risk a lit-
tle bit, I think.
You could see that B–21 that was just rolled out in California not
too long ago, things like that would be stretched out long-term. So
it’s a terrible way to do business. I’m not a businessman, but it’s
a terrible way to run a business when you’re doing basically budg-
ets for 9 months at a time if you do a CR for 3 months.
So it would have, I think, very, very significant negative impact
on the readiness and then, of course, future readiness but also
there’s the imponderable, the immeasurable one, which is morale.
It sends a terrible signal to our soldiers, our sailors, airmen, Ma-
rines around the world when we do these CRs.
So it always leaves people in a sense of uncertainty and then it
sends a terrible message to our allies and partners and our adver-
saries around the world. So I think it’s significant.
Senator TESTER. Thank you.
Senator Collins.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let’s assume that we do achieve our goal of enacting the DoD
(Department of Defense) appropriations bill on time. If we use the
Administration’s estimate for fuel costs, which the Government Ac-
countability Office underestimates costs by 20 percent, General
Milley, absent some relief from Congress, how would military read-
iness be affected in terms of the department’s flying hours, training
exercises, and other activities needed to stay within the 20 percent
shortfall?
General MILLEY. Well, I think there’s a direct relation. If it’s 20
percent shortfall in fuel, you’re going to have 20 percent less flying
hours because all these aircraft, ships, as well, and ground vehi-
cles, tanks and much infantry fighting vehicles. They all rely on
fuel.
The Department of Defense is the biggest fuel consumer in the
United States. So we would end up reducing the amount of oper-
ational tempo of our vehicle fleets, whether ground or air, and the
specific number of hours, we’ve done the math, and I’d have to get
back to you for the record on the specific number of hours they
would have. It would depend on how long and how deep the CR

---

210

was, but it would have significant impact on flying hours, driving
miles per vehicle, and the sailing of the ships.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you.
Secretary Austin, General Milley correctly noted in his statement
when he was discussing Iran that Iran would only take several
more months to produce an actual nuclear weapon and he goes on
to say that the United States remains committed as a matter of
policy that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.
What are some of the policies that the Administration is pur-
suing to prevent Iran from developing very quickly a nuclear weap-
on?
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, from a military perspective, you know,
my responsibility is to make sure that is our policy. Iran will not
have a nuclear weapon.
My responsibility is to make sure that the President has options
available to him to enforce that policy and so we remain focused
on making sure that those options remain available and they are.
Senator COLLINS. All right. I’ll move on to a different issue.
In January, the department announced that 31 Abrams tanks
would be delivered to Ukraine. The latest information I have is
that that will not occur until this fall, is that accurate? Could you
update us on what the current delivery schedule is and whether
there’s any way to accelerate the delivery of these tanks to
Ukraine?
Secretary AUSTIN. Thanks, Vice Chair. We are doing everything
possible to accelerate the delivery of these tanks and early fall is
a projection.
In the meantime, we’ve moved a number of tanks over into the-
ater so that the Ukrainians can begin training on this capability
and when they complete that—by the time they complete that
training, the tanks will be available for them to use.
We’re putting in the infrastructure to be able to sustain and sup-
port this capability, as well. As you know, this is a different capa-
bility, turbine engine, and a number of pretty sophisticated sys-
tems. We’re moving as fast as possible to get the capability in the
hands of the Ukrainians and will certainly have that available by
early fall.
Senator COLLINS. Another threat to the United States is a ter-
rorist attack. I think with our focus on China and Russia and Iran,
North Korea, we can’t lose sight of the fact that Afghanistan is
once again a safe haven for many terrorist groups.
General Kurilla testified before the Armed Services Committee
that ISIS–K will likely be capable of conducting operations outside
of Afghanistan within 6 months and that that would come with lit-
tle or no warning.
I know that the United States military made an effort to take
most of its weapons and ammunition out of Afghanistan when our
troops left, but the fact is that approximately $7 billion worth of
valuable useful military equipment provided to the Afghan Security
Forces by the United States remains in that country.
Are you concerned about the fact that the weapons that the
Americans gave to the Security Forces could now be turned against
us and our Western allies in a terrorist attack?

---

211

Secretary AUSTIN. Vice Chair, you accurately described what
we’re looking at in terms of that equipment. The equipment that
the United States troops were using was retrograded by General
Miller and his staff when the decision was made to retrograde our
troops out of Afghanistan. So we closed 11 bases, brought out thou-
sands of tons of equipment that we were using that was equipment
for our forces, and that retrograde was done very successfully.
As you know, over 20 years we did a lot to provide capability to
the Afghan military and that over time turned out to be quite a
bit of equipment.
Now when that government collapsed and when the Security
Forces laid down their arms, then that material became available
to the Taliban. So, yes, that equipment is still in Afghanistan, but
again its equipment that we had provided to their forces, their Se-
curity Forces, and not the equipment that we left behind because
we couldn’t retrograde it.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins.
Senator Murray.
Senator MURRAY. Well, thank you very much, Chair Tester, Vice
Chairman Collins.
I’m really glad that we are continuing to hold these really impor-
tant hearings and move closer to finally getting the committee back
to regular order. So I appreciate it.
We’ve made good progress, but we have to stay the course if
we’re going to pass our Nation’s funding bills in a timely manner.
We know that our competitors, like the Chinese Government, are
doing everything they can to gain ground. So we cannot afford to
let our efforts get sidetracked and our investments fall behind.
Our military needs the certainty of a regular and smooth appro-
priations process that they can depend on. So I’m really glad to
have this opportunity to hear from Secretary Austin about the re-
sources needed to support our service members and keep our Na-
tion safe, including support for our military families, like good
housing and schools, mental healthcare, childcare, and a lot more,
because, as I have said, our most important military asset isn’t our
weapons or our equipment, it is the brave and talented women and
men who are willing to put their lives on the line to keep our coun-
try safe.
So we owe it to them to work together across the aisle, get our
job done, get our government funded without drama, and get them
the support they need.
So, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. Let me start
with a really important topic. Our Nation’s suicide crisis is dev-
astating and we see serious risk among our servicemembers. The
latest report on suicide in the military shows a steady increase
over the past decade and we finally saw a small decrease in 2021
but there’s still a lot of work to be done.
Secretary Austin, you have previously noted how the stress
caused by the unpredictability of life in the military, the demand
for troops to confront so many threats abroad, real challenges ac-
cessing counseling, all contribute to this problem.

---

212

I understand the department is facing challenges hiring enough
specialists to provide servicemembers with access to mental
healthcare and counseling.
Can you tell us what steps you are taking to increase hiring so
servicemembers have access to mental healthcare?
Secretary AUSTIN. This is something that’s very, very important
to me. You’ve heard me talk about this. This is something that re-
mains very important to me. You’ve heard me talk about this a
number of times.
Mental health is health, period, and I think we have to continue
to maintain that outlook towards taking care of our troops.
I just had all our senior leaders, both uniform and civilian, in for
a senior leader session, and this was one topic that was prominent
in that session.
I’m asking you for $200 million in this budget plus to devote to
suicide prevention which includes increasing access to mental
healthcare and I am really emphasizing to leadership that we need
to do everything possible to make sure that we’re working with,
you know, the civilian capabilities in our communities to make sure
that we have access to those, to increase the capacity that’s avail-
able to us.
But we will remain sited on this and you’re right, we did see an
improvement in 2021. We’re going to work hard to see if we can
continue to improve, but this remains a challenge and access to
mental healthcare is fundamental to this challenge.
Senator MURRAY. Thank you and we need to follow up on that.
I appreciate it.
Let me change the topic. As you know, the Navy is sending a nu-
clear-armed submarine to South Korea for the first time since the
1980s and the USS George Washington will replace the USS Ron-
ald Reagan in Japan so it can head to Bremerton, Washington, for
maintenance.
These naval assets will only become more important as the U.S.
works to strengthen our partnerships and support allies through-
out the Indo-Pacific.
Maintaining this fleet is really paramount to our success and the
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is really vital, as you know, to the
maintenance work.
PSNS (Puget Sound Naval Shipyard) is the only shipyard on the
West Coast with Nimitz and Ford Class capable of dry dock and
it’s responsible for the maintenance of the majority of the West
Coast-based attack submarines. Those dry docks are currently vul-
nerable to seismic activity.
Secretary Austin, I am disappointed that despite knowing about
the need to address those seismic issues, it was left out of the
budget request this year.
How is the department ensuring this multiyear project is and
will continue to be a top priority for the Navy?
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, thanks and thanks for your continued
support on this issue.
First of all, let me emphasize that the safety of our personnel
and the protection of our assets is very important to the depart-
ment.

---

213

When we experienced a challenge with the—because of the seis-
mic activity recently, as you know, we rapidly deployed assessment
teams to assess damage and also to outline steps that are nec-
essary to get our capability back up and running. We have a high
standard for safety and we have done that work and we are bring-
ing those assets back online.
In this budget, Chair, I’m asking you for $2.7 billion to continue
to invest in our infrastructure. That’s in the SIOP (Shipyard Infra-
structure Optimization Program) Program and we will continue to
invest in this in future budget requests, as well.
Senator MURRAY. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Moran.
Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you, Chairman.
Secretary, thank you for your presence and your service.
Mr. Secretary, what’s your explanation? How do we solve the
problem with recruitment? What’s the cause for the failure for
young men and women to sign up? It strikes me that it’s something
that needs to be defined. I know at Fort Riley, we have the greatest
level of retention of any military installation but recruitment is
down.
So retention is there but not recruitment. What’s your story?
Secretary AUSTIN. There are a number of challenges that have
come together, Senator, to create headwinds. Foremost among
those challenges is 2 years of COVID.
As you well know, sir, recruiters spend a lot of time interacting
with prospective recruits at schools and so their access to schools
is pretty important. If they don’t have that access for 2 years, then
it certainly creates a challenge for us.
You add that to the fact that we’ve seen the lowest unemploy-
ment rate in decades and so there are a number of things that
have combined to create the challenge.
It’s not the first time that we’ve seen challenges in recruiting, as
you know. When I was in the military, I was a recruiter for a pe-
riod of time and I know that the things that you have to do to im-
prove, Number 1, you have to increase contact with your prospect,
you have to invest in advertising and marketing, you have to have
the right quality of recruiters out engaging the public, you have to
engage centers of influence, like yourself and other key leaders in
the community, and all of those things our services are working to
up their activity in all of those areas and I’m optimistic that, you
know, this trough that we entered because of the effects of COVID
and other things we’ll climb out of and we’re seeing some positive
trends and we’ll continue to do the right things and invest in the
right things to make sure that gets turned around.
Senator MORAN. Well, as you know, our capabilities of defending
our country rest solely with the men and women who serve in uni-
form. I wish you well in those efforts and any way that I and I’m
sure my colleagues can be of help to get folks to sign up, please
include me. Please ask.
Secretary AUSTIN. I would ask—make one strong request and
that is that we all emphasize the value of service and whether or
not you serve in the military or whether or not you serve your com-
munity or you serve as a member of the Federal Government, serv-

---

214

ice is really important, but certainly hearing that from key leader-
ship in the country I think would help this overall effort.
Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir.
Let me ask you about the National Guard. We’ve seen how im-
portant the National Guard is, what role they play in defending
our Nation. The National Guard makes up 20 percent of the Joint
Force, but the National Guard Vice Chief is the only vice chief
that’s a three star.
Thoughts about if that’s appropriate or is there a plan to remedy
that circumstance.
Secretary AUSTIN. I agree with you, Senator, that the National
Guard is critical to our overall department, to the Department of
Defense.
I can’t overemphasize, you know, the capability that they bring
to the force. This is something—you know, our structure and the
number of billets that we have is something that we continue to
evaluate.
I have all the authorities that I need. I don’t need any authority,
additional authorities or help, but that’s something we’ll continue
to look at as we go from year to year into the future and right now
I don’t see the need to effect any changes.
Senator MORAN. Well, thank you for your consideration.
Finally, Secretary Austin, my time is about to expire. Congress
last year—so I’ll just make this point. Congress passed the PACT
(Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics) Act dealing with toxic
exposure by our service men and women. We have significant chal-
lenges of families and servicemembers who are impacted by con-
taminated drinking water at Red Hill and if the department has
not established an exposure registry, I encourage you to do so and
I hope that this budget has the resources necessary to care for
those servicemembers and their families.
Secretary AUSTIN. We have established a registry and so thank
you, Senator.
Senator MORAN. You’re welcome. General Milley, thank you for
your service, appreciate you very much.
Senator TESTER. Senator Durbin.
Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General Milley, you’ve served our Nation well and when the his-
tory is written of your service, it will clearly recognize that America
was safer under your watch and the troops you led had an effective
and caring leader under your command, but this history may not
tell the whole story unless you write it of your fidelity to our Con-
stitution when there were serious questions of the peaceful transi-
tion of power which is essential to the preservation of our democ-
racy.
Because of you, our Constitution and our Union survived and we
are stronger today. Thank you.
Secretary Austin, yesterday I had a meeting in my office of sev-
eral Senators with a man named Kareem Khan. He is the chief
prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. He recently
charged Vladimir Putin with war crimes. We know what he’s bas-
ing that on, the unspeakable atrocities caused by the Russian
forces in Ukraine, stealing, kidnapping hundreds, if not thousands

---

215

of children, rape, beheadings, torture, mass executions, and tar-
geting individual private citizens for his bombardment.
Ukraine’s Prosecutor general has documented more than 77,000
war crimes and crimes against humanity. Sadly, the number con-
tinues to grow.
When I met with Kareem Khan I asked him if there was more
the United States could do to help him gather the evidence and
documents necessary to prosecute Vladimir Putin for these awful
war crimes. He said three was cooperation from the Department of
State, the Department of Justice, but he did not include the Sec-
retary of Defense and your department.
Khan’s efforts regarding war crimes are so important that Con-
gress last year passed additional authority allowing the U.S. to
share critical war crimes evidence and intelligence with the Inter-
national Court of Criminal Justice.
We have one president, we have one commander-in-chief, but I’m
not certain that we have one policy when it comes to the War
Criminal Vladimir Putin.
I’d like to ask you directly. Why are you reluctant to share the
evidence that we have gathered in the United States through the
Department of Defense from those who are holding Vladimir Putin
accountable for his war crimes?
Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, Senator.
I absolutely agree with what you said in terms of the atrocities
that we’ve witnessed throughout. It’s been absolutely despicable
and we continue to see evidence of Putin deliberately targeting ci-
vilians, hospitals, and apartment buildings and you name it.
The department firmly supports the goal of holding Russia ac-
countable for its violations in Ukraine. There are multiple ways to
promote accountability, including the domestic Ukrainian efforts
that you mentioned, and I believe in a principled approach to pro-
moting accountability.
I will always prioritize the protection of U.S. military personnel
in anything that we do.
Senator DURBIN. So why is your department not sharing evi-
dence that we have gathered to help that effort? The Department
of State is. The Department of Justice is. Why is the Department
of Defense not doing so?
Secretary AUSTIN. Senator, I will just tell you that, you know, it’s
important to us to make sure that Russia is held accountable and
we support the goal of holding him accountable, but again I do
have concerns about reciprocity going forward and so we will con-
tinue to look for ways to support the effort of holding Russia ac-
countable.
Senator DURBIN. Are you aware of the additional authorities we
created by law that allow your department and the others of this
government to cooperate with the ICC (International Criminal
Court)?
Secretary AUSTIN. I am aware of the legislation, Senator.
Senator DURBIN. Do you feel there is a deficiency in that legisla-
tion that would hold you back from helping the prosecution of
Vladimir Putin?
Secretary AUSTIN. I see no deficiencies in your legislation, no.

---

216

Senator DURBIN. Then what is the explanation? There’s got to be
a bottom line here. Why is it when these prosecutors come and
meet with us they list the cooperating agencies of our government
and specifically don’t list the Department of Defense? Why?
Secretary AUSTIN. Again, Senator, we’ll do everything within our
power to make sure that we support efforts to hold Russia account-
able, but again I remain concerned about the protection of U.S.
military personnel——
Senator DURBIN. I’ve got to ask for more—General, I respect you
and I voted for you and I’d do it again, but I got to ask for more.
Your personal feelings about whether you do it or not should be
second to the law, should it not?
Secretary AUSTIN. It is. They are, Senator.
Senator DURBIN. Well, if the law says cooperate and you refuse,
what am I—what conclusion am I supposed to draw?
Secretary AUSTIN. Senator, we have not refused any—to abide by
any law. So there could be some confusion here, but again we sup-
port the goal of holding Russia accountable.
Senator DURBIN. I have to ask you to prove it by doing so and
I have to ask you why the people who have observed the conduct
and policy of the agency think you’re falling short and you’re hold-
ing back.
Why we would hold back evidence against this War Criminal
Vladimir Putin and the terrible things he’s doing? I don’t under-
stand at all. You say you don’t think the law is deficient, but you
have a feeling.
Mr. Secretary, give me more than that. Tell me why. You must
have a compelling reason for not cooperating. What is it?
Secretary AUSTIN. Again, I will always prioritize protection of our
military personnel. That’s my concern.
Senator DURBIN. And you don’t think the law that we’ve passed
does that?
Secretary AUSTIN. I didn’t make a comment on the law, Senator.
I think again the law is sufficient obviously. It’s been established
by Congress and we are compelled to respect the law.
Senator DURBIN. Well, I would never jeopardized our troops and
I know Senator Graham feels the same. We both worked on
crafting this law so it would necessarily protect our troops. You’ve
drawn a personal opposite conclusion and I think it is frankly hurt-
ing the efforts to hold Putin accountable.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield.
Senator TESTER. Senator Graham.
Senator GRAHAM. Rather than beating this horse, I would rec-
ommend that we probably have a meeting, Secretary Austin, if
that’s okay with you.
Listen. I’ve been a judge advocate most of my adult life and we’ve
written this law in a way to make sure it applies to foreign nation-
als, Russians, involved in war crimes in Ukraine to help hold Putin
accountable.
Mr. Khan says we have a lot of valuable information that could
accelerate his prosecution not only of Putin but of others.
Are you familiar with the Wagner Group, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary AUSTIN. I am.
Senator GRAHAM. Do you think they’re a terrorist organization?

---

217

Secretary AUSTIN. I think they are a horrible terrorist organiza-
tion.
Senator GRAHAM. Well, I’d like to prosecute them, too. So what
I would like to do is meet with you and your team to make sure
that not only you follow the law but you understand the benefit of
this legislation to help this war effort.
So, General Milley, what do all those stripes on your arm mean
on your right shoulder, right arm there, those white stripes?
General MILLEY. Each one represents 6 months in combat.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Since 9/11 how many years have you
been away from your family?
General MILLEY. Seven, eight, nine, probably about half the time.
Senator GRAHAM. Is that more typical than not for people in the
military?
General MILLEY. No, it’s actually very typical. I think my peers
and those probably NCOs (Non-commissioned officers) at this point
that have been in this thing since 9/11 have probably spent year-
on/year-off for, you know, half the time basically deployed in Iraq
or Afghanistan in combat.
Senator GRAHAM. Well, I hope you get some time with your fam-
ily and thank your family for their service to our country.
Let’s go to Afghanistan right quick. Based on the withdrawal of
Afghanistan, our withdrawal from Afghanistan, General Kurilla
said that, as Senator Collins indicated, 6 months we could be at-
tacked without warning. Is that a fairly accurate statement from
your point of view?
General MILLEY. 11 months ago I actually testified and said 12–
18–24–36, I rounded it like that. So what Kurilla had said in his
testimony, that’s within the ranges that I had mentioned, as well.
So absolutely. I mean, look at our ability to monitor and track ter-
rorists in Afghanistan is less than it was with boots on the ground,
true, but we still have the ability to monitor.
Senator GRAHAM. I know, I know, but let me ask this right quick.
Are we less safe than we were before?
General MILLEY. I would just say that the United States military
is committed to continuing to monitor, track, and, if necessary,
take action——
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. All right.
Senator MILLEY [continuing]. Against any terrorist threat.
Senator GRAHAM. All right. I would just say we’re less safe.
So Putin, if he wins, perceived at winning, what does that mean
for the world? If he’s perceived as having lost, what does that mean
for the world? Is there a correlation in your view between success
of Putin or failure of Putin and China’s likelihood to invade Tai-
wan?
General MILLEY. I think that the Chinese are watching the war
between Russia and Ukraine very carefully and I think for Ukraine
obviously it’s an existential threat for their very existence, but for
Europe, for the United States, I think the issue is about a rules-
based international order and I think that what Putin has done is
an illegal direct assault on that order and if he’s allowed to succeed
in that, China will learn certain lessons and it may not be the sin-
gle decisive point but I think it will calculate into their decision-
making process as to whether or not they attack and seize Taiwan.

---

218

So I think the outcome of Ukraine is critical to much broader
issues than just Ukraine.
Senator GRAHAM. And if Putin is seen as having lost, does that
make America safer?
General MILLEY. I think it does because I think that what loss
being defined as Ukraine remains a free independent sovereign
country with its territory intact. If that is the end result of this
war, then I think Putin will have failed in his attempts to take
Ukraine and undermine that rules-based order and I really think
that that order, which has been in existence for eight decades now,
since the end of World War II, that’s critical to global stability and
world peace.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Mr. McCord, in 2033 under this budget,
how much will we be spending on defense in terms of GDP (Gross
Domestic Product)?
Mr. MCCORD. Senator, we have been in the three range for quite
a while and we’ll probably be right around three at the end of the
process.
Senator GRAHAM. Well, my information says 2.5. So check that
one out, see who’s right. Okay?
The Navy real quickly thinks they need 370 ships, 373, and to
get there, they have to spend 5 percent above inflation.
Do you agree this budget will not allow the Navy to get to 373
ships?
Mr. MCCORD. Within the FY DP (Future Years Defense Pro-
gram), we will not be at that number.
Senator GRAHAM. Yes. Cause we’re spending under inflation.
So real quickly, Mr. Chairman, there’s a bunch of scenarios.
None of them are really good. The House budget, 2022 plus one,
is about a 14 percent cut, is that right, Mr. McCord?
Mr. MCCORD. I’m sorry. The House——
Senator GRAHAM. The House proposal, the 2022 plus one percent,
what would that mean to the military? How many dollars would be
lost?
Mr. MCCORD. In this year, it would be about a hundred billion
below our request. Over——
Senator GRAHAM. Okay.
Mr. MCCORD [continuing]. Five years it would be about $600 bil-
lion.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. So a CR is a loss to the military, right,
General—Secretary Austin?
Secretary AUSTIN. That’s right, Senator.
Senator GRAHAM. Okay. This budget puts you below inflation. So
the committee’s task is to reject all of this stuff and come up with
a number that keeps us safe.
Senator SCHATZ [presiding]. Thank you very much.
Secretary Austin, General Milley, thank you for being here.
I want to start in Hawaii the people of Oahu have suffered tre-
mendously with the biggest pollution event in the State of Hawaii
at Red Hill bulk Fuel Storage Facility and the defueling and clo-
sure of Red Hill must continue to stay on schedule.
I want to submit for the record a Unified Statement from Hawaii
State Leaders about the importance of pure water and the remedi-
ation of the lands impacted by the Red Hill Fuel Spill.

---

219

Without objection.
[The information follows:]

Senator SCHATZ. Secretary Austin, can you reassure the people
of Hawaii that Red Hill will never be used for fuel storage or fuel
operations once it is emptied?
Secretary AUSTIN. Yes, when I made that decision, that was my
intent, Senator, and also thank you for everything that you and the
delegation have done to help us move forward.

---

220

Senator SCHATZ. Are you on track to send your certification to
Congress that our Indo-Pacific fuel needs won’t be adversely im-
pacted by the closure?
Secretary AUSTIN. Yes, we are on track and this is something
that we work routinely. I just met with my leadership on Red Hill
here last week to check to see where we are and, yes, we are.
Senator SCHATZ. Thank you.
As General Milley said, war with China is not inevitable. To
avoid conflict, the department must use all tools available to it,
new capabilities, alliances, partnerships and facilities in the AOR
(Area of Responsibility).
Secretary Austin, the budget includes $9.1 billion for the PDI
(Pacific Deterrence Initiative). How are you going to ensure that
these funds improve readiness and bolster deterrence without fall-
ing into the trap of fancy expensive gold-plated weapon systems?
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, this is something that, as you know,
Senator, that we track very closely as the Indo-Pacific Command
commander develops his requests. We work through each request
with him and we’re investing in those things that will provide us
the ability to further forward station our troops and capability and
so infrastructure is really, really important to us and you’ll see that
reflected in the PDI.
Senator SCHATZ. I think it’s really important that we understand
how achieved partnerships are compared to these weapon systems.
Obviously we need a balance of both, but I think it’s important for
the Defense Appropriations Committee to make it clear to you that
these partnerships are highly leveraged.
I mean, I think about Pacific Pathways with the Army. This is
really small money and an enormous impact. Whenever I’m talking
to INDOPACOM or in the Asia Pacific Region, they don’t talk
about the weapon systems. They talk about Pacific Pathways. I
think Incas another example of a pretty highly leveraged partner-
ship. It’s not zero dollars but it’s not nearly as expensive as the
other stuff.
Commanders are preoccupied with failing sewer systems, fragile
electrical grids, and deteriorating barracks. Dealing with these
issues have real opportunity costs and take away from our readi-
ness.
General Milley, the Active Army, Navy, and Air Force have re-
quested over $14 billion for FSRM (Facilities Sustainment, and
Restoration and Modernization), a $470 million increase over last
year.
How are services ensuring that they’ll make meaningful progress
on improving the most critical aging infrastructure?
General MILLEY. Thanks, Senator, for that. Each of the services
have very, very deliberate inspection programs. They have readi-
ness calculations for all of their infrastructure. They go through a
very rigorous process to ensure that their infrastructure remains
modernized and up to date both from an operational standpoint for
training but also for taking care of the families and the troops.
So they’ve got very rigorous processes to do that. Each one is
slightly different, but I can come back to you with the exacts for
each of the services if you’d like, but I’ve looked at those processes

---

221

when I was Chief Staff of the Army. They’re all very rigorous in
each of those services.
Senator SCHATZ. Please. Thank you.
Last question for Secretary Austin. Last year I stressed the im-
portance of interagency coordination and the COFA (Compact of
Free Association) negotiations and DoD’s role as a silent but very
important partner in the process.
Negotiations are ongoing, but I think they’re going reasonably
well and the strategic importance of these relationships with the
Freely Associated States continue to grow.
Can you just talk about how important it is that the United
States successfully renew the COFA Agreements on time?
Secretary AUSTIN. It’s critical, Senator. These are partners that
have—we have a long history with. They’re incredibly helpful, in-
credibly patriotic, as you know. A large percentage of their popu-
lation serve in our military and as you pointed out, State has the
lead for this, but DoD is certainly a player and we will continue
to contribute and hopefully help move things forward in a meaning-
ful way.
Senator SCHATZ. As does VA (Veterans Affairs). I just wanted to
quickly point out this. You know, we are talking about relatively
small money, for instance, to make sure that veterans who are re-
siding in COFA States get the VA services that they deserve, but
we need a statutory change for that.
There’s some resistance as if it’s some big budget pressure item.
It’s not. But as you deal with Pacific Island leaders, you know, I
would say thank God for small favors. These are the kinds of
things that define our relationship with these Pacific Island lead-
ers, whether we respect them, whether we respect their citizens,
whether Secretary Blinken’s slogan of friends, allies, partners is
real to them, and so these big investments are important but it’s
the taking care of the people as though they are true partners that
I think makes the difference.
Senator Murkowski.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you.
Gentlemen, thank you. Chairman Milley, I know in your written
testimony you acknowledged that this is your last set of posture
hearings. So I don’t know whether you’re celebrating after this
morning’s hearing, but thank you. Thank you for your years of
service and all you have provided us.
Today is kind of a significant day. We’re all looking at the south-
ern border with regards to Title 42 and all the implication there.
The 11th of May is also a significant day far from the South in the
Arctic. Today is the day that Russia is transferring the chair-ship
of the Arctic Council to Norway. Hopefully all is going to be quiet
and smooth and without a bump there and the governing body in
the Arctic, the Arctic Council, will be moving forward, but it’s
something that I’m paying attention to cause both of you well know
we’re paying attention to the Arctic.
We appreciate the fact that all five services have updated their
Arctic Strategy. We’ve come a long, long way as an Arctic nation
and being able to focus clearly and with intent and so I was curious
as I read through in full both of your statements this morning and

---

222

I am concerned because in neither of your statements is there ac-
knowledgment or recognition of the Arctic.
Secretary Austin, you do use the word ‘‘Arctic’’ once in connection
with the issue of climate, but I think we know that it is broader
than just climate and certainly from a security perspective you’ve
indicated that the budget is linked to strategy. It absolutely posi-
tively has to be and so the question to you this morning is whether
or not you think the budget that we have in front of us is sufficient
to implement these Arctic strategies?
Given the significance of the Arctic geopolitically, given what
we’re seeing out of Russia, given what we’ve just seen in the past
couple weeks with a very clear intention from Russia to be cooper-
ating on bilateral perspective with China with regards to the Arc-
tic, this should send signals to us that the partnering up there is
changing, that peaceful multilateral cooperation that we have seen
historically is changing in a dynamic way as a consequence of what
we’ve seen with Putin’s aggressive and awful war in Ukraine.
But the question, I guess I’ll start with you, Chairman Milley, is
whether or not you think that this budget is sufficient in regards
to our priorities in the Arctic?
General MILLEY. Thanks, Senator, appreciate that.
I do think that because our forces are general purpose forces and
they can be applied in the Arctic or they can be applied anywhere,
and I personally think the Arctic is a critical geographic region of
geostrategic importance and it’s increasing in its importance over
time. That’s clear.
I’m attending the Arctic Chiefs Conference here shortly in the
next couple weeks which I do every 6 months or so and that has
all the chiefs of defense, Military Uniform Chiefs of Arctic Nations,
not including Russia, by the way, and we get together to discuss
the security issues with Norway and Canada and the other Scan-
dinavian countries, etcetera. So we recognize the importance of the
Arctic.
As you mentioned, all the services and all the commands have
updated their programs, their strategies. In addition, we run a
whole series of exercises and we’ve increased our capabilities. The
111th Airborne Division, for example, up in Alaska. So the Arctic
is clearly recognized within the Department of Defense, within the
Joint Force, as having a critical geostrategic importance and we
have forces that are able to operate in the Arctic right now.
Senator MURKOWSKI. I think we recognize, though, that the
training to the Arctic is perhaps a little more unique and this is
why——
General MILLEY. Very unique.
Senator MURKOWSKI. This is why the 111th is so important with
that focus.
Secretary Austin, in last year’s NDAA (National Defense Author-
ization Act), Section 603 authorized several policies that will im-
prove the quality of life. We’ve been concerned about the issue of
suicide, particularly up north, but we had included provisions re-
lated to special cold weather pay as well as an opportunity for the
Secretary to reimburse eligible servicemembers for the cost of air-
fare, travel home to their home of record—well, their assigned on

---

223

duty location. All these designed to help offset some of the chal-
lenges that come when you are in a remote and expensive area.
I had asked earlier for some updates on when the soldiers might
be able to expect receiving the cold weather duty pay as well as be-
ginning receivements for the eligible travel and have not gotten re-
sponses that have clarified that.
So if you can help us with that?
Secretary AUSTIN. Certainly. We’ll get you a response right away
in terms of where we are in the process there in complying with
the directive there.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER [presiding]. Senator Reed.
Senator REED. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
First let me thank and commend General Milley for his extraor-
dinary service. I first had the opportunity to meet the General
when he was Assistant Commander of the 101st Airborne Division
along with General McConnellville and since that time and before
that you’ve been a remarkable soldier. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Secretary, you indicated to the Chairman that a default on
our debt would have profound repercussions in the Department of
Defense and that also tracks with the testimony of Avril Haynes,
the Director of National Intelligence, before the Armed Services
Committee.
But there’s another aspect to this, too, and that would, I think,
give China an opportunity to exploit this dramatically.
Do you have any concept of the strategic competition with China
if we default?
Secretary AUSTIN. There is substantial risk to our reputation,
Senator. Again, we are viewed as being a source of stability glob-
ally and we always pay our debts and there’s just a number of
things that we’re working with allies and partners on that would
come into question as to whether or not we’ll be able to execute
programs, but most important, this will affect the livelihood of our
troops and our civilians. We won’t be able to pay people like we
should and I think that’s something that China and everybody else
can exploit.
Senator REED. Yes. Given the disposition of China, they would
like to exploit every opportunity and this would present them a
huge opportunity to provide disinformation to American citizens, to
confuse them, and also in the world community, as you point out,
to suddenly and miraculously look like the stable adult in the room
and that would be—it’s interesting we’re all talking about strategic
platforms and how do we, you know, operate vis-à-vis China.
This could be one of the greatest strategic eras vis-à-vis China
in history, is that fair?
Secretary AUSTIN. I think that’s an accurate statement there,
Senator.
Senator REED. Thank you very much.
The Chairman also brought up the issue, which is, I found, pro-
foundly disturbing of the inability to routinely confirm general offi-
cers and I know seven former Secretaries of Defense wrote a letter
actually deploring this as a gross politicization of the military. You
yourself wrote a letter to Senator Warren.

---

224

Mr. Chairman, I would like to include both these letters in the
record.
Senator TESTER. Without objection.
Senator REED. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The information follows:]

---

225

---

226

---

227

---

228

---

229

Senator REED. General Milley, we talked conceptually about this
issue. Can you give us an idea of the impacts that are beginning
to happen and that will accelerate?
General MILLEY. Again, Senator, thanks. Let me make one com-
ment on the default piece, though.
Senator REED. Yes, sir.
General MILLEY. China right now describes us in their open
speeches, etcetera, as a declining power. Defaulting on the debt will

---

230

only reinforce that thought and embolden China and increase risk
to the United States.
With respect to the general officers, there’s about 650 that are
on various lists throughout the services that are up for nomination,
confirmation, and they’re all going to go replace someone and
they’re going to be replaced. So it’s 650 really times three. So
you’re looking at 1,800, maybe almost 2,000 officers. Probably all
of them, I don’t know for sure, but probably most of them are mar-
ried. They probably have some kids. So you’re probably looking at
3,000 to 4,000 lives that are directly impacted in my view. So that
will have significant personal impact.
Then from a readiness standpoint, these are flag officers. So
they’re in charge of very large complex organizations and this is
unsettling for the institution and it will have over time, I think, a
significant degradation in readiness and capability, morale.
I think the impact is pretty significant on that whole—and I un-
derstand I’m going to stay out of the whole issue of why it’s being
held, but I think holding up commissioned officers’ confirmations
on anything other than their own personal talent and skills further
politicizes the military and if the intent is to not politicize the mili-
tary, I think it has the opposite effect. It drags the uniformed mili-
tary right in the middle of a political argument.
Senator REED. I think you’re exactly right and that’s why we’ll
do our best to reverse this. Again, I think the cumulative effect is
very, very dangerous to both readiness and certainly to the families
of these officers.
A final point. I’m running out of time, but we talk a lot about
the number of platforms you’re going to have and etcetera. My
recollection that has to be checked by the historians is that the
French Army had many more tanks than the Wehrmacht in 1940,
but what they didn’t have is the combined arms teams, the commu-
nications, etcetera, and one of the areas we’re trying to do is to get
JADC2 (Joint All-Domain Command and Control) in place so that
we can communicate which will multiply our power so that, you
know, X number of platforms can be more effective even if our op-
ponents have a lot more platforms.
Is that accurate or fair?
General MILLEY. It is, Senator. JADC2 is a critical component of
the modernization of the Warfighting concept. It is the command
and control section that brings it all together in a combined arms
way. It involves software, hardware, procedures, etcetera. It’s a key
piece of the way the United States military intends to operate in
the future operating environment and without it, you won’t be able
to execute combined arms operations. The JADC2 is critical.
Senator REED. And multiply the number of platforms we have ef-
fectively.
General MILLEY. Absolutely.
Senator REED. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Austin, General Milley, Deputy Secretary McCord,
thank you all for being here and, General Milley, let me echo all
of the thanks from other members of the subcommittee for your
long service to this country.

---

231

I would like to follow up on Senator Reed’s comments and I’m
disappointed that more of the members of the subcommittee aren’t
here because I’m not sure that everyone understands what the im-
pact of holding these general officer nominations are on the mili-
tary and I think Senator Reed and I are the only ones on this sub-
committee on Armed Services who have had a chance to see this
play out.
And while you may not want to get into the reason why these
officers are being held up, I’m going to ask you, Secretary Austin,
to explain the policy that you put in place that is the reason why
our colleague from Alabama says he is holding these nominees.
Secretary AUSTIN. You’re speaking of our policy on reproductive
healthcare.
Senator SHAHEEN. Absolutely.
Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, Senator. As you well know, Sen-
ator, about 18 percent of our force is female.
Senator SHAHEEN. That’s right, and can you speak to how impor-
tant it is to be able to recruit those women into the military, espe-
cially given that recruitment is down right now?
Secretary AUSTIN. I think it’s critical that people be assured that
if they join the force they will continue to have access to reproduc-
tive healthcare and currently we have about 80,000 of our women
that are stationed in those areas where they don’t have ready ac-
cess to reproductive healthcare and they don’t get a chance to pick
where they live and where they’re stationed.
And so, you know, what this policy does is ensure that that ac-
cess exists, that they have the means to access reproductive
healthcare, especially those things that are non-covered reproduc-
tive healthcare, and again this policy is firmly rooted in law. We’ve
talked about the fact that the DOJ (Department of Justice) has
provided an opinion. That opinion is posted on their website and
so this is important for our force and again we have a young force
and about one in five of our troop’s area women and I think it’s
critical that they be assured that they’ll have access.
I want them focused on the mission and not worried about
whether or not they’re going to have access to reproductive
healthcare.
Senator SHAHEEN. And I would just add that we know that
women serving in the military have a higher rate of unintended
pregnancies than the general population in this country. So that’s
another reason why this is so important, but can you also address
whether we would be making our recruitment numbers that we
need to make for the military if we were not able to recruit women?
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly that problem would be com-
pounded by an order of magnitude. Again, our women do incredible
work for us, Senator, and we are all very proud of them and they
continue to amaze us each and every day and we would not be the
force that we are without the contribution that they bring to the
table and again it’s throughout DoD. I’ll make that comment.
Senator SHAHEEN. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it as
I do so many people the policy that you’ve put in place and I think
it’s absolutely critical and I hope that we are going to see this body
address those holes that are being placed on our general officers.

---

232

I talked to one of them yesterday who’s waiting to be sent out
to another posting and he doesn’t have his new title. He’s basically
in a holding pattern while he waits for that.
Secretary AUSTIN. It would be tragic if that kind of talent began
to vote with their feet and because of the unpredictability leave our
service and go do something else.
These people have earned the right to be promoted and their
families deserve what comes with that, as well, and so we certainly
don’t want to begin losing people because we can’t promote them.
Senator SHAHEEN. Absolutely. Mr. Secretary, you were asked, I
think by Senator Moran, about the registry for those people at Red
Hill and you said that that is in fact in place which I appreciate.
I think that’s important.
But DoD has not sought to set up a registry for military mem-
bers who have been exposed to PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances). Can you speak to why that is?
Secretary AUSTIN. You’re right. Obviously we have not done that
and certainly PFAS is a national challenge and DoD continues to
do everything that we can to help address this issue.
We recognize the importance of it and so we’ll take a look at
whether or not we can and should do that. We’ve increased our
testing across the board and so I’ll have our staff provide some rec-
ommendations to me and we’ll come back to you and discuss this
with you.
Senator SHAHEEN. I appreciate that. I’ve introduced an amend-
ment in the last three NDAAs to try and set up a registry. We have
a health study that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry is about to complete at eight sites around this country
with the health impacts of PFAS that will give us that real health
data on which to base the impact of PFAS, but it’s clear we know
or we’re pretty sure it’s a carcinogen and so I hope that you will
in fact take this seriously and I stand ready to be helpful in any
way that I can.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Murphy.
Senator MURPHY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you all for being here and for your service.
As the new member of this subcommittee, General Milley, I’ve
not had the pleasure to work with you through the appropriations
process, but I am deeply grateful for your service and your willing-
ness to continue to work with this committee.
I wanted to speak with you for a moment about information war-
fare. Our National Defense Strategy today has a robust information
component. Today, the amount of money that Russia and China are
spending on propaganda unfortunately dwarfs the amount that we
are allocating to fight misinformation.
Obviously this has to be a component of your strategy, but you’re
partnered often with the State Department. There are certain
things you can do that the State Department cannot. For instance,
the Global Engagement Center at the State Department funds not-
for-profits and fact-checkers on China and Russia’s periphery that
are trying to set the record straight.
So I want to just to ask you about why that partnership is impor-
tant. I think we have to a whole of government approach to fight-

---

233

ing misinformation that involves making sure that your com-
manders have the ability to be nimble in fighting back against nar-
ratives that are endangering our Nation’s security and endangering
their security, but also it means making sure the State Department
has resources to do the same.
General MILLEY. So, thanks, Senator, for the opportunity to com-
ment.
Information has always been critical to the conduct of war.
Throughout history and it’s probably never more important than it
is today, we’re in the Information Age. We’ve got a wide variety of
information tools. We’ve got the explosion of social media. You’ve
got all kinds of tools that literally you can walk around with,
iPhones, for example, and these are very, very powerful tools.
Now we’re in the age of artificial intelligence algorithms. You’ve
got the ability to do deep fake stories out there with people or store
other things. So this is an area in which we need to get better and
we need to get more coordinated.
Information oftentimes can be a decisive factor in the conduct of
war. We’ve got a lot of really good programs inside the military and
we know that we work well with intelligence agencies, for example,
and the State Department, but this effort needs to be more coordi-
nated and I think advanced to a greater level, given the capabili-
ties of not only Russia but China. They have very significant infor-
mation capabilities in cyber, very significant electronic warfare ca-
pabilities, and very significant disinformation capabilities, and
they’re active every single day.
So this is an area of real importance and we need to improve our-
selves.
Senator MURPHY. Well, thank you for challenging this committee
to step up on that effort.
General, Secretary Austin, there’s reports that the Pentagon has
sought a high level meeting with your counterparts in China and
obviously we have been missing high level dialogue with the Chi-
nese since the flying of the Chinese balloons over U.S. air space.
There’s no excuse for the provocative actions of the Chinese Gov-
ernment, but at the same time it’s not good when we’re not talking
to each other at a high level and so my question is this.
My belief is that there’s no choice to be made between having an
effective China policy to try to make sure that their power does not
expand in a way that hurts the United States and continuing a dia-
logue about the things where we can work together and the ways
in which we address our challenges.
Can you just talk about the state of the mil-to-mil dialogue with
China and your views on whether it’s important to keep those
channels open?
Secretary AUSTIN. I think it’s critical, Senator. Thanks for bring-
ing this topic up.
I have reached out to my counterpart on a number of occasions.
I have conducted face-to-face meetings with the former Minister of
Defense. There’s a new Minister of Defense in the seat now. I’ve
reached out to him. I’ve sent him a letter and offered to talk, as
well. I’ll continue to do that. I think that’s critical.
You know, when you have two countries with this kind of capa-
bility and we’re operating, you know, globally, I think we have to

---

234

have the ability to manage potential crises and really there are
things that we will have to address from time to time and we really
need to be able to pick up the phone and talk directly to senior peo-
ple.
So I’ll continue to work this. I think it’s really important. We’ll
probably have another opportunity as we go out to Singapore for
a conference in Singapore and if the opportunity presents itself, I’ll
look to engage my counterpart.
I think that we need to open that door and continue to engage
each other.
Senator MURPHY. Well, I appreciate your public statements to
that effect and the outreach that you’re doing. Agree that these are
not mutually exclusive goals to keep that dialogue open to avoid
conflict, but also to make sure that we are plusing up resources
both at DoD and at State to make sure that we are ready.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Boozman.
Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and — I’m
sorry. Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you for that.
[Laughter.]
Senator BOOZMAN. I was just with Senator Murray at another
meeting. So I’ve got my Chairmen’s mixed up.
I just want to say I agree with the point that Senator Murphy
was trying to make that the communication really is real impor-
tant. We’ve seen that in other areas when we’ve had situations like
our situation with China and I know that you’re working really
hard to do that.
Congratulations to all of you for your great careers. We’re going
to miss you, General Milley. Who would have thought that the
young hockey player would have all the stars and have such a tre-
mendous career? So again congratulations.
Secretary Austin, you mentioned in your testimony that our co-
operation with our allies and partners is central to co-developing
best capabilities for our warfighters.
Recently, the record of decision was signed by Secretary Kendall
that will make Ebbing airfield in Fort Smith, Arkansas, the future
home for F–35 U.S. allied pilot training.
I continue to work with the Air Force to make having a premier
pilot training center and ensure it’s ready for time to train our ally
and partner pilots.
Secretary Austin, can you briefly speak to how important this
mission in Arkansas is to our national security?
Secretary AUSTIN. It’s critical as our allies and partners invest
in the kinds of capability that we have. F–35s are a great example.
We need to make sure that we’re working together to increase
interoperability and we do that, you know, by not only making sure
that we have the policies and procedures in the right place but
there’s frequent contact. This working together with each other is—
you know, you can’t replace that. Also builds trust.
We know that when you need trust, you can’t surge it. It has to
be there. It’s something you’ve got to work on each and every day
and so the capability that you’re speaking of in Arkansas I think

---

235

is critical and I know that we have some allies and partners that
are really looking forward to using that capability.
So thanks for what you’re doing to broaden our capacity here.
Senator BOOZMAN. Okay. Thank you. In regard to the foreign
military sales, there’s all kinds of benefits. We’ve seen that as stim-
ulating the economy in our country and again just in providing the
protection that we desperately need.
Unfortunately, this system is overburdened with regulation, bu-
reaucratic logjams, and according to Mr. Eric Fanning’s recent tes-
timony in the Armed Services Committee it’s resulted in an aver-
age delay of over 18 months to get on contract.
This leaves our allies vulnerable and turning to other countries
to buy military capabilities.
Secretary Austin, how does FMS (Foreign Military Sales) con-
tribute to the department’s strategy of deterrence and what specific
processes contribute to the unacceptable delay for getting capabili-
ties on contract?
Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly FMS helps us to magnify our
capability because if our allies and partners are working with the
same kinds of equipment and are skilled on that and using that
equipment, then it’s really helpful in terms of expanding our foot-
print, our capability.
In terms of the kinds of things that contribute to lags, there are
a number of things that come together. One, industry owns a piece
of that and we would hope that, you know, as the contracts are in-
active that they’re able to meet the timelines and so coming out of
a period of 2 years of COVID, that’s had an impact on a number
of things.
But there are also to your point bureaucratic issues that often
get in the way. Now what we did, what I did early on 2 years ago
was I put together a group of our senior people to really focus on
the FMS process and to identify those bureaucratic issues and
roadblocks that we could knock down and so that body continues
its work and it’s hard work, but we’re going to do everything pos-
sible on our end to make sure that bureaucratic issues in the Pen-
tagon are not solely holding things up, but again there are a num-
ber of things that come together to make this process more com-
plicated than it should be.
Senator BOOZMAN. Right. I know sometimes we make that more
difficult. So I think I can speak for the committee if there’s any-
thing we can do legislatively or, you know, be sure and let us know.
That’s so very important.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Boozman, and I’m going to
dovetail on to what you just said.
I can tell you what Congress can do to make things easier, not
default on our debt like the House of Representatives wants us to
do. Get a budget done on time so these guys don’t have to deal with
this uncertainty of a CR. Take the holds off the military pro-
motions because, quite frankly, it’s flat stupid and politicizing our
military. That’s what we can do and I know, Senator Boozman,
you’re a good man and I don’t think you’d disagree with me. So
thank you.

---

236

But the truth is, is this, Congress needs to step up and do their
job. If we want to hold you guys accountable, if we want to hold
the contractors that supply us with our military equipment ac-
countable, we need to do our job and part of that job is making
sure that we get a budget that keeps this country safe, and the
other part of it is just not do stupid things like CRs and defaults
and holding military promotions.
I just want to say thank you. Thank you for what you do every
single day to keep this country safe, to lead some of the finest peo-
ple on earth in our military. We appreciate your testimony here
today.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may ask additional questions. I would ask that you get
back to them as quickly as you possibly can with a response.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were
submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hear-
ing:]
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LLOYD J. AUSTIN III

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. The budget request assumes an inflation rate of 2.4 percent. However,
yesterday’s Consumer Price Index is now at 4.9 percent—lower than last year’s
peak, but still higher than your budget.
Secretary Austin, have you re-reviewed your budget request to account for price
increases? Have you identified specific programs where you’re going to be short of
what’s required to buy what you need?
If yes, can you please provide that data to the Committee?
Answer. This is a strategy-driven budget designed to implement the 2022 National
Defense Strategy and the budget incorporates the Administration’s FY 24 inflation
projections. The Department thanks Congress for the additional funding and au-
thorities provided in FY 2023 to help us on key areas like fuel, housing, and subsist-
ence allowances.
The Department is working to counter the impacts of inflation and looks forward
to working with Congress on this important matter. Our budget request uses infla-
tion estimates provided by OMB, which are similar to those recently released by
Congressional Budget Office. If those estimates do not prove to be on target, that
will stress our ability to execute our budget.
The Department continues to assess the impacts of inflation and will continue to
work with both the Administration and Congress to address resource implications.
I can assure you that I will never hesitate to ask the President for the resources
I believe we need to execute the mission.
Question. Based on current trends, are you comfortable with DoD’s 2.4 percent es-
timate for next year?
Answer. The 2.4 percent estimate for FY24 is OMB’s government-wide inflation
projection, which the Department is required to use. It is very similar to the most
recent estimate of 2.7 percent from the Congressional Budget Office. However, if the
inflation estimates once again undershoot the real inflation rate, it may stress our
ability to get all of our programs on contract and delivered in full on time. Similar
to prior years, we may have to reprogram funds, such as for utilities, to address
emergent requirements.
Question. For good reason, when we talk about China, we spend a lot of our time
talking about its bad behavior in the Taiwan Strait.
However, we can’t overlook the fact that China’s global ambitions are presenting
problems for every Combatant Command, including in Africa and Latin America. If
we only prepare for a high-end Indo-Pacific fight, we will come up short worldwide.
Secretary Austin, these Combatant Commands aren’t afforded significant force
structure. Are they sufficiently resourced to ensure we remain the preferred partner
of these regions? It seems to me that for relatively minor investments, we could
make major headway here.

---

237
Answer. In FY 2023, the Department allocated more than $130 million in appro-
priated funds for security cooperation programs to build the capacity of foreign part-
ner national security forces in Central America, the Caribbean, and South America,
and also $175 million for such programs for foreign partner national security forces
in Africa. These investments are in addition to the up to $200 million appropriated
under section 8068 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2023, for
USAFRICOM or USSOUTHCOM to expand cooperation or improve the capabilities
of allies and foreign partners in their areas of responsibility. This totals over a half
a billion dollars in FY 2023 spending to expand cooperation and build partner capac-
ity.
With the concurrence of the Secretary of State, the Department will continue to
prioritize smart, targeted investments in and with these partners to deepen our
shared security and build real capability in a way that strengthens security sector
governance and enhances strategic resilience, within a global prioritization of secu-
rity cooperation efforts.
Question. The War in Ukraine is now entering its second year, and both sides are
gearing up for a spring offensive.
There are some who argue that given the threat from China, we can’t afford to
invest in Ukraine. I strongly disagree but defer to our military experts.
Mr. Secretary, to date, over $60 billion has been appropriated for Ukraine’s de-
fense needs. Do you have the resources you need to continue supporting Ukraine?
Answer. Ukraine’s battlefield requirements have evolved over time since Russia’s
unprovoked full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022. The security assistance we
provide Ukraine is based on a collective assessment of the capability needed for suc-
cess on the battlefield. Shifting dynamics on the ground necessitate agility in our
security assistance efforts. The consistent and strong bipartisan support from Con-
gress continues to help Ukraine make key gains, and we will continue evaluating
the need for additional funding as the situation on the ground evolves.
Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons to load up our
weapons magazines for future contingencies.
In this year’s budget, the Department is proposing multi-year procurement agree-
ments for 9 different munitions. This would provide significant predictability and
stability to the industrial base.
Secretary Austin, what is the industry feedback to these proposed contracts?
Answer. First, let me thank Congress for supporting our multi-year procurement
authorities request in FY 2023. These authorities will help us send a clear demand
signal to industry as we work to build our munitions stockpile to be read to fight
and win in any contest if called upon.
Industry feedback on our request for multi-year procurement authorities has gen-
erally been positive. Industry leaders see the advantages of increased predictability
of demand from the Department. This persistent demand provides a signal to the
industrial base, and it helps provide stability for sub-tier suppliers. Department and
Service leadership are currently meeting with industry to map out the multi-year
plans to increase inventory, reduce cost, and improve industrial base resilience.
Multi-year procurement contracts remain a valuable tool for the Department to pro-
cure the munitions needed to support national defense. Moving forward, we will con-
tinue to advocate for ways to increase long-term flexibility for critical munitions to
ensure that we have the rounds that we need.
Question. Secretary Austin, have you mapped-out the supply chains for each of
these contracts to ensure that there won’t be bottlenecks as quantities increase?
Answer. That work is currently underway. There are multiple, critical components
with long lead times across the Department’s programs, and several are common to
multiple systems for which we are pursuing multi-year procurement. We are exam-
ining approaches for enabling those suppliers to meet the necessary ramp-up. Indus-
try is also looking across its portfolios to identify commonality of critical components
with long lead times and broadcast these demand signals across the industrial base.
Question. Shortages in our supply chain are delaying major programs across every
military Service, hampering our ability to field new capabilities to the warfighter
on cost and on time.
Secretary Austin, when the Department makes a contract award, how does it
track the performance of suppliers? It seems we often rely on the prime contractor
instead of identifying and managing key suppliers ourselves. The results have been
mixed.
Answer. The Department tracks performance of its suppliers via the Federal-wide
Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System to measure the quality and
timely reporting of past performance information. The prime contractor is held re-
sponsible for managing their supply chains, including tracking sub-supplier per-

---

238
formance. The Department is currently evaluating other methods and approaches to
engage with sub-suppliers on a more regular basis.
Question. Secretary Austin, this budget request includes billions of dollars of di-
rect spending to suppliers in the industrial base. If we don’t have the data to track
what they’re providing—and to whom—how are we ensuring that this investment
is paying dividends and accelerating weapons deliveries?
Answer. I agree that the Department needs data to track whether or not we are
getting equipment into the hands of warfighters as soon as possible, an effort that
is ongoing in the Department. We have also worked with industry to identify steps
it can take to accelerate production, such as workforce initiatives and advance pro-
curement of long lead time items. We have also leveraged authorities such as the
Defense Priorities and Allocations System under DPA title I to help accelerate deliv-
eries.
The accelerated deliveries we are seeing from these engagements and investments
show that these efforts are paying dividends, especially in Ukraine. For instance,
these efforts have enabled production of 155mm artillery projectiles at a higher
monthly throughput and did so 6 months earlier than were originally projected.
Similarly, suppliers in the GMLRS supply chain have been able to increase produc-
tion rates ahead of schedule, increasing overall deliveries compared to last year.
These multi-pronged efforts are building enduring industrial capacity, both to sup-
port Ukraine and potential conflict with peer adversaries and to ensure the security
of the United States, our partners, and our allies.
Question. The Department of Defense spends roughly $40 billion a year on Infor-
mation Technology systems.
However, instead of delivering modernized and transformational IT systems, the
end product is often behind schedule and over budget. This is not just a DoD prob-
lem, the VA struggles with the exact same issue.
For example, the Navy’s new pay and personnel system has disrupted pay and
benefits for thousands of sailors and veterans in recent years. This is unacceptable.
Secretary Austin, how can we close the gap between what we need these IT sys-
tems to do for us and what is actually delivered in a timely and cost-effective man-
ner?
Answer. DoD recognizes the imperative of improved software to enable defense op-
erations using modern development approaches. Following the publication of the
DoD Software Modernization Strategy in 2022, the Department is transitioning to
an agile approach to buy, develop, and deliver secure software at the speed of rel-
evance, while adapting DoD culture to embrace modernization. Further, the Depart-
ment has implemented the Software Acquisition pathway under the Adaptive Acqui-
sition system to support this approach. By adopting this strategy, software is being
delivered more consistently, faster, and more securely than ever before.
Question. Secretary Austin, what processes do you have in place to ensure we are
getting what we pay for?
Answer. DoD has several procedures in place to ensure that it is receiving the In-
formation Technology (IT) systems for which it paid. These include management of
requirements, procurement, development, testing, deployment, operation, mainte-
nance, and oversight. The complexity, speed, and cost of IT systems are some of the
issues DoD must overcome to maintain the effectiveness and efficiency of its IT sys-
tems. Despite these obstacles, DoD is dedicated to making sure it receives value for
the money spent on IT systems.
Question. This budget request is again proposing record investments in research
and development. You are asking for $145 billion dollars in R&D spending, which
is more than $5.2 billion over the fiscal year 2023 enacted amount.
Mr. Secretary for years, R&D has been used to mature and prototype technologies
like hypersonic weapons and artificial intelligence. These technologies will give us
decisive capabilities in a near-peer competition with China, so when will they be-
come real programs that are fielded at scale? My concern is that we are at risk of
falling into the trap of ‘perennial prototyping’, and not actually delivering capability
in relevant numbers to our troops by increasing procurement. This budget does not
transition prototypes to procurement in significant numbers.
Answer. The Department is in a period of modernization that will ensure our abil-
ity to deter and, if necessary, defeat any potential adversary. This necessitates that
the Department experiment with new capabilities and invest in inserting new tech-
nology into our systems to provide our warfighters with the capabilities they need
to meet the pacing challenge.
The Department is constantly working to improve existing tools and pathways to
transition technology. The Middle Tier of Acquisition opens new opportunities for
program offices to prototype and/or field new capability while developing the docu-
mentation for a formal program of record. The Department’s Competitive Advantage

---

239
Pathfinders initiative is identifying bureaucratic gaps in our system and working
with the Services to develop or inform new processes in the Defense Acquisition Sys-
tem.
Through the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve program, we are also devel-
oping the capacity for rapid prototyping, to deliver game-changing capabilities to the
battlefield quickly. We are focused on getting the right capabilities as fast as pos-
sible to the warfighter.
Finally, the Department has stood up a new Acquisition Integration and Inter-
operability office to address the challenges in acquiring and managing joint capabili-
ties, including transitioning new technology.
Question. Congress has established a Commission to review the Department’s
budget process and make recommendations to speed up the process of getting stuff
to the warfighter. Often, these Commissions point the finger at Congress (in some
cases, rightfully so!) without addressing barriers inside the Department that you
could fix yourself.
Secretary Austin, where do you feel the primary pitfalls are in DoD’s current
budget process, and what is the Department doing internally to improve its proc-
esses?
Answer. Delivering state-of-the-art capabilities at speed and scale is critical to en-
suring that we maintain our enduring military advantage. The Department regu-
larly reviews obstacles across the acquisition, requirements, and resourcing systems
to maximize critical capability delivery. Any discussion regarding speeding up acqui-
sition must also account for the considerable effort required leading up to the initi-
ation of procurement processes, namely the identifying military requirements and
securing resources. For that reason, the Department works collaboratively between
program and acquisition workforces to improve our policies and processes to get the
right capabilities to the warfighter as fast as possible.
Question. Mr. Secretary, Congress has already provided authorities to reduce pa-
perwork and speed up acquisitions. Yet we continue to hear about internal road-
blocks, such as long contracting times. How are you addressing this?
Answer. Maintaining focused alignment to the strategy while balancing limited re-
sources across the Department’s many competing missions, priorities, and constitu-
encies is always the primary challenge throughout the programming and budgeting
process. Over the last several cycles, the Department has made significant progress
toward implementing the 2022 National Defense Strategy by actively shaping our
internal review processes to ensure that senior leadership’s program and budget de-
liberations are tightly scoped to the most compelling challenges facing the Depart-
ment. By streamlining the avenues for the submission of issues utilizing both top-
down and bottom-up processes and emphasizing the analytic and programmatic
links to the strategic priorities and focus areas, the Department continues to sub-
stantively improve the budget-to-strategy alignment.
Delivering state-of-the-art capabilities at speed and scale is critical to ensuring
that we maintain our military advantage. The Department brought together a team
that is actively identifying obstacles across the acquisition, requirements, and
resourcing systems, and working to deliver critical capability faster. We are also im-
plementing organizational improvements, coordinating with allies and partners and
industry, and using lessons learned from our Foreign Military Sales tiger team to
ensure that acquisitions can rapidly support the joint force and our allies and part-
ners. Through the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve program, we are also de-
veloping the capacity for rapid prototyping, to deliver game-changing capabilities to
the battlefield quickly. We are focused on getting the right capabilities to the
warfighter as fast as possible.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR RICHARD J. DURBIN
Question. Can the Department describe how it will engage with EPA to establish
robust, safe, and science-based clean-up standards to protect communities and to
continuing to update these standards with EPA as science and technology on PFAS
contamination evolve?
Answer. There is nothing I take more seriously than the safety, health, and well-
being of the force, of our military families, and of the communities around our in-
stallations. The Department has taken a number of actions over the last few years
to remove PFAS from things we currently use—like firefighting foam—to strengthen
our drinking water monitoring efforts, and to provide support to Service members
who have healthcare concerns about past PFAS exposure. PFAS are a national chal-
lenge, and the Department is committed to doing our part. We continue to work
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to understand the potential

---

240
health impacts from PFAS-impacted drinking water, and support EPA efforts to fi-
nalize a safe drinking water standard for PFAS to also be used in our PFAS clean-
ups nationwide.
Question. Please detail the Department’s research and development of PFAS alter-
natives in critical uses in national security including but not limited to microelec-
tronics and weapons systems, and non-incineration PFAS destruction technologies,
including but not limited to: electrochemical oxidation, SCWO, and other thermal
treatment processes?
Answer. The Department is currently assessing the mission and readiness risks
associated with emerging constraints in the PFAS supply chain. Currently, PFAS
are enablers of critical defense technologies and have essential application to our
critical infrastructure. PFAS also have essential uses in microelectronics, semi-
conductors, energy storage, and batteries.
To fully address PFAS in our systems and to develop and scale alternatives, we
have a long road of research and development ahead of us. We will work with sup-
pliers to rapidly assess and adopt alternatives currently under development that
meet performance specifications. The Department’s research and development offi-
cials are working with our best scientists across the interagency to develop a long-
term plan for replacements. We estimate that it may be between six to 10 years
before viable alternatives can be developed and demonstrated, with the potential for
significant associated costs.
Question. How does the Department plan on coordinating with relevant agencies,
industry, and academia to research alternatives to these critical PFAS in both?
Answer. We must be deliberate in taking a nationwide, cross government ap-
proach to ensure research investments are efficient and complementary as we joint-
ly seek to determine the viability and scalability of alternatives to PFAS. The De-
partment’s Emerging Chemicals Governance Council oversees coordinated lines of
effort to identify essential uses of PFAS and prioritize actions according to
vulnerabilities to national security. The Department is also expanding resources, as
well as working within the Strategic Environmental Research Development Pro-
gram, an interagency group established in statute to review development needs. In
addition, the Department coordinates with industry and the interagency through
routine engagement meetings to discuss obsolescence risks and possible PFAS alter-
natives.
Question. As the Department advances in destruction technologies, can you work
to assure that these alternatives do not release PFAS or products of their incom-
plete destruction into the air, water, or other environmental media?
Answer. DoD is committed to using and advancing the best available science and
treatment technologies to treat, destroy, and dispose of PFAS. The Department cur-
rently uses disposal options with the most stringent controls where an environ-
mental regulator has issued a permit for the facility. The Department is engaging
in robust efforts to advance our knowledge on destruction removal efficiencies, po-
tential releases of products of incomplete destruction, and effective emission control
devices. This year, the Department’s Environmental Security Technology Certifi-
cation Program will award over $40 million to 16 projects focused on improving the
effectiveness and reducing the implementation costs of advanced destruction tech-
nologies.
Question. Can the Department achieve a broader phase-out of non-essential, or
non-critical, PFAS uses and procurement in the next 10 years?
Answer. We are rapidly and deliberately assessing uses of PFAS in the Depart-
ment’s supply chain. However, it is difficult to determine a timeline for completion.
We are phasing out non- essential and non-critical uses of PFAS where there is no
mission impact such as in food packaging, cookware, furniture, and personal protec-
tive firefighting equipment in accordance with requirements. However, the PFAS
supply chain is not transparent, and it will require multiple government agencies
working together to phase out non-essential or non-critical PFAS uses and procure-
ment. We will continue to keep the Congress informed on this issue.
Question. If not, can you put a timeline on how long such a phase out may take?
Answer. It is difficult to establish a timeline for completion. We are challenged
by the need for transparency in the supply chain, the complexity of dissecting the
defense industrial base value chain, anticipating market dynamics, identifying the
number and specificity of products requiring alternatives, related requalification re-
quirements, and the complexity of the supply chain dependencies. Nevertheless, the
Department is committed to addressing this important issue deliberately and expe-
ditiously, and keeping the Congress informed as we work through this process.

---

241
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BRIAN SCHATZ
Existing Red Hill Health Registry
Question. During the May 11 hearing, Secretary Austin confirmed that DoD estab-
lished a registry of potentially exposed individuals to the Red Hill fuel spill.
Is this registry synonymous with the DOEHRS Red Hill incident report?
Answer. Yes, this registry is synonymous with the Red Hill Defense Occupational
and Environmental Health Readiness System (DOEHRS) Incident Report.
Question. What population is included in the registry? Are non-DoD affiliated in-
dividuals included?
Answer. DoD-affiliated individuals potentially exposed to the JP–5 fuel release in
November 2021 are included in the registry. Non-DoD-affiliated individuals are not
eligible to be included in the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report.
Question. Are individualized health data captured within this registry?
Answer. No. Individual health data for TRICARE beneficiaries is maintained in
the DoD electronic health record system, which can be linked to the Red Hill
DOEHRS Incident Report by DoD Identification Number.
Question. How will DoD utilize these data to track long-term health effects?
Answer. DoD will analyze healthcare encounter data to determine whether there
is any presence of health conditions which occur at a greater frequency than would
otherwise be expected in the general population.
Future Red Hill Health Registry Options
Question. There is limited data on the long-term health effects of exposure to jet
fuel, particularly for vulnerable populations like pregnant people and young chil-
dren. This lack of data means that it is essential to take up ATSDR’s recommenda-
tion to launch a third-party registry and conduct long-term epidemiological studies
of the exposed population. DHA has indicated that it is exploring potential avenues,
including a third-party registry. Time is of the essence as the longer DHA delays,
the harder it will be to ensure a comprehensive account of all who were exposed.
How many individuals have been added to the Red Hill incident report through
the hotline?
Answer. 446 out of 28,626 individuals in the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report
were added through the call center.
Question. A critical function of an effective registry is as a communications tool,
including sharing resources and new data as it becomes available. Beyond the initial
outreach to housing sponsors to inform them that they and their dependents were
included in the Red Hill incident report, how has DHA used this tool to share infor-
mation with individuals included?
Answer. DoD publicly presented an interim update on registry planning at the
last Hawaii Fuel Tank Advisory Committee in November 2022 and will do so again
in June 2023. We are also actively engaged in communication with the surrounding
and affected community. Once Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam workers are added
to the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report, which we expect to be within the next
month, DoD will update all sponsors in the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report by
email.
Question. If DHA adopts a third-party registry: Would the registry be procured
and administered by DoD or HHS?
Answer. The registry will be funded by DoD. A third party will independently ad-
minister the registry via a DoD grant.
Question. How does DHA intend to consult with subject matter experts on the de-
sign and operation of the registry, including ATSDR?
Answer. DoD has been regularly consulting with exposure registry subject matter
experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Sub-
stances and Disease Registry and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Question. How will DHA ensure it is managed and maintained independently?
Answer. DHA is committed to a fully independent Red Hill registry through
awarding a grant to a qualified third partner.
Question. What is DHA’s plan to collaborate with trusted community partners on
this effort?
Answer. DHA expects that the selected registry partner will actively engage with
the Red Hill community and consider their needs, values, and preferences in the de-
sign and conduct of the Red Hill registry. This will be written into the grant re-
quirements.
Question. Does DHA have authorities necessary to transfer data from DOEHRS
to ATSDR/its contracted grantee? If not, what authorities are required?
Answer. Yes, DHA generally has the authority to enter into a data use agreement.
Question. What steps will DHA take to ensure effective recruitment of civilians?

---

242
Answer. DHA will work with the third-party registry partner, the Hawaii Depart-
ment of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Sub-
stances and Disease Registry, the EPA, and other partners to ensure individuals po-
tentially exposed to the fuel release are educated and encouraged to enroll in the
registry.
Question. How long would DHA intend to maintain the registry?
Answer. DHA does not have a registry end date at this time. DHA will support
the registry as long as it maintains value to the Red Hill community, stakeholders,
public health authorities, and researchers.
Question. What factors would DHA weigh to decide whether to maintain or sus-
pend the registry?
Answer. DHA will support the registry as long as it maintains value to the Red
Hill community, stakeholders, public health authorities, and researchers.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN
Building and Maintaining the Defense Industrial Base
Question. One takeaway military leaders mention regarding institutional lessons
learned from our support for Ukraine is the importance of the domestic defense in-
dustrial base and the ability to quickly ramp-up production to meet replenishment
requirements. The U.S. is currently struggling to replenish munitions stockpiles as
the war with Ukraine continues—just one example why not just building a strong
and enduring defense industrial base is critical to meet today’s challenges and fu-
ture threats.
What is the Department of Defense’s current assessment of the domestic defense
industrial base’s ability to meet sudden increases in demand, particularly with re-
gards to munitions production, in the wake of unexpected geopolitical developments
such as the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine?
Answer. America’s defense industrial base (DIB) is one of our core strategic assets,
and the Department is focused on shoring up this advantage. Decades of under-in-
vestment in critical munitions and an uneven message to the DIB have resulted in
some challenges to its ability to quickly respond to demand. However, we have seen
significant improvement over the past 2 years, particularly as the DIB has moved
to support Ukraine’s self-defense and maintain U.S. readiness.
We are sending steady and certain demand signals to industry, in particular
through a $170 billion FY24 President’s budget (PB) request for procurement—the
largest ever—and seeking multi-year procurement authorities for critical munitions.
I am regularly briefed on the status of our munition stocks given the ongoing need
to provide weapons to Ukraine, backfill stocks for the United States, and support
our allies and partners. Securing investments in munitions to meet the quantities
necessary today and tomorrow is critical to our ability to deter and, if necessary,
defeat any would-be challenger.
Question. Does the President’s proposed defense budget provide sufficient predict-
ability and support for the defense industrial base, particularly in capital and labor-
intensive areas such as shipbuilding, vehicle maintenance, and other related sec-
tors?
Answer. Yes. The Department is making major investments to shore up ship-
building, including in the FY24 PB request: $2.7 billion for the Shipyard Infrastruc-
ture Optimization Plan, and $1.2 billion for the submarine industrial base. We are
also working to on-shore defense supply chains, including FY24 budget request in-
vestments of $2.6 billion in microelectronics, $177 million in forging and casting,
and more than $250 million in critical materials. This budget request also includes
$48.1 billion for modernization of our naval forces, and you will see us deliver nine
battle force ships this year.
Question. What is the status of the Department’s implementation of Executive
Order 14005?
Answer. The Department is committed to maximizing the use of goods, products,
and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States, consistent
with Made in America laws and regulations.
The Department plays an instrumental role with other Federal agencies to imple-
ment Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All
of America’s Workers. The Department is supporting the implementation of the
order in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rule (FAR Case 2021—008), effec-
tive October 25, 2022, that executes an initial increase of the domestic content
threshold from 55% to 60% and then a phased, multi-year increase to 75% by cal-
endar year 2029.

---

243
The Executive Order also requires the Department to submit bi-annual reports to
the Office of Management and Budget/Made in America Office describing progress
toward the implementation of and compliance with Made in America laws and the
Department’s use of waivers or exceptions. The most recent report submitted in Feb-
ruary 2023 included a Build America, Buy America Act Implementation Plan. The
Department is currently supporting the development of further implementing guid-
ance in the FAR and Defense FAR Supplement.
Clean-up parity between Active Duty and National Guard locations
Question. I am committed to ensuring that the Defense Environmental Restora-
tion Program successfully cleans up all toxic elements in impacted areas, to include
National Guard locations. In previous years there was a discrepancy between access
to funding between active component and National Guard installations. Due to a
policy change in 2017, the National Guard was removed from the Defense Environ-
mental Restoration Program and no longer had the same access to funds as active
duty locations. My colleagues and I secured a reversal of this policy to place Na-
tional Guard installations back into the program.
How does the program currently prioritize sites for clean-up of hazardous sub-
stances?
Answer. The Department shares your concern about hazardous substances and
the safety, health, and welfare of all personnel on DoD bases as well as members
of the surrounding communities in and around our facilities. The Department
prioritizes sites based on risk, by evaluating the relative risk to human health and
the environment and addressing the highest risk sites first across all installations,
including National Guard installations.
Question. Do National Guard installations currently have access to clean-up funds
through the Defense Environmental Restoration Program?
Answer. Yes. National Guard installations that meet the requirements for the De-
fense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), as updated by the FY 2023
NDAA, have access to clean-up funds under that program. Each Military Depart-
ment prioritizes the cleanup of its DERP sites based on risk. The Air Force and
Army prioritize their sites and DERP-eligible National Guard sites together and ad-
dress the highest risk sites first.
Question. What was the impact of being removed from the program for National
Guard installations and what is being done to address any backlog that National
Guard installations may have experienced when they were excluded from the pro-
gram?
Answer. The Department is committed to addressing releases at National Guard
installations. National Guard sites impacted with certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances, had full access to Defense Environmental Restoration Program funds
during the time period covered in the FY23 NDAA provision, and the Department
will continue to ensure that all facilities, including National Guard installations
have access to clean-up funds.
Noise Mitigation
Question. The Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation provides critical as-
sistance to counties and municipalities to both foster cooperation with military in-
stallations as well as to address any concerns or challenges communities encounter
as neighbors to military installations.
This office has provided critical assistance to Wisconsin in the form of a planning
and outreach grant as the state starts to receive the F–35 aircraft at Truax Airfield
in Madison.
I’ve noticed a trend over the last few years in which the budget request for
OLDCC falls well below what many deem necessary to accomplish its increasing
program demands.
What are you doing to support OLDCC as it expands in both staffing levels and
in demand for its programs?
Answer. The Department recognizes that defense communities provide indispen-
sable support to our installations, our Service members, and their families, and that
it is imperative that we be conscientious and committed partners with those commu-
nities. The Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation (OLDCC) staff and pro-
grams are a critical component of that partnership, and the Department remains
committed to community outreach programs that improve community infrastructure
and improve installation resilience.
Question. Does the current budget for this program support this critical commu-
nity outreach program?
Answer. Yes, it does. The FY24 budget request for OLDCC is $118.2 million. The
Department appreciates the work the OLDCC does with states and communities to

---

244
respond to defense activities and actions and will continue to ensure they have the
resources necessary to fully carry out their programs of assistance.

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS
Question. Budget Top-line: Today, China already has the largest Navy and Army
in the world. Its Navy and Air Force will continue to grow and modernize while this
budget request proposes to shrink our Navy and the Air Force. I am having trouble
squaring the Administration’s national security strategy with a budget request that
proposes to increase non-defense spending by 8.5 percent, while defense spending
would increase at a rate of 3.3 percent, which is less than half the rate of growth
for non-defense spending.
Does the budget request include only those China-related investments that fit
within external constraints (e.g. topline from OMB)?
Answer. The President’s FY 2024 Defense budget request is a strategy-driven
budget which aims to fund the right mix of capabilities necessary to deter and, if
necessary, fight to win in any contingency. The 2022 National Defense Strategy
(NDS) makes clear that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is our pacing chal-
lenge and we have crafted a budget that addresses that challenge.
As the PRC races to modernize its military, this budget makes major investments
in our dominance in all warfighting domains, including space and cyber, and invests
in integrated air and missile defenses and operational energy efficiency. The budget
also invests in critical munitions, including hypersonic and sub-sonic weapons, to
sustain our military advantage. The FY 2024 budget request includes $9.1 billion
for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, an increase of more than 40% over the FY 2023
enacted level. These funds will support the development of advanced capabilities,
new operational concepts, and a more resilient force posture in the Indo- Pacific re-
gion as we continue to work to build the Joint Force necessary to maintain domi-
nance and have a distributed and resilient security architecture in the region.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. Secretary Austin, thousands of U.S. service members, five ships and
more than 150 aircraft are participating in Northern Edge 2023 (NE23–1), a joint
field training exercise at various locations in and around Alaska, which began 4
May 2023. Preliminary reports state there have been challenges with the coordina-
tion of Link16 between the DoD and FAA.
Are these challenges having a tangible impact on our military competitiveness
both in the ability to execute training and to modernize our weapon systems?
Answer. The Northern Edge joint training exercise is an important opportunity for
the Department to learn about our capabilities in a high-end conflict, and to identify
challenges that we must address to remain dominant on the battlefield.
Link 16 is critical for coordinating joint fires between our partner nations and
ourselves and providing essential situational awareness to protect Allied forces from
hostile and friendly fire threats during this exercise. The spectrum employed by
Link 16 in CONUS is allocated to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and
used for radio navigation aids utilized in the national airspace, so we must strike
a balance between our needs for operational training and the FAA’s requirement to
prevent interference with navigation radars and collision avoidance systems.
From a military competitiveness perspective, there have been no significant im-
pacts to modernization efforts. However, DoD is currently working with FAA to de-
velop new certification and deconfliction procedures to expedite the approval of Link
16 systems to permit unconstrained operations in the national airspace.
Question. Can you discuss some of the current impacts experienced?
Answer. There have been some challenges to exercises and training due to this
current restriction of requiring FAA approval within 200 nautical miles of the
United States. My staff is engaged with the FAA to resolve this issue in a way that
supports DoD use of the National Airspace System while ensuring safe and efficient
use by commercial and general aviation. We also continue to work with the Services
to ensure these impacts are minimal by initiating requests as early as possible and
ensuring that FAA coordination is present during all exercise and event planning.
Question. Were there difficulties getting Link16 approval from the FAA for NE23–
1 and if the approval hadn’t gone through last minute what would the impacts have
been to this exercise?
Answer. While there were some challenges, FAA collaborated with DoD exten-
sively to facilitate the objectives of the Northern Edge exercise. Without the ap-
proval of the FAA, our exercise would not have delivered a realistic training envi-

---

245
ronment for our warfighters, and we would have lacked the interoperability we seek
with joint counterparts and allies.
Question. Secretary Austin, recently I was on a CODEL to Ukraine, and I con-
tinue to be awe-inspired by the resilience of the Ukrainian people and the leader-
ship of President Zelenskyy in the face of the unspeakable atrocities unleashed
against them by Vladimir Putin. More than ever, I am fully committed to ensuring
that Congress provides the assistance that Ukraine needs. This assistance is not a
waste and is vital to their success. We recently saw the Ukrainians use their Patriot
Battery to shoot down an inbound Russian ballistic missile. I want to thank you,
Mr. Secretary and Chairman Miley, for your unwavering support of Ukraine and for
the assistance you provided them. However, for all this success, there are areas in
which they need greater assistance. For example, Russia’s electronic warfare capa-
bilities have been taking a significant toll on Ukraine’s forces.
Mr. Secretary, can you explain what the DoD has done to bolster Ukraine’s elec-
tronic warfare capabilities?
Answer. The Department provides Ukraine with equipment based on a collective
assessment of the capabilities Ukraine needs to be successful on the battlefield,
while balancing U.S. readiness requirements, required training, sustainability, and
other factors. Our assistance to Ukraine has included defense articles to support
Ukraine’s electronic warfare capabilities such as electronic jamming equipment and
detection equipment. This equipment, combined with all the other security assist-
ance we have provided, has helped the Ukrainians to achieve success on the battle-
field.
Question. What are we doing to bolster our own electronic warfare capabilities?
Answer. The Department is taking actions to bolster our capabilities to fight in
a contested and congested electromagnetic spectrum. We are investing in advanced
technologies and fielding electromagnetic warfare capabilities with intelligent ana-
lytics to address the sophisticated near-peer threat. We continue to invest in offen-
sive electromagnetic attack capabilities and pathfinder initiatives which leverage
Service-specific electronic warfare investments and rapidly transition them to other
Services. In addition, we have increased manning and resourcing at USSTRATCOM
to expand training and exercising, which enable an assessment of the performance
of our operational forces and systems in a contested and congested electromagnetic
spectrum.
Question. Secretary Austin, in the FY2023 NDAA, Section 603 authorized several
policies that will drastically improve the quality of life of soldiers stationed in Alas-
ka. After making inquiries with leadership in the state, I understand there has been
no guidance released for how these new policies should be implemented.
Servicemembers are missing out on time-limited incentives to help alleviate the
unique hardships of serving in Alaska, as well as improve recruitment and retention
in the state. This is not AIP (Assignment Incentive Pay) from the Army pro-
grammed budget, which includes all AIP programs (Korea, USASOC, CYBER, Oper-
ational Deployments, etc.) whereas when soldiers arrive in Alaska and signs a writ-
ten agreement to serve the prescribed tour. Congressional intent is for this to be
in addition to what the Army is currently providing service members through AIP.
What is the status on implementation of Section 603(a) of P. L. No. 117–263 re-
garding cold weather special duty pay?
Answer. The Department thanks Congress for enacting laws that allow the De-
partment to assign incentive pay and special duty pay to members serving in cold-
weather locations. Implementation of policies pertaining to cold weather special
duty pay is on track.
The Military Departments have the necessary flexibility to offer the monetary in-
centives Congress envisioned to Service members assigned to cold weather locations.
Monetary incentives in these locations are dependent on and driven by the needs
of the individual Services. The Secretaries of the Military Departments have suffi-
cient authority to establish or abolish assignment incentive pay or special duty pay
for cold weather and to increase or decrease the amounts payable for any assign-
ment, location, or unit at any time as necessitated by mission requirements. These
incentives are currently being implemented within existing restrictions and limita-
tions in accordance with the needs of the individual Services. In addition to the one-
time, lump-sum assignment incentive pay the Army pays to Soldiers accepting as-
signments to Alaska, members of all Services serving in Alaska receive an overseas
cost-of-living allowance to compensate them for the increased costs of non-housing
goods and services. Furthermore, members assigned to installations above the Arctic
Circle receive $150 per month in hardship duty pay.
Question. When should servicemembers expect to begin to receive a cold weather
duty pay?

---

246
Answer. Service members can expect to receive cold weather duty pay if the Sec-
retary of the Military Department concerned determines such pay is required to
meet and/or maintain mission requirements.
Question. Secretary Austin, in response to Executive Order 14017, the DoD draft-
ed a report titled Review of Critical Minerals and Materials—Department of De-
fense. This report highlights the challenges that DoD faces in their efforts to main-
tain secure supply chains and reduce net import reliance on necessary strategic and
critical minerals. For many who have been following critical minerals, this report
looks a lot like the reports that came before it. It screams out loud that we have
a problem. It highlights the current vulnerabilities we face with our high levels of
import reliance for some of these minerals and it highlights the potential dangers
that reliance poses for the United States.
Given that this report is nearly 2 years old, please explain what progress the de-
partment has made in addressing the key concerns?
Answer. America’s defense industrial base is one of our core strategic assets and
we are focused on shoring up this advantage, including by on-shoring several de-
fense supply chains and mineral production. The Department’s FY24 budget request
invests more than $250 million in critical materials. We are also deploying several
tools to mitigate reliance on foreign produced critical minerals. This includes in-
creasing our stockpiles and investing domestic capability under the Defense Produc-
tion Act, where practicable.
Question. Are we more or less import reliant on these minerals now than we were
2 years ago?
Answer. On balance, the Department’s net import reliance for 2023 is approxi-
mately the same compared to 2021. Reducing the Department’s reliance on imports
will occur over the long-term. DoD has made key investments over the last 2 years
to reduce import reliance for strategic and critical materials to safeguard supply
chains and preserve national security. The DoD has awarded and is continuing to
evaluate awards for Defense Production Act title III investment funds to build do-
mestic mining and processing capacity for a range of critical materials, including
rare earth elements, battery storage minerals, and more.
Question. How has the war in Ukraine changed the DoD’s priority of addressing
the vulnerabilities in this report?
Answer. The war in Ukraine has reinforced the urgent need to secure supply
chains for critical materials necessary for key DoD systems. The recent Presidential
Waiver authorizing the use of the Defense Production Act to bolster domestic capac-
ity for materials and systems demonstrates the Administration’s and DoD’s commit-
ment to this effort. The waiver allows DoD to expand domestic production capabili-
ties for key minerals to help secure munitions supply chains. The war in Ukraine
has provided real-world data on supply chain dynamics in times of crisis, informa-
tion which is informing analysis to model DoD materials stockpiling needs.
Question. Congress supported the recommendation to open title III DPA funds for
EV mineral projects. Can you please provide information into what projects have
been funded, how much funding has been awarded to date, and the number of appli-
cations DoD has received for funding?
Answer. The Department is grateful for Congressional support in our efforts to se-
cure the battery supply chain. Batteries are a vital component in weapon systems,
including missiles and munitions. The Inflation Reduction Act provided DoD’s DPA
fund with $250 million to address sourcing for these vital raw materials. Currently,
DoD is evaluating various proposals to resolve gaps in this supply chain. These po-
tential projects range from feasibility studies to modernization and construction of
production facilities. Planned investments in battery materials include graphite,
lithium, manganese, nickel, and cobalt with an average project value of $28 million.
The Department anticipates announcing awards in the next few months.
Question. What additional authorities or resources does the DoD require to reduce
the overall level of vulnerability that this report laid out?
Answer. DoD’s continued efforts to secure critical and strategic materials require
Congressional support of the Department’s FY24 budget request. DoD has several
key methods for investing in the industrial base, including the DPA’s title III pro-
gram and the Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS) program. Our budg-
et request includes $968.6 million in DPA and $1 billion in IBAS funding to con-
tinue the Department’s commitment to strengthening the domestic industrial base
essential to national defense.
The Department also submitted a legislative proposal that, among other things,
would expand the definition of the ‘‘domestic industrial base’’ within the DPA to in-
clude our AUKUS partners Australia and the United Kingdom. Expanding the defi-
nition of ‘‘domestic industrial base’’ would strengthen DoD’s ability to secure critical
materials, establish robust secondary markets, and leverage allied nations to enrich

---

247
U.S. manufacturing and industrial base capabilities, increasing the nation’s advan-
tage in a competitive environment.
In addition, the National Defense Stockpile program is key to reducing U.S. vul-
nerability to near-term supply disruptions. The current stockpile inventory is insuf-
ficient to meet projected U.S. materials needs in the event of a national emergency.
Appropriations would enable the National Defense Stockpile to acquire materials
critical to preparedness, readiness, and national security.

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM
Question. Section 1204 of the FY23 NDAA modified the authorities for the Irreg-
ular Warfare Center that was first authorized in the FY21 NDAA. It requires you
to submit to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, within 180 days,
a plan for establishing the Center, including a determination as to the desirability
of establishing it at a university through a partnership like a UARC.
I would like to note, first, that the 180-day deadline for that plan is fast approach-
ing—June 21 will be 180 days since the President signed the NDAA on December
23. That’s a little less than six weeks from now.
I am aware that last July you directed an ‘‘expedited’’ basing analysis to find the
permanent home for the Center. But that was more than 9 months ago now, and
you have not even taken the first step of submitting to Congress the criteria by
which a site will be selected. So, as far as we know, you have made zero progress
in selecting a site.
I will further note that the strategic basing analysis was your idea—it is not man-
dated by statute, nor directed by either the FY21 or the FY23 authorization. In fact,
Congress has repeatedly signaled its intent to have the center located at and oper-
ated as a partnership with a civilian research university, and the NDAA also ex-
pressed the sense of Congress that the center should be named in honor of our late
colleague, Senator John McCain. The preferred path here is clear.
It has been more than 28 months since Congress gave you the authority and the
resources to establish the center in accordance with this vision. Congress has re-
newed the appropriation three times now, and we have essentially nothing to show
for it. Meanwhile, the challenges the center is meant to address are only growing
more acute. Frankly, our adversaries are unmoved by your commitment to this pro-
tracted bureaucratic process.
Can I have your commitment to delivering by June 21 a plan to establish the cen-
ter in accordance with congressional intent?
Answer. Yes, the Irregular Warfare Center (IWC) report will be provided in June
2023. The Department has determined that the final location for the IWC will be
at a DoD installation in order to address the IWC’s inherently governmental tasks
and will note this determination in the report. However, the Department will con-
tract for irregular warfare (IW) research, curriculum development, and teaching
support with a civilian institution of higher education—including by establishing a
Center of Excellence or University Affiliated Research Center. The Department has
identified several DoD installations as potential locations for the Center and ap-
proved a set of criteria for evaluating those options. While the Department is still
identifying the optimal arrangement for the civilian institution partnership, the pri-
ority of the Department is to identify an arrangement through a robust competition
that optimally supports the IWC’s prescribed mission areas and can be completed
expeditiously. The IWC reached initial operating capability in October 2022 and is
conducting IW programs in accordance with section 345 of title 10, United States
Code, as we identify a final location. The Department is committed to keeping Con-
gress informed on this issue.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO
Question. What specific steps is the Department of Defense taking to analyze pro-
duction constraints, and to expand capacity, at facilities within the (1) organic de-
fense industrial base and (2) U.S. energetics industrial base?
Answer. The Department is laser-focused on ensuring that our defense industrial
base is resilient, and we appreciate the support from Congress as we work together
to re-invigorate its capacity. In particular, our depots help ensure that our weapons
systems are well-maintained, which is critical to maintaining readiness and is at the
core of our strength as a Department.
Over the past 2 years, the Department established organic industrial base (OIB)
goals that define priorities, constraints, risks, and opportunities within the OIB to
meet current and future readiness objectives. In addition, the Department created

---

248
an ammunition capacity framework assessment to facilitate production require-
ments to meet war munitions readiness levels.
Our energetics base is also essential to generate new and innovative technologies.
The Department is investing directly in the energetics industrial base, including
over $200 million in onshoring energetics production that are high risk due to for-
eign-sourced or single-sourced materials.
Question. What mechanisms are currently available to the Department of Defense
to provide support or capacity expansion for the organic industrial base?
Answer. The Military Services provide direct investments to the OIB through the
regular appropriations process, as well as Ukraine supplementals and replenish-
ment funding. The Department also can utilize the Defense Production Act to expe-
dite and expand the OIB to promote the national defense.
The Department also exercises existing authorities to designate depot-level activi-
ties and military arsenals as Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence. This
encourages the use of Public- Private Partnerships to maximize the use of OIB ca-
pacity, reduce cost of ownership of industrial facilities, and leverage private sector
investment to accelerate efforts like plant and equipment recapitalization.
Question. Understanding the recent adjustment making the organic industrial
base newly eligible for Defense Production Act funding, is the Department currently
lacking any other authorities that would help provide support for the organic indus-
trial base? If so, what are those authorities?
Answer. The Department does not lack any authorities to provide necessary sup-
port to the OIB.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. For good reason, when we talk about China, we spend a lot of our time
talking about its bad behavior in the Taiwan Strait.
However, we can’t overlook the fact that China’s global ambitions are presenting
problems for every Combatant Command, including in Africa and Latin America. If
we only prepare for a high-end Indo-Pacific fight, we will come up short worldwide.
Chairman Milley, how are Combatant Commanders in AFRICOM and
SOUTHCOM adjusting and planning for increased PRC activities within their areas
of operation?
Answer. The Joint Staff provides each Combatant Commander with campaign and
posture planning guidance to ensure their strategies are globally integrated and
support our National Security priorities.
In line with this guidance, AFRICOM has developed a strategic competition
framework that takes into account the PRC’s activities in Africa, and which is de-
signed to adapt as required with dynamic conditions. Their plans are fully nested
within global priorities, and synchronized with other Combatant Commands, the
interagency, and select partners and allies to ensure unity of effort.
Key efforts include monitoring PRC basing activity, countering Illegal Unreported
Unregulated (IUU) fishing through increased maritime domain awareness, intel-
ligence sharing with partner nations to expose illicit or malign activity, and security
sector cooperation/capacity building to help African partner states to resist coercion
and conduct independent security activities.
AFRICOM continues to see tangible results from their activities, as many of our
African partners continue to request increased U.S. security sector cooperation, and
training.
The Joint Force participates in a globally integrated approach to deterrence that
seeks to deny the PRC the perceived benefits of aggression, while strengthening
partnerships with, and the capabilities of, states across the SOUTHCOM AOR. By
closely monitoring China’s military and dual-use activities in the region while sup-
porting our regional partners, we aim to mitigate Beijing’s malign influence and
maintain our position as the partner of choice.
To do this, SOUTHCOM is extensively engaged in security cooperation efforts that
train partner nation personnel and modernize equipment. Through Foreign Military
Sales, Foreign Military Financing, the transfer of Excess Defense Articles, Joint Ex-
ercises, the National Guard’s State Partnership Program, and the International
Military Training and Education Program, we help our partners meet shared
threats to regional security, while demonstrating U.S. values and commitment.
The Joint Force also counters China’s influence by supporting the people of Latin
America and the Caribbean in ways that highlight shared American values. In 2022,
for example, the USNS COMFORT hospital ship deployed to five countries in the

---

249
region, treating over 30,000 patients. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
also works with SOUTHCOM and regional partners on infrastructure development
projects that advance U.S. security interests. In Peru, USACE is helping the Peru-
vian Navy to build port facilities, and in Ecuador, USACE is mitigating the negative
effects of a substandard PRC construction project at the Coca Coda Dam. Activities
like these, and many others, build good will and enhance our readiness and posture
to operate in the region. Together, SOUTHCOM’s efforts help limit China’s ability
to expand its military influence in the region.
Question. The War in Ukraine is now entering its second year, and both sides are
gearing up for a spring offensive.
There are some who argue that given the threat from China, we can’t afford to
invest in Ukraine. I strongly disagree, but defer to our military experts.
General Milley, simply put, why is our continued support of, and investment in,
Ukraine critical to our own national security?
Answer. Russia poses an immediate and persistent threat to international peace
and stability. Providing security assistance to Ukraine, coupled with Ukraine’s bat-
tlefield success against Russian aggression, sends a deterrent signal to our potential
adversaries. Alongside our allies and partners, America is helping to make Russia’s
war on Ukraine a strategic failure. The overwhelming multinational response to
Russia’s unprovoked and unlawful war against Ukraine to restore international
order is unprecedented and vital to the security of sovereign nations across the
globe.
Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons to load up our
weapons magazines for future contingencies.
In this year’s budget, the Department is proposing multi-year procurement agree-
ments for 9 different munitions. This would provide significant predictability and
stability to the industrial base.
Chairman Milley, are these planned procurement quantities enough to fund our
munitions requirements for potential future conflicts and rebuild our stockpile?
Answer. We thank Congress for the multi-year procurement and other flexible ac-
quisition authorities granted in recent legislation. Multi-Year Procurement (MYP)
authorities will improve taxpayer buying power, bolster inventory, and provide a
more stable and predictable demand signal to industry.
Following 20 years of conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq to combat terrorism, the
Department is shifting its focus to near-peer conflict. The Department is constantly
evaluating its munitions inventories and munitions procurement strategies, and this
realignment of the munitions ecosystem will take time. Our PB24 request includes
plans to pursue MYP for five munitions and will continue to identify additional op-
portunities to leverage existing MYP authorities, and recommend additional au-
thorities. We will continue to work closely with industry to expand production ca-
pacity and deliver the needed quantities of munitions, while being good stewards
of the capital provided by the American taxpayer.
Question. This budget request is again proposing record investments in research
and development. You are asking for $145 billion dollars in R&D spending, which
is more than $5.2 billion over the fiscal year 2023 enacted amount.
General Milley, for years, R&D has been used to mature and prototype tech-
nologies like hypersonic weapons and artificial intelligence. These technologies will
give us decisive capabilities in a near-peer competition with China, so when will
they become real programs that are fielded at scale? My concern is that we are at
risk of falling into the trap of ‘perennial prototyping’, and not actually delivering
capability in relevant numbers to our troops by increasing procurement. This budget
does not transition prototypes to procurement in significant numbers.
Answer. The Joint Staff continues to work with Combatant Commands, leveraging
a portfolio management approach, to highlight our capability gaps, requirements,
and prototyping opportunities. Further, the Joint Force is continually experimenting
with new technologies to identify those capabilities most needed by the warfighter.
While not every effort matures into a game changing capability, those that do tran-
sition often face challenges in crossing the ‘‘valley of death’’ from R&D to procure-
ment. To facilitate technological transition the department has established new pro-
totype pathways such as the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve (RDER) and
the Accelerate the Procurement and Fielding of Innovative Technologies (APFIT)
pilot. We have organizations such as the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) and De-
fense Innovation Unit (DIU) to help guide promising technologies to programs. And
the department is leveraging acquisition authorities such as Middle Tier-Acquisi-
tions (MTA) to speed the delivery of innovation to our warfighters.
For example, our first land battery of the Army’s Long Range Hypersonic Weapon
(LRHW) will achieve its initial operational capability in FY23 thanks to the MTA
pathway. In FY25 this hypersonic capability will expand to the sea as the Navy’s

---

250
Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) program achieves initial operational capability
using the same missile as the LRHW. CPS will also deploy in the payload modules
of VIRGINIA class SSNs currently under construction.
We will endeavor to prioritize initiatives that enable R&D projects to deliver re-
sults in operationally-relevant timelines to allow us to deter and, if necessary, pre-
vail against threats.
Question. Congress has established a Commission to review the Department’s
budget process and make recommendations to speed up the process of getting stuff
to the warfighter. Often, these Commissions point the finger at Congress (in some
cases, rightfully so!) without addressing barriers inside the Department that you
could fix yourself.
Chairman Milley, do you feel the warfighter is getting a fair shake in articulating
their needs?
Answer. In terms of addressing warfighter needs, I believe the Joint Capabilities
Integration and Development System (JCIDS) offers our individual Services and
Combatant Commands the venue necessary to identify requirements and inform our
acquisition enterprise. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council provides nec-
essary strategic guidance while facilitating warfighter need identification from the
Combatant Commands to ensure that our capability development efforts are con-
cept-driven and threat-informed. We will continue to work with Congress and across
the Department to align requirements, resourcing, and acquisition activities to ac-
celerate the fielding of capabilities to the warfighter.

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. Thank you for what you do. General Milley,
your record speaks for itself. Thank you very much.
This Defense Committee will reconvene on Tuesday, May 16, at
10 a.m., in a classified session to hear from the Director of Military
Defense Agency and the Commander of U.S. Northern Command
on the Budget Request for Hypersonic Threats, Missile Defense,
and the Protection of the U.S. Homeland.
With that, we stand in recess.
[Whereupon, at 11:26 a.m., Thursday, May 11, the subcommittee
was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, May 16.]

---

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2023

U.S. SENATE,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9:30 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Tester, Durbin, Baldwin, Shaheen, Collins,
Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE
STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON, CHIEF OF THE NA-
TIONAL GUARD BUREAU

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. Good morning. We are going to call this com-
mittee to order. I want to begin by welcoming our witnesses. I
thank you all for being here to discuss your fiscal year 2024 budget
priorities.
General Bellon, I think this is your last appearance before this
committee. We extend a particularly warm welcome to you and
wish you the best in your upcoming retirement. And we don’t really
care whether you retire in Maine or Montana——
[Laughter.]
Senator TESTER. But either one of the places will work, okay.
Senator COLLINS. Split the year, maybe.
Senator TESTER. Yes—house in each State. You can move back
and forth. Either one will be a heck of a lot better in Kansas, right?
[Laughter.]
Senator TESTER. At any rate, I want to say thank you for what
you guys do. The National Guard and Reserves have always done
more with less, fewer full-time personnel, smaller budgets, older
weapons systems and vehicles, and aging IT infrastructure and fa-
cilities.
The men and women that you lead have one foot in civilian life
and the other foot in the military. They juggle their homes, their
families, their duties while unselfishly serving their country, both
here and abroad.
And the workload certainly isn’t decreasing, and the ongoing mis-
sion in the Southwest border, as well as your support to European
(251)

---

252

Command, demonstrate exactly that. However, over the last 5
years alone, the National Guard and Reserves collective forces have
shrunk by more than 40,000 servicemembers.
You are not immune from recruiting challenges that our active-
duty military services face, nor are you immune from disruptive
impacts of Government shutdowns, continuing resolutions. It is my
sincere hope that with the threat of Government default hopefully
averted, we can now make progress on passing the Government’s
budget on time, get it out of the cycle of annual continuing resolu-
tions.
I want to hear how you are managing these challenges and how
you are providing a ready modernized Guard and Reserve Force, as
well as ensuring the healthy work life balance and rewarding mili-
tary career for these men and women.
Once again, I want to thank you for being here. I want to thank
you for your testimony ahead of time. But before you begin that
testimony, I want to turn it over to Susan Collins. Senator.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for hold-
ing this hearing on the National Guard and Reserve component fis-
cal year 2024 budget request. As the Chairman is well aware, I am
very concerned about the budget request and its adequacy. The citi-
zens Soldiers of the Guard and Reserve serve in the proud tradition
of the Minutemen who fought for the very founding of our country.
In fact, the 133rd Engineer Battalion of the Maine National
Guard has an unbroken line of service from 1760 to this very day.
That is a distinction of which we are all very proud in the State
of Maine. By design and consistent with the tradition of our Na-
tion’s founding, the United States military is not able to fight a
war without the Guard and Reserve.
For the past 2 decades, Guard and Reservists have accounted for
nearly half of deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. The Guard has
also borne the brunt of supporting the Department of Homeland
Security along the Southern borders since 2018, and they will con-
tinue to do so until our border is finally secured.
The need to properly resource ready, well-equipped, and inte-
grated Guard and Reserve components could not be more clear. The
Guard’s State Partnership Program is also an essential inter-
national security cooperation tool. To date, Guard units have
formed ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) partnerships with
100 countries around the world.
The Maine Guard’s partnership with Montenegro paved the way
for that country’s successful accession to NATO (North Atlantic
Treaty Organization) in 2017. And yet the President’s budget re-
quest cuts the Guard and Reserve budget by $3 billion compared
to fiscal year 2023 enacted levels, impeding both modernization
and readiness.
As General Hokanson has previously shared with the committee,
the National Guard represents a lower cost option to deliver deter-
rence and combat power. I understand all of you have considerable
equipment shortfalls, and none of you has parity with the active
components in terms of fielding the most modern capabilities avail-
able.

---

253

Congress has repeatedly needed to provide the National Guard
and Reserves with up-to-date vehicles, platforms, and aircraft that
were excluded from inadequate budget requests. Finally, the com-
mittee is aware of efforts to transition DoD’s (Department of De-
fense) ongoing mission at the border from active duty to guard or
reserve units.
I would welcome an update from our witnesses on the status of
that plan and what the Department’s plans are to pay for those de-
ployments. I look forward to the testimony and join the Chairman
in thanking each of you for your service.
Senator TESTER. We will start out with General Hokanson, Chief
of the National Guard Bureau. General, you have the floor.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON

General HOKANSON. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins,
and esteemed members of the subcommittee, thank you for the op-
portunity to testify before you today. Your investment in the Na-
tional Guard has built a ready, capable, and professional force vital
to our Nation’s defense and our communities in times of crisis.
Thank you for your support. I would also like to recognize the ef-
forts of my wife, Kelly, and our senior enlisted adviser, Tony
Whitehead, for their support and partnership in addressing Soldier,
Airmen, and family needs.
As a community-based force with the authorities to perform al-
most any mission, ensuring healthy and resilient Guardsmen and
families is not only our highest priority, it is foundational to all we
do. This is my third time before you on behalf of the Soldiers, Air-
men, and families at the National Guard.
In that time, the National Guard has repeatedly demonstrated
its capability, capacity, and readiness, both at home and overseas,
on a historic scale. Over the past 3 years, we performed over 28
million man-days in our communities, responding to emergencies of
every kind. And as I speak, Guardsmen are supporting typhoon re-
lief operations in Guam.
In the last 3 years alone, the National Guard has rescued or
saved 18,826 individuals. In the midst of all those events, our for-
mations still met every one of our overseas deployments. This in-
cluded the Nation’s final days in Afghanistan, where National
Guardsmen helped defend the Kabul airport, evacuate refugees,
and then assist with Operation Allies Refuge.
One of our other missions is the Joint Multinational Training
Group-Ukraine. In concert with California’s 30 year State partner-
ship with Ukraine, our Guardsmen helped establish a training cen-
ter in Ukraine after Russia’s first invasion in 2014. Focused on
combat arms and lessons learned, our National Guard trainers
were some of the last to leave Ukraine before Russia’s unprovoked
invasion.
A few months after the war began, we reestablished our training
group and have been training our partners every single day since
then. Today, every Combatant Commander leverages our State
Partnership Program, which was recently mentioned, now includes
100 nations around the globe.
Always ready, always there is not just our motto. It is our prom-
ise to America. A promise we have kept for over 386 years. And in

---

254

the 2,800 communities we call home, they know whenever or wher-
ever a disaster occurs, the National Guard will be there because we
already are.
As I begin my final year as chief, there are still many things we
must accomplish to ensure the National Guard remains always
ready, always there. Today, I will shorten that list to four priority
areas. The first is our Air National Guard units who have been
performing space missions for over 28 years. In 1947, when the Air
Force was established, the Air Guards’ 29 original squadrons were
established concurrently, and today’s Air Force is the envy of the
world.
In 2019 when the Space Force was formed, it did not address
nearly 30 percent of its operational squadrons that reside in the
National Guard. With 1,000 personnel in 14 units, we are almost
all tooth and no tail. These highly skilled Airmen are absolutely
vital to the success of this space mission, and just like our Air
Force, we want today’s Space Force to be the envy of the world.
The second is premium free healthcare for currently serving
Guardsmen and Reservists. There are many things we can surge
in times of emergency, but medical readiness is not one of them.
Access to care is critical to medical readiness and the number one
concern I hear from our Guardsmen and recruiters when I visit our
States and territories. To help recruit and retain the most talented,
skilled, and ready force, all National Guard servicemembers, re-
gardless of status, need medical coverage.
This is a matter of readiness, a matter of duty to the Guardsmen
who serve and sacrifice for our Nation. We are working closely with
the Adjutants General and the Defense Health Agency to clarify
the number of Guardsmen this would impact and what current pro-
grams could be reduced or eliminated so we can accurately identify
the cost and the readiness benefit it could provide.
The third is recapitalization of Air Guard fighter squadrons. We
have 25 fighter squadrons in the Air Guard, and our Nation needs
every single one of them. By working with the Air Force and Con-
gress, we believe there is a path to recapitalize all 25 squadrons
to the F–35, F–15EX, and our newest F–16s through fleet leveling
and new aircraft buys.
This would help the Air Force divest its older platforms and re-
tain the capability, capacity, and force structure it needs to help
meet Combatant Command and warfighting requirements.
Lastly, I ask for your support in meeting the intent of the Na-
tional Guard Empowerment Act. To be a full member of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and appropriately represent our 430,000 Guardsmen
and their families, our Vice Chief cannot do that effectively as a
subordinate to his peers.
In closing, I want to thank you again for the National Guard we
have today. All we do would not be possible without your support
that you provide to our Soldiers, Airmen, and their families. I look
forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON
Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and esteemed members of the Sub-
committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this statement prior to my testi-
mony. Your investment in the National Guard has built a ready, capable, profes-

---

255
sional force that is vital to the Joint Force and our American communities in times
of crisis. Thank you for your ongoing support.
I would also like to recognize the efforts of my wife Kelly and Senior Enlisted Ad-
visor Tony Whitehead for their support and partnership in addressing Soldier, Air-
men, and family needs. We are a unique force with unique needs and ensuring
healthy and resilient Guardsmen and families is our highest priority and
foundational to all we do.
NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY

The 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) identifies the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) as our pacing challenge and most consequential strategic competitor.
The NDS focuses the Department of Defense (DoD) on this pacing challenge while
taking steps to manage other threats in this dynamic strategic environment.
The National Guard plays a critical role in implementing the NDS and advancing
DoD’s priorities of: Defending the homeland; deterring attacks against the United
States, our allies, and our partners; deterring aggression while being prepared to
prevail in conflict when necessary; and ensuring our future military advantage
through a resilient Joint Force and defense ecosystem.1 These priorities are how we
intend to meet and deter threats to our national security and the rules-based inter-
national order.
National Guard Soldiers and Airmen are actively engaged in every aspect of our
NDS. As twenty percent of the Joint Force, we are a significant component of inte-
grated deterrence. As the combat reserve of the Army and the Air Force—manned,
trained and equipped to fight our Nation’s wars, and currently serving in every
Combatant Command—we play a key role in campaigning. As a dual-status force
that builds key partnerships at every level—including international state partners,
the Federal interagency, regional emergency management, and local law enforce-
ment—we provide enduring advantages not found anywhere else in DoD. The NDS
cannot succeed without the National Guard.
NATIONAL GUARD SUPPORT TO THE NDS

Priority one is defending the homeland, and the National Guard is the funda-
mental element in this regard. The National Guard has a community-based force
structure, and our wide-ranging geographic distribution provides unique advantages
to defending the homeland. Guard members defend the National Capital Region,
support Ground Based Missile Defense in Colorado and Alaska; man non-stop, 24-
hour intercontinental ballistic missile defense systems from Alaska and California;
protect American air sovereignty; support the U.S. Space Force with fourteen oper-
ational space squadrons; mitigate critical cyber vulnerabilities; and use National
Guard manning, training, and equipment to assist our communities in times of
need.
Priority two is deterring strategic attacks against our homeland and our allies
and partners. This priority clearly demonstrates both the interconnected nature of
the threats and challenges we face and the cooperative approach we must take to
counter them. Through the National Guard’s State Partnership Program’s (SPP) 88
partnerships with 100 nations around the globe, Soldiers and Airmen experience the
global operating environment, develop military-to-military relationships, improve
readiness, enhance access and influence, and ensure our Nation has trusted, capa-
ble, interoperable Allies and partners at our side. With the assistance of Congress,
the SPP has proven to be one of the most valuable security cooperation programs
available and continues to grow in support of the National Security Strategy, NDS
and Combatant Commanders’ theater security objectives. Fully funding the SPP
through the services will ensure continued access to timely, consistent, and ade-
quate resources to maximize the program’s potential and historically robust return
on investment. As the NDS makes clear, mutually beneficial alliances and partner-
ships are an enduring strength, and a key to the integrated deterrence and cam-
paigning efforts of the National Guard.
Priority three is deterring aggression and preparing to prevail in conflict when
necessary. This speaks directly to the National Guard’s purpose: fighting and win-
ning our Nation’s wars. The National Guard is an operational force. We participate
in combat, peacekeeping and stability operations, training exercises, and humani-
tarian missions’ shoulder-to-shoulder with our parent services, and the Joint Force.
We serve in every Combatant Command, enhance the readiness of the Joint Force,
and support missions within the Global Force Management Allocation Plan
(GFMAP) process. Being fully modernized and interoperable with our parent serv-

1 The 2022 National Defense Strategy, p. 1.

---

256
ices and the Joint Force ensures we present a combat-credible force that can suc-
cessfully deter and defend aggression from our strategic competitors and prevail in
conflict if needed.
Priority four is ensuring our future military advantage by building a resilient
Joint Force and defense ecosystem. This priority speaks to both people and sys-
tems—strengthening the resilience of the Soldiers and Airmen who serve, improving
the resilience of the critical infrastructure on which we rely, and enhancing the re-
silience of our organization. We continue to devote time and resources to improve
all aspects of National Guard culture to make service more appealing and inclusive,
to include fostering an environment that values education and understands the im-
portance of mental and physical well-being. We also continue efforts to enhance na-
tional resilience by protecting our nation’s critical assets, communications and con-
trol, and infrastructure; and increasing our ability to withstand the effects of nat-
ural and manmade disasters.
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

The Department’s FY 2024 budget request helps build a Joint Force that is the
most lethal, resilient, survivable, agile, and responsive in the world. Paced to the
China threat, it builds combat-credible forces able to deter, defend, and defeat ag-
gression if required. It advances recruiting, retention, and readiness while enhanc-
ing unit and personal resilience; strengthens deterrence, Ally and partner nation ca-
pability, and interagency capacity. However, budgetary uncertainty and inflationary
pressures could erode buying power, stressing National Guard programs and per-
sonnel, and diminishing our Joint Force readiness. Continuing Resolutions in par-
ticular impede our ability to implement the NDS, hurts service members and their
families, and undermines the predictability needed for Reserve Component (RC) per-
sonnel to effectively support the Joint Force.
As I engage with senior leaders and service members throughout the 50 states,
three territories, and the District of Columbia, I remain concerned with several
issues that directly impact future readiness and the health of the force. I look for-
ward to working with the Subcommittee and your colleagues on solutions to address
the challenges before us.
National Guard Space Operations
For 28 years, National Guard space units have been providing missions as varied
as strategic missile warning, nuclear detection, space domain awareness, command
and control, and electromagnetic warfare, and the U.S. Space Force continues to
rely on these critical space capabilities. It is imperative we appropriately train, and
equip in-line with U.S. Space Force standards and U.S. Space Command priorities.
Modernization and Recapitalization
To fulfill NDS obligations, the National Guard must be deployable, sustainable,
interoperable and survivable on any battlefield, in any domain. For example, the Air
National Guard has twenty-five fighter squadrons today, each essential to the de-
fense of our Nation, our integrated deterrence capabilities, and our ability to cam-
paign. As the National Guard transitions from legacy platforms, it is essential we
pursue cost-effective solutions that preserve our capability, capacity and
generational experience to meet the today’s threats.
Recruiting and Retention
The National Guard provides the unique opportunity to combine military service
with a civilian career. Every member and potential recruit weigh the benefit of that
military service with impact on their lives and that of their families. We’ve taken
concrete steps to improve community outreach, bolster recruiting and retention pro-
grams, and foster a culture that makes service more appealing, inclusive, and se-
cure. Ensuring we recruit and retain America’s best in the National Guard must re-
main a top priority; to do so, every aspect of our recruiting and marketing enter-
prise must be fully resourced.
Healthcare
According to a 2019 Office of the Secretary of Defense study, roughly 60,000
Guardsmen are uninsured and lack access to healthcare when not in a duty status.
If unable to seek treatment for a physical ailment or mental health crisis or obtain
follow-on care due to a lack of insurance, it impacts their medical readiness and
ability to serve. We cannot surge medical readiness; our people must be ready when
they are needed. I have formed a working group dedicated to providing the best esti-
mate of cost and areas of potential savings and look forward to sharing those find-

---

257
ings soon so we can identify the true cost of premium-free healthcare options and
how it would impact the readiness of our force.
CONCLUSION

The NDS signals a new era of challenges and opportunities for our Nation. With
the support of Congress, the National Guard will continue to be a force for inte-
grated deterrence, campaigning, and building enduring advantages that empower
our Nation to compete and prevail. With your continued support, we boldly face the
future: Always Ready, Always There.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Hokanson. Next up, we
have General Daniels, Chief of the Army Reserve. General.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS, CHIEF OF
ARMY RESERVE
General DANIELS. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins,
distinguished members of the committee, on behalf of the 190,000
Soldiers and civilians of the Army Reserve, Command Sergeant
Major Lombardo and I thank you for this opportunity to testify,
and for your continued support to our Soldiers, civilians, their fam-
ilies, and our other employers.
Present in 20 time zones and on 5 continents, the Army Reserve
makes up nearly 20 percent of the total Army’s personnel, at just
5 percent of the total Army operation and maintenance budget.
We provide key units and capabilities with nearly half of the
Army’s maneuver support and a quarter of its force mobilization
capacity, while sustaining the mobilization and deployment of more
than 10,000 Soldiers and civilians annually.
As a Federal response partner, the Army Reserve maintains a
ready posture for defense support to civil authorities by providing
critical dual use capabilities such as petroleum distribution, water
purification, and railroad operations.
In an extremely challenging recruiting environment, our highest
priority is sustaining the resources required to recruit and retain
the best today and into the future. We also rely heavily on the sup-
port of families and communities, as well as the willingness of em-
ployers to share their best talent.
By changing our culture to refocus on tough, realistic training
done safely, we are helping to bridge the knowledge divide between
the military and the American public. This creates better experi-
ences for civilian Soldiers who want to share with their commu-
nities.
As we build the Army of 2030, we are grateful for the authoriza-
tions and appropriations that invest in our people, enhance readi-
ness, and accelerate equipment modernization to maintain superi-
ority over any potential threat.
The need for Reserve component duties to perform cannot be
overstated and is long overdue. That is why we support DoD pro-
posal to fundamentally redesign the current system, aligning bene-
fits to duties performed, and ensuring our Soldiers receive the enti-
tlements that they earn.
The Army Reserve also appreciates Congress’s efforts to improve
access to childcare. However, access to quality and affordable
childcare remains a challenge for our Soldiers, especially during
battle assembly weekends. As the Army Reserve pilots new initia-
tives and deepens partnerships, continued Congressional support to

---

258

address weekend childcare gaps will help enhance retention and
readiness.
Finally, as the Army Reserve looks to the future, leveraging the
National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account, or NGREA, re-
mains a key component of our modernization strategy. This fund-
ing enables the Army Reserve to fill mission critical shortages that
improve overall readiness interoperability.
Command Sergeant Major Lombardo and I are incredibly proud
to lead the men and women in America’s Army Reserve, and I look
forward to your questions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS
THE UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVE

READY NOW! SHAPING TOMORROW . . .

In today’s unpredictable global environment, the Army Reserve is more con-
sequential than ever. Since its establishment 115 years ago, the Army Reserve has
never failed to answer the call to serve. Since 1908, more than one million citizen
soldiers have been mobilized in defense of the nation—at home and around the
world.
The core strength of the Army Reserve is its ability to provide high-quality mili-
tary capabilities, enhanced by citizen soldiers’ civilian skills, education, training,
and experience. As the Army prepares for Multi-Domain Operations, harnessing pri-
vate sector education and expertise in areas such as artificial intelligence, cyber,
and sustainment are vital in providing the Army and the nation an asymmetric ad-
vantage against potential adversaries. These capabilities, critical during Large-Scale
Combat Operations, are also crucial in defending the homeland.
The Army Reserve is both a component and a command. Flexible and adaptable,
the Army Reserve provides the Army, combatant commanders, and the nation with
‘‘forces to rapidly surge and provide follow-on forces, thereby mitigating force struc-
ture reductions and impacts from prolonged operations.’’ On any given day, more
than 10,000 Army Reserve soldiers are mobilized or deployed in support of combat-
ant commands worldwide. Thousands more participate in deployment training or
annual Joint exercises that strengthen our alliances and partnerships, contributing
to integrated deterrence and campaigning. And on average, the Army Reserve sup-
ports the mobilization and deployment of more than 10,000 soldiers and civilians
from force generation installations annually.
The Joint Force cannot deploy, fight, and win without the Army Reserve. The
Army provides the bulk of sustainment forces to the joint fight, and the majority
of these capabilities reside in the Army Reserve. Citizen Soldiers maintain special-
ized skills required to support Large Scale Combat Operations—including theater-
opening and theater-level sustainment—as well as civilian-acquired skills, training,
and certifications that are costly to maintain on active duty, such as medical, cyber,
legal, engineering, and port operations.
BY THE NUMBERS

The Army Reserve has an FY23 authorized strength of 177,000 soldiers, includes
11,000 civilians, and is present in all 50 states and five U.S. territories. Fiscally effi-
cient, the Army Reserve supports the needs of the Total Force, with just 15% of the
component serving as fulltime support.
Making up nearly 20% of the Total Army’s personnel, the Army Reserve provides
critical units and capabilities—nearly half of its maneuver support, and a quarter
of its force mobilization capacity—at a cost of just 5% of the total Army Operation
and Maintenance budget.
More than 50% of the Army’s quartermaster and medical formations, over 80%
of its civil affairs, legal, psychological operations, and religious units, and over 40%
of its chemical and transportation forces reside in the Army Reserve. Some critical
enabling capabilities include petroleum distribution, water purification, and railroad
operations.
The Army Reserve maintains five installations and an Army Support Activity:
Fort Hunter Liggett and Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, California; Fort
McCoy, Wisconsin; Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico; Devens Reserve Forces Training
Area, Massachusetts; and Army Support Activity—Fort Dix, New Jersey. Addition-

---

259
ally, with 742 Army Reserve facilities, the Army Reserve’s dispersed footprint is in
every corner of the country, enabling the U.S. to project combat power and creating
an added layer of resiliency.
Each year, Army Reserve facilities support upwards of 335,000 servicemembers
from every Department of Defense (DoD) branch—partnering with Federal, state,
and local agencies for joint training missions—with ranges, maneuver areas, urban
assault, military transport aircraft-capable landing sites, transient barracks, and
dining facilities.
RECRUITING AND RETENTION

Preserving the all-volunteer force is vital to our national security interests. In an
extremely challenging recruiting environment, sustaining the resources required to
recruit and retain soldiers is critical to the Army Reserve’s ability to generate the
readiness required to deploy trained, capable, combat-ready, and lethal soldiers.
In fiscal year (FY) 2022, the Army Reserve recruited 9,400 new soldiers, falling
short of our mission. To close the gap, commanders, and staff are maximizing every
potential source of high-quality accessions and working to minimize preventable at-
trition.
Recruiting and retention investments include $164.4 million in incentives, and ap-
proximately 3,000 full-time soldiers directly supporting Army Reserve recruiting and
retention activities.
In 2022, the Army Reserve achieved 107% of the Army Reserve Active Component
to Reserve Component (AC2RC) mission by retaining more than 4,000 active compo-
nent service members. This program continues to perform strongly in FY 2023.
The Army Reserve Private Public Partnership Office (P3O) is contacting
transitioning active component members about the AC2RC program by linking
transitioning active duty servicemembers to civilian career pathways through con-
tinued service in the Army Reserve. This initiative—currently being implemented
at the soon to be Fort Liberty, currently known as Fort Bragg, Fort Stewart, Fort
Cavazos, Fort Bliss, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and Schofield Barracks—allows the
nation to retain valuable talent while providing transitioning service members with
civilian career opportunities.
P3O is also working with U.S. Army Recruiting Command to link new Army Re-
serve recruits with an employment specialist to explore their civilian career options.
In order to connect with the public—and future soldiers—we recently introduced
a new branding strategy, including a new logo and public outreach program to bet-
ter reflect today’s citizen-soldier—the selfless professional who balances the respon-
sibilities of both nation and family, uniform and civilian workplace.
SOLDIERS AND FAMILIES

Citizen Soldiers are invaluable to our nation’s defense, bringing civilian-acquired
skills and experiences to the Army Reserve, and personifying the Army’s values in
their local communities. The Army Reserve is a highly educated, experienced and
diverse force, which provides operational flexibility and strategic depth.
African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans com-
prise over half of the Army Reserve force. Women comprise more than 25% of all
Army Reserve soldiers and 22% of general officers.
Thirty-three percent of all Army Reserve soldiers hold a bachelor’s degree or high-
er. In the officer ranks, 32% hold master’s degrees and 13% hold doctorates. Soldiers
in the enlisted ranks are also pursuing higher education. More than 13% hold bach-
elor’s degrees, and nearly 4% have a master’s or doctoral degree—benefiting employ-
ers and the nation.
The Army Reserve relies heavily on the support of families and communities, as
well as the persistent willingness of employers to share their best talent. From fam-
ily-focused programs to quality-of-life initiatives and employer partnerships, the
Army Reserve’s focus on caring for soldiers and families is at the core of our shared
Army values—and crucial to the readiness and health of the force as we strive to-
wards improved work-life integration between Army Reserve requirements, civilian
career responsibilities, and family.
Army Reserve family programs continue to provide our geographically dispersed
soldiers and families across more than 1,200 communities with a clear path to com-
mand and community resources, assistance, and referrals for every aspect of mili-
tary life, including Military Onesource, childcare, food assistance, and behavioral
health resources.
The Army Reserve recruits and retains our soldiers where they live and work.
Providing civilian employers with advance notification of military commitments and

---

260
treating them as partners in national security demonstrates that everyone has a
role in serving the American people.
To support work-life integration, P3O links eligible team members to immediate
and long-term employment opportunities. This year, P3O partnered with more than
150 businesses across career fields such as engineering, healthcare, finance, cyber
security, and logistics. Through these connections, 730 soldiers, spouses, and family
members were hired—an 86% placement rate.
Through quality-of-life initiatives such as travel and lodging expenses, health, and
childcare programs, we continually improve how we care for our soldiers. From
training management to a focus on culture and work-life integration, the Army Re-
serve’s People First approach makes the Total Force stronger. The Army Reserve
focuses on supporting all aspects of a soldier’s life: families, civilian employment,
and educational goals, integrated with a rewarding uniformed experience that deliv-
ers the training, confidence, and leadership skills that employers seek.
ADDRESSING HARMFUL BEHAVIORS

The Army Reserve is evaluating programs and activities surrounding harmful be-
haviors to determine the effectiveness of existing efforts—taking a scientific, data-
based approach to decreasing risk factors and increasing protective factors.
The development and implementation of an Integrated Prevention Advisory Group
will allow a collaborative look at primary prevention activities, including policies,
programs, and practices that aim to prevent harmful behaviors—sexual harassment
and assault, as well as suicidal behavior and ideations will be particularly exam-
ined.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT/ASSAULT RESPONSE AND PREVENTION (SHARP)

The Army Reserve Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP)
program continues to provide staff assistance to every major subordinate command’s
program. Based on the results of an internal analysis—in coordination with Army’s
People First Task Force and the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault
in the Military recommendations as approved by the Secretary of Defense—the
Army Reserve is executing a SHARP Fusion Directorate pilot.
The 99th Readiness Division’s SHARP Fusion Directorate’s victim-centered pro-
gram is showing improvements in the ability of Sexual Assault Response Coordina-
tors, and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response victim advocates, in coordination
with law enforcement, to create a flexible and responsive system which streamlines
what can be a complex process—from making a report through case resolution and
long-term recovery. Established as a year-long program in July 2022, this virtual
alternative reporting process is tailored to the Army Reserve’s geographically dis-
persed force, leveraging technology to connect victims with providers throughout a
13-state region.
SUICIDE PREVENTION

Suicide remains one of the Army’s most complex challenges, and prevention re-
quires a comprehensive approach. In 2022, the Army Reserve experienced a slight
decrease in suicides—however, one suicide is one too many. Our suicide incident re-
ports reveal soldiers are demonstrating increased confidence in leaders and actively
seeking help. The Army Reserve supported nearly 500 soldiers needing help and
intervention through the support of unit leadership, Chaplain Corps, Suicide Pre-
vention Program Managers, Army Reserve Psychological Health Program, and Mili-
tary OneSource. An increased number—82%—of soldiers are seeking help on their
own initiative. Likewise, an increased number of leaders are recognizing changes in
behavior and engaging in intervention.
Families are on the front line of defense against suicide. The Army Reserve now
offers family members free virtual suicide prevention training to help them build
the skills to provide support and dispel any stigma about seeking care.
Virtual command team suicide prevention training assists commanders in build-
ing prevention programs that empower soldiers and leaders at all levels to identify
and address high-risk behavior early on. Soldiers—down to the squad-leader level—
are empowered to escort any soldier in crisis to immediate life-saving care.
TRAINING

With the statutory minimum of 39 days a year to meet individual and collective
readiness requirements, the Army Reserve focuses on tough, realistic training done
safely to generate the readiness required to support operations home and abroad.

---

261
Added emphasis on individual and collective training opportunities enhances unit
readiness and allows soldiers to improve their individual skills.
Optimizing the time to shape, grow, and retain the future force through effective
and efficient training and maintenance management allows soldiers to build pro-
ficiency in their mission-essential tasks and deepen their technical skills—giving
them a sense of purpose and fueling their passions.
By removing redundant administrative tasks and concentrating on creating the
kinds of relevant experiences citizen soldiers will want to bring back to their com-
munities, the Army Reserve is changing its culture—and helping to bridge the
knowledge divide between the military and the American public. As soldiers learn,
train, and grow, employers and members of more than 1,200 communities stand to
benefit from their accumulated knowledge, leadership, and technical expertise.
READINESS

The Army Reserve is present in 20 time zones and on five continents around the
world—around the clock. This presence makes a difference every day, in commu-
nities across America, and around the world. It also expands relationships with al-
lies and partners and serves as a critical deterrent against our near-peer adver-
saries.
An example of this integral role can be seen across Europe and in the Indo-Pa-
cific—the DoD’s priority theater—where the Army Reserve’s regional forces span
Hawaii, Alaska, America Samoa, Saipan, Guam, and 12 additional countries.
More than 7,000 soldiers and 43 units enable early-entry theater-opening and
sustainment of Joint operations across vast distances, strengthening our partner-
ships, enhancing interoperability, and increasing collective readiness. Combined
with additional staff augmentation and operational support from 13 commands on
the mainland, they deliver functional support to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, U.S.
Forces Korea, U.S. Forces Japan, and U.S. Army Pacific.
The Army Reserve strengthens logistics and sustainment to support of the Joint
Force in the Indo-Pacific and Europe, enhancing the Army’s readiness in the re-
gions. Our contested logistics capabilities ensure freedom of action and prolonged
endurance for our combatant commanders, extending operational reach to the vital
points of conflict.
The Army Reserve also supports Operation Pathways, a series of key inter-
national exercises, including Pacific Sentry and Talisman Saber in Australia,
Garuda Shield in Indonesia, and Salaknib in the Philippines. These exercises help
deter aggression, build joint readiness and interoperability, and increase the con-
fidence of our allies and partners across the Indo-Pacific.
Twenty-three units and more than 1,000 Army Reserve soldiers are also sup-
porting NATO missions in the U.S. European Command area of operations with a
broad spectrum of capabilities, including cyber, intelligence, logistics, transportation
and civil affairs.
Since the onset of war in Ukraine, the Army Reserve supplied more than 100
pieces of equipment, including armored personnel carriers, cargo trucks, and mine
countermeasure equipment under Presidential Drawdown Authority directives.
SUSTAINED FUNDING IS ESSENTIAL FOR CONTINUED NATO SUPPORT.

Army Reserve units regularly participate in realistic collective training events to
prepare for Large-Scale Combat Operations in a multi-domain environment. In FY
2022, 2,600 soldiers rotated through the National Training Center at Fort Irwin,
California, and more than 1,500 participated in collective training at the Joint Read-
iness Training Center at Fort Polk, Louisiana, honing the skills needed for future
multi-domain operations.
DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES

With soldiers and equipment strategically postured throughout the country, the
Army Reserve flexes critical assets to support Homeland Defense and Defense Sup-
port of Civil Authorities—such as ‘‘Heavy Lift’’ helicopters search and rescue, sup-
ply, medical, civil affairs, and engineer capabilities.
Army Reserve Emergency Preparedness Liaison Officers (EPLOs) stand ready to
support state and local authorities in times of natural and man-made disasters.
Over the past 5 years, more than 2,500 Army Reserve soldiers supported incident
response.
Recently, 23 EPLOs deployed to provide critical connectivity as Federal and mili-
tary officials reached out to communities in need during Hurricanes Ida, Fiona, Ian,
and Tropical Storm Nicole. EPLOs have also supported winter storm response in the
western United States.

---

262
Army Reserve aviation assets are among those called to provide key capabilities
needed for disaster response. UH–60 Blackhawk crews assisted in fire-fighting oper-
ations in central Texas, while CH–47 Chinook aircrews also assisted civilian first
responders in conducting search and rescue operations on Mount Rainier, Wash-
ington.
MODERNIZATION/FACILITIES/SHAPING TOMORROW

The Army Reserve is evolving to meet the challenges of our time—preparing not
only for the future of Large-Scale Combat Operations, but also for the increasingly
complex needs of the Joint warfighter in a multi-domain operational environment
by balancing mission-critical capabilities across the force spectrum.
To meet the evolving needs of the Army and the nation, we will simultaneously
focus on recruiting the next generation of Citizen Soldiers while ensuring that the
current force is Ready Now. Building on this, the Army Reserve will concentrate on
increasing interoperability through targeted modernization efforts and capability de-
velopment, ensuring seamless support to the Joint Force throughout the conflict
continuum.
The Army Reserve is modernizing its facilities and serving as a sustainability
leader in energy and water resilience, environmental compliance, solid waste man-
agement, vehicle electrification, and long-term sustainability planning.
As part of the ‘‘Defense Innovation Unit Electric Vehicle Support Equipment’’
pilot, the Army Reserve is also implementing a climate resiliency process, which in-
cludes recommendations on prioritizing projects that increase the resilience of build-
ings and natural infrastructure.
Soldiers assigned to the 75th Innovation Command are employed in a wide range
of career fields, bringing critical job experience and skill sets to accelerate innova-
tions and technologies. Areas of expertise include artificial intelligence, autonomy,
and robotics, block-chain, cyber, medical, synthetic biology, and space. As the Army
moves toward multi-domain operations, Army Reserve soldiers will play a critical
role in linking the private sector into the defense enterprise.
Professional skills in areas like defensive cyber operations provide valuable capa-
bilities. The Army Reserve provided 25% of the Total Army’s Cyber Protection
Teams aligned to the U.S. Cyber Command’s Cyber Mission Force. Our soldiers con-
duct defensive cyberspace operations in support of the Army, Combatant Com-
mands, the DoD, and Interagency operations worldwide.
The Army Reserve is preparing to conduct home-station defense cyberspace oper-
ations in support of Exercise Defender Europe 23—designed to support mission
partners and assist in real-world exercises.
As the Army Reserve looks to the future, leveraging National Guard and Reserve
Equipment Account funding is a key component of our modernization strategy. This
enables the Army Reserve to fill mission-critical shortages that improve overall
readiness and interoperability.
CONCLUSION

In an era of strategic competition, the Army needs forces capable of defeating ad-
versaries, responding to crises, and preparing for the future. To accomplish these
goals, the U.S. needs a dedicated Federal reserve force that is ready today and pre-
pared to shape the world of tomorrow. That force is the United States Army Re-
serve.
To deliver cutting-edge capabilities at home and abroad, America needs a modern-
ized, powerful, and resilient Federal reserve force of highly skilled men and women.
From force structure optimization to equipment modernization and operational re-
alignments, it will take the unique strengths and capabilities of each of the Army’s
components to ensure we are on a sustainable, strategic path.
The Army Reserve is grateful for the Congressional support of our Citizen Sol-
diers, civilians, and their families, along with resources that positively impact the
readiness and modernization efforts to ensure our adversaries cannot out-range or
outpace us on the traditional battlefields or in the new frontiers of space and cyber-
space.
As always, we are Ready Now! Shaping tomorrow . . .
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Daniels. Next, we have Ad-
miral Mustin.

---

263
STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL JOHN B. MUSTIN, CHIEF OF NAVY RE-
SERVE
Admiral MUSTIN. Good morning, Chair Tester, Ranking Member
Collins, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is my
distinct honor to report to you today alongside my peers Reserve
service chiefs and General Hokanson on the status and the vision
of America’s Navy Reserve.
I would like to begin by recognizing my wife Kim, whose stead-
fast support for 30 years exemplifies the unsung sacrifices typical
of our military spouses. And I would also like to thank Navy Re-
serve Force Master Chief Tracy Hunt for his tireless efforts in sup-
port of our enlisted Reserve Sailors.
Additionally, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation
for my colleague and friend, Lieutenant General Dave Bellon for
his exemplary multi-decade career of service in uniform. We are
going to miss you, General. Fair wind, shipmate.
Finally, I call the committee’s attention to the 103,000 Sailors,
the 450 civilians, the families who sustain them, and the thousands
of employers who value and enable the worldwide service of our
citizens Sailors.
All are essential to the success of our Reserve force. For more
than a century, the Navy Reserve has reliably responded when
needed in times of peace, in times of war. In the recent past, the
Navy Reserve provided the rapid activation of nearly 9,000 Sailors
in response to the coronavirus 19 pandemic and surged nearly 500
Sailors on equally short notice to support the ongoing security cri-
sis in Europe.
Most recently, they were instrumental to the execution of non-
combatant evacuation operations in Sudan, rapidly removing Amer-
ican citizens from harm’s way. These activations highlight the flexi-
bility, readiness, and value our citizens Sailors bring to the fight,
and yet these contributions merely hint at the demands expected
of the Navy Reserve in a conflict with a great power maritime com-
petitor.
The Navy Reserve is rapidly transforming to deliver a peerless
force designed, trained, and ready to fight confidently and boldly in
sustained multi-domain high end warfare. To this end, the singular
priority of our Navy Reserve is simple, warfighting readiness.
Modernizing Reserve equipment, training systems, and mobiliza-
tion processes is critical to delivering this readiness and a mandate
to ensure the readiness and availability of the critical response
team our service component and Combatant Commanders depend
upon.
To ensure our Sailors are ready to activate and serve on day one
of any conflict, the Reserve force must maintain parity with our ac-
tive counterparts and operate relevant, modern equipment.
To this end, procurement of the modern C–130 Juliet aircraft
variant to replace legacy C–130 airframes is the Navy Reserve’s
number one equipment priority. In the past year, Navy Reserve
fleet logistics squadrons flew 26,000 hours, moved 96,000 pas-
sengers, and 19 million pounds of cargo at a cost avoidance of $1
billion over alternative methods.
However, with an average age exceeding 3 decades, the current
C–130 fleet is unable to meet sustained fleet logistics requirements

---

264

due to obsolescence issues. In conflict, the strain on supply chain
will be an Achilles heel to contested logistics requirements and op-
erations.
The KC–130 Juliet is a more capable, modern airframe that de-
livers increased capacity supported by cost savings from parts, com-
monality, fuel efficiency, and reduced lifecycle costs, resulting in a
reduction of $1,000 per flight hour. In addition to equipment mod-
ernization, we are leveraging technology advancements to improve
and modernize access to work and training, and to bring the Navy
Reserve into the 21st century.
These comprehensive transformative improvements include hard-
ware and software upgrades, the creation of digital workflows, and
the implementation of policies and processes that harness our
greatest assets, the minds, talents, ideas, and civilian skills of our
Reserve Sailors.
In concert with these efforts are adaptive mobilization process,
demonstrated during our response to the COVID pandemic and
multiple mass mobilization exercises, will leverage the Navy Re-
serve’s nationally distributed infrastructure to locally mobilize
50,000 Sailors in only 30 days, rapidly, accurately, and at scale.
Our Reserve Sailors are central and vital to our Navy’s enduring
warfighting advantage, so we are investing in the personal and
professional development of every Sailor. We are committed to re-
cruiting and retaining the very best of our society, and we are
equally committed to maintaining a culture of excellence, elimi-
nating disruptive behaviors, ensuring Sailor wellness, and fostering
a diverse, inclusive culture.
Doing so is about warfighting readiness, and doing so enhances
the asymmetric advantage generated by our lead winning team. I
am grateful for the committee’s support of the Navy Reserve. Our
efforts are made possible by the timely delivery of a fiscal year
2024 appropriations bill.
That provides predictability to our Sailors, their families, their
employers, and most importantly, to our global Combatant Com-
manders. Chair Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and distin-
guished members of this committee, I remain humbled every day
by the commitment and contribution of our citizen Sailors, our
dedicated civilians, and the supportive families and employers that
collectively are your Navy Reserve.
Thank you for your continued support and your attention today,
and I look forward to your questions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL JOHN B. MUSTIN
Chair Tester, Ranking Member Collins, distinguished members of the Committee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding the contribution of the
Navy Reserve to national defense, both as it stands today and as we prepare for
the threats of tomorrow. On behalf of Navy Reserve Sailors, civilians and their fami-
lies, thank you for your continued leadership and support as we optimize the
warfighting readiness of your Navy Reserve Force for strategic competition.
In 2020, the Navy Reserve began a transformation to improve and modernize the
way we organize, man, train, equip, and mobilize to generate the combat power and
critical strategic depth the Navy requires to prevail in conflict. We have embraced
the imperative to redesign the Reserve Force—structurally, procedurally, and oper-
ationally—to align with strategic priorities calibrated for a competitive security en-
vironment. With a singular focus on generating warfighting readiness, this
generational transformation will provide the most capable force possible to our

---

265
Navy’s Numbered Fleets and deliver integrated all-domain naval power to the Joint
Force in competition, crisis, and conflict.
Throughout its rich 108-year history, the Navy Reserve has proven to be an elite
fighting force—a deep well of strategic depth from which our great nation has
drawn time and again to prevail in competition, crisis and conflict. The talent our
Navy Reserve Sailors bring to bear provides an unequivocal asymmetric advantage.
As we transform the organization, training, and mobilization processes of the force,
we have not lost sight of our collective responsibility to recruit and retain our na-
tion’s precious talent. I remain in awe of the dedication and professionalism of Navy
Reserve Sailors, civilians and the families that support them. They provide the foun-
dation that underwrites more than a century of successful contribution to the Navy
and our Joint Force, and the reason I gaze optimistically to the future.
Timely, predictable and relevant funding from Congress is critical for the Navy
Reserve to meet mission requirements and, as always, we are grateful for your con-
tinued support and enduring interest. Keeping the Reserve Personnel Navy account
funded at President’s Budget levels enables the Reserve force to deliver trained Sail-
ors ready to fight and win in the early stages of conflict as readily as they are to
sustain combat operations. The National Guard and Reserves Equipment Account
(NGREA) affords the Navy Reserve agility in rapidly acquiring and implementing
equipment solutions that fill mission-critical shortages and generate readiness. Con-
tinued Congressional support will ensure the Navy Reserve provides relevant, mod-
ern capability and capacity, keeping parity with active duty service members in
training, facilities and equipment, and a resilient surge force today and into the fu-
ture.
DESIGN THE FORCE: CAPABILITIES

For the two decades following the unprovoked attacks of 9/11, and during our
global fight against violent extremism, the Navy Reserve provided operational sup-
port in land-based combat environments. The recent strategic shift to address peer
adversaries in the maritime domain has forced an evolution to address the ready
force the Navy Reserve must deliver. With the resurgence of a global pacing chal-
lenge, generating warfighting readiness requires a force design process focused on
modernization and accelerated delivery of relevant, current capabilities.
Multi-domain warfighting capability and capacity relevance remains an impera-
tive guiding principle in the modernized Reserve Force. As such, we are investing
heavily in capabilities that directly align with winning future wars, including Mari-
time Operations Centers, contested logistics, surge maintenance, integrated fires,
and Naval Special Warfare. New technologies and capabilities in space, cyber, im-
agery analysis, battle damage assessment and repair, autonomous and un-crewed
platforms, artificial intelligence, machine learning, data analytics and additive man-
ufacturing represent growth areas that capitalize on the unique skills and experi-
ences of Reserve Sailors and the civilians that enable the Reserve Force.
The Navy Reserve delivers these modern capabilities through three employment
models: readiness units that augment active Navy units with trained, warfighting-
ready Reserve Sailors, individual Sailors with unique skills that enhance the Total
Force, and stand-alone operational units that supplement active component capabili-
ties. The Navy Reserve’s operational units require investments in modern equip-
ment to ensure strategic depth in logistics, aviation, security, medical, special war-
fare as well as investments in critical capabilities.
Navy Unique Fleet Essential Airlift (C–130J)
The Chief of Naval Operations’ Navigation Plan identified Distributed Maritime
Operations (DMO) as one of the Navy’s key operating concepts necessary to prevail
in conflict. In Navigation Plan 2022, the CNO emphasizes resilient logistics in con-
tested environments as a critical Force Design Imperative and directs recapitaliza-
tion of the C–130 fleet, a reserve-only capability, by 2030. The C/KC–130T aircraft
are the Navy’s only long-range aerial logistics platform capable of transporting bulk
cargo, such as boats, diver recompression chambers, submarine masts, and all mod-
ules of the F–35 engine. Operated entirely by the Navy Reserve, Navy Unique Fleet
Essential Airlift (NUFEA) consists of 27 C/KC–130T and 17 C–40A aircraft that
comprise the Navy’s organic intra-theater air logistics capability.
Last year, NUFEA aircraft transported 96,105 passengers and 18.8 million
pounds of cargo for the Navy and the Department of Defense. This capability saved
the Department $1.14 billion in expenditures relative to alternative means of trans-
portation. Despite their demonstrated necessity and value, the C–130T’s age, lack
of available parts due to obsolescence, and increasing cost of flight hour, drive a
growing gap between Fleet’s demand for this mission and the Navy’s capability to
fulfill it. Compared to the legacy ‘‘T’’ model, the more efficient and reliable ‘‘J’’ model

---

266
incurs a cost saving of approximately $1,000 per flight hour. The essential mission
these aircraft provide make recapitalization of the C–130T to the KC–130J the Navy
Reserve’s number one equipment priority.
Adversary
The aviation adversary mission ensures readiness for the Navy’s carrier-based
tactical aircraft and develops Navy pilots’ air-to-air combat skill. The Navy Re-
serve’s Tactical Support Wing (TSW) maintains 29 F–5N/F and 2 F–5N+/F+ aircraft
that replicate low-to-mid level threats. The Navy Reserve is modernizing the F–5N/
F avionics suite to improve safety of flight and resolve obsolescence limitations. Fur-
ther upgrades will improve the range of the aircraft and generate more accurate
threat replication. The current fleet of F–5s will reach the end of their service life
by the early 2030s; however, eleven upgraded F–5s purchased in FY20 will come
into service over the next 3 years to ensure adversary capability does not lapse prior
to fielding a replacement aircraft.
In April the Navy Reserve received twelve F–16C aircraft that provide dissimilar
aircraft training and high-end adversary support to the fleet. These aircraft have
sufficient airframe hours remaining to sustain adversary missions through 2035.
Ongoing efforts to upgrade F–5 and F–16 aircraft, together with investments in
Live-Virtual-Constructive technology, will increase the fidelity of modern threat rep-
lication and keep Reserve adversary training relevant to the fleet until follow-on
platforms become available.
Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance (P–8A)
The P–8A aircraft is the nation’s only full-spectrum, broad-area Anti-Submarine
Warfare platform. Additionally, it provides armed Anti-Surface Warfare and
networked Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance capability. The Navy Re-
serve’s Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aviation (MPRA) squadrons mirror the
active component units and integrate seamlessly into the Global Force Management
(GFM) deployment cycle. The Navy Reserve is in the process of transitioning from
the P–3C to the P–8A. VP–62 received their first two P–8A in February and March
of 2023 with their third aircraft scheduled for delivery in July. VP–69 began the
transition process to the P–8A in April 2023, with the first aircraft scheduled for
delivery in August 2023. Transitioning to the P–8A sustains the joint forces military
advantage over our pacing threat by providing worldwide, continuous deployed pres-
ence to deter adversaries and provide robust support of maritime operations. Hang-
ers to support the new aircraft in the two squadrons are late to need and are the
number one and two military construction priorities for the Navy Reserve. The re-
capitalization of Reserve MPRA ensures equipment parity with active units to de-
liver operational resiliency and strategic depth to the Joint Force. I am grateful for
your support.
TRAIN THE FORCE: READINESS

The singular focus of the Navy Reserve’s transformation is to generate and deliver
warfighting readiness. As such, each Reserve Sailor’s peacetime training and active
duty service must translate directly to readiness in their programmed warfighting
billet. We are ensuring that training resources, and the policies that support them,
provide Reserve Sailors the ‘‘reps and sets’’ they need to excel, on day one, in their
wartime roles in a maritime fight.
For the first time, the Navy Reserve issued explicit Force Generation Guidance,
released in December of last year, establishing a force-wide process to define and
validate training requirements and to assess force-wide status. Most importantly,
the guidance ensures that every Sailor is familiar with their unique training plan,
tailored to their mobilization billet. Automated systems document individual train-
ing requirements and allow Commanding Officers of Reserve Readiness Units to
evaluate and report the status of each Sailor’s training, specific to their unique mo-
bilization billet. Accurate, relevant information gives Sailors and their leadership
actionable tools to manage their warfighting readiness effectively and optimizes
training investments to enable ‘‘plug-and-play’’ integration with active-duty forces.
Billet-Based Activation—activating individual Sailors and Reserve Units of Action
to their programmed maritime assignments—represents an important inflection for
the Navy Reserve in our transformation from a legacy force providing Individual
Augmentees mobilized for land-based conflict against non-state, violent extremism.
In the future, when necessary, we will activate units of action rather than individ-
uals to meet reserve-appropriate requirements.
Individual Sailors will train and activate into roles that align to their wartime
billet and their specific experience and qualifications. This effort is in-line with the
Secretary of the Navy’s updated policy for sourcing active and reserve Sailors to fill

---

267
current requirements. The Secretary’s policy directs the DoN to apply the Total
Force to source ongoing global requirements, and to continue developing permanent
manpower solutions in lieu of individual augmentees. Billet-Based Activation pro-
vides reserve Sailors practical experience, while preserving strategic depth for the
new reality of multi-domain warfare in competition, crisis and conflict with peer and
near-peer adversaries.
MOBILIZE THE FORCE: CAPACITY

A Reserve Force designed and trained to fight and win must be ready and capable
of mobilizing rapidly, and at scale, to provide the strategic depth necessary to sus-
tain multi-domain combat operations. We will deliver on the imperative to mass mo-
bilize the entire Reserve Force within 30 days when called upon.
Adaptive Mobilization
Our legacy approach to mobilization, in which individual Reserve Sailors were
processed through a single, centralized facility to receive specialized training over
the course of several months, did not meet the demand of a complex, dynamic secu-
rity environment. To enable the readiness and deliver the Reserve Force to the fight
immediately, we developed Adaptive Mobilization (AM) processes tailored to each
billet, and distributed mobilization pathways to bring mobilization-ready Sailors
into their active duty warfighting role efficiently and at scale.
Using the AM model, six regional Readiness and Mobilization Commands
(REDCOMs) and their subordinated Navy Reserve Centers (NRCs) support distribu-
tion of current and future activations by mobilizing the entire Selected Reserve pop-
ulation—roughly 50,000 Sailors—within 30 days of the demand signal. This model
capitalizes on Training and Administration of the Reserve (TAR) staffs, located at
the REDCOMS, NRCs and within Fleet units, and leverages the nationally distrib-
uted infrastructure unique to Reserve Forces to execute the AM model across glob-
ally distributed regions. The Navy Reserve has intentionally and frequently exer-
cised these processes through force-wide mobilization exercises that stress-test our
capabilities and drive future improvements.
Navy Reserve Center Optimization
The 115 Navy Reserve Centers spanning the United States, Puerto Rico and
Guam make up a critical support network for Reserve Sailors across the world. In
Fiscal Year 2020, the Navy Reserve began a crucial effort to optimize this network
by strategically closing small, off- installation NRCs in order to realign TAR staff
personnel to fill vacancies at under-staffed NRCs and REDCOMs. The Navy Reserve
benefits by optimizing essential manpower to train and administer Reserve Sailors
and to implement Adaptive Mobilization. NRCs outside of military installations
incur force protection and security risks that ‘‘on-installation’’ NRCs do not.
Evaluating these ‘‘off-installation sites’’ for closure reduces risk to the Force and
curtails the expense and mobilization impact of Armed Watch Stander programs.
The effort, which aligns with SECNAV’s 10-year infrastructure reset direction to di-
vest the Navy’s facility footprint by 10%, reduces the Navy Reserve facility footprint
by 10.3%.
Administration and Management of the Individual Ready Reserve
The Navy Reserve is comprised of 54,607 Selective Reserve (SELRES) Sailors,
9,966 TAR Sailors and 39,214 Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) members, totaling
over 103,787 Sailors. The IRR is a critical component of the Navy Reserve, enabling
additional surge capacity for the Navy Reserve Force at a significantly reduced cost.
IRR Sailors also maintain many of the primary benefits associated with military
service, such as access to the military exchange, commissary and Morale Welfare
and Recreation facilities, Space-Available travel, Psychological Health Outreach Pro-
gram (PHOP) and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) services. In
order to leverage the potential of this population as a relevant source of strategic
capacity, we have defined critical skills for the IRR, shifting the focus from the land-
based fight against violent extremists and Individual Augmentee roles to those fo-
cused on the maritime domain. We are deliberately exercising the IRR muster proc-
ess via the application of a new technology solution to refine and improve the expe-
rience. Engaging with our IRR Sailors through proactive musters has also proved
an effective means of recruiting experienced personnel by tapping into a desire to
affiliate with the Selective Reserve.
DEVELOP THE FORCE: SAILORS

Navy Reserve Sailors and civilians provide the asymmetric advantage that allows
the Navy Reserve Force to provide world-class warfighting readiness to the Fleet;

---

268
as such, they remain my primary focus in the transformation of Reserve design,
train, mobilize, and develop initiatives. These efforts support the professional, mili-
tary, and personal growth of our Sailors, with special emphasis also on minimizing
administrative distractions, enhancing talent management, and improving quality of
life. The Navy Reserve has promoted particular efforts to improve mental health,
resiliency and suicide awareness. We are focused on fortifying a culture of dignity
and respect that exemplify our Navy’s core values of honor, courage and commit-
ment.
Recruiting and Retention
We are competing for talent within a discriminating labor force under rapidly
evolving economic conditions. The labor market in the United States is the tightest
in recent memory, with more job openings than people to fill them. However, the
turmoil and uncertainty of the last few years have shown that many Americans are
more likely than ever to pursue work for organizations that provide purpose to their
lives and align with their deeper values. We believe the Navy Reserve is the em-
ployer of choice for those seeking challenge, purpose, and personal growth within
a cohesive community of diverse and motivated individuals. To reach our goals, we
are at General Quarters to spread this message to talented Americans who are
eager to serve.
Reserve component recruiting and retention includes parallel efforts to access new
Sailors as well as those with prior service. The Prior Service Mission is unique and
critical to manning the Reserve force: in order to ensure we can fill critical gaps,
the Navy Reserve must maintain a deep reservoir of talent, which requires active
duty Sailors to affiliate with the Navy Reserve prior to leaving active Navy service.
With this in mind, the Navy established the Navy Recruiting Reserve Command
(NRRC), charged with retaining Sailors transitioning from active duty for continued
service in the Reserve Component. The new NRRC can focus on the prior-service
Reserve mission in today’s competitive job market. To improve this process, NRRC
has established Prior Service Detachments in the five continental fleet concentration
areas and at two locations outside the continental United States. These detach-
ments are staffed with reserve benefits advisors whose sole purpose is to act as an
extension of the Career Transition Office and to educate Sailors on the transition
process and the benefits and opportunities available in the Navy Reserve.
We are also aggressively activating accession and retention levers by promoting
Active Component to Selected Reserve (AC2SELRES) opportunities during Transi-
tion Assistance Program classes and required career development sessions. Addi-
tionally, we are expanding bonus opportunities, including implementation of a TAR
selected re-enlistment bonus for selected rates, extending High Year Tenure excep-
tion to policy to allow more flexibility in the process for service members, executing
a High Year Tenure Plus program that automatically approves continuation of
SELRES Sailors through 30 September 2024, extending Tuition Assistance Pro-
grams to SELRES Sailors and implementing SELRES exit surveys to identify addi-
tional issues or potential policy changes that could support the recruiting and reten-
tion mission. The Navy has also updated the Military Service Obligation construct
by creating mandatory SELRES service for eligible Sailors identified as fitting a
specific need within the Reserve Force.
The Navy Reserve is projected to miss New Accession Training goals by 973 Sail-
ors and to finish approximately 3,000 Sailors short of the FY23 10,330 recruiting
goal. To address end strength shortfalls, the Navy and Navy Reserve are collabo-
ratively embracing innovative digital advertising methods to identify candidates for
high-demand fields such as Special Warfare, aircrew, Information Technology, and
healthcare specialties. Digital advertising is especially critical since the Navy Re-
serve derives 40.2% of all new contracts from marketing and advertising leads.
Navy Personnel and Pay Modernization
Legacy pay and personnel systems continue to challenge and frustrate our reserve
sailors and their families. The Navy is undertaking an Enterprise personnel and
pay transformation to modernize and streamline the processes that govern activa-
tion and deactivation of Reserve Sailors, their career management, their pay, and
the service and support they receive and deserve throughout their career. The Navy
is modernizing the MyNavy HR Enterprise, to include Manpower, Personnel, Train-
ing and Education systems, to improve performance, achieve Active Component/Re-
serve Component permeability, increase productivity, achieve auditability and gen-
erate cost efficiencies in all aspects of personnel readiness for all Navy sailors and
their families. The centerpiece of this transformation is the Navy Personnel and Pay
(NP2) system, which will enable a single, integrated personnel and pay system that
allows Reserve Sailors to seamlessly transition on and off active duty, without a dis-

---

269
ruption in pay. This capability will accelerate Adaptive Mobilization and provide the
efficiency required to mobilize rapidly and at scale. While modernization efforts
have been delayed, the Navy Reserve is pressing forward with initiatives integrating
antiquated systems that decrease timelines and mitigate shortfalls in operating ca-
pacity to support sailors and their families.
Culture of Excellence
As we transform the Reserve Force for strategic competition, Sailors form the
foundation of our readiness and remain our most important customers. As such, we
remain focused on strengthening an inclusive and diverse culture that is intolerant
of sexual harassment and assault, and that provides comprehensive support to Sail-
ors, civilians and their families. We are optimizing the warfighting readiness of the
Reserve Force by empowering Sailors, promoting organizational trust and trans-
parency, and ensuring inclusion and connectedness among every member of the Re-
serve Force.
The Navy Reserve is an exponentially more effective warfighting-ready force when
it capitalizes on the diverse backgrounds, experiences, perspectives and talents of
those who serve. With this as our guiding principle, the Navy Reserve is committed
to fielding a force as diverse as the country and harnessing the asymmetric advan-
tage of our Sailors to accelerate our warfighting advantage. In aggregate, the diver-
sity of the Reserve Force has increased across all categories over the previous five-
year period. We must continue to foster inclusion and equity in order to harness the
diverse and unique capabilities of our Sailors.
Suicide Prevention
The well-being of Reserve Sailors, civilians and their families is an imperative for
a healthy, whole force. We continue efforts to decrease barriers to mental health
treatments, including the negative beliefs about help-seeking, and ensure appro-
priate services are available to all service members and their families. The Psycho-
logical Health Outreach Program (PHOP), a Reserve program, provides counselors,
coordinators and resources 24/7/365. In FY22, PHOP completed a total of 506 Re-
serve Center on-site visits and 29 virtual visits, a 25% increase from FY21. Addi-
tionally, they received 3,377 Navy Reserve referrals. Electronic behavioral health
screenings are available to every Sailor and family member for immediate access to
PHOP services, while Resiliency Check-ins provide screening and referrals as nec-
essary. Reserve Sailors, civilians and their families are critical to our warfighting
readiness and remain our most important asset and, as such, the importance of
their health, wellness and safety underscores all of our efforts.
CONCLUSION

We are transforming the Navy Reserve and delivering ready units of action and
augmentation manpower to support Navy warfighting throughout the spectrum of
conflict. To remain ahead of our pacing threats in the coming decades, we must con-
tinue to transform our force with urgency, to face the challenges of today while pre-
paring for the war of tomorrow. My unambiguous focus remains warfighting readi-
ness. Strategic and tactical guidance supports this singular goal, with the enduring
foundation of professional, empowered, proficient Sailors at the core. We have made
great strides in modernizing how we man, train, equip and mobilize the force. But
we still have much to do. Our Navy is stronger as a result of the Navy Reserve’s
contribution to the fight. As it has for well over a century, America’s Navy Reserve
remains ‘‘Ready Now.’’
On behalf of the men and women of the United States Navy Reserve, thank you
for your steadfast support of Navy Reserve Sailors, civilians, families, and employ-
ers. Today, we face a new era with new challenges. With your continued support,
we will lead the transformation of our Navy Reserve to address the current and fu-
ture global environment with speed and agility.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Admiral. Next up, we have General
Bellon, Commander of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve. General.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL DAVID G. BELLON, COM-
MANDER, MARINE FORCES RESERVE
General BELLON. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins,
and distinguished members of the subcommittee, it is great to be
here with you today to share a conversation, a public conversation
with Forward Sergeant Major Carlos Ruiz and Command Master

---

270

Chief Mike Mussett who are sitting behind me about your Marine
Corps Reserve.
Congress has been a great partner to us as a service as we have
been in the middle of this historic inflection point to evolve the Ma-
rine Corps in order to meet the threats that we have been directed
to meet, and hopefully my comments today will provide a little
extra context about what the Marine Corps Reserve has done to
meet those demands. Time, time is what I want to emphasize.
This is a time sensitive task that we have been given by you and
by the Department of Defense and by the Combatant Commanders
to evolve quickly in order to first deter, and then if necessary, meet
threats. So, what have we done about that? What have we actually
done in the last year to meet that need with your help?
I want to talk about a couple of things specifically. I will talk
first a little bit about a vignette. I mean, the lens through which
we see the world, we focus on the Marines first, right, the all-vol-
unteer force effort. We believe in our hearts that we are tasked
with winning our Nation’s battles and we win our Nation’s battles
with Marines and Sailors. We don’t man equipment. We equip Ma-
rines and Sailors.
So, as we looked deep into the threat and deep into our tasking,
and what we acknowledge is we have this amazing human capital
that joined us because they want to serve. They chose us because
they thought it was going to be a harder task. It was going to be
more difficult than other choices.
And what they are asking us to do is to make their service
worthwhile, to honor them with the most difficult tasks, and then
to arm and equip them to achieve those tasks. So, to that end, we
have formed what we call the Marine Innovation Unit. It was an
acknowledgment that this population that we all enjoy had this
unique combined experience and education. They have their mili-
tary service, and they have their civilian occupation and education.
And if we bound them together, they could do amazing things,
if we didn’t pay attention to military occupational specialties and
ranks, and instead to a desire to serve and their human capital.
This Marine Innovation Unit accelerated an opportunity for us to
transition legacy capacity and capability, and you gave us the tools
to do it.
By using degree of funds from fiscal year 2022 and 2023, we
were able to take 400 Marines who were facing a sundowning sce-
nario with legacy equipment, and instead buy a littoral craft capa-
bility, a maneuver capability that allowed them to not only have
a new mission set, but more importantly reinvigorated them.
And here is the lesson I learned from that. By placing a littoral
craft in both Tampa, Florida, and Galveston, Texas, we went from
a scenario where our re-enlistment rates in those two companies
because they perceived that their service was undervalued, to some
of the highest in my component.
They were simply looking for a signal from us collectively that
their service is meaningful and that the task we were going to give
them would be meaningful. And so, with your help and with the
help of your staffs in particular, we got great guidance from you,
and we moved at the speed of relevance, and enabled and empow-
ered these volunteers to continue service in a way that is inspiring.

---

271

So, the future, what do I believe the future is. The other thing
we did was we combined the authorities that you have given us by
combining the commands of Marine Forces Reserve and Marine
Forces South—Southern Command. So, we accomplished two tasks
at once. We raised the capabilities and readiness of our Marine
Forces in the Reserves, and also provide capabilities and capacities
to a significantly under-resourced Combatant Command.
And I believe the American people want us to do that, and your
Marines and Sailors love it. I am excited about the future. The
quality of the Marines that we have are phenomenal. The environ-
ment for recruiting is going to be difficult, and the American people
and our forces are waiting for us to show that service is meaning-
ful, and they can trust us as institutions, and today is all about
that.
So, I appreciate the opportunity and I look forward to your ques-
tions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL DAVID G. BELLON
Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the
Subcommittee, it is my privilege to testify on behalf of the Commandant of the Ma-
rine Corps and provide an overview on the current state of the Marine Corps Re-
serve and an insight into our vision for the future.
Your Marine Corps Reserve has always been ready, relevant, and responsive for
the Nation, and to maintain that status we must innovate and evolve to meet the
threats of both today and tomorrow. As part of the Marine Corps’ effort to mod-
ernize our force and our warfighting capabilities through Force Design, the Marine
Corps Reserve has embraced several unique initiatives to drive innovation on mul-
tiple fronts. The establishment of the Marine Innovation Unit (MIU) aboard Stewart
Air National Guard Base in New York is a shining example of how your Marine
Corps Reserve is leading from the front in this area. The MIU harnesses an un-
touched talent pool of Reserve Component Marines with unique skill sets from di-
verse backgrounds. MIU, in partnership with the Marine Corps Warfighting Labora-
tory, postures the Marine Corps to accelerate the adoption of advanced capabilities,
and transform Naval Service capacity for technology while retaining and investing
in Total Force human capital. In addition to the MIU, and in collaboration with the
Defense Innovation Unit, the Marine Corps Reserve has been exploring a unique op-
portunity to identify and purchase dual-use commercially available small craft for
littoral operations. These craft will allow the Marine Corps to leverage Reserve
Component Assault Amphibian Battalion units and their littoral warfighting exper-
tise to support Service-level experimentation and learning in littoral areas of oper-
ations. Continuous refining of how to compete and fight against a peer adversary
is key to retaining the talent and service of these maritime-oriented Marines, and
it is key to our evolution.
Just as we innovate and evolve, the Marine Corps Reserve remains dedicated to
connecting with and contributing to the communities in which they reside, forming
a critical link between the Marine Corps and our communities across the Nation.
In 2022 we celebrated the 75th Anniversary of the Marine Corps Reserve Toys for
Tots program. For 75 years Marines and their families have given back to their local
towns and neighborhoods through their participation in this program; uniting local
communities in a common cause to help less fortunate children through annual toy
collections and distribution campaigns. Every year, no matter the clime or place, the
Marine Corps Reserve is on the forefront of this initiative to support communities
and families across the Nation.
I am deeply impressed by the professionalism, competence, and dedication of our
Reserve Marines and Sailors. Like their Active Component counterparts, they serve
selflessly to protect our great Nation. I am inspired by the way they balance family
responsibilities, civilian careers, and military service with humility and a sense of
pride and dedication that is consistent with the great sacrifices of Marines from
every generation. As a warfighting organization, the key to our success has been
and will continue to be individual Marines and their families. Your support of the
National Guard and Reserves, down to the individual Marine Reservist, ensures we
have the resources and funding to fight and win our Nation’s battles.

---

272
A TOTAL FORCE

Throughout the past year, the Marine Corps Reserve continued global deploy-
ments supporting Combatant Commander requirements by providing multifaceted
forces focused on combat operations, crisis prevention, crisis response, and theater
security cooperation. In addition to the Active Component Marines already deployed,
2022 saw an additional 1,847 Reserve Marines activated and mobilized to support
22 operational requirements across six geographic Combatant Commands. The Ma-
rine Corps Reserve continues to meet the demand for use as an Operational Re-
serve; however, challenges to our readiness and ability to meet strategic require-
ments remain.
In FY23, the Marine Corps Reserve has already activated more than 83 Marines
in support of four Combatant Commands and is forecasting the activation and mobi-
lization of 589 additional Reserve Marines to support 21 separate formations. These
operations significantly increase the Reserve Component’s readiness and interoper-
ability with the Active Component, Joint Forces, allies, and coalition partners. Plan-
ning is currently underway for increased activations and deployments across the
globe that integrate Reserve forces with the Active Component commencing in FY24
and stretching across the Future Years Defense Program in support of high-priority
Combatant Command requirements.
Throughout 2022, the Marine Corps Reserve continued to provide direct support
to Operation ALLIES WELCOME with more than 1,100 Reserve Marines. Upon the
successful completion of Operation ALLIES WELCOME, 103 Reserve Marines vol-
unteered to extend their mobilization and deploy to Kosovo for Operation ALLIES
WELCOME–KOSOVO located aboard Camp Bondsteel. The ability to augment this
humanitarian aid mission with volunteers from the Reserve force speaks volumes
to the dedication, professionalism, and compassion of our Reserve Marines. The Ma-
rine Corps’ continued employment of the Reserve Component as a supplemental
force has enabled the Active Component to focus its effort on global crisis response
and contingency operations.
In addition to participating in operational requirements, the Marine Corps Re-
serve conducts a wide array of combat related training exercises across the globe.
The purpose of these exercises is to improve the Marine Corps Reserve’s combat
readiness, international relations, and interoperability between allied nations and
partners. In FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve led or participated in 59 military exer-
cises across 16 countries, contributing 10,599 Reserve Marines. In FY23, the Marine
Corps Reserve is forecasted to participate in 49 exercises globally, with a total force
of 9,887 Reserve Marines. We expect the overall number of exercises and engage-
ments to increase in the coming year as planners from the Marine Corps Reserve
continue to attend exercise-planning events.
The Marine Corps Reserve continues to participate in the Department of Defense
(DoD) Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) Program, which provides joint/military
training in the United States and its territories to increase deployment and unit
readiness. The IRT program simultaneously provides key services such as
healthcare, construction, transportation, and cybersecurity with lasting benefits for
our American communities. In 2022, the Marine Corps Reserve participated in nine
exercises under the IRT Program, with two of those exercises involving both Active
and Reserve forces. Our participating units were able to train to mission essential
tasks involving both horizontal and vertical construction, logistical support, commu-
nications, and medical care while making tangible, meaningful impacts in commu-
nities located in Alaska, Indiana, Ohio, Texas, and Hawaii. With your continued
support of these efforts, we look to expand our footprint in this program; to include
airlift, construction, medical, and cybersecurity efforts.
In addition to participating in operational requirements throughout the world, the
Marine Corps Reserve supports the Total Force by dutifully executing the sensitive
and crucial mission of providing casualty assistance to the families of our fallen Ma-
rines. There is no responsibility we treat with higher regard than this solemn mis-
sion. Inspector-Instructor (I–I) and Reserve Site Support staffs are geographically
positioned to accomplish the vast majority of Marine Corps casualty assistance calls
and are trained to provide compassionate and thorough assistance to families. In-
deed, most Marine Corps casualty notifications and follow-on assistance calls to the
next of kin are made by our Reserve Marines.
During FY22, I–I and Reserve Site Support staffs supported 247 of the 298 active
casualty calls performed by the Marine Corps. The professionalism and compassion
of our Casualty Assistance Calls Officers (CACOs) continues well beyond the initial
notification. We ensure that our CACOs are well trained, equipped, and supported
by all levels of command through a combination of in-person and online training.
Once assigned, the CACO serves as the family’s central point of contact and coordi-

---

273
nates with funeral homes, government agencies, and other organizations as needed.
They assist family members with planning the return and final resting place of
their Marine and ensure the filing of appropriate documents so that families receive
all entitled benefits. In many cases, our CACOs provide a long-lasting bridge be-
tween the Marine Corps and the grieving family.
The Marine Corps Reserve also performs the solemn mission of military funeral
honors, and our Reserve units take pride in performing many of these services for
our fallen Marines and their families. Marine Corps funeral honors are dedicated
to ensuring all Marines who have served honorably receive the appropriate honors.
It is a final salute to their life and the final demonstration of our country’s gratitude
to those who, in times of war and peace, have faithfully defended our Nation. Ma-
rine Corps Reserve units performed 22,819 military funeral honors in 2022, 93% of
the total funeral services provided by the Marine Corps.
PERSONNEL

Our Marines, Sailors, and civilian Marines are the foundation of all that we do.
The resources we dedicate to sustaining and developing this foundation directly con-
tribute to the success of our Service and the Marine Corps Reserve. The vast major-
ity of the Marine Corps Selected Reserve’s authorized end strength of 33,000 falls
under Marine Forces Reserve. The Selected Reserve is composed of Marines in four
categories: Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR) Units, Active Reserve (AR), Indi-
vidual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs), and service members in Initial Active-Duty
Training (IADTs). Embedded with these Marines are 1,502 Active and Reserve Com-
ponent Sailors who serve critical roles in the operational, medical, dental, and spir-
itual readiness of our Reserve Force. The success of the Marine Corps Reserve
would not be possible without the support of these Sailors and U.S. Navy programs.
In addition to the Marines and Sailors of the Selected Reserve, the Marine Corps
Reserve administratively manages approximately 64,500 Marines who serve in the
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). The Marine Corps Reserve continues to monitor
the activation viability of these IRR Marines with muster events at multiple loca-
tions across the country. The events also provide the opportunity to address admin-
istrative issues, conduct mental health and post- deployment assessments, review
Reserve obligations and new opportunities, and meet with Marine Corps prior-serv-
ice recruiters. During the past year the Marine Corps Reserve conducted 24 muster
events in which 4,626 IRR Marines attended. In addition to the in-person muster
events, the Marine Corps Reserve contacted and screened 47,711 IRR Marines.
The Marine Corps Reserve strives to attract and retain the most qualified Ma-
rines capable of fulfilling our leadership and operational needs. Marines approach-
ing the end of their current contracts, whether Active or Reserve Component, re-
ceive counseling on the tangible and intangible benefits of remaining affiliated with
the Selected Reserve. We educate each transitioning Active Component Marine on
opportunities for continued service in the Marine Corps Reserve through the Marine
Corps’ transition assistance and educational outreach programs.
As the Marine Corps modernizes our forces to ensure we are postured to confront
future potential adversaries, we are making every effort to retain those Marines
who are affected by Force Design initiatives. During 2022, the Marine Corps Re-
serve deployed a series of Personnel Transition Teams (PTTs) to every Reserve unit
where the Commandant’s Force Design program had a direct impact on Marines
and their ability to continue serving; this also included those units who were af-
fected by the Marine Forces Reserve Site Optimization program. These PTTs were
specifically designed to ensure each Marine was provided information, education,
and one-on- one career counseling concerning available incentives, career opportuni-
ties, and continued service options. We successfully retained more than 64% of all
Reserve Marines assigned to those site locations through voluntary reassignment to
another Marine Reserve unit, while an additional 14% of those Marines chose to
transfer to another Service to continue their military careers. Survey responses
show that 83% of the Reserve Marines felt they had been provided with the infor-
mation and support needed to make an informed decision, while 90% of the Reserve
Marines felt their best interests were kept in mind.
Recruiting and retaining high-quality Marines is essential to the Marine Corps’
role as the Nation’s force-in-readiness. Although the Marine Corps Reserve has re-
cruited and trained Marines safely in the face of the global pandemic, the challenges
with recruiting in a COVID–19 environment have persisted into the past fiscal year.
The Marine Corps Reserve still enjoys high affiliation from non-prior service recruit-
ing and accomplished its recruiting goals in FY22. The Marine Corps Reserve is
thankful for and greatly appreciates the retention programs supported by Congress
and the DoD, which include inactive duty travel reimbursement and multiple bonus

---

274
programs. These programs are essential to ensure we continue to meet authorized
end strength and retain our most talented Marines. Your continued support of these
critical programs has helped preserve our overall personnel end strength at 84.6%
of the total requirement and maintain a grade and Military Occupational Specialty
match rate of 72.3%. Our personnel readiness not only reflects the health of the
force, but it directly contributes to our overall operational readiness. We fully expect
to meet or exceed our Selected Marine Corps Reserve retention goals this year. Con-
tinued use of available incentive programs is critical to optimally match individuals
to our requirements, maintain individual and unit-level readiness, address shortfalls
in our staff non-commissioned officers’ ranks, and fully rebuild readiness from pre-
vious force structure changes.
EQUIPMENT

Every Marine Corps Reserve unit is manned, trained, and equipped to standards
that facilitate seamless integration and employment of forces to meet the require-
ments of both the Service and Geographic Combatant Commanders. Marine Corps
Reserve units, along with their personnel and equipment, continue to be in high de-
mand due to their high interoperability with their Active Component counterparts.
The Marine Corps Reserve is designed to be equipped at near parity with its ac-
tive component counterpart due to the Total Force approach to equipment fielding.
However, the high demand for Reserve units and the resulting high operational
tempo places stress on the Marine Corps Reserve’s ability to maintain equipment
and replenish deficiencies. Inadequate or delayed fielding coupled with delays in ap-
propriation of funds disrupts our ability to program long-term activities and chal-
lenges our efforts to improve current and future readiness. One of the greatest ongo-
ing concerns has been our Individual Combat Clothing and Equipment (ICCE) defi-
ciencies. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY23 provided a line-item ap-
propriation specifically providing the Marine Corps Reserve the ability to place
ICCE procurements at levels which will meet current materiel Table of Equipment
allowance requirements. Currently, ongoing enterprise-wide contracting and manu-
facturing delays have impeded the replenishment of unserviceable items. In the
event of a large-scale wartime mobilization, to include any sizable call-up of the
IRR, ICCE deficiencies may become a Service-level risk.
The Marine Corps Reserve continues to mitigate risk and ensure maintenance
readiness through Training Allowances (TA), Operation and Maintenance Marine
Corps Reserve (OMMCR) funds, and third-party logistics. First, we refine a unit’s
TA, which is that portion of a unit’s full Table of Equipment (TE) located at Reserve
Training Centers (RTCs). Our goal is to balance the amount of equipment necessary
to conduct training with the amount of equipment that can be maintained within
personnel, facility, and fiscal constraints. Second, we leverage OMMCR funds to em-
ploy mobile maintenance support teams that augment our limite nicmaintenance ca-
pacity in the Marine Corps Reserve. Third, we utilize a Service-managed third-
party logistics provider to repair secondary components that cannot be repaired or-
ganically due to limited intermediate maintenance capacity. Congressional support
for Reserve funding is paramount to our continued success in sustaining our equip-
ment and maintenance readiness.
The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) and Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV)
will provide the Reserve Component with the latest generation of combat equip-
ment. The Marine Corps Reserve began receiving its allocation of 2,628 JLTVs in
3rd quarter FY21; to date, we have received only four vehicles. An additional eight
specialty vehicles for the artillery community are scheduled for fielding in FY23/24.
All Marine Corps Reserve ACV deliveries are currently scheduled for FY27. Final
ACV Full Operational Capability (FOC) quantities and timelines will be determined
pending future Service-level Force Design 2030 assessments.
TRAINING

The Marine Corps Reserve participates in a number of training exercises in the
United States and abroad each year to improve combat readiness and enhance our
ability to rapidly activate and integrate with the Active Component. The Reserve
Force’s ability to participate in and conduct training, drill weekends, and annual
training periods have resumed to a steady state following the global pandemic. Local
commanders continue to demonstrate initiative and creativity in conducting mean-
ingful training for the Reserve Marines at each opportunity. Virtual training con-
tinues to allow for an increase in individual skills, but the focus of effort is to con-
duct in-person unit training at the company and battalion levels.
The dual-hatted Marine Forces Reserve and Marine Forces South command struc-
ture has resulted in efficiencies by enabling Reserve Marines to meet Geographic

---

275
Combatant Command requirements while simultaneously providing realistic multi-
national training for our Reserve formations. During FY22, Marine Corps Reserve
Forces participated in the annual Service-level Integrated Training Exercise (ITX)
at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California. ITX
provides an opportunity for units to perform realistic, coordinated, live-fire training
to meet Marine Air Ground Task Force mission essential tasks. In addition to the
tactical training, ITX also serves as a rehearsal exercise in the activation and mobi-
lization processes. The Reserve Force that forms at Twentynine Palms for training,
receives orders to muster and move personnel from 77 different units located at 58
disaggregated Home Training Centers. Additionally, units plan for and coordinate
the transportation of equipment to arrive simultaneously with the units in
Twentynine Palms. These actions replicate similar tasks the units would be re-
quired to perform should there be a wartime activation and Reserve Force mobiliza-
tion. 4,237 Marines participated in ITX across the span of 20 training days this
year. This realistic training aids in improving combat readiness for all exercise
forces and enhances efficiency in Total Force integration to enable more rapid acti-
vation response times at the battalion and squadron levels.
The Marine Corps Reserve continues to focus on operational readiness within the
Marine Air Ground Task Force and the Joint operational environment. Using joint
aviation assets from the Marine Corps, Air Force, Air National Guard and Army
National Guard, the Marine Corps Reserve conducted Tactical Air Control Party
training to sustain Joint Terminal Air Controller (JTAC) qualifications at Smoky
Hill Bombing Range in Salina, Kansas. This training benefitted the other Services
by enabling more than 45 fixed and rotary wing aviation platforms to achieve mis-
sion essential training in close air support while certifying Reserve Marine JTACs.
Resident Professional Military Education (PME) courses regained momentum in
FY22 as seat capacity returned to 1,091 Reserve Component seats. In addition, the
Marine Corps Reserve continues to leverage distance education and virtual learning
to maximize PME training opportunities.
The Marine Corps Reserve uses training simulators wherever and whenever pos-
sible to preserve fiscal and materiel resources. Marine Corps Reserve units employ
Indoor Simulated Marksmanship Trainers (ISMTs) to maintain combat marksman-
ship skills and to maximize the use of their most precious resource, time. The
ISMTs enable onsite training and eliminate long distance travel to remote DoD
training locations. The use of this and other simulations systems, as well as in-
creased online training, enabled the force to complete mission essential tasks and
required DoD and Service-level annual training.
FACILITIES

The Marine Corps Reserve occupies facilities in 47 states, the District of Colum-
bia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. These facilities include 28 sites that are
owned and maintained by the Marine Corps Reserve. The other 130 Reserve Train-
ing Centers, in which the status is ‘‘Tenant,’’ are owned and maintained by other
Services. Although some sites are located onboard major DoD installations, most Re-
serve Training Centers are located within civilian communities, ranging from resi-
dential neighborhoods to industrial and commercial districts. With a continuous ef-
fort to improve the maintenance and security of all our facilities, our main goal is
to ensure the safety of our Marines and Sailors by facilitating effective readiness
training and efficient activation and mobilization locations.
Traditionally, the Marine Corps Reserve has committed 100% of the facilities
budget to support the sustainment and maintenance of existing infrastructure and
day-to-day operating costs. Because of this investment and commitment, we have
been able to improve the overall readiness of our facilities’ inventory. Moreover,
through the comprehensive utilization of the Facilities Sustainment, Restoration,
and Modernization (FSRM) program, we have also retained and maximized inad-
equate facilities that were deemed vital to support the Marine Corps Reserve’s mis-
sion. Currently, we are working to identify major FSRM projects for future funding.
In conjunction with our maximization efforts, we also sought out cost and funding
savings in the divestiture of facilities and demolition of excess footprint. In the last
2 years, the Marine Corps Reserve has divested, or is in the process of divesting,
from 19 sites at a savings of approximately $200k–$300k savings per site.
As we capitalize the utilization of the Military Construction, Navy Reserve
(MCNR) program, our focus is on providing construction for new and enduring capa-
bilities, as well as recapitalization of our aging facilities. The construction projects
enabled by the annual authorization and appropriation of MCNR funding are a sig-
nificant factor in advancing our facilities support mission, especially as we optimize
our force laydown throughout the Nation. Continued support for our MCNR pro-

---

276
gram requests is essential for the planning and execution to modernize our capabili-
ties and, when needed, the ability to divest from failing infrastructure or facilities
that no longer meet the mission.
The combined effects of our targeted site consolidations, FSRM, and MCNR Pro-
grams have steadily reduced the number of inadequate or substandard Reserve
Training Centers and enabled improved support to the Reserve units and personnel.
However, as our infrastructure ages, the operating costs have steadily increased and
will continue to increase as the Marine Corps modernizes to meet the requirements
of the National Defense Strategy. The continued support of our annual funding re-
quest for our facilities program will enable us to improve the overall physical infra-
structure that reinforces the operational readiness of our units and personnel.
The safety of our Marines, Sailors, and their families is of utmost importance;
therefore, we are actively engaged in ongoing efforts to improve the overall force
protection at all our sites. We take pride in working with our Service partners and
the National Guard to improve our sites where joint occupation is optimal. Through-
out the last 10 years, numerous force protection assessments have been conducted
at our facilities and security-engineering reports have been generated to assist in
developing designs that mitigate protection concerns, specifically within the realm
of physical security. These assessments identify requirements and serve to prioritize
enhancements, which ultimately improve the overall facility security for our Ma-
rines, Sailors, and their families. While we are funded for the Installation Physical
Security of our owned sites, at Reserve Training Centers where we are considered
‘‘tenants,’’ we are reliant on the other Services to fund the physical security require-
ments. However, to ensure the Physical Security requirements for these units, the
Marine Corps Reserve often funds security projects that should be funded by the
host command. As a direct result, the Marine Corps Reserve plans to submit a
budgetary increase in the future years to ensure our projects are funded to the re-
quired levels.
HEALTH SERVICES

The Marine Corps Reserve Health Services Support (HSS) system prioritizes the
health and wellness of our Reserve Marines and Sailors. We improve medical readi-
ness through a robust Individual Medical Readiness Program within the Marine
Corps Reserve and by accurate monitoring, identification, and supervision of unit-
level actions necessary to attain readiness goals. Additionally, our Health Services
personnel participate in Force Readiness Activation Assessment Program inspec-
tions and audits which provide oversight at the individual unit, as well as the abil-
ity to monitor readiness and adherence to policy.
The Reserve Health Readiness Program (RHRP) has greatly increased overall
medical and dental readiness throughout the force. This program uses contracted ci-
vilian medical and dental providers to work with units that do not have organic
medical or dental support personnel or are remote from, or not supported by, a near-
by Military Treatment Facility (MTF). During FY22, the RHRP performed 11,237
Periodic Health Assessments (PHAs), 54 Onsite Post-Deployment Heath Re-Assess-
ments (PDHRAs), 17,465 audiological examinations, and 8,600 dental examinations.
The Marine Corps Reserve HSS’s priority is to achieve the DoD’s goal of a 90%
medically ready force. While national, regional, state, and local restrictions on travel
and group activities due to COVID–19 affected scheduling and availability of both
organic unit and RHRP readiness events over the course of several months, FY22
individual medical and dental readiness rates were nevertheless 91% and 89%, re-
spectively. Marine Corps Reserve units rely heavily on RHRP to maintain our med-
ical and dental readiness, and continued support of this program is imperative for
maintaining overall readiness.
As a result of the overlapping Marine Forces Reserve/Marine Forces South rela-
tionship, MARFORRES/MARFORSOUTH HSS coordinates with Headquarters Ma-
rine Corps and Navy Medicine to align with Force Design 2030. This relationship
provides unique opportunities to achieve Mission Essential Tasks (METs) and
Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs) to address prioritized expeditionary medical
support capabilities, including Prolonged Casualty Care, Multi-modal Patient Trans-
portation and Patient Movement, and Scalable Force Packages for support to Expe-
ditionary Advanced Based Operations (EABO) and Littoral Operations in a Con-
tested Environment (LOCE).
In partnership with USSOUTHCOM, the Marine Corps Reserve has aligned with
Service components to advance the USSOUTHCOM Global Health Engagement
strategy. Opportunities to foster relationships with Partner Nations throughout
Central and South America and the Caribbean could not have come at a more fortu-
itous time. In an environment where instability, post-pandemic restrictions, and ma-

---

277
lign near-peer influence may impact access, the Marine Corps Reserve is initiating
smart, innovative, and cost-effective medical capability concepts in partnership with
the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab that include the Tactical Scalable Surgical Sys-
tem (TS3) and Virtual Reality training to demonstrate constant U.S. presence and
support to our partners in the USSOUTHCOM region. A fully developed suite of col-
laborations in the Global Health and Medical Education spaces further demonstrate
how the Marine Corps Reserve and other Service components will continue to be the
partner of choice in the region, as well as a vehicle to preparation for operations
throughout the world.
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

The Marine Corps Reserve executes a multifaceted behavioral health program
that includes Combat Operational Stress Control Capability, DoN’s Deployment
Health Program, Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP), and collaboration
with the National Guard Bureau and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), as
well as targeted initiatives for Suicide Prevention Capability, Substance Abuse Pre-
vention, and Family Advocacy Programs. The Combat Operational Stress Control
(COSC) capability provides essential knowledge, skills, and tools to assist com-
manders with improving mission readiness, force preservation, and improving the
long-term health of Marines and their families. The COSC is comprised of two
trainings: Operational Stress Control and Readiness (OSCAR) and Deployment
Cycle Training (DCT).
OSCAR builds teams of selected Marines and unit leaders along with medical and
religious personnel to work together as sensors for the commanders by identifying
small changes in personnel behavior. OSCAR teams help to enable a bias for action
within the command and link individuals to appropriate resources. The DCT is con-
ducted across every rank and is delivered to service members at the appropriate
point in the deployment cycle. The combination of these programs helps to prevent,
identify, and effectively manage combat and operational stress, whether deployed or
in garrison. Each of these tools supports the unit commanders in building unit
strength, resiliency, and readiness, as well as keeping Marines and Sailors in the
fight.
The Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery supports behavioral health through
various independent and contracted programs such as Post-Deployment Health Re-
assessment/Mental Health Assessment (PDHRA/MHA) and PHOP. The PDHRA
Program is intended to focus specifically on identifying issues that emerge after our
Marines and Sailors have returned home from deployment. The MHA is conducted
at multiple intervals throughout the deployment cycle, annually with a Marine or
Sailor’s physical health assessment (PHA), and during the Separation Health As-
sessment (SHA). The MHA serves as a screening for any mental health concerns
including but not limited to depression, alcohol misuse, and post-traumatic stress
syndrome symptoms. PHOP secures behavioral health screenings, psychological
treatment referrals, and essential follow-up treatment to ensure our service mem-
bers’ behavioral health needs are met. In FY22 PHOP connected with 9,129 Marine
Corps Reservists; an estimated 13% of those connections resulted in intensive case
management. Through their outreach services, PHOP addresses general behavioral
health needs, post-deployment concerns and crisis-related interventions by providing
our Marines and Sailors access to local resources through a network of contracted
behavioral health programs. Internally, PHOP and Marine Corps Reserve’s Force
Chaplains regularly exchange contact rosters to multiply networking effectiveness.
These programs remain critical to maintaining a resilient force by providing path-
ways for Marines, Sailors, and families to seek behavioral health assistance.
Access to reliable behavioral healthcare is a barrier to many Reservists and their
families. However, memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with the National
Guard Bureau, and the Department of Veteran’s Affairs have greatly increased the
resources available to Reservists and their families. Marines, Sailors, and their fam-
ilies can now utilize more than 400 additional resource sites through the National
Guard Bureau’s Family Assistance Centers, and 383 veteran centers (83 of them
mobile) through the VA. Veteran centers are able to provide psychological assess-
ments, counseling, and additional treatment options.
Signs of operational and combat stress may manifest long after a service member
returns home from deployment. This delayed onset of symptoms presents unique
challenges to Reserve Marines and Sailors who may be detached from vital medical
care and the daily support network inherent in active-duty Marine Corps units. En-
couraging Marines to recognize and communicate mental health challenges is a per-
vasive issue facing our commanders. The Marine Corps Reserve addresses the stig-
ma associated with mental healthcare through key programs such as the Yellow

---

278
Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) and COSC. We market all our behavioral
health initiatives and programs through our Marine Corps Reserve website, our
smart phone mobile application (app), and during key Marine Corps forums
throughout the year.
The Marine Corps Reserve smart phone mobile app, USMC Reserve Connect, is
tailored to Marine Reservists and family members. This Defense Information Sys-
tems Agency (DISA) approved app is an enterprise-wide, mobile app that serves as
a gateway to public content on government websites. The app delivers portable,
timely, and relevant information to Marines, Sailors, and their families and reduces
reliance on traditional computers to access career and personal resources. The app
is customizable, enabling units to provide Reserve Marines and Sailors with rel-
evant, unit-specific information. The app includes a mobile Common Access Card
(CAC) portal that allows Marines to pair their devices with a mobile CAC reader
to access some CAC-secured sites. USMC Reserve Connect increases engagement,
communication, and connectedness through greater access to career, lifestyle, and
behavioral health resources. The app is free to the public and is available for
download in most mobile app stores.
The Marine Corps Substance Abuse Program educates Marines and Sailors on
substance misuse and how it may impact relationships, coping mechanisms, think-
ing patterns, and risk awareness. The Substance Abuse Program provides tools to
promote the safety and total fitness of Marines, Sailors, and their families to sustain
and improve personal readiness and unit performance. The Marine Corps Reserve
relies profoundly on its Drug Demand Reduction Program that uses random urinal-
ysis testing to deter the use of illicit drugs and misuse of prescription drugs. Each
Reserve unit conducts monthly drug testing to screen Reserve Marines and Sailors
for drugs as well as breathalyzer testing to screen for alcohol use while in a duty
status. In FY22, with the decrease in COVID–19 restrictions and bases returning
to Health Protection Condition Alpha (HPCON A), units have reintegrated the Alco-
hol Screening Program into their monthly testing requirements. In response to this,
the Substance Abuse Program has increased education and training for Alcohol
Screening Program Coordinators.
Additionally, the Substance Abuse Program staff provides quarterly on-demand
education and awareness training on the dangers of abusing prescription drugs, in-
formation on the proper disposal of unused and outdated medications, and annual
supervisor-level training that increase leaders’ awareness of the dangers of abusing
prescription drugs. In FY22, the Substance Abuse Program continued the use of
Prime for Life in our educational efforts. This 4.5-hour training is designed for Sub-
stance Abuse Control Officers and their unit leaders to explore how biology and
choices affect an individual’s risk of alcohol and substance dependence, with empha-
sis focused on values and goals.
The Marine Corps Reserve recognizes there are a myriad of factors contributing
to suicide-related events. Risk factors can include depression, social isolation, impul-
sive or aggressive tendencies, and substance misuse and abuse. Common precipi-
tating stressors are consistent with the previous year and include relationship,
legal, and financial challenges, as well as disciplinary problems. Commanders em-
ploy a coordinated and effective suicide prevention methodology that allows for the
identification of stressors and application of mitigation measures to prevent and ad-
dress conditions that lead to suicidal behaviors within their units. Force Preserva-
tion Councils are conducted monthly to optimize the potential of all Active and Re-
serve Marines and Sailors. Through engaged leadership and consultation with sub-
ject matter experts, unit leaders identify potential risk factors and apply holistic
risk management courses of action in order to improve individual and unit readi-
ness.
The Marine Corps’ Unit Marine Awareness and Prevention Integrated Training
(UMAPIT) educates every Marine on the basics of suicide prevention, assists with
normalizing life changes, and emphasizes the need to seek help with the aim of de-
creasing the negative stigma around behavioral health. UMAPIT is a tiered initia-
tive designed to improve the total fitness of Marines, help foster mission readiness,
and increase the chance for early intervention. This training incorporates evidence-
informed practices and raises awareness about common risk factors and warning
signs associated with a range of behavioral health issues such as substance abuse,
suicide, family maltreatment, and combat operational stress before such issues be-
come unmanageable. The Marine Corps culture toward encouraging Marines to seek
help continues. This culture shift aids in reducing barriers to care and the fear of
reprisal for seeking help. Lastly, all Marines are taught to recognize suicide warning
signs and to seek appropriate resources for themselves and others to ensure that
no Marine is left behind.

---

279
Care Management Teams focus on supporting Reserve Marines and Sailors
through the Department of Veterans Affairs Transition Care Management Program.
The Reserve Marines and Sailors are provided with a Care Manager who oversees
the referrals, follow-on care, and individual healthcare needs of the Reserve mem-
ber. The Marine Intercept Program (MIP) is an evidence-informed, targeted inter-
vention for service members serving on active duty or activated Reservists who have
had an identified suicide ideation or suicide attempt. MIP includes a series of tele-
phonic contacts in which a counselor assesses the Marine for risk, encourages the
use of a safety plan, and identifies and addresses barriers to services or resources.
These services are also provided to our Reserve Marines and Sailors through PHOP.
Our Reserve Marines and Sailors have proven their strength in navigating chal-
lenging issues such as frequent moves, deployments, and separations from loved
ones. To help with these challenges, our Marines, Sailors, and family members can
access behavioral health programs at Marine Corps installations through Marine
Corps Community Services (MCCS) while on active-duty orders. Additionally, we
continue to support Military OneSource which provides confidential, non-medical
counseling, resources, and support to service members and their families anywhere
in the world.
SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

Sexual assault is a corrosive problem across the Department of Defense with dam-
aging impacts to the victims and their families, friends, communities, and the orga-
nizations they serve. Each case of sexual assault causes harm to unit cohesion, mo-
rale, unit and individual readiness, and the reputation of the Service as a whole.
Recruitment, retention, and most importantly the health and wellbeing of our men
and women in uniform also suffer. For the Marine Corps Reserve, improving the
health and safety of our service members by fostering a culture of dignity and re-
spect are top priorities as they are key to reducing and ultimately eliminating sex-
ual assault within our ranks. The Marine Corps Reserve has a robust Sexual As-
sault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program that provides training, advocacy,
guidance, and supportive services across our geographically dispersed force. Our
current SAPR Program is comprised of seven full-time professional employee posi-
tions developed to ensure the efficacy of the program and provide both prevention
and response services. In addition to the force-level Sexual Assault Response Coordi-
nator (SARC), each Major Subordinate Command (MSC) within the Marine Corps
Reserve has a full-time civilian SARC who serves as a special staff officer and sub-
ject matter expert to their Commanding General. The SARCs manage each MSC’s
SAPR Program from Marine Forces Reserve headquarters in New Orleans, Lou-
isiana, along with two professional civilian SAPR Victim Advocates (VAs) who are
available to travel throughout the country to provide in-person advocacy services,
training, and unit-specific program guidance to Marines, Sailors, and their families.
The Marine Corps Reserve’s SAPR personnel work diligently to provide prompt and
effective victim response, outreach, and sexual assault prevention by approaching
these efforts as a team. The SARCs and SAPR VAs work together to ensure there
is never a gap in coverage, regardless of the MSC or location. Leaders at every level
and anyone in need of support services have access to a SAPR staff member for pro-
gram guidance. To strengthen both prevention and response efforts, the Marine
Corps Reserve will be adding more full-time civilian SAPR personnel across the
Force in a phased hiring plan based on the Independent Review Commission on Sex-
ual Assault in the Military (IRC)’s recommendations adopted by the Secretary of De-
fense. The additional SARCs will be advisors to our Regimental and Battalion Com-
manders, and professional full-time civilian Victim Advocates will further support
our leadership at every level and the Marines and Sailors across the country. The
SAPR staff historically have trained up to 160 service members to become new vic-
tim advocates each year during week-long courses held quarterly in New Orleans.
We will continue to reinforce our SAPR program with collateral duty Victim Advo-
cates in operational and deployed as well as geographically isolated environments
as we establish a larger full-time civilian staff in alignment with the IRC rec-
ommendations approved by the Secretary of Defense. SAPR personnel respond to
Marines, Sailors, and adult dependents who request support services related to a
report of sexual assault. The SARCs and VAs screen for potential safety issues, de-
velop individualized safety plans, and offer advocacy services and referrals in the
military and civilian sectors. A nationwide database of resources is maintained in
order to effectively support Reserve Component members who may not have access
to military providers.
The Marine Corps Reserve operates a dedicated Sexual Assault Support Line that
is staffed by the professional SAPR team 24/7. The Marine Corps Reserve also ac-

---

280
tively publicizes the DoD Safe Helpline, an additional resource that offers crisis sup-
port services for members of the DoD community. The DoD Safe Helpline is avail-
able 24/7 worldwide with telephonic, secure chat, and web-based resources and can
be used anonymously for confidential support.
The Marine Corps Reserve’s prevention strategy is holistic and integrated with
other programs aimed toward eradicating sexual assault and interpersonal violence,
such as the Equal Opportunity Program, Safety, Spiritual Readiness Initiatives,
PHOP, Total Force Fitness initiatives, and Behavioral Health. Leaders at every
level are encouraged to actively engage with Marines and Sailors to create a positive
environment free from attitudes and harmful behaviors that are incompatible with
our core values. Each year, all Marines and Sailors receive SAPR training that cov-
ers reporting options, available resources, and prevention techniques. New course
material focusing on the prevention of interpersonal violence is in development and
additional efforts toward fostering a healthy command climate are being high-
lighted. Along with overall education about the SAPR Program, these periods of in-
struction give individual Marines and Sailors an opportunity to interact with their
local Command SAPR representatives, thereby helping to generate trust in the pro-
gram and confidence that the prevention of sexual assault is a priority for leader-
ship.
MILITARY EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

A key component to mission readiness is a healthy command climate, devoid of
unlawful discriminatory practices and unacceptable behaviors that are collectively
referred to as Prohibited Activities and Conduct (PAC). These harmful behaviors
may include bullying, dissident and protest activity, harassment, hazing, prohibited
discrimination, sexual harassment, and wrongful distribution of an intimate image.
The Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) Program is enforced throughout the Marine
Corps Reserve to eliminate such behaviors and foster a culture of dignity and re-
spect, regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including pregnancy),
gender identity, or sexual orientation. The MEO Program is staffed by fully trained,
Active Component Marines who possess the 0147 (Equal Opportunity Advisor) Mili-
tary Occupational Specialty. These billets include a force-level Equal Opportunity
Advisor (EOA) and three additional EOAs at the MSC levels. Currently the MEO
program is undergoing a restructuring to increase the number of personnel to sup-
port the Marine Corps Reserve’s unique structure and geographical dispersion. The
Marine Corps Reserve EOAs work cohesively as trusted agents to ensure seamless
coverage by providing sound program advice to commanders and assistance to mem-
bers across the force. EOAs are also assisted in program implementation by unit-
level Equal Opportunity Representatives (EOR), a collateral duty maintained by
Staff Noncommissioned Officers and higher at every O5 and O6 level command. Ad-
ditional EORs are utilized at geographically dispersed subordinate units throughout
the force for additional program implementation at the lowest level.
Both EOAs and EORs provide training to all Reserve Component members in pre-
venting, identifying, and reporting PAC. Additional guidance is provided to ensure
members understand the benefits of a healthy command climate and the adverse
impact that PAC has on individual members, units, and the Service. EOAs and
EORs are responsible for monitoring and advising commanders on command climate
issues to include those identified in their Defense Organizational Climate Survey
(DEOCS) results. During FY22, Marine Corps Reserve units were in full compliance
with the Secretary of Defense-directed DEOCS requirements, including all follow-
on corrective action plans. In addition to MEO resources, commands utilize the
SAPR and behavioral health programs for a holistic approach to maintaining
healthy command climates. Both EOAs and EORs work cohesively to ensure formal
PAC complaints are addressed in a timely manner and in accordance with the appli-
cable references. During FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve resolved 36 unique cases
through the complaint resolution process. Throughout this process, commanders en-
sured complainants were protected against all forms of retaliation, maltreatment,
ostracism, and reprisal.
QUALITY OF LIFE

The Marine Corps Reserve is committed to ensuring quality of life programs are
designed to effectively assist all Reserve Marines, Sailors, and their families, wheth-
er they are deployed or on the home front. The Marine Corps Reserve is geographi-
cally dispersed throughout the country and often stationed away from most tradi-
tional brick-and-mortar resources available at major bases and stations. Therefore,
we strive to provide awareness of and access to the diverse support programs avail-
able for their benefit. Face-to-face and virtual learning opportunities are available

---

281
along with toll-free telephone and Internet resources. The ability to access the com-
prehensive set of MCCS programs, which support operational readiness, warfighting
capabilities, and quality of life can have a profoundly positive effect on the well-
being of our Marines and their families. MCCS programming includes Exceptional
Family Member Program (EFMP), School Liaison Program, personal and profes-
sional development, fitness and recreation, readiness and deployment support, fam-
ily team building, and prevention. MCCS is an accessible and responsive resource
that provides continual and lasting support to Marines and their families through-
out their entire service or affiliation with the Marine Corps. The Unit, Personal, and
Family Readiness Program is supported by civilian Deployment Readiness Coordina-
tors and Uniformed Readiness Coordinators who implement a commander’s family
readiness vision and provide a vital link to Marines, Sailors, and their families to
ensure a constant state of family readiness.
MCCS programs are flexible, constantly adjusting to meet the needs of our geo-
graphically dispersed Reserve Marines and their families. The training programs
provided to our commanders, Family Readiness Command Teams, and Marines and
their families help to produce a ready and resilient force equipped to achieve suc-
cess. The Marine Corps Family Team Building (MCFTB) Program enhances readi-
ness and resiliency through non-clinical preventative education, professional train-
ing, and community-building support to Marines, Sailors, and their families
throughout the wide array of mission, life, and career events. During FY22, the Ma-
rine Corps Reserve conducted 183 training events in which 4,848 Marines, Sailors,
and family members received essential information to assist them throughout the
deployment cycle. These events helped them prepare for and flourish during deploy-
ments and achieve a positive post-deployment reintegration experience.
A Reserve Marine’s quality of life and resiliency runs deeper than mental and
physical wellness. The Marine ethos includes an impressive resolve forged in the
spirit and able to perceive that which is greater than self. This connection with the
transcendent inspires Marines to be their best and is undergirded by 167 chaplains
and Religious Program Specialists who deliver religious ministry support and care
to all Marines and Sailors, regardless of religious affiliation. Beyond equipment,
training, and technical skill, it is the strength of spirit that enables our Marines
and Sailors to accomplish the mission with honor, to overcome adversity, and to sac-
rificially serve with meaning and purpose. Religious Ministry Teams (RMT) com-
prised of uniformed chaplains and Religious Program Specialists, help to increase
the readiness of Marines, Sailors, and their families by preparing them for the rig-
ors of military life, including the demands of military operations. The Marine Corps
Reserve has chaplains embedded in 39 Marine Corps Reserve units across the coun-
try and nine Religious Ministry Support Units directly supporting the Active Com-
ponent. Through personal presence, these RMT’s cultivate trust with leadership in
carrying out the competencies of provision, facilitation, care, and advisement.
Chaplain Religious Enrichment Development Operations (CREDO) is a pro-
grammatic means to increase the spiritual readiness and resilience of service mem-
bers and other authorized persons as part of the Department of Navy’s Strategic
Plan for Religious Ministry. Operating within the Command Religious Program
(CRP), CREDO provides transformational retreats and workshops, including the
Marriage Enrichment Retreat (MER), the Personal Resiliency Retreat (PRR), and
Suicide Intervention Workshops such as Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Train-
ing (ASIST). The MER initiatives equip Marines, Sailors, and their families with
practical relationship and communication tools that strengthen marriages and indi-
vidual resiliency on the home front and during mobilizations. The PRR helps Ma-
rines and Sailors set personal goals, make healthy decisions, develop coping skills
for stress, and live their lives with greater purpose and satisfaction. During FY22,
chaplains invested in 145 couples through 10 MERs and in 578 individuals partici-
pating in 31 retreats and workshops focused on resiliency and team building in the
context of leadership and human dynamics.
In an ongoing effort to reduce death by suicide and suicidal events, the CREDO
Program offers ASIST, Suicide Alertness for Everyone (safeTALK), and START
training to Marines and their families. These are evidence-based skill trainings for
intervention in suicidal events to prevent death and increase prevention until care
is available. Chaplains trained a total of 71 people in five workshops including three
in remote locations. Participants in these programs self-reported an 83% increase
in their likelihood to intervene to help a person having thoughts of suicide.
The Marine Corps emphasizes the importance of readiness for Marines and family
members in many areas of life. The Marine Corps Personal and Professional Devel-
opment Programs provide training and educational resources to increase awareness
and build skills for individual and family development. These programs enhance the
quality of life for our military community by promoting self-reliance and self-suffi-

---

282
ciency, as well as continuing the tradition of ‘‘taking care of our own.’’ The Marine
Corps Personal and Professional Development Programs include transition readi-
ness, personal financial management, voluntary education, and information and re-
ferral.
The Marine Corps’ Transition Readiness Program (TRP) is a comprehensive pro-
gram that helps Marines, and their families develop and attain effective post-transi-
tion employment, educational, and entrepreneurship goals. It provides the tools and
resources needed to comply with DoD directed Career Readiness Standards (CRS).
Transition Readiness is a process that occurs across the Marine for Life Cycle; it
is not an event that occurs at a single point in time, but rather takes place through-
out a Marine’s career. The Marine for Life Network helps to link our Marines to
employment, education, and community resources in their hometown areas to sup-
port their future goals. The Transition Readiness Seminar (TRS) is a week-long pro-
gram required by Title 10 for all Active and Reserve Component Marines and Sail-
ors who have served a minimum of 180 consecutive days on active duty. Marines
are encouraged to attend TRS at the closest military installation to their location
regardless of affiliation. For geographically dispersed Marines, many of whom are
not located near a military installation, a virtual course is available to meet the re-
quirement. In FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve transition staff assisted 800 geo-
graphically dispersed Marines with pre-separation counseling and capstone comple-
tion.
Additionally, Marines may take advantage of the DoD partnership with
Tutor.com, which offers our Marines, Sailors, and their dependents access to 24/7,
no-cost, live tutoring services for grades K–12 and college students. Our Marines are
also provided with remote access to language courses through Mango Languages,
which supports more than 70 languages, including English as a Second Language.
Peterson’s Online Academic Skills Course helps Marines and Sailors build math and
verbal skills to excel on the job, pass exams, and advance their careers and edu-
cation.
Marines with a solid understanding of their personal financial situation and
sound financial management practices are better prepared to meet the needs of the
nation. The Personal Financial Management Program (PFMP) provides personal fi-
nancial education, training, counseling, information, and referral as the number-one
source for unbiased financial information to Marines and their families. The PFMP
utilizes Financial Education Action Points to increase the knowledge and improve
the financial practices of Marines at predetermined milestones within their career,
such as promotion, permanent change of station, marriage, birth of a child, and oth-
ers. The PFMP is available to all Marines and their families free of charge and on
a variety of platforms (in-person, hybrid, and virtual).
The Marine Corps’ Semper Fit Program coordinates with our bases and stations
to provide fitness education activities that promote physical and mental readiness
and develops positive self-esteem and healthy lifestyles. Additionally, the High-In-
tensity Tactical Training (HITT) Program focuses on physical resiliency, combat
readiness, and injury prevention. The HITT Program provides hands-on, science-
based strength and conditioning courses and online physical fitness tools to include
instruction on injury prevention, nutrition, and weight management. Life Athlete
Readiness and Resilience programs provide opportunities for life skill development,
social health, community connectedness, and stress management. Programs include
recreational aquatics, outdoor recreation equipment checkout, community centers,
community-wide activities, competitive events, parks, trails, picnic areas, youth
sports, and other recreational programs.
The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) is a DoD-wide effort to promote
the well-being of National Guard and Reserve members, their families, and commu-
nities by connecting them with resources throughout the deployment cycle. The
YRRP is an enduring and invaluable part of our efforts to build resiliency. Since
its inception in 2010, we have conducted more than 971 training events for more
than 58,348 Marines, Sailors, and family members. In FY22, we conducted 27 vir-
tual events connecting more than 1,795 participants with local resources before, dur-
ing, and after deployments.
The Marine Corps Reserve is a dedicated advocate for flexible quality of life pro-
grams and services that evolve and adapt to the changing needs of our Marines,
Sailors, and their families. The combined effect of these programs and services is
critical to the readiness and retention of our Reserve Marines, Sailors, and their
families.

---

283
SUPPORTING OUR WOUNDED, ILL, OR INJURED MARINES AND THEIR FAMILIES

The Marine Corps ensures the availability of full spectrum care to all wounded,
ill, or injured (WII) Active and Reserve Service members through the Marine Corps’
Wounded Warrior Regiment (WWR). Due to the unique nature of how Reserve Ma-
rines are activated and mobilized, they often encounter unique challenges to
healthcare when WII. The Marine Corps has sought to address these challenges
through the establishment of a WWR Liaison Officer whose sole purpose is to pro-
vide subject matter expertise in WII policies and procedures, coordination between
Reserve leadership and WWR staff, and guidance and training to Reserve units
throughout the recovery care continuum.
The WWR staff includes the Reserve Medical Entitlements Determination
(RMED) Section, which maintains specific oversight of all Reservists requiring med-
ical care for service-incurred and duty-limiting medical conditions. During this past
year, RMED solidified professional relationships with key personnel at Defense
Health Agency-Great Lakes in order to streamline the process for Reserve Marines
injured in the line of duty to access medical healthcare benefits. This close working
relationship resulted in the publication of a coordinated Marine Corps Administra-
tive Message providing detailed guidance and instructions to Reserve units in order
to reduce the time between an injury occurring and a Reserve Marine receiving
treatment. We believe that arming Reserve units with this knowledge results in im-
proved access to medical healthcare, which will greatly aid in an injured Marine’s
recovery timeline and have a positive impact to overall personnel readiness through-
out the Marine Corps Reserve.
In addition to the oversight of medical care, RMED administers the Incapacitation
Pay Program for the Reserve Component. Qualification for Incapacitation Pay is de-
termined based upon the member being physically disabled as a result of their serv-
ice-connected injury and the member demonstrating a loss of civilian earned income
from non-military employment or self-employment as a result of that injury. During
Fiscal Year 2022, the RMED section processed 323 Incapacitation Pay requests for
payments totaling $272,274.
Reserve Marines facing complex care and recovery needs have access to WWR’s
network of 45 Recovery Care Coordinators who provide one-on-one transition sup-
port and resource identification for WII Reservists and families who often live long
distances from military installations.
The WWR also has medical advocates on the regimental staff who are available
to assist Reserve, Active, retired, and veteran Marines in need of medical care co-
ordination and advocacy. This support is called the District Injured Support Coordi-
nators (DISC) program which is provided by WWR Reserve Staff Non-Commissioned
Officers who are activated each year through Active Duty for Operational Support
(ADOS) funding. The DISCs are dispersed throughout the country and assist in per-
forming face to face meetings as part of their care and case management processes.
The DISCs are the WWR Commanding Officer’s representatives in the field with the
mission to facilitate care and case management to personnel with highly complex
needs and the successful transition of post-9/11 WII Marines from the Active or Re-
serve Component to veteran status.
The DISCs also provide direct support to more than 1,500 Marines currently on
the Temporary Disabled Retired List (TDRL) to assist them in meeting all their re-
quirements prior to the Department of the Navy’s final determination of their dis-
ability. The DISC mission is accomplished by providing needs-based support and
problem resolution, to include non-medical case management to post-9/11 WII vet-
erans and their families to ensure the Marine Corps keeps faith with all Marines.
Due to the reduction of ADOS funding, WWR reduced the DISC manning to mini-
mal viable capability in FY23. Much of the support to the recently separated WII
Marines and those on the TDRL has shifted to fully remote.
The Marine Corps will not forget the sacrifices our Reserve Marines made for this
great Nation, and we will continue to work with WWR to establish resources and
improve programs that address the unique and ongoing needs of our Reserve service
members and their families.
FORCE DESIGN

The Marine Corps Reserve, operating as both a strategic and operational Reserve,
is a critical part of the Total Force Marine Corps. As the Marine Corps transitions
toward Naval Campaigning in response to Strategic competition, the Reserve Com-
ponent continues to be an integral element of the planning effort. The Marine Corps’
force design process is strategy- driven, threat informed, and concept based. Force
development is then achieved through deliberate experimentation, wargaming, inte-
grating planning teams, and analysis to provide valuable data in our Campaign of

---

284
Learning to identify what is effective. The Marine Corps Reserve provides support
to this force design effort, while remaining a vital global contributor in meeting
Combatant Command requirements.
Although the Active Component forces have been able to rapidly modernize under
the direction of the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the Commandant, the Re-
serve Component has yet to mature as quickly due to resource limitations. Cur-
rently, the deactivations of 4th Tank Battalion, bridging units, VMU–4, and VMGR–
542 have been the only divestment requirements for the Reserve Component. The
requirement to divest in Tanks and the associated bridging assets was a total force
initiative, while the divestment in VMU and VMGR were specific to the Reserve
Component. With each unit deactivation, whether a Marine is contractually obli-
gated to serve or is no longer obligated, Personnel Transition Teams (PTTs) travel
to those locations to meet with each individual Marine in order to assist them in
finding opportunities for continued service. As changes to the Reserve Component
alter the physical location of Reserve units across the country, we will continue to
actively analyze their efficacy to ensure that any and all unit relocations are ana-
lyzed in detail and driven by relevant qualitative and quantitative factors.
The Reserve Component remains nested with all Service-related initiatives sup-
porting Force Design. As the Active Component evolves, so too will the Reserve
Component while also remaining ready and relevant to maintain its position as a
vital contributor in support of Combatant Command requirements. Additionally, the
Reserve Component, alongside Active Component planners, specifically 2nd Marine
Expeditionary Force, are working to design and mature the concept of Service Re-
tained Forces in support of global crisis and contingency operations. The Service Re-
tained Force concept provides an opportunity for the Reserve Component to remain
relevant and ready and provides a clear role for Reserve Marines in the future force
under Force Design. This will include potential adjustments to the current capabili-
ties and platforms within the Reserve Component that will ultimately serve to make
a more lethal and capable Reserve Force. Opportunities for Marine Corps Special
Operations Command integration are also being explored in relation to the Intel-
ligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Targeting (ISRT) focus area from the
MCWL Littoral Maneuver Experimentation Plan.
INNOVATION AND EXPERIMENTATION

The establishment of Littoral Craft Companies (LCC) is a comprehensive initia-
tive producing strong linkages across several Marine Corps Reserve Lines of Effort
(LOEs). The establishment supports numerous key objectives including Site Optimi-
zation, Talent Management, New Platforms and Technologies Integration, Experi-
mentation and Wargaming Support as well as Service component integration in a
way that effectively aligns broad aspects of the Marine Corps Reserve’s strategic vi-
sion.
The LCC initiative emerged in response to a 2020 Service-level decision directing
the divestment of C (Galveston, TX) and D (Tampa, FL) Companies, 4th Assault
Amphibian Battalion (AA Bn) in FY25 and FY24 respectively. Preserving the talent
and facilities at these two key coastal sites became imperative. Recruiting and re-
tention at both Tampa and Galveston are consistently well above average com-
parable to the rest of the force at a time when the Marine Corps Reserve Compo-
nent is recovering from COVID–19 and other end-strength challenges. In addition,
both sites offer exceptional littoral training venues and wide-ranging opportunities
for Joint and Interagency maritime partnerships within the Gulf-coast region.
Transitioning C and D Cos 4th AA Bn into LCCs presents an ideal Talent Man-
agement and Site Optimization solution to the problem, with the bonus of inte-
grating new Platforms and Technology in the form of littoral craft. In partnership
with the Defense Innovation Unit, the Marine Corps Reserve is pursuing a rapid
acquisition of dual-use commercially available vessels through an Area of Interest
solicitation to Industry. This highly flexible process offers direct access to vendors
capable of producing state of the art littoral craft to the Marine Corps Reserve on
an aggressive delivery timeline.
The Marine Innovation Unit and other staffs across the reserve component are
coordinating closely with Service-level capability developers and the Marine Corps
Warfighting Lab (MCWL) to posture the LCCs for support to live force experimen-
tation in response to Service-level littoral maneuver, mobility, and tactical
sustainment-oriented learning demands. Exploration is already underway in key
focus areas to include ‘‘Training and Training Sustainment’’ and ‘‘Littoral Maneuver
Craft Characteristics.’’ Support to Experimentation is expected to rapidly increase
once the LCCs are formally established allowing the Marine Corps Reserve to con-
tribute significantly to the ultimate Total Force capability solution(s).

---

285
Initial planning efforts have begun for LCC participation during bi-lateral and
multilateral exercises as well as waterborne Theater Security Cooperation activities
in the U.S. Southern Command and other Global Combatant Command Areas of Re-
sponsibility once initial operational capability is achieved. Opportunities for Marine
Corps Special Operations Command integration are also being explored especially
in relation to the ‘‘Surveillance and Reconnaissance’’ and ‘‘Kinetic and Non-Kinetic
Fires and Effects’’ focus areas from the MCWL Littoral Maneuver Experimentation
Plan. This represents yet another clear example of how the LCC initiative links the
Marine Corps Reserve Infrastructure, Human Terrain/Talent Management, Capa-
bilities and Capacity and Utilization/Employment LOEs in an extraordinarily cohe-
sive manner with potential wide-ranging, operational benefits for the Total Force
Marine Corps.
TALENT MANAGEMENT

Earning victory in the increasingly complex and multi-domain warfighting realm
of the future requires Marines to achieve and maintain an advanced level of tech-
nical, intellectual, and physical capability, and to operate comfortably in distributed
and ambiguous environments. The Marine Corps of the future will require signifi-
cantly more low-density/high-demand skillsets that are difficult to achieve and re-
tain, particularly if we continue to rely so heavily on the Active Component. To
achieve Service objectives, the Marine Corps is leveraging the Reserve Component
to attract and retain diverse personnel with unique talent and skill, while also pro-
viding a path to service more compatible for Reserve Marines who choose to main-
tain a civilian career in conjunction with military duty. The Marine Corps Reserve
is aligned with service goals to mature the force through the introduction of new
initiatives to increase career flexibility and further develop talent in the Reserve
Component. Initiatives such as the Direct Affiliation Program (DAP) provide unique
opportunities for departing Active Component Marines with valuable skills to con-
tinue their service in the Reserve Component and provide a vital advantage to in-
creasing reserve unit personnel readiness. Additionally, the Marine Corps Reserve
promotes a variety of talent management initiatives, to include the Diversity Aimed
Officer Program (DAOP) which targets historically underrepresented populations
and provides them an opportunity to visualize and pursue their career path as a
Marine Corps Officer through educational events, hands on experience, and senior
leader mentorship. In the summer of FY23 we will host our third annual DAOP
event, comprised of Marines chosen through a highly competitive process.
As the Active Component Marine Corps develops and implements new talent
management and diversity objectives, policies and programs, the Marine Corps Re-
serve offers the Service many unique opportunities to attract, recruit, identify,
incentivize, and retain the most talented individuals across the Total Force. The
Marine Corps Reserve has already begun to integrate with Active Component teams
at Headquarters Marine Corps, Manpower and Reserve Affairs and Marine Corps
Recruiting Command to ensure the Reserve Component is seamlessly integrated
into all Service-level talent management efforts. Soon, a sample Reserve Component
officer billet will be included in the initial release and testing for the Marine Corps’
Talent Management and Engagement Platform (TMEP). When this platform reaches
full operational capability, TMEP will greatly enhance talent management, leader-
ship development, as well as enhance diversity, inclusion, and equity throughout the
Reserve Component. Moving forward, the Marine Corps Reserve will continue to de-
velop innovative policies, pathways, and tools designed to capture, catalogue, and
maintain visibility of our diverse pool of talent and ensure these Marines have a
path for future service.
CONCLUSION

As the operational environment changes, your Marine Corps Reserve will continue
to innovate and evolve in order to meet future challenges and deter the pacing
threats as prescribed in the National Defense Strategy. Through efforts such as the
MIU and the acquisition of dual-use small littoral craft, we are constantly shaping
and refining that evolution. As we are evolving our force, we are continuing to keep
faith with and remain true to the communities that have supported us with pro-
grams such as Toys for Tots. The key to our success has been and will continue to
be individual Marines, Sailors, and their families. Your Reserve Marines will con-
tinue to answer their ‘‘irrational call to serve’’ and, with your continued support, we
will remain ready. Semper Fidelis!
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General. Next up, we have General
Healy, Chief Air Force Reserve.

---

286
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY, CHIEF OF
AIR FORCE RESERVE
General HEALY. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
70,000 men and women of the Air Force Reserve, it is an honor for
me to be here today with my senior enlisted advisor, Chief Master
Sergeant Israel Nuñez.
As a Commander, I am continually amazed by the accomplish-
ments of our Reserve Airmen as they meet every challenge put
forth in front of them on behalf of our Nation. This year marks the
75th anniversary of the Air Force Reserve, and during that time
we provided the Nation with an operational capability, strategic
depth, and surge capacity across every core mission set of the
United States Air Force.
As a largely part time force, we provide a ready now, accessible
force that is both mission effective and cost efficient. As our near-
peer threat increases, we are committed to the Secretary of the Air
Force’s operational imperatives, the Chief of Staff’s vision of accel-
erate, change, or lose, and the Chief of Space Operations’ three
lines of effort.
When I took command of the Air Force Reserve almost a year
ago, I issued a task order with my two priorities of ready now and
transforming for the future. In the past year, we have got to prove
that ready now force through our ability to rapidly surge and pro-
vide experienced Reserve Airmen to Combatant Commands and the
Joint Force.
Reservists provided critical support to our NATO allies and our
European partners, and performed everything from intelligence
analysis and cybersecurity, to airlift and air superiority missions,
to aircraft maintenance and force protection. The U.S. Air Force
and the U.S. Space Force would not be able to support Ukraine and
deter Russian aggression without Reserve citizen Airmen.
To optimize our performance as part of the total force, the Air
Force Reserve must transform for the future. That transformation
requires the Air Force Reserve be proportionately and concurrently
modernized with the regular component. Maintaining equipment
parity with the regular component ensures our ability to match
pacing threats.
Legacy aircraft divestment without recapitalization and delayed
modernization adds substantial risk to the ability to sustain com-
bat credible air superiority and strategic storage capacity in the fu-
ture. We are grateful to Congress for the National Guard and Re-
serve Equipment Account.
NGREA enables us to modernize, sustain our capability, and re-
place obsolete equipment when recapitalization by the active com-
ponent is not feasible. Our most important weapon system is our
Airmen. We are focused on ensuring that Reserve citizen Airmen
receive the support they need.
This includes providing mental health resources, investment in
resilience initiatives, offering social support through yellow ribbon
reintegration programs, implementing recommendations from the
Independent Commission on Sexual Assault, and policy changes to
remove barriers from service.

---

287

Over the past 75 years, the Air Force Reserve has provided con-
duct proven readiness. We are confident the Air Force Reserve will
remain prepared to defend our great Nation now and in the future.
Thank you for your continued support of the Air Force Reserve,
its citizen Airmen, and their families. I look forward to answering
your questions.
[The statement follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE RESERVE

The Air Force Reserve is a combat-ready force, with a Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 end
strength of 70,000 Reserve Airmen, stationed at over 60 locations throughout the
United States, and serving globally in air, space, and cyberspace. As a cost-efficient
and mission-effective force, the Air Force Reserve provides the Nation with oper-
ational capability, strategic depth, and surge capacity, both overseas and here at
home. The Air Force Reserve’s wide-ranging operational capability serves the di-
verse needs of every Combatant Commander, whose requirements are as varied as
the geographic and functional areas they support.
With over 80 percent of our Reserve Airmen serving part-time, this combat-tested
experience is retained in a cost-efficient force, available whenever the Nation calls.
Further, the Nation benefits from the intrinsic value gained by a member’s civilian
experience in a variety of career fields, from pilots and nurses to teachers and cyber-
space professionals.
The Air Force Reserve directly supports the United States and neighboring coun-
tries with special capabilities, including aerial firefighting, aerial spray, and weath-
er reconnaissance, better known as the ‘‘Hurricane Hunters.’’ The Air Force Re-
serve’s relationship with other Federal agencies, including the National Weather
Service and U.S. Forest Service, demonstrates how Federal, military, and civilian
organizations can work together to support the entire Nation.
The Air Force Reserve is a proven part of the Total Force. We are committed to
the Secretary of the Air Force’s Operational Imperatives, the Chief of Staff’s vision
of Accelerate Change or Lose, and the Chief of Space Operations’ three Lines of Ef-
fort. The Air Force Reserve is critical to the Department of the Air Force’s (DAF)
effort to address the four National Defense Strategy (NDS) priorities: defending the
homeland, deterring strategic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient
joint force. We execute the full spectrum of DAF missions, providing strategic depth
and maintaining an operational readiness to deter our adversaries, defend the
United States and our allies, and respond to any contingency—at a fraction of the
cost of the Regular Component of the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force.
AIR FORCE RESERVE FISCAL YEAR 2024 POSTURE STATEMENT

Total Force operations require Total Force investments. The Joint Force faces a
complex battlespace across multiple domains. The Regular Component of the U.S.
Air Force and U.S. Space Force are working to fulfill the NDS priority of building
a resilient joint force and defense ecosystem. The Air Force Reserve meets these
challenges as part of the Total Force. Our mission capabilities rest on one single
foundation—our people. Our Reserve Airmen must be able to work side by side with
their Regular Component partners in the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force.
To do that, we must train and equip our Reserve Airmen in a manner that is pro-
portional and concurrent with the Regular Component. This will ensure the Air
Force Reserve remains a credible operational and viable strategic reserve that can
provide a surge capacity in a crisis or contingency.
With Congress’ support, we were able to improve our readiness. Upon taking com-
mand of the Air Force Reserve, I issued a Task Order that emphasized two prior-
ities: Ready Now and Transforming for the Future. The order empowers Reserve
Airmen to own their individual readiness and establishes accountability across the
entire command to become the force the Nation needs. The approval of our FY 2024
budget request will enable us to continue building readiness while also transforming
for the future.
This year marks the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Air Force Reserve, and I am
proud to say we have responded to every U.S. conflict and contingency since 1948.
It has not been easy. The Air Force Reserve first mobilized to halt aggression on
the Korean Peninsula in 1950, without a mobilization plan. Despite this challenge,
Reserve Airmen brought combat air power to support United Nations Forces. Today,

---

288
Reserve Airmen remain ready, such as when an Air Force Reserve C–17 and its
crew supported earthquake relief operations in Turkey and Syria by transporting 28
tons of cargo, 76 personnel, and 6 search and rescue dogs within 10 hours of notifi-
cation on February 6, 2023.
During the last year, we accelerated the readiness of our nuclear deterrence forces
and continued our focus on ensuring preparedness against pacing threats. We mod-
ernized key weapon systems and closed the gap on critical staffing shortfalls. We
increased our organizational effectiveness and improved our ability to provide excel-
lent care for our Reserve Airmen and their families while also working to bolster
individual and organizational resilience.
My intent is to prioritize every dollar spent on initiatives that optimize readiness.
We will hold ourselves accountable from planning to execution of a comprehensive
and effective strategy to build a ready force and transform the organization. By em-
ploying data analytics coupled with new tools and processes, we are making timely
and informed programmatic decisions. We are implementing policy reform that fa-
cilitates modernization and reduces administrative requirements. The result is an
agile and judicious execution of financial resources. Continuing resolutions hamper
Total Force readiness and degrade our ability to sustain progress.
While we continue to prioritize readiness, we still face challenges. Like the Reg-
ular Component of the U.S. Air Force, in FY 2022 the Air Force Reserve did not
meet its end strength and in FY 2023, we are projected to fall short of end strength
again. The FY 2024 budget request includes funding that will allow the Air Force
Reserve to offer bonuses to help recruit and retain personnel. The budget will also
provide funds to bring Airmen on status for additional training to support readiness.
This is dual purposed as readiness training also improves an Airmen’s experience,
providing our members a sense of purpose and thereby improving retention.
The Air Force Reserve will support the DAF as it makes hard choices in Airpower
and Spacepower modernization to keep pace with our strategic competitors. This is
critical to address the four NDS priorities, which depend upon effective command
and control capabilities that are survivable in the threat environment of today and
tomorrow. The Air Force Reserve must be a part of that decisionmaking process
since concurrent fielding, recapitalization, and divestment of airframes, systems,
and equipment is essential to our ability to integrate effectively with the Regular
Component and support the Geographic and Functional Combatant Commands. We
conduct operations in every DAF core function and support both DAF services: the
U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force. For the Air Force Reserve to remain a
viable contributor to joint operations, the Total Force must maintain equipment par-
ity and interoperability. The FY 2024 budget continues to integrate Air Force Re-
serve capabilities with the Joint Force.
Reserve Airmen and their families are the foundation of our readiness, oper-
ational capabilities, and organizational success. Our Airmen’s diverse talent and
depth of experience are a force multiplier. Their dedication to our mission is second
to none. We owe our Airmen stability and predictability. The Air Force Force Gen-
eration (AFFORGEN) model will increase predictability and lessen Reserve Air-
men’s time away from family and the financial burdens they may incur being away
from their civilian occupations.
Our FY 2024 budget request supports our continuing efforts to implement the
NDS by making deliberate and impactful investments in readiness. The Air Force
Reserve value proposition is simple: we are a cost- effective strategic force that is
experienced and accessible. We will use budgeted funds to ensure the Air Force Re-
serve has the capabilities and training required to generate combat power for the
future security environment. We also will ensure readiness to answer our Nation’s
call, as we’ve done over the past seventy-five years. With the requested Congres-
sional support, we will continue to organize, train, and equip our Reserve Airmen
to remain a ready force to defend our Nation and its interests.
AIR FORCE RESERVE’S ROLE IN DEFENDING THE NATION

The Air Force Reserve is codified in law to provide trained and qualified personnel
available for active duty in time of war, national emergency, or in response to a cri-
sis or contingency. Recognizing that joint warfighters need air and space power, the
DAF plays a critical role in defending the homeland, deterring strategic attacks, de-
terring aggression, and building a resilient joint force. The accessibility of the Air
Force Reserve is critical to ensuring the DAF has a surge capacity to meet joint
warfighter requirements. Because operational demands fluctuate, the Regular Com-
ponent cannot be staffed to meet peak operational demands and is therefore right-
sized for steady-state operations. The Air Force Reserve provides the strategic depth
and operational support the DAF needs to meet these demands. This requires Re-

---

289
serve Airmen to be organized, trained, and equipped in line with the Regular Com-
ponent to be a ready, resilient, and combat-credible force in reserve. We are trans-
forming for the future to become the Air Force Reserve the Nation needs.
Our President’s Budget (PB) request for FY 2024 enables the Air Force Reserve
to be an operational and ready part-time force with a strategic surge capability. The
PB allows us to invest in readiness and continue supporting every DAF core func-
tion. As the Regular Component divests legacy systems and brings new weapon sys-
tems online, the Air Force Reserve is following suit. The Secretary of the Air Force
and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force concurred with the recommendation from the
National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force report published on January
30, 2014, which stated that as the Air Force acquires new equipment, force integra-
tion plans should adhere to the principle of proportional and concurrent fielding
across the components.
When mobilized, our Reserve Airmen provide full-time support to the Joint Force.
In addition to our daily contributions to global operations, we provide rapid surge
capability and strategic depth for national defense. In FY 2022, 3,299 Reserve Air-
men deployed to support taskings. In FY 2023, over 2,500 Reserve Airmen are pro-
jected to deploy. This support is critical to the Regular Component by burden-shar-
ing deployment requirements and providing the expertise of Reserve Airmen to
Combatant Commands and the Joint Force. For example, since February 2022,
1,849 Reserve Airmen have supported U.S. Air Forces Europe and the United States
European Command by serving 145,313 days on active duty orders. These Reserv-
ists have performed everything from intelligence analysis and force protection to air-
craft maintenance and reconnaissance flights to deter Russian aggression.
Force Structure
With 80 percent of Air Force Reserve members serving part-time, most Reservists
serve alongside our Regular Component counterparts in association constructs. Ap-
proximately two-thirds of the Air Force’s associations are with the Air Force Re-
serve. Integrating through associations delivers significant taxpayer value, both in
cost savings and improved mission effectiveness, by sharing aircraft, equipment, and
facilities with the Regular Component. Our part-time force brings a wealth of
knowledge and expertise from their civilian careers to their military service. This
strengthens our capabilities, enables the integration of commercial best practices,
and facilitates beneficial partnerships with industry and other institutions. This can
be seen in organizational initiatives known as ‘‘Bullpens’’ that leverage Individual
Mobilization Augmentees who have critical high demand low density skills that are
lacking in the Regular Component. These Bullpens are critical to supporting the
Secretary of the Air Force’s Operational Imperatives and a great example is the
bullpen being established to study Hypersonics. The Hypersonic Bullpen has 13 Re-
serve Airmen who are experts from industry and academia. There is also a China
Bullpen with Reservists who have expertise spanning several disciplines including
language, internal politics, and strategy.
Classic Associations
Unit associations between geographically collocated Regular Component and Re-
serve Component units exemplify Total Force Integration. In this construct, equip-
ment resources are officially assigned to the lead unit but are shared between the
lead and associate unit. Associations further enhance our interoperability and give
the Regular Component access to the experience of the more seasoned Reserve force.
This ensures parity in equipment and training, while providing cost savings and
readiness benefits to both components. There are 79 associations between the Re-
serve and the Regular Components which span nearly every major mission set. The
Reserve Airmen of the 477th Fighter Group at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson,
for example, include some of the most experienced F–22 pilots and maintainers. The
pilots average over 1,200 flight hours in the F–22 alone, compared to their Regular
Component counterparts’ 400 hours. Every pilot is mission commander and instruc-
tor pilot qualified, providing vital operational and instructional capacity to the asso-
ciate unit. As the F–22 costs $80,000 an hour to operate, the cumulative F–22 flying
experience of the Reserve pilots has a replacement value of $1.1 billion. Our Reserve
maintainers provide a stable base of deep experience to mentor maintainers across
the Total Force.
AFFORGEN
The DAF established AFFORGEN to enable force presentation to meet Combatant
Command requirements in a sustainable, predictable manner while ensuring oper-
ational preparedness and required readiness. AFFORGEN is an evolution and matu-
ration of the Air Expeditionary Forces model that balances risk between Combatant
Command requirements, Air Force readiness, and modernization, by deploying pre-

---

290
identified units who have trained together. Since 2015 the Air Force Reserve has
executed a form of AFFORGEN through Reserve Component Periods (RCPs). In FY
2024, AFFORGEN will meet initial operational capability, and the Air Force Re-
serve will provide 671 personnel to the initial Expeditionary Air Base Sourcing rota-
tions and another 548 personnel for Supplemental Expeditionary Air Base Sourcing
rotations totaling 1,219 Reserve personnel. These Reserve Airmen will include Lo-
gisticians, Security Forces, Administration Personnel, Civil Engineers, Aerial Por-
ters, and Communications troops. The Air Force Reserve will also provide additional
Airmen to augment gaps in the Regular Component AFFORGEN manning.
The AFFOGREN model will provide Reserve Airmen with predictable deployment
cycles. This predictability enables Combatant Commanders and the DAF to preplan
and budget for the utilization of Air Force Reserve forces that is consistent with
Congressional intent and Title 10 USC Section 12304b. It also enables Reserve Air-
men, their families, and their employers to prepare for the demands of defending
our Nation.
Core Functions
Our ability to meet current taskings and to supply strategic reserve staffing are
predicated on equipment parity and our readiness. The Air Force Reserve provides
daily operational support to the Joint Force, while maintaining a ready and acces-
sible strategic force during major conflict or surge operations and unforeseen events,
such as national disasters and contingencies. As an operational Reserve, we must
maintain our readiness to support present-day missions while aligning our capabili-
ties to meet the requirements of the NDS. We remain ready to employ traditional
capabilities, while continuing to modernize our equipment to deter and defeat pac-
ing threats.
Air Superiority
Preserving the advantage in strategic competition requires generating combat
power in contested environments. Maintaining equipment parity with the Regular
Component ensures our ability to match pacing threats. Legacy aircraft divestiture
without recapitalization and delayed modernization programs add substantial risk
to the ability to sustain combat-credible air superiority and strategic surge capacity
in the future.
The Air Force Reserve provides vital experience to the DAF’s 5th Generation
fighter capabilities. The Air Force Reserve’s first unit-equipped F–35 wing at Naval
Air Station (NAS) Joint Reserve Base (JRB) Fort Worth, Texas will begin the con-
version from F–16s to F–35s in FY 2024. We currently execute F–35 combat oper-
ations through our Classic Association at Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah. We con-
duct F–35 formal training at Luke AFB, Arizona and Eglin AFB, Florida through
Classic Associations. We also perform operational test and weapons instructor
course missions at Nellis AFB, Nevada through a Classic Association. The experi-
ence of our Reserve pilots and maintainers in all aspects of 5th Generation fighter
operations reduces costs, improves the experience of the Total Force, and improves
the Regular Component. This is critical to meet the challenge from our pacing
threat in a future fight.
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)
Our ISR enterprise is optimized to provide strategic depth and operational surge
capacity in traditional and emerging mission sets. Currently the ISR enterprise sup-
ports missions in Targeting, Special Operations, Distributed Common Ground Sta-
tion (DCGS), Signals Intelligence, Human Intelligence, Geospatial Intelligence,
Measurement and Signatures Intelligence, Acquisition Intelligence, Combat Air
Force support, Mobility Air Force support, Cyber, Space, and Combat Operations
Squadrons (COSs). We continue to develop capabilities in areas to support the Joint
Force while ensuring current mission sets provide decision advantage against pacing
threats.
There are 4,400 ISR Reserve Airmen supporting every Air Force Major Command
and all Functional and Geographic Combatant Command Intelligence Directorates.
We are exploring mission growth with Air Combat Command and 16th Air Force
to determine the way forward for the Air Force Reserve ISR Enterprise to be in-
volved in synchronizing and integrating Information Warfare efforts into daily oper-
ations. There are also plans in place to have steady state Air Force Reserve ISR
units available to the Global Force Mission Allocation Plan for the Regular Compo-
nent to have additional access to our capabilities.
Rapid Global Mobility
Global power projection through Rapid Global Mobility hinges on a robust airlift
enterprise and the extended range provided by a modern aerial refueling fleet. The

---

291
Air Force Reserve enables combat delivery through our strategic and tactical airlift
fleets. We provide 65 percent of the total aircrews and 100 percent of student air-
crew training capabilities for the C–5. The Air Force Reserve also provides 31 per-
cent of aircrews for the C–17. Air Force Reserve’s C–5 and C–130H fleets continue
to face sustainment challenges due to aging aircraft, diminishing vendors, and in-
creased part costs. Each of our mobility platforms require continued investment in
modernization to ensure survivability in contested environments.
The Air Force Reserve air refueling fleet consists of seven unit equipped wings.
In 2022, the 916th Air Refueling Wing, a Reserve unit stationed at Seymour John-
son AFB completed the conversion to the KC–46 and took possession of its twelfth
and final aircraft.
Nuclear Deterrence Operations
Nuclear capability is foundational to national security. Our Nuclear Deterrence
Operations assets include nuclear strike, air refueling, and nuclear command, con-
trol, and communications capabilities (NC3). To modernize our capabilities and
maintain Total Force interoperability, we will equip all seven of our NC3 capable
command posts with the new primary strategic communication system, the Global
Aircrew Strategic Network Terminal, which will be fielded to units in FY 2024. This
system will replace legacy terminals that are based on 1990s technology. The Air
Force Reserve is also standing up the MH–139 Field Training Unit at Maxwell AFB
as part of the 908th Airlift Wing mission conversion. It is postured to begin training
in FY 2026. The MH–139 will enable increased Intercontinental Cruise Missile
(ICBM) security.
Command and Control (C2)
Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) is the Department of Defense’s
top modernization priority. The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) is
the Air Force’s primary contribution to JADC2 as it provides the situational aware-
ness and decision support tools to close hundreds of kill chains on relevant timelines
in all domains—air, land, maritime, space, and cyber—while operating in a highly
contested environment.
To assure strategic depth, the Air Force Reserve must maintain equipment parity
to achieve enterprise mission optimization as the DAF fields new capabilities. This
includes ensuring legacy platforms are equipped with ABMS capabilities to guar-
antee interoperability and lethality. The Air Force Reserve also provides non-mate-
rial support for ABMS initiatives with C2 manpower. Investment in digital infra-
structure and applications, along with modern air and space communication plat-
forms, provides the foundation of C2 with the speed, adaptability, and resilience
needed to achieve these objectives.
Cyberspace Operations
Integrating cyber capabilities enhances our ability to generate combat power but
exposes us to new threats, as digital technology is both pervasive and inexpensive.
The Air Force Reserve is exploring continued growth in cyber mission sets to
counter persistent threat actors. We continue to posture our forces to better align
with United States Cyber Command and Air Force Cyber requirements.
Special Operations Forces and Personnel Recovery
The Air Force Reserve has one wing dedicated to personnel recovery and another
multi-mission special operations wing. Both wings operate in low-density, high-de-
mand environments. As the Regular Component fields new platforms and realigns
missions, we will continue to provide support across the spectrum of these no-fail
missions. It is critical that Air Force Reserve units associated with Special Oper-
ations Forces and Personnel Recovery be proportionally recapitalized and concur-
rently fielded in the future.
Space Superiority
The establishment of the U.S. Space Force underscored the criticality of space op-
erations to our national security. This point has been amplified by recent space
weapons tests by our strategic competitors. The Air Force Reserve is a major con-
tributor to space operations with 1,400 space operators in the Air Force Reserve.
These personnel executed 26 percent of daily space missions directly supporting
United States Space Command taskings. The Air Force Reserve will continue to pro-
vide focused support to the Space Force.
Equipment and Infrastructure
Credible strategic depth requires concurrent fielding of systems for Active and Re-
serve Components. Effective support to the Joint Force demands continuous up-

---

292
grades to legacy platforms to assure interoperability and combat effectiveness.
Rapid technological advancement and the wide proliferation of digital technology
have increased the tempo of strategic competition. These forces drive the need for
continuous equipment modernization and equipment parity with the Active Compo-
nent.
The Air Force Reserve must also be able to divest its obsolete legacy platforms.
Deliberate divestment avoids gaps in critical capabilities and frees up resources for
investment in capabilities to match pacing threats. Asynchronous airframe divest-
ment can cause significant per platform sustainment cost growth due to diminishing
vendors for spare parts. Further, it can also drive increased training costs as we
are unable to hire qualified Regular Component members for obsolete legacy plat-
forms.
Weapon System Modernization and Sustainment
Fully funding the Air Force Reserve FY 2024 Weapon System Sustainment (WSS)
request is essential to bridging the concurrent fielding gap and maintaining parity
with the Regular Component. As new systems are brought online to enhance the
DAF’s combat capabilities, both the Regular and Reserve components will continue
to rely on proven platforms in our inventory. Aircraft modernization and system up-
grades will provide capabilities needed for strategic competition by ensuring surviv-
ability in contested environments. A balanced portfolio of new and legacy platforms
will achieve adequate wartime readiness. The WSS budget increase to $186.8 mil-
lion in FY 2024 will balance the portfolio. In addition to modernization, many of our
airframes require upgrades, repairs, and component replacements to maintain air-
worthiness and extend service life. For example, to achieve adequate wartime readi-
ness the FY 2024 budget provides increases in B–52, C–5M, C–130H, and WC–130J
aircraft.
Infrastructure and Facilities
Maintaining and modernizing our infrastructure and facilities is critical to readi-
ness, force protection, and ensuring a safe work environment for our Reserve Air-
men. Military Construction (MILCON) appropriations fund new facilities and major
infrastructure projects. The Facility Sustainment, Repair, and Modernization
(FSRM) funds included in our Operations and Maintenance (O&M) appropriation
are used to repair and modernize existing facilities and to extend the service life
of existing infrastructure. While we work diligently to maximize use of existing fa-
cilities at our nine host installations and fifty-seven partner locations, we still have
$1.077 billion in MILCON projects and $1 billion in validated FSRM projects in
backlog. We are grateful to Congress for providing an additional $49.3 million in
MILCON funding and $10 million in FSRM funding for FY 2023, for our most ur-
gent projects.
During FY 2022, the Air Force Reserve utilized FSRM funding to make ongoing
investments in airfield pavement sustainment and repair. FSRM funds are used to
repair and modernize existing facilities to accommodate new missions such as the
KC–135 Conversion at Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station (ARS), New York, F–35
bed-down at NAS JRB Fort Worth and KC–46 bed-down at March ARB. The Air
Force Reserve FY 2024 MILCON funding request includes plans to replace a facility
from 1942 at NAS JRB Fort Worth with a modern warehouse and three separate
projects that will enable on-time delivery of KC–46 aircraft at March ARB. Finally,
our Aerial Port Facility MILCON project request will replace an existing undersized
facility at Andersen AFB, Guam and move port operations onto the flightline—ena-
bling effective operations at a critical base in the Pacific.
AIR FORCE RESERVE’S ROLE IN TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE

Taking care of our Reserve Airmen and their families is critical. It begins the mo-
ment a member joins the Air Force Reserve and continues throughout their career.
The Air Force Reserve does everything possible to support our Airmen as they bal-
ance their military career, civilian obligations, and family responsibilities. This
assures the Air Force Reserve retains talented Airmen who can leverage diverse ex-
perience from their military service and civilian lives. The FY 2024 budget provides
the support our Reserve Airmen need to be successful. This support includes suicide
prevention through investments in resilience, social support through the Yellow Rib-
bon Reintegration Program, working to implement the recommendations from the
Independent Review Commission (IRC) on Sexual Assault, and removing significant
barriers to service through expansion of childcare programs.

---

293
Recruiting and Retention
Like the Regular Component of the Air Force, the Air Force Reserve did not meet
its recruiting goal in FY 2022. The Air Force Reserve missed the Congressional
mandated end-strength requirement of 70,300 by 2,252 personnel. The projections
for FY 2023 indicate the Air Force Reserve will fall short of the Congressional end-
strength of 70,000.
The recruiting environment continues to present significant challenges based on
multiple factors to include a reduced propensity to serve, competitive civilian com-
pensation and difficulty in medically clearing recruits. Along with the Chief of Staff
of the Air Force and collective Total Force team, we have identified accession poli-
cies that limit our ability to recruit young adults to serve in the military. Three im-
portant changes include: revising the tattoo policy to allow for limited hand and
neck tattoos; adjusting body fat standards to align with the other Services (increas-
ing to 26% for males and 36% for females for accessions); and allowing members
to join without a driver’s license. The Air Force Reserve human capital strategy
calls for 70% prior service (PS) and 30% non-prior service (NPS) recruiting mix but
currently we are challenged on both fronts. The accession model is built on the ex-
pectation that there will be sufficient prior-service members leaving active duty who
will affiliate with the Air Force Reserve. The Air Force Reserve strives to affiliate
ready trained airmen. However, current trends indicate increased reliance on NPS
recruits which increases training costs and dilutes unit experience. We are
proactively increasing our targeted outreach efforts to connect with potential re-
cruits, specifically focusing on members of the Regular Component. By expanding
our reach, we aim to effectively communicate the benefits and opportunities avail-
able in the Air Force Reserve. The Air Force Reserve is also executing a plan of ac-
tion to mitigate recruiting challenges with Reserve Component Affiliation Incentive
Bonuses and a deliberate on-boarding process to increase recruiting production.
Increasing retention provides cost savings by decreasing training requirements.
We are presently targeting retention through bonuses and special salary rates. A
single $15,000 retention bonus results in a cost avoidance of roughly $45,000 in
training funds and prevents an approximate three-year readiness gap, which occurs
while a replacement is trained. In FY 2022, $24–27 million was spent in reenlist-
ment bonuses and Air Force Reserve primary retention tools. In FY 2023, the Air
Force Reserve offered a $10,000 bonus for enlisted members to fill vacant positions
and a $5,000 bonus for fully qualified members to fill an authorized overage. To ad-
dress shortfalls in pilot manning, the Air Force Reserve has utilized an Aviation
Bonus Program to stabilize both full-time and part-time manning.
Pilot Staffing
The Air Force Reserve provides a mechanism to retain talent by providing contin-
ued service options for members who separate from active duty. The DAF under-
stands the importance of retaining experienced talent from both a cost-effectiveness
and capacity perspective. During FY 2022, the Air Force Reserve had an 81 percent
overall pilot staffing. This is a marked decline from FY 2021 when we experienced
a high of 94 percent overall pilot staffing. Full-time pilot assigned manning de-
creased slightly from 990 at the beginning of FY 2022 to 981 at the beginning of
FY 2023. During Calendar Year 2022, there was an unprecedented hiring effort by
civilian airlines. This hiring has made full-time retention a challenge. For ART avi-
ators, we offer recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives, which can equal up
to 25 percent of annual base pay, and special salary rates which can equal up to
30 percent of annual base pay.
In FY 2022, we offered aviation bonuses up to $35,000 for priority units at critical
manning levels. Each of these measures has been implemented to retain significant
investments in well-qualified pilots. While the overall Aviation Bonus Program cost
increased from $3 million in FY 2017 to $31 million in FY 2022, this contributes
to a cost avoidance of $10 billion in replacing the over 3,600 pilots in the Air Force
Reserve.
Training
Thanks to the FY 2023 increase in the Reserve Personnel Appropriation (RPA)
budget, we were able to address the cost of training for NPS recruits. RPA execution
for FY 2023 is showing a marked improvement as January’s execution numbers
were 29 percent, compared to the 22 percent 3-year average. The FY 2024 request
was increased by $13 million due to a 5.2 percent military pay raise, a 2.4 percent
non-pay inflation adjustment, and 4.2 percent Basic Allowance for Housing increase.
To make a meaningful contribution to the DAF core functions, the Air Force Re-
serve maintains a focus on being Ready Now which requires the Air Force Reserve
to have the capability to train Reserve Airmen. The FY 2024 budget provides the

---

294
Air Force Reserve the funds and flight hours to train our Airmen. The budget also
allows the Air Force Reserve to work closely with Combatant Commands and gain
joint experience in training events.
Accelerated Mission Readiness Training (AMRT) is crucial to developing tech-
nically proficient Airmen to provide a qualified force to Combatant Commanders. In
FY 2023, nearly 46 percent of the enlisted personnel and 38 percent of the officers
in the Air Force Reserve were NPS. This places a significant strain on readiness
thresholds. Emerging threats and evolving requirements of building Multi-Capable
Airmen requires a technically proficient force that cannot be achieved through Unit
Training Assemblies and Annual Tour days alone. Without AMRT funds to accel-
erate training, the average NPS Reservist would need two-three years to become
minimally proficient on mission requirements. With decreasing numbers of fully
qualified members transferring from the Regular Component to the Reserve, there
is an increased training burden upon the command. Without continued funding, the
Air Force Reserve can expect to see a 20% decrease in qualified, deployable airmen,
and an increase in excessive training times across all career fields.
The Yellow Ribbon Program
The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program is a vital resource for providing pre-
and post-deployment education on mental health resources for Reservists and their
families. Historically, the feedback for these events has been overwhelmingly posi-
tive, with 97 percent of attendees finding the events beneficial. After 2 years of dis-
ruption due to COVID–19, we have returned to in-person events which resulted in
increased participation rates. The rising costs of travel and venue expenses has re-
sulted in the Yellow Ribbon Program not being able to meet all attendance requests.
Childcare
Access to reliable and quality childcare is crucial to the retention of service mem-
bers in the Air Force Reserve, as it directly alleviates a major stressor for those bal-
ancing service and family responsibilities, enhancing their ability to focus on their
duties and increasing the likelihood of continued service. The Air Force Reserve has
worked to ensure that childcare is available during training periods at no cost to
parents
through the Home Community Care (HCC) program. Many of our Airmen have
gaps in childcare due to being single parents or dual military couples. Airmen who
do not have another adult to provide childcare during training periods are eligible
for the program. The HCC program addresses gaps in coverage at host locations
without Child Development Centers and at Regular Component host facilities with-
out weekend childcare options. Currently, the HCC is available at 41 Air Force Re-
serve locations, and we are working to recruit more providers by zip code. This pro-
gram is vital to retention, as 50 percent of Reservists cite family and work/life bal-
ance issues as their reason for separating during exit surveys.
Suicide Prevention
We remain firmly resolved to preventing suicide across our workforce. Our suicide
prevention efforts are along four lines of effort: building connections, detecting risk,
promoting protective environments, and developing resilient Airmen and families.
We have placed Violence Prevention Integrators (VPIs) at each of our nine host base
locations and NAS JRB Fort Worth, who are keenly focused on preventing inter-
personal and self-directed violence.
In FY 2021, we completed the process of providing full-time Religious Support
Teams (RSTs) consisting of a chaplain and chaplain’s assistant at each of our nine
host installations and NAS JRB Fort Worth. These RSTs fill a previously identified
gap in care for Airmen and their families by providing spiritual support and liaising
with helping agencies. In FY 2022, there was an increase from 757 to 1,571 coun-
seling sessions provided per year, as well as an increase in religious services pro-
vided per year from 2,500 to over 7,000. In FY 2021, we hired 20 full-time First
Sergeants to work directly with Airmen and their families to navigate support agen-
cies. We anticipate being able to place full-time First Sergeants at each of our wing
and wing- equivalent organizations by FY 2024.
Mental Health
Access to Mental Healthcare is a challenge facing our Nation. The Air Force Re-
serve promotes mental health through early intervention, identifying and sup-
porting members at elevated risk and managing crisis response. While traditional
reservists are not eligible for active duty benefits, there are reserve specific re-
sources available to them. This includes 37 mental health providers in the Director
of Psychological Health (DPH) Program, who have been embedded throughout the
Reserve Wings to advise leadership. DPHs provide non-clinical services to reservists

---

295
and their families during unit training assemblies or during the week to include
training and education, consultations, and referrals, needs assessments, suicide pre-
vention, resiliency building, crisis intervention and command advisement on psycho-
logical and mental health issues. Reserve Airmen can also access the Military Fam-
ily Life Consultants, who are licensed contract counselors that work outside of Mili-
tary Treatment Facilities to provide anonymous and confidential assistance to all
military members in problem solving issues resulting from deployment, reunions, re-
integration, and/or other times of change. Finally, there is the AFRC Psychological
Health Advocacy Program that provides psychological health referral services to Re-
serve Airmen and their families through telephone calls or site visits.
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
We are working diligently with our Total Force partners to aggressively imple-
ment all the accepted recommendations from the Secretary of Defense’s IRC on Sex-
ual Assault and Sexual Harassment. We are working to recruit, retain, and develop
our full-time prevention workforce to ensure our prevention footprint is optimized
to meet the unique needs of Reservists. We will also continue increasing efforts to
educate our force on prevention and local area resources for survivors. Based on the
IRC’s recommendations, our VPIs will focus on sexual assault prevention, allowing
Sexual Assault Response Coordinators to focus exclusively on supporting survivors.
COVID–19 Vaccination Noncompliance
The FY 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was enacted requiring
the Secretary of Defense to rescind the mandate that members of the Armed Forces
must be vaccinated against COVID–19. I immediately issued a memorandum that
stated COVID–19 Vaccination Status was not a barrier to service in the Air Force
Reserve. Prior to the FY 2023 NDAA’s enactment, the Air Force Reserve did not
separate members for COVID–19 vaccination noncompliance, but rather utilized In-
dividual Ready Reserve (IRR) reassignment actions. 547 members were con-
sequently reassigned to the IRR for noncompliance with the vaccine requirements
and this approach allows for a streamlined process for those members to return to
duty.
Stability for Members
Our Reserve Airmen and their families need stability and predictability. Exit sur-
veys suggest the high operations tempo and the demands of maintaining a work/
life balance are the top reasons for leaving the Air Force Reserve. Without delib-
erate and planned deployments and training, Reservists are unable to adequately
prepare their families and notify their civilian employers. The Air Force Reserve is
working to provide members stability and predictability. This is done via AMRT
funding which allows Reserve Units to offer predictable training timelines.
AFFORGEN offers Reserve Airmen predictable deployment cycles. These efforts aid
our Reserve Airmen when preparing for deployments and guarantees Air Force Re-
serve support to the DAF and Combatant Commands.
AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Teamwork for the Air Force Reserve begins within the DAF, where the Air Force
Reserve provides an experienced and accessible surge capacity to the Regular Com-
ponent of the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force. We work to maintain a
Ready Now posture that can support almost every core function in the DAF. Main-
taining this readiness and teamwork with the Regular Component and the Joint
Force requires consistent training.
The Air Force Reserve is implementing training to develop Multi-Capable Airmen
proficient in sustaining operations, hardening air bases, and recovering air bases
following attack. The FY 2024 budget provides funds for training, ensuring our Re-
serve Airmen are Ready Now to support the Regular Component as well as the
Joint Force. At several Air Reserve bases, we have developed organic training cen-
ters that provide Reserve Airmen the chance to train in Agile Combat Support
(ACS) and Agile Combat Employment (ACE) requirements and hone their expedi-
tionary skillsets. These centers also support the Regular Component, the Joint
Force, Federal, and local agencies. At Westover ARB, Massachusetts, the Dogpatch
Expeditionary Training Area was revitalized to offer an expeditionary airfield, as
well as a drop zone and tactical vehicle training route. At Youngstown ARS, Ohio,
we identified a training need for Security Forces Reserve Airmen.
This base established a site that provides a venue for Reserve Defenders to build
proficiency and lethality through a 180-hour program of realistic training that simu-
lates combat situations and prepares Security Forces members to deal with stress
under fire. The training also prepares participants for ACE and ACS missions. The

---

296
site has been so successful that we are partnering with U.S. Army Reserve and U.S.
Marine Corps Reserve to use the area for joint force training events. Civilian and
Federal law enforcement have also used the Youngstown site for training. Finally,
at Grissom ARB, Indiana, we developed bivouac sites to better rehearse ACS and
ACE events and conduct deployment exercises. Thanks to funding from Congress,
we can provide our Reserve Airmen the facilities to conduct realistic training while
also working with the Regular Component, joint partners, Federal, and local agen-
cies.
In addition to supporting the Regular Component in the DAF and global military
operations, the Air Force Reserve expands it teamwork by partnering with and sup-
porting multiple Federal and civil organizations. We routinely participate in human-
itarian aid, disaster relief, and scientific research efforts. The Air Force Reserve pro-
vides direct support to civil authorities through the execution of Modular Aerial
Spray System (MASS), Modular Airborne Firefighting System (MAFFS), and Weath-
er Reconnaissance missions which utilize specially modified C–130 aircraft.
Modular Aerial Spray System
The 910th Airlift Wing’s 757th Airlift Squadron (AS) from Youngstown ARS oper-
ates the Department of Defense’s only aerial spray capability. In FY 2022, the 757
AS conducted 11 MASS missions treating 165,018 acres and applying 51,939 gallons
of product. These missions control insect populations, eliminate undesired and
invasive vegetation, and disperse oil spills in large bodies of water.
In FY 2022, acceptance testing of the first Electronic Modular Aerial Spray Sys-
tem (EMASS) was completed. It represents a decade-long acquisition project to in-
sure the sustainability of the Aerial Spray program. EMASS provides additional ca-
pacity and more accurate calibration for precise application of products when com-
pared to our aging legacy MASS.
Modular Airborne Firefighting System
The MAFFS is another specialty mission the Air Force Reserve supports, con-
ducted by the 302d Airlift Wing (AW) from Peterson Space Force Base, Colorado.
As the only Title 10 Aerial Firefighting asset available for direct tasking, the 302
AW’s MAFFS mission supports U.S. Northern Command’s Defense Support to Civil
Authorities (DSCA) efforts and represents 25% of MAFFS assets in the DoD. The
Air Force Reserve’s MAFFS capability mobilized between 20 July and 29 September
2022 and represented 28% of 929 drops, 942.6 employment hours, and over 2.5 mil-
lion gallons of retardant delivered during California wildfires. The 302 AW surged
its MAFFS assets for 31 days, between 24 August and 23 September and provided
3 aircraft and 37.5% of total MAFFS efforts.
Weather Reconnaissance
The United States military has been flying into hurricanes since the Second
World War. Today, the Air Force Reserve maintains the only operational military
weather reconnaissance unit in the United States. The 53rd Weather Reconnais-
sance Squadron (WRS) is the only DoD unit that conducts aircraft reconnaissance
missions into severe tropical weather during hurricane season and flies winter
storm missions off both coasts of the United States. Flying out of Keesler AFB, Mis-
sissippi, the WC–130 operations improve forecast accuracy up to 30%, enabling com-
manders and civil authorities to make informed, fiscally responsible decisions to pro-
tect personnel and assets during extreme weather events year-round. Mission mod-
ernization and resourcing is essential to this expanding mission set that supports
our military and civilian population across the United States.
In FY 2022, the 53 WRS flew 141 missions with flight hours at the third highest
in the past eight fiscal years (1,160 hours). This included 310 hours in support of
21 West Coast Atmospheric River requirements and 35 hours supporting East and
Gulf Coast requirements. The Atmospheric River mission capability released 825
dropsondes over 39 intense observation periods, resulting in a 30–75% forecast im-
provement across the US, translating to an additional 72 hours of lead time for deci-
sion makers. The 53 WRS also flew 815 hours of hurricane reconnaissance across
7 storms in the Atlantic, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and East Pacific Ocean, sup-
porting 112 lead Federal agency (LFA) requirements and safeguarding of forces
throughout the Western hemisphere. Since the beginning of FY 2023, the 53 WRS
flew 468 hours into four storms supporting 54 LFA requirements.
Mission modernization and resourcing is essential to the expanding weather re-
connaissance mission sets that support our military and civilian population across
the United States. The Weapons Systems Sustainment allocated to the Air Force
Reserve allowed for several hardware and software upgrades some of which are still
in progress. With funding from Congress in the FY 2024 budget, the Air Force Re-
serve can continue supporting critical weather reconnaissance as well as aerial

---

297
spray and aerial firefighting missions, ensuring that the Air Force Reserve can de-
fend and protect the Nation through teamwork with the Regular Component, the
Joint Force, as well as Federal, state, and local agencies.
SUMMARY

Our FY 2024 budget request is carefully crafted to ensure interoperability with
the Regular Component and the Joint Force. The request will maintain Air Force
Reserve readiness to support our allies and partners around the world. This request
will continue weapon system modernization, positioning our force to be more capa-
ble, survivable, and lethal while also enhancing support to our Reserve Airmen and
their families. In an era of strategic competition and increased resource constraints,
we will continue to provide strategic depth and operational surge capacity to meet
pacing threats in the most cost-effective manner possible. Reserve Airmen will con-
tinue to leverage their unique blend of military and civilian experience to bring out-
sized impact to pursuing the DAF’s Operational Imperatives. For this to occur, we
need to take care of our Airmen and the FY 2024 PB request allows the Air Force
Reserve to do that. With your continued support, we are confident the Air Force Re-
serve will remain prepared to deliver effects anytime, anywhere to fly, fight, and
win in Air, Space, and Cyberspace.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, General. I want to thank you all for
your statements. Appreciate it very, very much. I am going to start
out with a story that has been well documented over the last 2 or
3 months.
It is about a 21-year-old Air Guardsman that posted highly clas-
sified documents on the Internet, including intel about the war in
Ukraine. I can tell you, I don’t know anybody that can tell me why
this person had access to this particular classified information, but
it is troublesome, and I don’t think it gives the Air National Guard
a particularly good look.
So, General Hokanson, what can you tell me about the status of
the investigation?
General HOKANSON. Chairman, thank you for the question. With
respect to the Airmen of the Massachusetts National Guard, the
Secretary of the Air Force has initiated an IG (Inspector General)
investigation, which is just about to complete, and we look forward
to the results soon.
Any and all recommendations they make will obviously be imple-
mented immediately. With respect to the individual, it is an ongo-
ing FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) investigation, and we
look forward to the results of that investigation.
Senator TESTER. So, I think we need to learn from the past as
we move forward in the future. How confident are you that with
the IG information, with the information, you know, and the people
that you have talked to, that this kind of situation will never hap-
pen again?
General HOKANSON. Chairman I am very confident this will
never happen again based on what we have found. Unfortunately,
we have been doing this for a long period of time. A lot of per-
sonnel, a lot of units are doing this.
This one individual was an individual action and not indicative
of the entire system. But we are looking at safeguards that we can
put in place that would prevent any individual in the future from
ever being able to do this.
Senator TESTER. Ultimately, this person didn’t do it without
somebody above him knowing what was going on. Are the people
that allowed this to happen being held accountable to?

---

298

General HOKANSON. Yes, Chairman. They have removed some
folks temporarily in light of the investigation. Based on the results
of the investigation, not only active Air Force or if it applies to the
National Guard, we will take appropriate action against those indi-
viduals.
Senator TESTER. Okay. A couple of the presenters talked about
the NGREA account. Just for a point of reference, Congress has ap-
propriated $2.9 billion over the last 3 years. And by the way, this
was a Congressional add to make sure that the Guard and Re-
serves have the equipment they need, modern equipment that is
ready when you are called upon.
And I think it is important we plan for how utilize this money
and so that the taxpayer gets the biggest bang for the buck. At the
end of March, basically half the money had been spent.
As I said, I think it is important to plan, but I think your needs
are great—I don’t think anybody would dismiss that. For all of you,
and be as brief as possible, why does it seem, at least seem to me
that it has taken so long to get this money out the door to actually
get the equipment you need? Whoever wants to start can. It doesn’t
matter.
General HOKANSON. Chairman, on behalf of the National Guard,
we program to get about a 99 to 100 percent execution of all our
NGREA funding. And as you mentioned, it is absolutely critical to
modernization and also for some of our dual use of equipment. Un-
fortunately, what we have found is some of the supply chain issues
has delayed the delivery of some of those goods, but we are on
track to spend all of that money.
Senator TESTER. Anybody else want to comment? Go ahead. Gen-
eral Daniels, go ahead.
General DANIELS. So similar to the National Guard, we take a
very hard look at what equipping lines are open, what critical dual
use capabilities are prioritized at the top of the list.
Sometimes we cannot get access to that equipment in the se-
quence that we would like to get it, but we do monitor a lengthy
list of requirements and make sure that we spend those funds judi-
ciously across the 3 years that we have the funds available to us.
Senator TESTER. Admiral.
Admiral MUSTIN. Comment was going to be very similar in that
with the 3-year look, we phase out the expenditures. There is pres-
sure in a CR (Continuing Resolution) environment, however, for
new starts or new contracts, which has delayed in some cases what
we had intended to originally buy. So, we will probably address
that topic at a later moment, but CRs certainly have an impact on
us.
Senator TESTER. General.
General BELLON. Yes, sir. For us, the biggest delay this year was
the fact that we wanted to reroll some of the money you had al-
ready approved and your staff, some of who are sitting here, helped
us with that. We are going to be 100 percent committed this year.
And as a good teammate, if there is any leftover, we will spend
that too.
Senator TESTER. General Healy.
General HEALY. Sir, the same. The CR does impact our ability
to get a start with it. But once we do get started, the money does

---

299

flow through our proportional multi-year plan of implementation.
We plan to fully execute.
Senator TESTER. Thank you. I have got about 20 seconds left.
General Hokanson, you talked about 25 flying missions within the
Guard. You needed every one of them, I believe, is what you said.
A–10s are going away and they should go away. How many mis-
sions does that impact?
General HOKANSON. Mr. Chairman, specific to the A–10s, we
have three squadrons, and all three would convert to a more cur-
rent aircraft, either F–35, F–15EX, or one of the, what is called a
post block F–16, our newest ones.
Senator TESTER. Okay. So, there are plans for every A–10 mis-
sion that goes away in the Guard to replace them with another
fighter mission?
General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. That is the plan that we are work-
ing with the U.S. Air Force on. And we believe through fleet lev-
eling, and by current scheduled aircraft buys or any additionals, we
could provide the ability to do that.
Senator TESTER. Okay. Senator Collins.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to follow up
on the important issue you just raised since we have heard our wit-
nesses talk about the need to recapitalize the aircraft fleet. General
Healy, I understand that more than three quarters of the 25 Air
Guard fighter squadrons operate legacy F–15 fighter aircraft.
That obviously reduces interoperability and compatibility with
the active-duty units. The disproportionate fielding of the aircraft
affects other units as well, such as the air refueling wing in my
home State of Maine.
My understanding is that the current KC–46A basing plan places
71 percent of the new KC–46 with active units, 14 percent with Re-
served units, and 15 percent with Guard units, even though the
Guard flies almost 38 percent of all Air Force tankers.
So, it seems disproportionate to me if only 15 percent of the new
aircraft is going to the Guard, if the Guard is flying 38 percent of
all Air Force tankers. Should new aircraft be fielded in a manner
that is proportional to the Guard’s operational contributions?
General HEALY. Ma’am, I agree 100 percent that it appears dis-
proportionate right now. 77 percent of the Air Force Reserves fleet
is legacy. And in the words of the Secretary of the Air Force, legacy
is defined as does not concern the PRC (People’s Republic of China)
in a fight. KC–135s, C–130Hs, pre-block F–16s, A–10 divestment
are all issues and concerns for the Air Force Reserve in terms of
proportionality.
The National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force in
2014 called for and recommended proportional and concurrent
fielding of weapon systems with the Guard and Reserve in associa-
tion with the active component, and we are constantly advocating
adherence to that recommendation.
As weapon systems are upgraded and recapitalized in the active
component, if the Guard and Reserve, and specifically my concern,
the Reserve are not proportionally recapitalized, we will ultimately
lack the capacity and the capability to participate in that near-peer
fight if we are still flying in 37-year-old aircraft, pre-block F–16s.

---

300

Whether it is the F–16s to the F–35, one for one, KC–135 to the
KC–46, or any of the bombers for the B–21 family systems, we are
looking to contribute and we want to be that surge capacity that
we provided for the last 75 years.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much. General Hokanson, I
want to follow up on the Chairman’s questions to you about the
Massachusetts Air National Guard member who has been accused
of leaking classified documents.
What was most disturbing to me was when I learned through
some of the court filings that there was an Air Force memorandum
that indicated that he had been repeatedly warned. So, this was
not a deviation that came out of the blue.
But in fact, he had been reprimanded and he had been instructed
to, ‘‘stop any deep dives into classified intelligence information’’ and
focus on his job. He ‘‘had been observed taking notes on classified
intelligence materials.’’
These reports are very concerning because it appears that this
serious breach might have been prevented or stopped much sooner
if the Airman’s Guard unit had taken greater action to restrict his
access to classified information.
My question is, what is the standard practice when someone has
been reprimanded for misuse of classified information and then
does it again? That to me shouldn’t require an IG report. That
should be on the books now, I think.
General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. I found this extremely con-
cerning as well. Any time there is a disciplinary action, the chain
of command should address it immediately.
I know it is not specifically the IG investigation that is looking
at it, but also the FBI investigation that is looking at that to deter-
mine if there was negligence within the airman’s chain of command
at the time he was mobilized under Title 10 working for a Combat-
ant Commander.
And we were looking at very closely the chain of command who
is responsible for that. And if there was negligence on their part,
it will be addressed immediately.
Senator COLLINS. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen.
Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, ev-
eryone. Thank you all for being here. As the co-chair of the Na-
tional Guard Caucus, I am especially appreciative of hearing your
concerns this morning.
General Hokanson, I want to start with you, and I think you may
wish to weigh in as well, General Healy, but in your opening state-
ment, you talked about the readiness concerns, and you mentioned
specifically the fighter squadrons.
But I am—with the 157th Air Refueling Wing in New Hampshire
at Pease Air Force Base, I am very concerned about the status of
those KC–46 units, both the fact that we still don’t have all of them
flying the way they were commissioned to fly, but also what we
have seen at the 157th is that they have face cuts to their per-
sonnel, placing them about 5 percent below the national average.
While I recognize that you faced constraints, and you all talked
about that, I am very concerned that we have got these aircraft sit-
ting in New Hampshire and I know they are being used, but it

---

301

doesn’t feel like they are being used to their full extent because of
those personnel constraints.
So, can you talk about how you expect to resolve some of those
issues? And I understand you are conducting a manning study for
the KC–46. So, when do you expect the results of that study, and
do you have any insights into what that is going to show?
General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. And you bring up a great orga-
nization. In fact, I believe that refueling unit just set a world
record for the longest continuous flight of an aerial refueling. So,
it is a great——
Senator SHAHEEN. We are very proud of them.
General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. It is a great organization. And
when we look across the entire Air National Guard, as I am sure
the Air Force Reserve does as well, if we have any positions that
are in excess of our authorized end strength, we need to account
for those.
Now, the personnel actions were not specific to the 157th, but
really holistically at all of our Guard units. But because you are
the first of our KC–46 units, we are evaluating it on an annual
basis to make sure that we have the right number of personnel in
the right positions so that we can fully leverage the capability of
that system.
And so, this is a temporary measure, ma’am, to keep in touch
with what we are authorized, but as we review this and identify
additional capabilities, we will reallocate the manpower to fill those
shortages.
Senator SHAHEEN. But it has been temporary now for several
years.
General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. And that is, as we have men-
tioned before, our end strengths have reduced in some cases, and
so we have got to look across the entire Air National Guard to
identify where that personnel savings could come from.
Senator SHAHEEN. And so, do you have any insights from the
staffing study for the KC–46? Do we know what that might rec-
ommend?
General HOKANSON. I am not aware of that right now, ma’am,
but I can follow up with our staff on the exact specifics of that
study.
Senator SHAHEEN. General Healy, do you have any additions to
that?
General HEALY. With the Reserve KC–46 units, we are currently
in Seymour Johnson in North Carolina, and we have seen great re-
sults in terms of coming up to speed and delivering on schedule.
I know that the Air Force, the Air Mobility Command, is holding
the manufacturers to task to ensure that we are releasing all the
capabilities as fast as they are able and to recover the capabilities
that weren’t initially produced the way they should be.
We are very much looking forward to deliveries to March Air Re-
serve Base on California next, and expect by then, with the first
aircraft delivery in 2026, we expect to see a fully capable KC–46.
Senator SHAHEEN. How many years late?
General HEALY [continuing]. yes, ma’am——
Senator SHAHEEN. I appreciate that, but I think it is a message
to Boeing to do better in the future as well. General Daniels, you

---

302

mentioned the importance of childcare in your opening statement,
and I think that is very critical that we think about how important
that is.
We have an interesting cooperative effort between the Ports-
mouth Naval Shipyard and the Air National Guard in New Hamp-
shire to do a joint childcare center that they would share. But can
you speak to why that is so important to the Guard?
General DANIELS. Yes, ma’am. My challenge is that I have got
850 Army Reserve centers sprinkled across the United States, most
of which are not within a 50-mile radius of a major installation.
Therefore, they are out in communities, and historically, we have
challenges finding weekend care. We just can’t find the providers
that are willing to work on weekends. So, we have done a number
of different pilot activities over the past year and that is still our
challenge.
We found a couple of organizations we think we are going to
make some inroads with to help us have that weekend opportunity.
Senator SHAHEEN. Well, thank you. I look forward to hearing
more about what you have learned and seeing how this committee
can be supportive of that.
I am out of time, but General Hokanson, I just wanted to go to
your first priority for how the Guard gets integrated into the Space
Force, because I think that is a very real concern. I have asked
General Saltzman about that issue on several occasions, and the
ambiguous response has not been reassuring.
So, I hope that we can continue to work with you on how that
gets done. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Shaheen. From the beau-
tiful Sunflower State, Senator Moran.
Senator MORAN. Thank you, Chairman. I have always known you
to tell the truth, at least on some occasions. Thank you, all of you,
for being here. Thank you for your service to our Nation. I under-
stand and appreciate the crucial role that the National Guard and
Reserve play, our components play in our military.
Disaster at home, around the world, you are there and a great
asset to the well-being and National Security of our country. Gen-
eral Hokanson, to follow up on Senator Shaheen’s beginning con-
versation about the space mission. When General Saltzman was in
front of this committee, I asked him about the creation of a Space
National Guard.
He testified that his best military advice supported the most
cost-effective alternative that preserves operational capabilities. In
your best military advice on creation of a Space National Guard,
how would you answer that request from General Saltzman?
General HOKANSON. Senator Moran, thank you for the question.
And I would argue that the comments that the Chief of Space Op-
erations made describe exactly the Air National Guard units per-
forming the space mission.
From my best military advice, when I look at the fact that we
have been doing this mission for over 28 years, in some cases, we
are the only ones that ever have done those missions. We have got
14 units of about 1,000 people. We are about 30 percent of the
operational squadrons today.

---

303

And to me, my greatest concern is readiness to the force. And by
simply redesignating those Air Guard units performing the space
mission to a Space Guard type organization, I could do that within
the resources that I currently have in my budget, and it would sim-
ply be from one drill weekend to the next, where our Airmen would
change their name tape from Air Force to Space Force.
And at no time would it interrupt the capabilities they provide
to our Nation. The personnel would stay in the same place, same
civilian jobs, doing the same mission that they are doing every sin-
gle day today. In fact, some of them are deployed right now pro-
viding that support to our Nation.
My concern is, if we looked at reestablishing them in another
component, it could cost our Nation about $1 billion. And that is
not only to restructure and rebuild this within a different compo-
nent, but then also the need to retrain those current Air Guard
members that are performing the mission into another mission set.
And overall, when you look at this, it is a, I think, a very easy
decision.
Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. I was going to ask you about the
cost to stand up a National Guard component, and perhaps you
have answered that, but I would give you the chance to in a sen-
tence to make that clear.
General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. So, we look at the cost of about
$640 million to re-mission what currently exists into a future type
organization. But the concern that we have is right now the Air
National Guard space units are the only unit equipped surge to
war capability.
Our Air Force Reserve counterparts that are being incorporated
in the Space Force are primarily individual fillers, whereas the Na-
tional Guard is actually manned, trained, and equipped units.
The concern there, as well as when you look at the 28 years of
experience that we have, to replicate that or to reconstitute it, it
may take 7 to 10 years to get those folks through schools and
trained, and I don’t think our Nation can afford to see that reduc-
tion in readiness over that time period.
Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. General Daniels, would you
elaborate on the significance of the National Guard Reserve equip-
ment account to the U.S. Army’s Reserves mission?
General DANIELS. Thank you for that. It is vital to my ability to
modernize. The Army has focused on lethality and modernizing its
lethality elements over the last several years and looking forward
to the 2030, 2040 future battles.
The Army Reserve is primarily combat support and service sup-
port, and therefore our modernization efforts have lagged behind
those of the lethality elements. And so, the NGREA account sup-
ports about 35 to 40 percent of my ability to modernize, in terms
of raw dollar value.
Senator MORAN. Thank you. General Hokanson, you and I have
had a conversation. I appreciate what you told me. I have a goal
of seeing that the STARBASE Program is expanded in Kansas.
STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) edu-
cation is hugely important to the National Security and economic
well-being of our Nation. STARBASE, which I have visited on sev-
eral occasions, is very compelling in its mission and having success,

---

304

but we have parts of the State, particularly those that are the most
rural, that are underserved or unserved, and I appreciate your will-
ingness to work with me to see that we change that circumstance.
And General Bellon, we appreciate your service to the Nation. I
thank you for your testimony today but thank you for the years you
have spent in duty to country. And all Kansans, and particularly
those who share your alma mater, are particularly honored by that
service.
Senator TESTER. Senator Baldwin.
Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all
of our witnesses this morning. General Hokanson, you have listed
healthcare for the National Guard force as a command priority.
Like you, I believe that increasing access to healthcare and dental
care for our Guard and Reserves service members would pay divi-
dends in readiness, especially for short notice deployments.
Last Congress, I introduced the Health Care for Our Troops Act,
a bill that would provide all National Guard and Reserve service
members premium free healthcare coverage. Can you please de-
scribe the impact of this proposal, what sort of impact it would
have on increasing the readiness of the total force?
General HOKANSON. Thank you, Senator. And I think you hit it
right on the head. The premium free healthcare and dental care as
well are critically important. And having been through multiple de-
ployments, one of the biggest things that we see addressing—to ad-
dress and readiness is medical and dental readiness for our per-
sonnel to go.
In fact, I would say that is the largest thing that impacts our
readiness. And so having that ability so that every Guardsmen and
reservists that is in uniform, is serving that has that ability to get
preventative care or care when they need that, and the same with
dental care, will ensure their medical readiness.
And we look at the investment that we put in our individuals in
terms of the training and the time that goes into it, and not only
that, but their investment and their time away from their families
and employers—to me, this is the best way to ensure that when we
make that call, they are ready to go to answer whatever our Nation
needs them to do.
Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. General Hokanson, last month,
the F–35 aircraft started to arrive at Truax Field in Madison, Wis-
consin, entrusting the Wisconsin Air National Guard with a critical
capability for our Nation’s defense.
I have a couple of questions about that basing. The unit supports
a significant number of jobs. What are the economic benefits for the
local community that we can anticipate from hosting the F–35
fighter wing?
General HOKANSON. So ma’am, first and foremost, just the com-
munity there that established such a fantastic unit obviously came
out through the Air Force basing process.
The benefits there is aerial ranges, there is gunnery ranges,
there is aerial refueling units nearby, and there is airspace, which
made that just a great choice. But when you look at the community
now, you have a State-of-the-art aircraft that is going to be there
for decades.

---

305

And the number of folks that are employees and are going to be
there to support that unit are going to make a huge difference to
the local community. And frankly, having been there, just the co-
ordination between the unit and the local community makes a huge
difference.
Senator BALDWIN. Yes. While I am very grateful that my home
State is making a significant contribution to National Security, I
would say that neighbors proximate to the airport are concerned
about the impact of increased noise in the area surrounding the
airport.
I helped secure resources in a previous appropriations bill to help
us start planning for noise mitigation activities. Can you please
elaborate on efforts the National Guard is taking to help with this
planning and to engage the local communities that will be im-
pacted by the noise?
General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. So, the key there is for us to
work with the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and also the
unit. And as we get the aircraft, and to identify those areas where
we can reduce noise, and this may affect the approach patterns
that they use or the type of approaches into the airport, also their
departures.
And also working with the air crews to identify the areas where
they can reduce noise. And then also make the communities aware
of grants or resources available to them to help reduce the noise
locally.
Senator BALDWIN. And are these activities well underway?
General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. As we get more aircraft and I
look forward to being out there September 7th for the welcome
ceremony. But I think as we go on, they are going to definitely
want to be good neighbors with the community there because they
are great supporters of that organization.
Senator BALDWIN. Thank you.
Senator TESTER. Senator Boozman.
Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all
for being here. We appreciate your service. I always enjoy getting
to visit with you when we talk about military construction.
And we appreciate your service, and as always, we appreciate
your families. This is certainly a family affair, and again, all that
you represent. General Daniels, one key element of funding for the
Reserve component is the funded Reimbursable Authority.
Each year, this committee authorizes this funding authority for
military intelligence activities in support of Combatant Commands
and defense agencies. Can you speak to the importance of this au-
thority?
And if you believe funded reimbursable authority should be ex-
panded to other high demand skills such as cyber and space activi-
ties?
General DANIELS. Yes, thank you. The funded reimbursable au-
thority allows the Combatant Commands to use their operational
funds to bring on and pay for reservists. It is done in a voluntary
manner, and it allows them to have additional capacity for those
folks who are available and willing and capable of using their civil-
ian skill sets and their military trained skill sets to support the re-
quirements within the Combatant Commands.

---

306

Expanding beyond intelligence to those other key technical areas
would be of great value to the commands, and it allows the individ-
uals to again use those civilian and military acquired skills and be
very expert and facile in those areas. So, expansion would certainly
be welcomed.
Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you very much. Duty status reform is
an initiative that seeks to streamline and simplify the activation
and utilization of Reserve component members.
Efforts to consolidate this burdensome duty status system has
gone on for almost 3 decades, which I know has been frustrating
for our servicemembers.
Can you all just kind of jump in, and if you would, briefly discuss
how consolidating this system would positively impact
servicemembers and their families and increase retention? How can
Congress be more helpful in getting this effort?
Again, this is something we have talked about forever, but with
the situation that we are in now with retention and this and that,
it is more important than ever.
General HOKANSON. Senator, I will start out. When we look at
the 28 different duty statuses, the ability under duty status reform
to reduce these to about 8 really simplifies how we would mobilize
and utilize our Guardsmen and Reservists. But the biggest thing
that we have a concern is we just want equal pay for what we do.
We want either Guardsmen or Reservists to be treated exactly
the same as their active-duty counterparts if they are doing the
same mission at the same location at any time. The last thing we
want is two Soldiers or Airmen, or Sailors and Marines to be stand-
ing next door to each other, and one is getting a benefit that the
other one isn’t.
And so, this goes a long way to resolve that and really address
some issues that have long gone neglected.
Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. Anybody else?
General DANIELS. Yes, we would fully endorse being able to have
that passed into law to help us not only to have, you know, equal
pay and equal entitlements for those same activities, but also to re-
move the administrative burden of knowing which is the right pay
status to put someone in and simplifying the entire process for ev-
eryone that is involved. That would be of great value and time sav-
ings as well.
Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. General Bellon, as we all know,
every service has encountered challenges with meeting their re-
cruiting goals. What has the Marine Corps Reserve done to meet
your specific goals and are there specific examples you can provide
that will help this committee better understand how we can help
all the services going forward?
General BELLON. Well, I think, sir, for this year, I think we are
the only one that came close to meeting the goal. But our require-
ment is smaller, so let me frame that, and our population we are
recruiting a slightly different. But I don’t think we should draw
their own conclusions.
I would say we were successful this year, but as you know, sir,
the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Secretary of the Navy,
and the Assistant Commandant all have testified that the future

---

307

end strength of the Marine Corps Reserve is going to be back at
37,000. We are at 33,000 today.
That has to happen by the end of the decade. And as I look at
where we are now, the trends in society, I have questions about
how we are going to do that. So, one of the things we are doing
is proactively looking at reestablishing capacity where the popu-
lation is and will be. By that I mean some of our drill centers are
located where the population was in the 50s, not where it is and
will be.
So, there are a number of things we are doing, but a big part of
it is simply proving to the American people that service is honor-
able and worthwhile. And as you know, the trends are not good in
that direction, and I don’t see that as a bad thing. Should we not
have to prove to our citizens occasionally that the Nation is worth
defending? Absolutely.
Senator BOOZMAN. Right. Very good. Thank you all. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven.
Senator HOEVEN. Thanks. Just picking up on that, General, how
do you do that? How do you convince them that, you know, that
they should want to step up and serve?
General BELLON. Well, I had a vignette earlier where I worked
with your staff. We had a need that emerged, a very fast need for
literal craft capability.
At the same time, we were looking at sundowning a couple of
units that were very healthy in Florida and Texas. And the dem-
onstration, by working with this committee, and the staff, and Con-
gress in General, to find the right authorities to move at the speed
of relevance, took two units whose re-enlistment rates were going
down because they saw no future in service, and now they are
among the top of all of my formations.
And all they needed was a demonstration from us that we value
the service, and we are going to give them the tools and equipment
they need to be ready when the Nation needs them. So that is an
example of what we can do.
But I also think days like this where we have open testimony,
and we demonstrate an open conversation that we are trying to
find ways to reestablish some of the faith and confidence we might
have lost over the previous years.
Senator HOEVEN. I would add a recruiting tool that I think is in-
credibly important and has great utility, not only for the services
and not only for the individuals while they serve with you, but for
their future as well, and that is the Federal tuition assistance pro-
gram. And I would like each of you to weigh in on that.
And I want to start with you, General Hokanson, because we put
together and funded a pilot program through this committee, and
that Air National Guard Reserve pilot program is incredibly impor-
tant not only to recruit those individuals in, but to keep them. And
there is a difference between the services, and there is a difference
between active duty, and Guard, and Reserves.
And I think we need to beef that thing up right now. It won’t
only help pull people in. It will help keep them in and it will make
them better, Soldiers, Airmen, Marines, you name it for all of you,
and I would like to hear from each one of you on that.

---

308

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. It is a great program. And
when I visit the 54, when I always talk to our recruiters and I ask
them, what are those things why people still come in, and edu-
cation is still one of those consistent things.
And we have been fortunate, and we look across the entire Na-
tional Guard, all of them but Guam, the State helps provide tuition
assistance so that we have that stability throughout the process.
Unfortunately, we had to balance sometimes with the fiscal year
and the academic year to fully utilize that funding, but any time
we have the ability to utilize that not only for tuition assistance
but also for tuition payback, and then also retention bonuses, will
make a huge impact.
Senator HOEVEN. Do you agree we should make it a priority to
get that in place and strengthen it as a tool for recruitment and
retention?
General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. Education. Any benefits we can pro-
vide to them is always a benefit when it comes to recruiting.
Senator HOEVEN. Thank you. And I will come back to General
Bellon and ask the same of the others.
General BELLON. Briefly, I want to offer this context. Less than
1 percent volunteer. So, who are they? They have a call to service
already. So, anything we can do to invest in them has an amazing
return on investment. From a citizen’s perspective, they are self-
motivated. They already have a call to service. Why wouldn’t we
invest in them?
Senator HOEVEN. And particularly if they enlist the Marine
Corps, right? Not easy duty. General.
General DANIELS. So, the Army Reserve used about $25 million
of tuition assistance in 2022, and then $31 million this year.
And we put in a request for about $33 million next year. It is
a growing—and its credentialing assistance is another fund that we
use simultaneously. It is super important for our members to be-
come more and more educated along with our—not just only our
enlisted, but our warrants as well.
They leverage the credentialing assistance quite a bit. So, this is
vital for us to keep them on the cutting edge of their technical ex-
perience for their civilian careers and then to be ahead of their
peers. So, it is super important.
Senator HOEVEN. Admiral.
Admiral MUSTIN. It is a winning program, and we recognize the
impact both on recruiting, which is obvious in that we can offer
this incentive. Secondly, we continue to, like Lieutenant General
Daniels, to invest within the Navy Reserve for selected Reserve tui-
tion assistance as a new program, also recognizing the benefit that
provides to our Sailors.
The Navy is a very technical force. That education benefits the
individual, but it is a selfish interest on my part as well to ensure
that our Sailors are trained and ready to perform when we need
them.
Senator HOEVEN. Right. I mean, I have been waiting to hear
some of you lob that in. I mean, you are becoming so techno-
logically sophisticated, every one of you, that they need that ongo-
ing education to handle all the amazing systems that you have, and
we are developing.

---

309

Admiral MUSTIN. Absolutely, Senator. I would say that in the
past we used to say, hey, we are competing for the same resources
to recruit against the Marine Corps, or the Air Force, or the Army.
Now, I tell people we are competing with Amazon, Google, Meta,
and others. It is a very technical—out there.
Senator HOEVEN. Absolutely. General.
General HEALY. You know, the Navy beat me to the punch on
that one. The Air Force is absolutely a very technical field, every
one of them——
Senator HOEVEN. Yes, absolutely.
General HEALY [continuing]. And the $4,500 a year that we
spend, and tuition assistance absolutely directly impacts our ability
to recruit and retain.
Senator HOEVEN. Tester and I have to get old pickup trucks be-
cause the technologies on the new one, we can’t figure out, so.
Senator TESTER. 100 percent correct.
Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
all. Thank you for your service. Thank you, certainly on behalf of
the State of Alaska. We certainly appreciate our Reserve and our
National Guard servicemembers and civilians. They provide ex-
traordinary support to us in the State and certainly to the country.
We have got continued success that we see with innovation, read-
iness, training, IRT (Innovative Readiness Training), certainly
when it comes to homeland defense, missile defense, absent key air
refueling, combat search and rescue, strategic airlift, there is just
so much.
And so, we are very grateful. I am very, very proud of the Guard
and Reserve men and women who serve us and provide such ben-
efit. I also am thankful for the cost savings that you bring to all
of the effort here, so.
General Hokanson, we had an opportunity yesterday to visit
about some of the more specific concerns that you and I had
shared, but we have discussed previously the issue of the Space
Force and the mission there of the Air Guards, 213th Space Warn-
ing Squadron at Clear Air Force Base.
They have been doing extraordinary work there with the ground-
based radar missile warning mission since 2006 now. We are see-
ing Space Force becoming more mature. That is good. But I have
been concerned that there hasn’t really been a clearly articulated
or perhaps an adequate plan to ensure that these Airmen and their
mission are cared for in a way that works going forward with the
Space Force. I fear that they may miss out on opportunities, or
education, or equipment.
I understand that prior to my arrival at committee here, you did
address a question regarding Space Force to Senator Moran. I ap-
preciate that. I don’t know if you want to add anything further to
that in terms of your opinion on the establishment of the Space Na-
tional Guard to really ensure that these Guardians are equipped
and trained for the mission set that they clearly are in the front
on.
General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. And as clear as you men-
tioned, this goes back to once again the years and years of experi-

---

310

ence that our Airmen have doing this mission set and just the in-
credible capability they provide our Nation each and every day.
And as you mentioned, we are the only unit equipped, surged go
to war capability that exist within the Reserve component for the
space mission.
And so having a clear pathway for them will not only help with
our current recruiting, but it will also ensure that all of those years
of experience, all the work that they have done, and frankly, the
ability of our Guardsmen to bring—over half of them have back-
grounds in technical or high tech or aerospace industries.
They bring that knowledge base to work with them when they
come to drill. And, you know, we rely on them to deploy around the
globe and continue to do their mission. So, anything and everything
we can do to retain them.
And as I mentioned earlier, my best military advice to reduce
any impact at all to readiness or the ability to field these unit
would be to transfer the current Air National Guard units doing
the space mission into a National Guard component for the Space
Force so they can continue everything they are doing today, tomor-
row.
Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you for just clarifying that and put-
ting that on the record. I appreciate it. I would like to direct a
question to you, General Healy. I think, fair to say that we are
both pretty proud of the 477th Fighter Group, U.S. Air Force’s old-
est, most experienced F–22 unit in the inventory.
I think they have produced some pretty qualified fighter pilots.
You had mentioned in your testimony the term concurrent and pro-
portional fielding that allows the Air Force Reserve to incorporate
new aircraft at the same rate and proportion as their active-duty
components.
How will the current—excuse me, concurrent and proportional
fielding affect units like the 477th, especially as we are looking to
the new airframes coming on such as the next generation air domi-
nance and the E–7s?
General HEALY. Thanks very much for the question, ma’am. And
I don’t know who wants to brag more on the 477th. I have had the
great opportunity to go twice this year up to Anchorage to visit
them.
Simply put, twice the F–22 fighter experience than their active-
duty counterparts, three times the fighter time experience in their
active-duty fighter time—or active-duty counterparts, makes them
the most experienced F–22 unit in the entire Air Force, and they
are exactly where they need to be, at the forefront of the defense
of the country.
They are the tip of that tip of the spear that Alaska provides. I
think as we look towards the future and possible recapitalization
from F–22s and to the possibility of next generation air dominance,
I think that air superiority experience and 5th gen aircraft will
translate perfectly and would be the template to go by, if we were
to look at the current proportional servicing of and progression to
the NGAD (Next-Generation Air Dominance) family of systems.
Likewise, with the E7, the experience, both with the Guard in
Alaska and the Reserves in the continuous States, allows us to pro-
vide that same degree of expertise and experience moving forward.

---

311

Senator MURKOWSKI. Yes, thank you. Mr. Chairman, I have got
a couple more questions, but I will submit this for the record.
Senator TESTER. Perfect. Senator Durbin.
Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I chair the Senate
Judiciary committee, and I just happened to adjourn in time for me
to make this hearing, and I am glad to be here. I would like to say
to all the witnesses, the GAO (Government Accountability Office)
noted last year that the Pentagon is facing the most challenging re-
cruitment environment in 50 years.
The Army, for example, has especially struggled to meet recruit-
ment goals. The service missed its end strength number by 15,000
or 25 percent in fiscal year 2022. I am glad to see this budget re-
quest increases competitive compensation and funding for recruit-
ment marketing programs, as well as improving quality of life for
current servicemembers.
So, I would like to ask you if you would tell me what the impact
has been on the Guard and Reserve with this recruiting challenge?
General HOKANSON. Senator, I will start with the National
Guard. So, when you look at where we are today, our recruiters,
particularly in the Army side, have really been able to adjust to the
current environment and we have seen a steady increase in our re-
cruiting abilities. In fact, we have been over 100 percent the last
3 months.
And right now, the Army National Guard is on path to meet our
end strength by the end of the fiscal year. In terms of the Air Na-
tional Guard, we are a little bit challenging environment. We look
at to be at about 97 percent of our authorized end strength by the
end of the year. But we have seen very positive increases, espe-
cially over last year.
Now, I am not declaring victory, but I am saying right now all
the trends are very positive and we hope to continue those into the
new year, and make sure we maintain our Army National Guard
authorized end strength and reach our Air National Guard author-
ized end strength.
Senator DURBIN. Tell me what the elements are that you think
are most persuasive for those who are enlisting.
General HOKANSON. Senator, thank you for the question. When
I go across the 54, I visit with recruiters everywhere I go. Edu-
cational benefits are one of the first things they bring up. The
other one is benefits such as healthcare. What they are finding in
the current environment to be competitive is many companies are
now offering benefits that they didn’t before. Medical, educational
benefits.
And so, the competition out there for the same individuals is get-
ting much stronger. And then also internally, we are working with
our own systems, and that is reducing the time it does to get—per-
sonnel to get waivers. And also addressing policies that are pre-
venting some folks from serving.
Senator DURBIN. Any other members of the panel have a com-
ment?
General BELLON. Yes, Senator, I think it is important to realize
the math component here. The population that we are all trying to
recruit right now is significantly smaller among Gen Z than the

---

312

millennials, so that is a fact we have to deal with. But also, the
propensity to serve has diminished.
And that is all about us earning the confidence of the American
people back that service is worthwhile. There is a pretty holistic
problem but there is a math component as well. Thank you.
Senator DURBIN. I would like to just make a comment. I am
about to say something that is a secret. It is not classified, but I
am going to share it with you. We have 780,000 DACA (Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrival) recipients, people who are protected
under DACA, many of whom want to serve this country, where
they grew up.
There is an obstacle, Congress. We have not given them a path-
way to citizenship. This should be a pathway. You ought to open
up your opportunities, we should across the board in the military,
to Dreamers and to DACA recipients who really want to serve this
country and I think are genuine about it.
For some reason, there has been a resistance. Perhaps it was the
luxury of a lot of recruits, and we didn’t need others. But I would
just tell you, I have met them. I know them. They would make
great sacrifices for just to have this opportunity to wear the uni-
forms you are wearing today.
And I hope that when you are in the highest levels of the Pen-
tagon, that you discuss this candidly. Your predecessors have not
always been cooperative when I have raised this issue. There is a
resistance because these folks are, ‘‘undocumented.’’
They may not have been born here, but they love this country
as much as any of us who pledge allegiance to that flag, so I hope
you will consider that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator TESTER. Senator Capito.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank all of you,
and I add my voice of thanks and gratitude to all of you for your
service, and to your families as well.
I wanted to ask General Hokanson, West Virginia is the home
to some of the National Guard Special Forces capabilities, includ-
ing the Special Operations Detachment Europe and the Second
Battalion 19th Special Forces Group.
Can you speak to the importance of the Guard’s Special Forces
capabilities and what they contribute to the Joint Force?
General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. It is an incredible capability.
When you look at the two Special Forces groups that are not in the
active component, they are both in the Army National Guard. And
if you go back really to the early days of 9/11, it was Guard Special
Forces folks that were there, and they have served admirably
around the globe ever since that time.
For us, it is something we have worked very closely with Special
Operations Command to make sure that we make the ability for
those leaving active duty to come into the National Guard and then
also to recruit those directly out of the National Guard into our for-
mations.
It is a critical skill set that we utilize each and every day, and
our Combatant Commanders can never get enough of them. So, we
are doing everything we can to recruit and retain and provide those
bonuses and incentives to keep them in our formations.

---

313

Senator CAPITO. So, you have a transition pipeline from active
to—for the Special Forces talents? Is that what you are saying?
General HOKANSON. Absolutely, ma’am.
Senator CAPITO. Yes, good. Good. I would note that in the early
days of 9/11, when the Special Forces deployed, we lost a good West
Virginian at the very beginning of that, and he was a Special
Forces National Guard.
This is kind of a technical question, and I am going to ask it, but
I am not sure exactly what I am asking in terms of the technical
parts of it. Accurate positioning, navigation, and timing, and GPS
(Global Positioning System) services are essential to U.S. critical
infrastructure and for military operations.
So, our State is one of the States of West Virginia to participate
as a test site for the National Guard’s National Integration of Time
Resiliency for Operations, or called NITRO. Could you tell me a lit-
tle bit about NITRO and where you see that is going, and how im-
portant that is?
General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. It is a very important capability
because it provides alternate resilient timing for GPS, and many
of our systems operate on that. Currently, we have six States that
have fielded it, and we are working very closely to support the
States because this provides that capability to the States and local
first responders in the case there is a loss of the GPS terrestrial
signal.
Senator CAPITO. Does this capability go through all different
forces? I mean, would this be something that every Guard and Re-
serve would have a great deal of interest in?
General HOKANSON. We are not sure of the exact fielding plan,
ma’am. It is based on the funding that is provided. But we do have
it in 6 States right now, and 21 others have expressed an interest.
So, we are looking at the long-term viability of this, or if there are
other alternate capabilities that provide the same.
Senator CAPITO. Right. Does anybody else want to speak to that?
Let me ask a question on cybersecurity. I am assuming that all of
you have certain cybersecurity components. Is it growing? How im-
portant is it to you? And is there a coordinating aspect to this
across the forces? So, I am going to start over here with General
Bellon.
General BELLON. I think, you know, acknowledging we are in the
information age, it is only going to get more important. It is vital
to everything we do.
And I think for all of us, we are looking for a more streamlined
way for us to get our Marines, Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen who
have civilian expertise and qualifications, but may not have the
military occupational specialty, to find a way to expedite their ac-
cess to our systems.
That doesn’t exist right now. It is a very Byzantine, very ham-
handed approach that we have now. We need to do better than
that.
Senator CAPITO. Yes. General.
General DANIELS. So, the Army Reserve is looking to expand the
amount of our force that is cyber warriors. We are growing out a
cyber-protection brigade, adding an additional capability.

---

314

And I meet once a quarter with the Army cyber lead, along with
the Army National Guard director, and we coordinate activities to
make sure that we are not hitting the, you know, training pipeline
too heavy, too fast. We are trying to make sure that we are all in
sync as we go forward, looking to 2030.
Senator CAPITO. Okay. I am going to go to the Admiral next. I
am going to skip——
Admiral MUSTIN. So, cyber is a growth area for the Navy Re-
serve.
So, we currently have about 8,000 Sailors within our information
warfare community, and we continue to work very closely with
CYBERCOM, as well as our fleet cyber, which is 10th Fleet, to en-
sure the creation of our cyber protection teams and offensive cyber
capability continues to mature.
Where I see this happening most effectively is also related to our
recruiting initiatives——
Senator CAPITO. Right. Absolutely.
Admiral MUSTIN [continuing]. Because we have got some fan-
tastic civilians that can walk in the door immediately and we can
do direct commission. We have recently created a new cyber desig-
nator, which is a pretty significant step from a community manage-
ment perspective.
Senator CAPITO. Or out the door. I mean, once they have served
and maybe they have decided where they want to transition, and
they have got such an incredible skill set here. I mean, to me, that
is a big selling point. And finally, yes——
General HEALY. Yes, ma’am. Absolutely a growth industry within
the Air Force Reserve, currently getting into mission assurance, in-
creasing in defensive and offensive cyber operations, and absolutely
looking forward towards leveraging our civilian experience and tak-
ing that to benefit the Reserve as well.
Senator CAPITO. Right, right. So, General Hokanson, do you want
to wrap it up on cyber?
General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. Obviously we have 4,000 cyber
professionals in the Guard. We are part of the Cyber National Mis-
sion Force and fully integrated into CYBERCOM.
The one thing I would highlight though is we have State partner-
ships with 100 nations. One of their greatest requests is to help
them with the cyber defense and network defense in their country.
And we are finding when we look at misinformation campaigns,
that this is absolutely critical to helping our partners and allies,
and that is something we leverage at every opportunity.
Senator CAPITO. Thank you all very much.
Senator TESTER. We appreciate your testimony here today. We
appreciate your work and making sure that our national defense is
up to where it needs to be. General Bellon, we wish you all the best
in the next phase of your life.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may submit additional questions. We would ask that if
additional questions come in, that you answer them as quickly as
you possibly can. The defense subcommittee will reconvene on
Tuesday, June 20 at 3:30 p.m. for a classified hearing with the in-
telligence community.

---

315

[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were
submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hear-
ing:]
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER
Question. The National Guard and Reserve is a part-time force, but also relies
heavily on Active Guard and Reserve.
We understand that when Guard and Reserve personnel learn that a continuing
resolution is on its way—especially longer-term, they stick with their civilian jobs.
What impact does a continuing resolution have on your overall force?
Answer. The impacts of a continuing resolution vary depending on its length. The
longer the continuing resolution lasts, the likelihood increases that the National
Guard will not be able to meet readiness requirements to support the Joint Force
or support the nation’s Governors when they need us most.
Specific impacts from a short-term continuing resolution (1–3 months) include: po-
tential curtailment of non-statutory training such as additional training days (i.e.
flight training), resulting in degraded readiness across the formation; degraded abil-
ity to maintain/manage real property inventory and unit stationing actions; and the
increased likelihood of missing critical training gates at prescribed times during the
training year cycle resulting in the inability to meet readiness milestones.
Continuing resolutions lasting beyond 4 months significantly increase risks for the
National Guard. Impacts include: continued pressure on soldiers and civilians from
the impacts of inflation by not receiving a pay raise; decreased ground OPTEMPO
and flying hours resulting in lower readiness proficiency; curtailment of readiness-
enhancing training exercises; reductions in depot repair of airframes, tactical
wheeled vehicles, and weapon systems; inability to address Base Operations Support
(BOS) shortfalls (e.g., fire and emergency services; range services), impacting oper-
ational readiness and Soldier/Family well-being; increased potential for the need to
furlough State employees; delays in modernization of inadequately structured facili-
ties/infrastructure and delays deficit reduction of critical facility types (readiness
centers, maintenance facilities, and barracks); and inability to afford filling critical
vacancies and limit bonuses/incentives which will degrade the ability to meet acces-
sions goals and end strength.
Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills,
training, and schools?
Answer. Continuing resolutions definitively impact the participation, attendance,
and execution of schools. The uncertainty of funding degrades the capability to
maintain fulltime staff and instructors to execute training, causes registered stu-
dents to adjust commitments for attending, and has a risk to student lodging pay-
ments for courses longer than 140 days. Without the proper appropriation, there is
a high probability for schools to cancel.
Question. The National Guard is now in year six of the Southwest border mission
supporting Customs and Border Protection.
Today, there are approximately 2,500 Army Guard personnel at our Southwest
border, with another 1,500 Active Duty troops headed down there following the
Biden administration’s decision to end Title 42.
This mission has never been budgeted for by DoD or the National Guard. How-
ever, we have now spent more than $1.65 billion for the southwest border mission.
General Hokanson, if the current surge of 1,500 Active Duty troops is prolonged,
I understand National Guard personnel may be deployed. What can you tell the
Committee about the likelihood and feasibility of such an expanded Guard footprint
there?
Answer. I acknowledge the difficult task the Department of Homeland Security is
faced with in securing the Southwest Border. However, continued National Guard
support has created an enduring, readiness-degrading law enforcement support mis-
sion. In addition, the mission’s costly personnel tempo is having a negative impact
on our service members, their families, employers, and impacting retention of
servicemembers. The primary mission of the National Guard is to fight and win our
Nation’s wars as the combat reserve of the Army and Air Force. In today’s environ-
ment, combat readiness is paramount for all National Guard formations. Anything
that negatively impacts readiness, that can be accomplished by other responsible
agencies or can be contracted, should be eliminated. Lastly, development of a stra-
tegic plan to offramp military support may quicken development of more cost-effec-
tive or contractual solutions to those currently being performed by the National

---

316
Guard. I continue to recommend that the border mission can be accomplished by
other agencies.
Question. General Hokanson, how is this mission impacting the readiness of
Guard personnel?
Answer. During operational employment for the Southwest Border (SWB) mission,
National Guard unit readiness is consumed rather than built. Unit preparation, de-
ployment, and redeployment, may overlap with training and modernization year ac-
tivities, further negatively impacting a unit’s ability to build combat readiness and
modernize on schedule. SWB units are mobilized for 400 days, resulting in nearly
13 months with no wartime mission training. Additionally, the National Guard has
received so many requests for support from National Guard UH–72 helicopters that
the SWB is depleting the serviceable life of the aircraft 2.5 times faster than pro-
grammed, significantly impacting Army aviation readiness and modernization.
Question. In the past 2 years, Congress has provided funds for thirty-two new C–
130J aircraft specifically for the Air National Guard.
Upgrading our airlift fleet is a top priority of mine. The Air National Guard—in-
cluding the 120th Airlift Wing based in Great Falls—is in real need of capable airlift
so that you can perform the critical missions assigned to you.
I understand that the basing decision for these aircraft is still underway, with a
decision slated for later this year.
General Hokanson: What can you tell me about your priorities for the strategic
basing process for these aircraft from the Guard’s perspective? How are you coordi-
nating with the Active Duty Air Force to ensure your equities are addressed?
Answer. The Air National Guard is utilizing the Air Force Strategic Basing Proc-
ess for the C–130J basing decision. The Secretary of the Air Force has delegated
the C–130J basing decision to the Director, Air National Guard and the process will
provide a standardized, repeatable, transparent, and deliberate decision.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BRIAN SCHATZ
Emergency Management Assistance
Question. How would the National Guard provide technical assistance to guard
units that are activated via Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC)
in expediting resources to states that have requested assistance but are geographi-
cally isolated, such as Hawaii?
Answer. The National Guard uses five means to mitigate the risks associated with
disaster assistance to geographically isolated States. First, the National Guard regu-
larly embeds Liaison Officers (LNOs) at the Federal Emergency Management Agen-
cy’s (FEMA) National Response Coordination Center during declared emergencies.
These LNOs inform FEMA of National Guard capabilities and forces available to
support disaster response in geographically isolated States. Second, the National
Guard may embed trained emergency management personnel with EMAC Advanced
Teams (A-Teams) assigned to FEMA’s Regional Response Coordination Center in
impacted regions. Guardsmen and women assigned to A-Teams ensure National
Guard support synchronizes with the Federal response. Third, the National Guard
uses the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) to assess
risks, develop mitigation strategies, and develop needed capabilities for potential
employment during disaster response. THIRA is especially valuable in synchro-
nizing the National Guard’s responses and resources with FEMA to ensure states
such as Hawaii enhance their resilience in disaster response. Fourth, NGB dis-
patches Joint Liaison Teams (JLT) to impacted states prior to or at the start of an
emergency. These teams assist the Joint Force Headquarters with coordinating re-
sponse options between the state and the National Guard Bureau. Fifth, isolated
states may authorize their Guardsmen and women already in a state active duty
status to support immediate responses to domestic emergencies until such time as
either the impacts of a disaster subside or resources from National Guard units ex-
ternal to the impacted state arrive. The National Guard Bureau ensures states and
territories adhere to relevant statutes and policy for the use of immediate response
authority.
Question. What coordination is there between the National Guard Bureau (NGB)
and the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) when considering
which guard units would assist another state that has requested assistance? How
does NGB account for geographic isolation as factor when coordinating logistics?
Answer. The National Guard Bureau (NGB) conducts annual workshops to coordi-
nate with the 54 States and territories, FEMA, United States Indo-Pacific Com-
mand, and United States Northern Command to supporting relationships during
emergencies through the construct of an Emergency Management Compact (EMAC).

---

317
The National Emergency Management Association (NEMA), through the National
Coordination Group (NCG), facilitates requests to deploy an EMAC Coordination
Team. These teams synchronize EMAC activities with Federal personnel whenever
requested by FEMA Headquarters during an incident.
Responding to disasters in geographic isolated locations requires a whole of gov-
ernment logistics response. Upon the Federal Declaration of an Emergency or Fed-
eral Disaster Declaration associated with a domestic response requiring military
support, a Mission Assignment (MA) is generated by the FEMA field office. The De-
fense Coordinating Officer in this office coordinates with the state or states Emer-
gency Managers and the National Guard liaison and decides which forces are best
suited to fulfill the request beyond the scope of EMACs already in place and exe-
cuted. All requests for support, including logistics outlined in the MA are prioritized
in coordination with FEMA, the state, NGB, and other agencies against available
transportation assets to move personnel and supplies into the impacted region.
These efforts require constant coordination between agencies to ensure allocated
transportation space is maximized and support is provided at the point of need.
Training and Partnerships
Question. How does the National Guard Bureau support unofficial partnerships
between National Guard units and Taiwan’s military to improve Taiwan’s defensive
and deterrence abilities?
Answer. The Taiwan Relations Act requires the U.S to make available defense ar-
ticles and defense services as necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient
self-defense capacity as determined by the President and Congress. The National
Guard has several elements working with personnel in Taiwan to increase pro-
ficiency in several areas. I would be happy to follow up with you in person to discuss
further.
Question. How is the National Guard Bureau tailoring more State Partnership
Program programming towards partnerships with nations in the Indo-Pacific?
Answer. The National Guard Bureau works very closely with the Geographic Com-
batant Commands (GCC) including U.S. Indo-Pacific Command to prioritize pro-
gramming. Because the State Partnership Program supports GCC Theater Cam-
paign Plans, the prioritization of programming is a function of many variables to
include availability of Guardsmen and women to participate in the event, partner
nation availability, and—crucially—the timing of availability of funds relative to the
NGB and the partner nation.
Question. Which State Partnership Programs yield the best cooperation between
National Guard units and foreign militaries? Are these high-yield partnerships pri-
marily focused on niches the guard excels at like cybersecurity and disaster re-
sponse?
Answer. The State Partnership Program currently has 88 partnerships with 100
countries ranging in age from 30 years old to new ones just formed this year. Most
of our partnerships thrive and encompass whole of government and whole of society.
Consistently, the following partnerships stand out and yield the best access, influ-
ence, and friendships. Lithuania/PA, Senegal/VT, Jordan/CO, Uzbekistan/MS,
Kazakhstan/AZ, Brazil/NY, Malaysia/WA, Morocco/UT, Latvia/MI, Poland/IL. These
partnerships all share the same attributes: highly-engaged state-level staffs, strong
partner nation commitment and involvement, exceptional Combatant Command Se-
curity Cooperation staff with clear integration into their Theater Campaign Plan
(TCP), and a strong motivation to engage with the United States in a mutual effort
to gain increased security for our citizens.
High-yield partnerships are not focused on any particular niche. All partnerships
are based on the partner nation’s desires, identified capability gaps, and the prior-
ities of the Combatant Commander.
National Guard Pay and Benefits Reforms
Question. Does the National Guard Bureau support states passing plans to reim-
burse health insurance fees for guardsmen?
Answer. Yes, the National Guard Bureau supports any plan that improves
Guardsmen’s ability to receive health insurance and increase access to healthcare
when not in a duty status. Proactively managing health through regular visits pro-
vides Guardsmen and women an opportunity to stay ahead of medical issues.
Question. Have states that previously implemented health insurance fee reim-
bursement seen increases to recruiting?
Answer. To the best of our knowledge, Maryland is the only state to enact health
insurance reimbursement into law. The Health Care for Heroes Act of 2023 was
passed on May 12th, 2023 and will not go into effect until July 1st, 2023. We look

---

318
forward to working with the Maryland National Guard to determine if it has a posi-
tive impact on recruiting.
Question. How will the National Guard focus future training opportunities on in-
demand workforce skills, like cybersecurity and medical training, to support, re-
cruitment, retention, and work-transfer opportunities for guardsmen?
Answer. The National Guard offers many in-demand specialty jobs that can be le-
veraged to pursue a civilian career, which enhances recruiting and retention within
the National Guard. We are implementing direct commissioning and constructive
credit to not only allow us to meet emerging mission needs, but to reward and
incentivize the civilian skills many of our recruits have gained.
National Guard Cyber Capabilities
Question. How is the National Guard using its robust cyber capabilities to partner
with state, city, and local government to help protect systems and critical infrastruc-
ture from cyber attacks?
Answer. National Guard cyber forces routinely leverage full scale cyber training
exercises (i.e., Cyber Shield, Cyber Yankee, etc.) along with tabletop exercises, inno-
vative readiness training, direct engagements, and technical assistance engage-
ments (when requested) to partner with state, city and local governments to build
the appropriate relationships needed to help protect systems and critical infrastruc-
ture.
As a specific example, over the last 10 months the National Guard participated
in the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) regionally aligned Homeland
Defense & Critical Infrastructure tabletop exercises to improve the collaboration re-
quired to protect and defend critical infrastructure. The intent is to bring together
state and Federal partners to: gain a shared understanding of the operational envi-
ronment and understand threats and vulnerabilities to critical infrastructure (in-
cluding force projection platforms and transportation nodes); consider potential De-
fense Support to Civil Authorities (DSCA) triggering events during a homeland de-
fense operation; and reveal resource/capability gaps as applied to defense of the
homeland.
Question. What cyber capabilities does the National Guard need to further invest
in to keep pace with growing cyber threats and what support does the guard need
to enable this skillset?
Answer. National Guard cyber forces need to be equipped with standard cyber
tools and training common to all Federalized mission forces to operate effectively
within the homeland cyber domain (i.e. operational technology, incident response).
Question. How is the National Guard designing its cyber capabilities to assist
CISA in protecting election infrastructure from foreign attacks?
Answer. The National Guard Bureau (NGB) works with the Army and Air Force
to design the required force structure to meet wartime requirements and to ensure
the National Guard is structured to perform cyber operations as required. Like
other types of force structure within the National Guard, the wartime capabilities
of the cyber units allow our professionals to assist CISA and the states to protect
the election infrastructure from foreign attacks.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN
Question. General Hokanson, can you provide an update on the importance of cor-
rosion prevention and control for National Guard assets. Specifically, on the C–130
aircraft?
Answer. Aircraft corrosion prevention and control, to include C–130 aircraft, is
critical. Corrosion contributes to increased need for both field-level and depot-level
maintenance. Every ANG Wing adheres to strict standards of corrosion prevention
and control through a Corrosion Prevention and Control Program detailed in Air
Force Instruction and in Technical Orders.
Question. How many C–130 aircrafts does the National Guard currently have in
inventory?
Answer. The Air National Guard has 127 C–130 aircraft in inventory, 87 C–130Hs
and 40 C–130Js.
Question. I understand that the Air Force is undergoing an air worthiness assess-
ment on a new blanket liner technology, the Improved Thermal Acoustic Blanket
(ITAB), for the C–130 that has the potential to significantly reduce corrosion to the
airframe. Could you also provide an update on what the National Guard is doing
on this effort specifically, as well as the importance of corrosion control for the C–
130 in general?

---

319
Answer. Corrosion control is extremely important for the C–130 aircraft. The Na-
tional Guard Bureau supports any and all efforts to better control corrosion on air-
frames. It is our understanding that the Air Mobility Command has the lead for
testing a variety of acoustic blankets, and we are looking forward to their test re-
sults.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. The Alaska Air National Guard’s 168th Wing at Eielson AFB is the only
Arctic region capable air refueling unit in the United States. Due to the extreme
environment at Eielson AFB, the addition of four KC–135 aircraft without the addi-
tion of hangar space will put DoD objectives at risk. The current fleet of nine KC–
135 aircraft at Eielson often see mission capable (MC) rates below 60 percent during
the coldest months. These MC rates are largely driven by extremely limited hangar
availability and based on historical data, scheduled and fuel maintenance alone will
utilize the two current hangars at 85%. If additional hangars are not constructed,
an MC rate above 50% will be difficult to achieve in the winter months. (ANG OPR)
Do you support additional hangar space at Eielson AFB to facilitate the additional
maintenance requirements while simultaneously providing secure alert parking?
Answer. Yes, The National Guard Bureau has assessed current and future tanker
aircraft hangar needs at Eielson AFB, AK. Through a Business Case Analysis con-
ducted in 2022, we have validated a requirement for an additional covered aircraft
maintenance spot. This would provide two covered aircraft maintenance positions as
well as a covered fuel cell maintenance position for 3 total covered aircraft spots.
A project to construct the additional maintenance space is in early scope develop-
ment.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Question. Last year’s omnibus included $350 million to bring 12 Gray Eagles to
the Army National Guard, and we expect to procure additional Gray Eagles for ad-
ditional Army National Guard Divisions. We need to ensure that the National
Guard has capabilities equivalent to its active duty counterparts.
How important will this new capability be to the National Guard?
Answer. It is always vitally important that the Army National Guard (ARNG) has
the same force structure, training, and equipment as the Active Army to ensure
interoperability with the Joint Force.
Question. When do you expect the 12 Gray Eagles procured last year to be fielded
in the National Guard?
Answer. The ARNG expects to field Gray Eagle in the middle of calendar year
2027.
Question. When would you expect the Army National Guard to have personnel
trained to operate and maintain those 12 aircraft?
Answer. The training seat allocations for Soldiers to be trained to operate and
maintain the 12 Gray Eagle aircraft will be available after the unit’s force structure,
which allocates personnel authorizations and equipment fielding, is finalized. The
Army National Guard currently expects to field the aircraft in mid-2027, and begin
training in 2026 or early 2027.
Question. In the fiscal year 2022 defense appropriations bill, $15.5 million was in-
cluded for the Dickinson Readiness Center. This project was fully authorized and
appropriated for, but due to inflation and the rising costs of construction and mate-
rials, the project now carries a cost-to-complete of over $5 million. This problem isn’t
specific to North Dakota, but is affecting National Guard projects all over the coun-
try.
How important of a role do readiness centers play in helping the National Guard
carry out its missions and objectives?
Answer. Readiness Centers are vitally important to the National Guard because
they serve as the ‘‘Home Base’’ for all National Guard Soldiers. The Readiness Cen-
ters serves as the primary Command Center for Mobilization, Disaster/Emergency
and Contingencies, and support the unit home station. Readiness Centers are cru-
cial to training and readiness preparation, supporting Individual and Collective
Training, Supply distribution, Family Support, Community support, Recruiting and
Retention.
Question. The 817th Engineer Company is operating and training out of a sub-
standard facility in Jamestown, North Dakota. The North Dakota Army National
Guard has prioritized and has expected the Jamestown Readiness Center to be list-
ed on the future years defense program (FYDP) since 2021. The unit is currently

---

320
preparing to deploy to the U.S. southern border and my concern is that without a
new readiness center, the unit’s ability to meet readiness, recruiting and retention,
and training objectives will be adversely affected.
Can you take a close look at the need for the Jamestown Readiness Center and
work to have it listed on next year’s FYDP?
Answer. The Army National Guard uses a transparent scoring process called the
Installations Requirement Plan to score all 54 States’ and Territories’ priorities in
order to maximize total ARNG readiness. The North Dakota Army National Guard
(NDARNG) has submitted the Jamestown Readiness Center project for consider-
ation to be included in the FY30 program year. The National Guard Bureau will
continue to work with the NDARNG to ensure their requirements are being fairly
considered.
Question. We need to do more to ensure Guardsmen and their families have time-
ly access to mental healthcare services. Due to accreditation and licensing obstacles,
only a limited number of civilian mental healthcare providers are eligible to partici-
pate in the TRICARE network. As a result, many of these providers do not have
availability due to high workloads, leaving Guardsmen and their families waiting
weeks, if not months, to access the mental healthcare they need and have earned.
How are you working to address this problem?
Answer. The National Guard has hired Psychological Health Specialists in every
State and Wing to provide Soldiers and Airmen access to mental health assess-
ments, psychological education, solution-focused mental health interventions, and
referrals to community-based resources. Additionally, the National Guard Bureau
(NGB) has developed partnerships with several national organizations focused on
improving access to mental healthcare allowing members to access additional treat-
ment options within their local communities (e.g., psychological evaluations, evi-
denced based therapy, crisis counseling, etc.). We have established and implemented
a program to provide community-level civilian providers with no-cost training on
military culture, treatment protocols, and other relevant topics to enhance care and
incentivize providers to join the TRICARE network. NGB continually evaluates the
effectiveness and feasibility of expanding best practices of State initiatives nation-
ally.
Question. Have you identified any solutions to increase the number of mental
health providers participating in the TRICARE network to increase timely access
to these important services?
Answer. The TRICARE benefit is managed by the Defense Health Agency (DHA).
The National Guard Bureau (NGB) is working closely with DHA leadership to ad-
dress access issues for Guardsmen and women with TRICARE. More than 237,000
National Guard members currently live outside of TRICARE Prime service areas,
where there are little to no contract incentives to maintain robust provider net-
works. Future TRICARE contract modifications could address reimbursement rates
and provide incentives to expand service, especially in more rural areas.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS

---

321
USAR will be able to sustain the recruiting and retention momentum, having begun
in Fiscal Year 2023, necessary to achieve our authorized end strength objective.
Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills,
training, and schools?
Answer. Commanders continue to execute monthly statutory drills/training peri-
ods for Soldiers during a continuing resolution, in accordance with 10 U.S. Code
§ 10147, but units will delay the planning/scheduling of exercises, larger training
events, and schools necessary for professional development, functional training, and
MOS-qualification. The Army Reserve schedules most of its large-scale exercises and
collective training in the 3rd and 4th quarters of the fiscal year. Continuing resolu-
tions that extend past the 1st quarter may result in the postponement, cancelation,
or scaling back of training events and schools which leads to a decrease in indi-
vidual and unit readiness. Multiple, short-term continuing resolutions that last well
into the fiscal year preclude commanders from conducting long-range planning.
Delays in planning/executing exercises, collective training events, and schools re-
sults in late notification to Soldiers/Families/employers as well as ineffective budget
execution and contracting actions, which leads to decreased Soldier availability/par-
ticipation and increased costs.
The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 includes requested increases of
∂$418 million for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR) and ∂$155
million for Reserve Personnel, Army (RPA). The USAR would limit expenditures to
the FY 2023 funding levels under an extended continuing resolution, which, when
combined with continued inflationary cost increases, significantly decreases pur-
chasing power. The USAR would be unable to fund planned Military and Civilian
pay increases or fully execute all equipment maintenance, statutory drills/training
periods, exercises, collective training, and schools if funded at FY 2023 levels.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO VICE ADMIRAL JOHN B. MUSTIN

---

322
The lost opportunity to attend schools and conduct additional training will degrade
readiness in the long term.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL DAVID G. BELLON

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY

---

323
Furthermore, the funding delays caused by CRs significantly disrupt the careers
of personnel on long-term formal school orders, who are only funded until the end
of the current CR period. This causes discontinuities in pay and benefits, which can
deter Reserve Citizen Airmen from fully committing to these educational opportuni-
ties.
Additionally, the delays introduced by CRs negatively impact recruitment efforts,
notably postponing Basic Military Training (BMT) attendance. This leads to lost po-
tential recruits and delays in mission posturing, further reducing participation
rates.
Continuing resolutions (CRs) also lead to a notable delay in the attendance to ini-
tial skills schools and advanced courses for new recruits, a consequence that can sig-
nificantly impede the readiness of the AFR. These training courses are critical to
developing the necessary skills, qualifications, and expertise among our new acces-
sions, equipping them to become fully integrated, capable, and deployable assets.
Any delay in this process hampers the immediate effectiveness of these individuals
and slows down the overall readiness rate of our force. Over time, this can create
a backlog of untrained personnel, leading to a continuous cycle of deferred readi-
ness, potentially compromising the AFR’s operational capacity.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI
Question. My understating is that the Air Force is not planning on standing up
a reserve NGAD squadron, like they did with F–22s at the 477th Fighter Group.
Do you have specific concerns regarding future basing and structure decisions as
these new platforms get fielded?
Answer. The Air Force Reserve (AFR) stands ready to defend our Nation while
concurrently adapting for the future. We are committed to investing in a com-
prehensive range of systems that enable our Air Force to maintain effective deter-
rence and command of the skies.
In transitioning from the F–22, we will fully support the Air Combat Command,
capitalizing on our rich experience to integrate manned next-generation air domi-
nance (NGAD) platforms with collaborative combat aircraft (CCA). Coupled with
command and control, sensors, and weaponry, this approach will enhance our force’s
lethality and performance in highly contested environments.
Our strategy hinges on concurrent and proportional fielding and progression to
the NGAD family of systems, and as of now, we are not aware of any approved deci-
sions that deviate from this plan.
As these new platforms are fielded, it will provide a tremendous opportunity to
harness the continuity, expertise and cost-effectiveness of the AFR. By leveraging
our strengths and actively integrating the AFR into these systems through a strat-
egy of concurrent and proportional fielding, we will position ourselves to signifi-
cantly bolster our operational efficiency, readiness and ability to defend our Nation.
Question. The Alaska Air National Guard’s 168th Wing at Eielson AFB is the only
Arctic region capable air refueling unit in the United States. Due to the extreme
environment at Eielson AFB, the addition of four KC–135 aircraft without the addi-
tion of hangar space will put DoD objectives at risk. The current fleet of nine KC–
135 aircraft at Eielson often see mission capable (MC) rates below 60 percent during
the coldest months. These MC rates are largely driven by extremely limited hangar
availability and based on historical data, scheduled and fuel maintenance alone will
utilize the two current hangars at 85%. If additional hangars are not constructed,
an MC rate above 50% will be difficult to achieve in the winter months. (ANG OPR)
Do you support additional hangar space at Eielson AFB to facilitate the additional
maintenance requirements while simultaneously providing secure alert parking?
Answer. Yes, The National Guard Bureau has assessed current and future tanker
aircraft hangar needs at Eielson AFB, AK. Through a Business Case Analysis con-
ducted in 2022, we have validated a requirement for an additional covered aircraft
maintenance spot. This would provide two covered aircraft maintenance positions as
well as a covered fuel cell maintenance position for 3 total covered aircraft spots.
A project to construct the additional maintenance space is in early scope develop-
ment.

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN
Question. We need to do more to ensure Guardsmen, Reservists, and their families
have timely access to mental healthcare services. Due to accreditation and licensing
obstacles, only a limited number of civilian mental healthcare providers are eligible
to participate in the TRICARE network. As a result, many of these providers do not

---

324
have availability due to high workloads, leaving servicemembers and their families
waiting weeks, if not months, to access the mental healthcare they need and have
earned.
How are you working to address this problem?
Answer. While the Air Force Reserve (AFR) does not directly control the
TRICARE program, we recognize the need for improved access to mental healthcare
services for our Reserve Citizen Airmen and their families.
We have implemented the Director of Psychological Health Program (DPH) that
places Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSWs) within our units. We currently
have 37 LCSWs who provide supportive services, to include, but not limited to needs
assessment, psycho-educational skills, goal/value clarification, short term problem
solving, enhanced mental health referral coordination, advocacy, and appropriate
training to members of the AFR population. They provide short term supportive
counseling (approximately 3–6 visits) and refer Reserve Airmen for appropriate com-
plex or high-interest related treatment to military or community-based providers.
The AFR DPH program is currently under review as we work to assess expanding
coverage across all Reserve wings, in addition to redesigning the clinical support,
guidance, privileging, and data/trend tracking initiatives within the program.
Question. Have you identified any solutions to increase the number of mental
health providers participating in the TRICARE network to increase timely access
to these important services?
Answer. The Air Force Reserve does not oversee the TRICARE network, which is
managed by the Defense Health Agency (DHA). However, we are dedicated to ensur-
ing that our members have access to necessary mental health services. To this end,
we’ve implemented the Director of Psychological Health Program, which positions
Licensed Clinical Social Workers directly within our units (as mentioned in the re-
sponse to Question 1a above).
Additionally, our Airmen have access to the Military Family Life Consultants,
who provide free, short-term support to service members, their families, and sur-
vivors utilizing confidential non-medical counseling on installations worldwide.
While we cannot directly increase the number of providers within the TRICARE net-
work, these initiatives significantly bolster the mental health support accessible to
our members and their families.
DHA has reported that they continue to accept applications from eligible mental
health providers. This policy indicates an active and sustained effort by DHA to ex-
pand the provider network. Despite the global shortage of mental health providers,
we remain committed to improving mental health support within our capabilities for
all Reserve Citizen Airmen.

CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS

Senator TESTER. This committee stands in recess.
[Whereupon, at 10:51 a.m., Thursday, June 1, the hearings were
concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene sub-
ject to the call of the Chair.]

---

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

U.S. SENATE,
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, DC.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
[CLERK’S NOTE.—The subcommittee was unable to hold hearings
on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and letters of those
submitting written testimony are as follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
The American Urological Association, the premier organization for urologists
worldwide with over 15,000 urologists across the United States, thanks Chairman
Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and fellow members of the committee for the op-
portunity to provide written testimony on the health needs of our military and vet-
erans, including bladder cancer. Our testimony will outline the importance of com-
batting bladder cancer to our Nation’s military and veteran population. Specifically,
we respectfully request an $8 million line item within the Fiscal Year 2024 Congres-
sionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP) for bladder cancer to sta-
bilize the field and fund groundbreaking science that can finally bend the survival
rate of bladder cancer in the right direction.
Bladder cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer in U.S. military
and veteran populations, and the sixth most commonly diagnosed cancer in Ameri-
cans. Additionally, it is estimated that approximately 82,290 Americans will be di-
agnosed with bladder cancer in 2023. While survival rates for many other cancers
have increased, the 5-year survival rate for bladder cancer has not improved in
more than 30 years. Congress has previously provided funding for bladder cancer
research through the DoD’s Peer Reviewed Cancer Research Program (PRCRP). De-
spite the support to date for innovative and competitive bladder cancer research,
there remains an urgent need to provide predictable investment that will improve
the outcomes for this deadly cancer. A dedicated funding line will help attract re-
searchers to this field by demonstrating a sustained commitment to this work.
The American Urological Association represents the interests of urologists across
the United States. We understand that new tools, treatments, and techniques are
necessary to ensure that a bladder cancer diagnosis has good long-term outcomes.
Yet time and again, research dollars go to other, higher profile cancers. Highlighting
bladder cancer’s importance to our military community by including a line item will
ensure that the research field can grow and that more research applications are
funded moving forward, particularly for younger investigators who may be inter-
ested in pursuing bladder cancer research but are unsure of the field’s financial sta-
bility and the feasibility of their grant applications given extremely limited re-
sources.
The relevance to U.S. veterans is clear: many veterans were exposed to high levels
of ‘‘rainbow herbicides,’’ including Agent Blue and Agent Orange which are both rec-
ognized as highly toxic. In the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2021,
Congress directed the addition of bladder cancer to the Department of Veteran’s Af-
fairs list of presumptive diseases linked to Agent Orange exposure. This addition
came after the National Academy of Medicine included bladder cancer on its list of
‘‘suggestive evidence of association’’ with Agent Orange exposure. Additionally, re-
searchers are just learning that there may be a significant link between exposure
to burn puts and bladder cancer, which must be further explored. Unfortunately,
bladder cancer is a lagging indicator for carcinogens given it tends to impact older
(325)

---

326
individuals. However, we can be sure that there is likely a connection to burn pits
based on other inhaled carcinogens being known risk factors.
Our membership has seen first-hand what bladder cancer can do to a patient. For
example, one bladder cancer patient is a 71-year-old veteran of the Vietnam war liv-
ing in Maryland with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Like many pa-
tients, he was unfamiliar with bladder cancer when he began to have blood in his
urine several years ago. When told that bladder cancer was the fourth most common
cancer among men in the United States, he and his wife were shocked. He was
treated with intravesical BCG, the standard treatment for this type of bladder can-
cer. BCG is also a relatively ineffective vaccine for tuberculosis and is more than
one hundred years old. Unfortunately, soon after treatment his cancer recurred. At
that point, his options were either a radical cystectomy, surgery to remove his blad-
der necessitating urinary tract reconstruction, or a second-line therapy. With few
FDA approved therapies available, the patient chose an experimental clinical trial
involving intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel therapies. He has responded well
thus far on this second line therapy.
The fact that the general standard of care for bladder cancer is a very old, ineffec-
tive TB vaccine should both shock and also reinforce the necessity of more research
funding for this disease. This case highlights the critical need for more funding to
further research and scientific understanding of bladder cancer, a disease which is
particularly prevalent among veterans. From this one example, it is clear that there
is a gap in patient awareness about bladder cancer and a lack of treatments avail-
able for patients who recur after BCG. We know that second-line therapies are lack-
ing and identifying novel therapies that avoid major surgery is a prominent focus
of research efforts. It is clear more must be done, and that our men and women in
the armed forces will directly benefit from advancements against bladder cancer
given its higher incidence rate among veterans than the general public. By estab-
lishing an $8 million Bladder Cancer Research Program in FY 2024, we can ensure
that bladder cancer research and the well-being of bladder cancer patients, particu-
larly service members and veterans, is a national priority.
We thank you for your time and attention to this urgent health priority for our
military and veteran population.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and members of the Defense Appro-
priations subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testi-
mony.
The Government Accountability Office plays a critical role in Congressional over-
sight of the Executive Branch. Unfortunately, that role may be stymied when it
comes to the Intelligence Community (‘‘IC’’). Despite the fact that, by statute, GAO
already has the purview to conduct oversight of all Federal agencies 1 and has since
its creation in 1921,2 the IC has, with a few exceptions, insisted that it is not sub-
ject to such audits since its inception. This effectively deprives Congress of one of
the most effective tools in its arsenal, especially at a time when the activities of the
IC present some of the most pressing needs for robust oversight in the Executive
Branch. I respectfully recommend that Congress take steps to conclusively validate
GAO’s jurisdiction in such matters.
In response to the IC’s recalcitrance, some Members of Congress have periodically
attempted to resolve the matter over the past few decades. For instance, then-Con-
gressman Leon Panetta introduced a bill in 1987 called the CIA Accountability Act
to officially clarify GAO’s authority vis-à-vis the Central Intelligence Agency (‘‘CIA’’)
and the IC as a whole.3 Unfortunately, it was not enacted. In 1988, GAO attempted
to conduct an investigation ‘‘[i]n order to evaluate whether ’information about illegal
activities by high level officials of other nations may not be adequately considered
in U.S. foreign policy decisions,’’’ leading the National Security Council to request
an opinion from the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel which has been
cited ever since:
We therefore conclude based on the nature of the GAO request that the sub-
ject of the GAO investigation is the Executive’s discharge of its constitutional

1 See 31 U.S.C. § § 712, 717, 3523(a) (GAO has authority to investigate each ‘‘department,
agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government.’’).
2 Budget and Accounting Act, Pub. L. 67–13, 42 Stat. 26, June 10, 1921 (‘‘All departments and
establishments shall furnish to the Comptroller General such information regarding the powers,
duties, activities, organization, financial transactions, and methods of business of their respec-
tive offices as he may from time to time require of them.’’).
3 H.R. 3603, available at https://fas.org/irp/eprint/panetta-1987.pdf.

---

327
foreign policy responsibilities, not its statutory responsibilities. The subject is
thus not ‘‘a program or activity the Government carries out under existing law,’’
and it is beyond GAO’s authority under 31 U.S.C. § 717(b). . . .
In addition to the infirmity in GAO’s statutory authority to pursue this inves-
tigation, we believe that GAO is specifically precluded by statute from access
to intelligence information. In establishing by law the oversight relationship be-
tween the intelligence committees and the executive branch, Congress indicated
that such oversight would be the exclusive means for Congress to gain access
to confidential intelligence information in the possession of the executive
branch.
This intelligence oversight system has been codified at 50 U.S.C. § 413. That
section sets forth requirements for the Director of Central Intelligence, the
heads of all other Federal agencies involved in intelligence activities, and the
President to inform the Congress through the intelligence committees (and in
some circumstances the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Represent-
atives and the majority and minority leaders of the Senate) of intelligence ac-
tivities.4
Over two decades later, this fight was still underway. When an amendment to the
FY2010 Intelligence Authorization Act (‘‘IAA’’) sought to reaffirm GAO authority, it
prompted a veto threat in the form of a letter from Director of the Office of Manage-
ment and Budget Peter Orszag,5 which Acting Comptroller General Gene Dodaro
thoroughly refuted, demonstrating that ‘‘[n]either the language of section 413 nor
its legislative history provides support for this position’’ and that the IC’s resistance
‘‘has greatly impeded GAO’s work for the intelligence committees and also jeopard-
izes some of GAO’s work for other committees of jurisdiction, including Armed Serv-
ices, Appropriations, Judiciary, and Foreign Relations, among others.’’ 6
Despite Mr. Dodaro’s testimony, the enacted law took a middle-of-the-road ap-
proach, stating that clarification was necessary but deferring to the Executive for
that clarification, instructing the Director of National Intelligence (‘‘DNI’’) to ‘‘issue
a written directive governing the access of the Comptroller General to information
in the possession of an element of the intelligence community.’’ 7 The DNI, for his
part, issued Intelligence Community Directive 114 the following year, which reluc-
tantly admitted that GAO had some authority to investigate the IC, but adopted a
severely restrictive interpretation of the scope of that authority:
Information that falls within the purview of the congressional intelligence
oversight committees generally shall not be made available to GAO to support
a GAO audit or review of core national intelligence capabilities and activities,
which include intelligence collection operations, intelligence analyses and ana-
lytical techniques, counterintelligence operations, and intelligence funding. IC
elements may on a case-by-case basis provide information in response to any
GAO requests not related to GAO audits or reviews of core national intelligence
capabilities and activities.8
In other words, GAO can investigate anything involving the IC that the Intel-
ligence Committees cannot, which amounts to basically nothing. Moreover, this is
not an academic dispute: in response to a question about this matter from Congress-
man Yoder in 2018, Mr. Dodaro explained that this remained an ongoing con-
troversy, although the situation is minimally better than it was before 2010:
Mr. YODER. Do you need additional support from Congress—
Mr. DODARO. Yes.
Mr. YODER [continuing]. Or direction to the intel agencies to make sure they
are aware that this is an authority you have?
Mr. DODARO. Yes, that would be helpful.9

4 Investigative Authority of the General Accounting Office, 12 Op. Off. Legal Counsel 171
(1988).
5 Letter from Orszag to Feinstein of 3/15/10, available at https://fas.org/irp/news/2010/03/
omb031610.pdf.
6 Letter from Dodaro to Feinstein of 3/18/10, available at http://www.pogoarchives.org/m/co/
dodaro-letter-to-intel-committees-20100318.pdf. Mr. Dodaro concluded that reaffirming GAO’s
authority in this area ‘‘would prove beneficial both to the conduct of oversight by the intelligence
committees and to the efficiency and effectiveness of IC operations.’’
7 50 U.S.C. § 3308.
8 ICD 114(D)(4)(b), available at https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICDl114.pdf.
9 Legislative Branch Appropriations for 2019: Part 2, Fiscal Year 2019 Legislative Branch Ap-
propriations Requests, Hearings before the Subcomm. on the Legislative Branch of the House
Comm. on Appropriations, 115th Cong., 2d Sess. 310 (Apr. 25, 2018) (testimony of Comp. Gen.
Gene Dodaro) (testifying that GAO has been able to investigate peripheral matters in the IC
such as ‘‘a facilities area’’ and contract management in the last few years).

---

328
When Mr. Dodaro testified before the House Legislative Branch Appropriations
subcommittee in 2019 regarding GAO’s FY2020 budget, Chairman Ryan again
asked him about this matter, and Mr. Dodaro again remarked that GAO needs ‘‘the
cooperation of the Intelligence Community’’ because GAO ‘‘ha[s] more difficulties
when the request comes from non-intelligence committees,’’ concluding, ‘‘I think we
could do more, particularly in the management area, and in the investments that
are made, in that area, whether there’s good return on the investments in all
cases.’’ 10 And in his testimony before that subcommittee in 2020, Mr. Dodaro testi-
fied, ‘‘It’s the same status as it was last year. Congress could work with the Intel-
ligence Committees to provide better direction to the intelligence agencies to cooper-
ate with us.’’ 11
In fact, however, even the involvement of the Intelligence Committees is not suffi-
cient to overcome the IC’s reliance on ICD 114 to obstruct meaningful GAO access.
In a meeting in 2019 with staffers from the House Legislative Branch and Defense
Appropriations subcommittees, a member of the latter subcommittee’s staff dis-
missed the need for reform, arguing that IC components do not refuse GAO requests
for information if GAO was acting pursuant to an Intelligence Committee request.
That presumption is unfortunately false. One need only consider the example of AR
13–5, the internal CIA regulation which implements ICD 114. This regulation di-
rectly addresses the question of how the Agency should respond to a GAO request
for information when GAO is acting under the direction of an Intelligence Com-
mittee:
As a general rule, if GAO makes a request on behalf of or to obtain informa-
tion responsive to a tasking by an intelligence oversight committee, the [Point
of Contact (‘‘POC’’)] will ensure that the CIA response to GAO does not contain
information prohibited in paragraph b.(2)(c)(3) above.12 The response to GAO
shall indicate that information responsive to the tasking, but not authorized for
release to GAO under the provisions of ICD 114, shall be made directly avail-
able to the requesting intelligence oversight committee. The POC shall prepare
an additional response for the intelligence oversight committee that contains in-
formation responsive to the committee request, but not authorized for GAO ac-
cess.13
In other words, if GAO asks CIA for any information which would fall under the
jurisdiction of an Intelligence Committee, CIA will simply refuse to cooperate, but
if an Intelligence Committee tasks GAO to make the request, CIA will still refuse
to provide the information to GAO, but instead will send the information directly
to the relevant Intelligence Committee. In neither situation does GAO receive the
requested information.
GAO possesses significantly more resources and institutional expertise in certain
kinds of Executive Branch investigations than even the most robust committee staff,
and there is frankly no reason for this arbitrary restriction on its authority. Con-
gress gave the Executive Branch a chance to establish reasonable limitations which
balanced the Executive’s legitimate interests with one of the most important func-
tions of Congress-effective oversight. Instead of crafting a reasonable policy, the DNI
memorialized the IC’s original hardline position.
I recommend this subcommittee include language to remove any doubt concerning
GAO’s audit power over the IC by advancing a measure that reStates Section 335
of the FY2010 IAA, as engrossed by the House of Representatives in February
2010.14
Not only would taking such a measure resolve a longstanding problem, but it
would be revenue neutral, since it would not require GAO to take on any more re-
sponsibilities than it already has; it would only open the universe of matters it may
investigate. When one considers the fact that the number of GAO employees with
Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (‘‘TS/SCI’’) clearances is higher

10 Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3WU2uZMlyk.
11 Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaRnD62qun4. Mr. Dodaro’s testimony last
year reiterated the same point, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PQWaMSJG7Y.
12 That paragraph reads:
Information that falls within the purview of the congressional intelligence oversight commit-
tees generally shall not be made available to GAO to support an audit or review of intelligence
collection operations; covert action; intelligence capabilities related to national intelligence ac-
tivities; counterintelligence operations; intelligence analysis and analytical techniques; intel-
ligence sources and methods; or intelligence budgets or funding; (including records or expendi-
tures made under the authority of 22 U.S.C. 2396(a)(8) or 10 U.S.C. 127, 7231 and 50 U.S.C.
403j(b)).
13 Available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/demandprogress/documents/2023-03-17-—ARl13-
5.pdf.
14 Available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr2701eh/pdf/BILLS-111hr2701eh.pdf.

---

329
than the combined number of staffers employed by both Intelligence Committees, it
is clear that these artificial restrictions on GAO’s authority are causing Congress
to expend more financial and manpower resources to accomplish less oversight over
a significant portion of the Executive Branch. In a time of crisis, when agencies
across the Government are spending vast amounts of time, money, and resources
to combat a once-in-a-century threat, it is more important that ever that GAO be
able to investigate allegations of governmental waste, fraud, abuse, and violations
of law wherever they may be found. It is time for Congress to assert its prerogatives
to protect its oversight capabilities over all agencies.
[This statement was submitted by Kel McClanahan, Executive Director, National
Security Counselors.]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HALO TRUST AND MINES ADVISORY GROUP AMERICA
As the world’s largest humanitarian demining organizations, The HALO Trust
and Mines Advisory Group (MAG) America protect lives and restore livelihoods for
those threatened by explosive hazards. We remove and destroy landmines, impro-
vised explosive devices (IEDs) and other explosive remnants of war and help secure
weapons that could fall into the hands of terrorist groups. For 20 years, HALO and
MAG have partnered with the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DOD) Humanitarian
Demining Research and Development (HD R&D) Program in more than 10 countries
and territories. This program, implemented by the U.S. Army, specializes in devel-
oping and testing innovative technologies to detect and clear landmines, unexploded
ordnance (UXO), and IEDs. These technologies increase the effectiveness, efficiency,
and safety of demining operations for military and humanitarian use—saving lives
and taxpayer money.
The HD R&D team designs technologies to respond to technical challenges in the
field, drawing from new commercial technology, equipment currently in use by the
DOD, and advanced sensor technology available only through other DOD R&D pro-
grams. They then trial prototypes in real field conditions through partnerships with
the Department of State’s (DOS) humanitarian demining programs. During field
evaluations, operators provide feedback on the functionality and effectiveness of the
equipment. This allows HD R&D to modify and improve the equipment and increase
the U.S. technical capacity to respond to explosive threats.
HD R&D produces four specific outcomes. First, the field evaluation process col-
lects data that helps to improve demining technologies used by the U.S. Armed
Forces and to support geographic combatant commands in achieving humanitarian
mine action objectives. Second, successfully trialed equipment is used to train and
equip explosive disposal units of the U.S. military as well as allied militaries. By
equipping partner militaries to address their own explosive threats, U.S. soldiers
are more likely to remain out of harm’s way. Third, HD R&D equipment saves civil-
ian lives from landmines, most frequently children, and amplifies the impact of
American assistance by increasing the amount of clearance performed on DOS
projects without increasing costs. Fourth, the HD R&D program supports American
jobs by utilizing American manufactured machines and products when possible in
their equipment development process.
The HD R&D Program has a track record of success, having performed nearly 250
operational field evaluations in 43 countries since 1995. The program is responsible
for developing advanced technology for the Handheld Standoff Mine Detection Sys-
tem (HSTAMIDS), which combines metal detection with ground penetrating radar,
the rotary mine comb, designed to efficiently excavate low metal content anti-vehicle
mines, and TRAXX, built to cut through hard-to-see tripwires and lift mines from
soil. Overall, HD R&D equipment has been used to clear more than 25,300 acres
of land, and to destroy more than 400,000 mines and UXO.
As you know, HD R&D now receives funding from the following account: Re-
search, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army/Advanced Component Development
& Prototypes/PE: 0603920A/Program Title: Humanitarian Demining. Due to strong
bipartisan support, the program received $21 million in Fiscal Year 2023. However,
the FY24 President’s Budget proposes only $9.068 million for HD R&D, which would
represent a 57% decrease from the previous year’s appropriation. This proposed
funding reduction would substantially curtail the ability of the HD R&D program
to develop necessary demining equipment that would otherwise protect members of
the Armed Forces.
HD R&D equipment has created huge cost savings for humanitarian demining
programs managed by the State Department through increased efficiencies. Through
the deployment of HD R&D-developed HSTAMIDS detectors, HALO’s program in
Zimbabwe estimates a cost savings of approximately $16 million over the last 6

---

330
years and the program was able to clear in 5 years what would have otherwise
taken eight. The Rebel Crusher, a mobile soil sifter and rock crusher used by MAG
in Lebanon and Iraq has allowed for mine clearance at a rate five times faster than
with a traditional demining team. Remote-controlled Robocut machines, used to cut
through tripwires in Ukraine, has accelerated clearance rates by an estimated
400%. The Wirehound in Afghanistan, used to identify hard-to-detect IED compo-
nents, has increased clearance by over 200% compared to traditional methods. The
FAE Mulcher, a vegetation clearing tool being used by MAG in Cambodia, can clear
200% more area than a single deminer using a handheld strimmer. Investing in re-
sources for HD R&D will allow humanitarian and military deminers to eliminate
threats far more quickly.
Innovative technology developed by HD R&D also protects deminers. Advanced
machines including the Mini MineWolf and the Medium MineWolf, can operate re-
motely to physically destroy anti-personnel (AP) and anti-tank (AT) landmines with
no threat to demining personnel.
This program has a long list of unfunded projects it is waiting to trial, including
magnetic technology in Iraq. HD R&D equipment will also be essential to demining
efforts in Ukraine, where technological advancements are already beginning to sup-
port the removal of mines and various items of unexploded ordnance in urban areas
from the current conflict.
We appreciate the support this subcommittee has provided for this valuable pro-
gram, and urge the subcommittee to raise funding to a level of $23 million in FY24
for HD R&D. This additional funding will improve the ability of U.S. soldiers and
our allies’ ability to safely detect and clear landmines, UXO, and IEDs. This funding
is especially important as new conflicts uncover new challenges in Ukraine and the
Middle East.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
[This statement was submitted by Chris Whatley, Executive Director, The HALO
Trust and Jamie Franklin, Executive Director, Mines Advisory Group America.]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SOCIETY
On behalf of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES), we are pleased
to provide this written testimony to the Senate subcommittee on Defense and Re-
lated Agencies for the official record. HFES urges the subcommittee to provide ro-
bust funding levels for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) at
the Department of Defense (DOD) in the fiscal year (FY) 2024 appropriations proc-
ess. Specifically, we urge the subcommittee to direct DOD to identify opportunities
across the services to transition human performance research to defense RDT&E ac-
tivities and acquisition programs to reduce cost, strengthen force protection, reduce
the potential for re-engineering, and enhance training.
HFES and its members believe strongly that investment in scientific research
serves as an important driver for innovation and the economy, and for maintaining
American global competitiveness. Accordingly, we thank the subcommittee for its
longtime recognition of the value of scientific and engineering research, and its con-
tribution to innovation in the U.S.
THE VALUE OF HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SCIENCE

HFES is a multidisciplinary, professional association with over 3,500 individual
members worldwide, including psychologists, scientists, engineers, and designers, all
with a common interest in designing safe and effective systems and equipment that
maximize and adapt to human capabilities.
For over 50 years, the U.S. Federal Government has funded scientists and engi-
neers to explore and better understand the relationship between humans, tech-
nology, and the environment. Originally stemming from urgent needs to improve the
performance of humans using complex systems such as aircraft during World War
II, the field of human factors and ergonomics (HF/E) works to develop safe, effective,
and practical human use of technology. HF/E does this by developing scientific ap-
proaches for understanding this complex interface, also known as ‘‘human-systems
integration.’’ Today, HF/E is applied to fields as diverse as transportation, architec-
ture, environmental design, consumer products, electronics and computers, energy
systems, medical devices, manufacturing, office automation, organizational design
and management, aging, farming, health, sports and recreation, oil field operations,
mining, forensics, and education.
With increasing reliance by Federal agencies and the private sector on technology-
aided decision-making, HF/E is vital to effectively achieving our National objectives.

---

331
While a large portion of HF/E research exists at the intersection of science and prac-
tice—that is, HF/E is often viewed more at the ‘‘applied’’ end of the science con-
tinuum—the field also contributes to advancing ‘‘fundamental’’ scientific under-
standing of the interface between human decision-making, engineering, design, tech-
nology, and the world around us. The reach of HF/E is profound, touching nearly
all aspects of human life from the healthcare sector to the ways we travel, to the
hand-held devices we use every day.
HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

HFES strongly believes that Federal investments in DOD-funded research will
have a direct and positive impact on national security, the economy, and the overall
safety and well-being of Americans. For this, HFES supports robust funding for
DOD RDT&E programs, including HF/E research programs across the Services to
encourage further advancements in technology and safety, among other areas.
With the creation of the Department of Defense Human Factors Engineering
Technical Group (DOD HFE TAG), DOD has demonstrated the value it places on
the inclusion of HF/E-related research and has acknowledged the benefit of inter-
agency collaboration, as it relates to RDT&E in this field. DOD HFE TAG is com-
prised of technical representatives from DOD, the National Aeronautical and Space
Association (NASA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
The scope of this working group is broad, making its benefits diverse. The goals
of DOD HFE TAG are to:
—Provide a mechanism for the timely exchange of technical information in the de-
velopment and application of human factors engineering.
—Enhance coordination among government agencies involved in HF/E technology
research, development, and application.
—Assist in the preparation and coordination of tri-service documents, and sponsor
in-depth interaction, which aids in identifying HF/E technical issues and tech-
nology gaps.
In addition, the American National Standards Institute recently approved ANSI/
HFES 400–2021, the Human Readiness Level Scale in System Development Process.
This standard, created by HFES, defines the nine levels of the Human Readiness
Level (HRL) scale and provides guidance for their application in the context of sys-
tems engineering and human systems integration processes. The HRL scale both
complements and supplements the existing Technology Readiness Level scale to
evaluate, track, and communicate the readiness of a technology or system for safe
and effective human use.
HFES strongly believes that all DOD programs developing new technologies
should be required to report to the Department on the HRL of their systems on an
annual basis. The HRL should be reported for each major component of new mili-
tary systems, and should be used to identify deficiencies and areas where additional
attention to human-system integration is warranted to reduce risks to program
schedules, human safety, and effectiveness. DOD’s HRL scale should correspond to
the requirements set forth in ANSI/HFES 400–2021. By incorporating this standard
DOD will better understand if needed human-system integration activities have
been conducted before deploying new national security systems and technologies.
Continuing to prioritize HF/E research at DOD, along with incorporating the De-
partment’s use of the HRL system would undoubtedly produce positive impacts on
the safety and well-being of American citizens.
CONCLUSION

Given DOD’s critical role in supporting fundamental research and development
across defense and engineering disciplines, HFES supports robust funding levels for
DOD RDT&E programs, especially those that specifically fund human factors
RDT&E activities, in FY 2024 as well as improvements to the inclusion of human
systems integration in acquisition programs. These investments fund important re-
search studies, enabling an evidence base, methodology, and measurements for im-
proving organizational function, performance, and design across sectors and dis-
ciplines.
On behalf of the HFES, we would like to thank you for the opportunity to provide
this testimony. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions
about HFES or HF/E research. HFES truly appreciates the subcommittee’s long his-
tory of support for scientific research and innovation.
[This statement was submitted by Carolyn Sommerich, President and Steven C.
Kemp, CAE, Executive Director, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.]

---

332
PREPARED STATEMENT OF JUMP AERO
Dear Members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, subcommittee on
Defense,
Emergency response times for 46 million rural Americans are twice as long as re-
sponse times in urban areas. This disparity contributes to higher mortality rates in
430,000 time-critical medical emergencies each year in rural America. Dual-use elec-
tric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) technologies such as those being developed
at Jump Aero have the potential to cut rural response times in half—helping first
responders save an additional 100,000 lives each year in the United States.
The U.S. Air Force’s Agility Prime program has been instrumental in catalyzing
and accelerating the development of Jump Aero’s lifesaving eVTOL technology. The
Agility Prime program should have the full support of all who care about improving
emergency response outcomes for both the warfighter and rural Americans.
Beyond Jump Aero’s particular mission, it is strategically critical that the United
States assume a global leadership role in the emerging advanced air mobility indus-
try. As an experienced aviation entrepreneur, I can say with certainty that funding
the Agility Prime program is the most direct and impactful avenue to achieving the
goal of US leadership in advanced air mobility. It will continue to help small compa-
nies like Jump Aero develop and deliver on our life-saving promise. I ask that the
committee consider increasing funding for the Agility Prime program.
I would be happy to make time to elaborate on any of the points above if given
the opportunity. Thank you for your due consideration.
Best regards,
Carl Dietrich
Founder & CEO
carl@jumpaero.com
[This statement was submitted by Carl Dietrich, Ph.D., Founder & CEO, Jump
Aero.]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NEUROFIBROMATOSIS NETWORK
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to the subcommittee on the
importance of continued funding for the Department of Defense’s Peer-reviewed
Neurofibromatosis (NF) Research Program (NFRP). NF is a terrible genetic disorder
closely linked to many common diseases widespread among the American popu-
lation. The highly successful Neurofibromatosis Research Program has shown tan-
gible results and direct military application with broad implications for the general
population.
On behalf of the Neurofibromatosis (NF) Network, a national organization of NF
advocacy groups, I speak on behalf of the 120,000 Americans who suffer from NF
as well as the millions of Americans who suffer from diseases and conditions linked
to NF such as cancer, brain tumors, heart disease, memory loss, bone abnormalities,
deafness, blindness, and psychosocial disabilities, such as autism and learning dis-
abilities. Thanks in large part to this subcommittee’s strong support, scientists have
made enormous progress since the discovery of the NF1 gene in 1990 resulting in
clinical trials now being undertaken by the NFRP.
In Fiscal Year 2024, we are requesting at least $25 million for the Peer-reviewed
Neurofibromatosis Research Program (NFRP) within the Defense Health Program,
the same as the Fiscal Year 2023 enacted level. The NFRP is now conducting clin-
ical trials at nation-wide clinical trials centers created by NFRP funding. These clin-
ical trials involve drugs that have already succeeded in eliminating tumors in hu-
mans and rescuing learning deficits in mice. In addition, in March 2020, the Food
and Drug Administration approved the first ever drug, co-developed by NIH and
AstraZeneca, with seed money from the NFRP, for the treatment of plexiform tu-
mors in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). Administrators of the NFRP have stated
that the number of high-quality scientific applications justify a much larger pro-
gram. For these reasons, it is imperative that we continue to invest in research if
we are to advance toward treatments and a cure for the numerous diseases associ-
ated with NF.
WHAT IS NEUROFIBROMATOSIS (NF)?

NF is an unpredictable genetic disorder of the nervous system that affects almost
every organ system in the body. There are three types of NF: NF1, which is more
common, NF2, which initially involves tumors causing deafness and balance prob-
lems, and Schwannomatosis, the hallmark of which is severe pain. NF causes tu-

---

333
mors to grow along nerves including in the skin, just below the skin, and in the
brain and spinal cord. NF is the most common neurological disorder caused by a
single gene and affects more people than Cystic Fibrosis, hereditary Muscular Dys-
trophy, Huntington’s disease and Tay Sachs combined. It strikes worldwide, without
regard to gender, race or ethnicity. Approximately 50 percent of new NF cases result
from a spontaneous mutation in an individual’s genes and 50 percent are inherited.
NF can cause a myriad of devastating clinical problems including nerve and brain
tumors; disfiguring skin growths; inability to heal after bone fracture, which may
ultimately require amputation; psychosocial disabilities, including autism and learn-
ing disabilities; unmanageable chronic pain; deafness; blindness; cardiovascular de-
fects; vascular disease; and paralysis. NF gene mutations are also important ’driv-
ers’ of cancers in the lungs, liver, brain and breast.
NF’S CONNECTION TO THE MILITARY

Neurofibromatosis (NF) has become a clinical ’model’ for advancing medical re-
search. The genetic information learned from NF holds the key to understanding a
number of health issues that benefit the war fighter, as well as the general popu-
lation, including cancer, bone fracture and repair, vascular disease, nerve regenera-
tion, behavior and psychosocial issues, and pain.
The Neurofibromatosis Research Program (NFRP) is providing critical research
that directly benefits the War Fighter including:
Bone Repair.—At least a quarter of children with NF1 have abnormal bone
growth in any part of the skeleton. In the legs, the long bones are weak, prone to
fracture and unable to heal properly; this can require amputation at a young age.
Adults with NF1 can have low bone mineral density, placing them at risk of skeletal
weakness and injury. The NFRP is a strong supporter of NF1 bone defects research
and as a result this field has made significant progress in the past few years. Bone
fractures sustained by the war fighter and how to repair them is of interest to the
military. Research studies will identify new information about understanding bone
biology and repair and will pave the way to new strategies to enhancing bone health
and facilitating repair.
Pain.—Severe and unmanageable pain is seen in all forms of NF, particularly in
schwannomatosis, and significantly impacts quality of life. NF research has shown
similarities between NF pain and phantom limb pain. NFRP funding has been crit-
ical in supporting this. Chronic pain, and how to treat it effectively, is one of the
most poorly understood areas of medicine but has very high relevance to those in
the military recovering from service-related injuries. NF Research in this area could
help identify new ways to target pain effectively with the right drugs or therapies.
Vascular Disease.—NF1 elevates the risk of vascular disease including aneurysm,
stroke and vessel occlusive disease. NF1 predisposes patients to early cardiovascular
disease, which is also the leading cause of death among United States Veterans. NF
research has demonstrated that when treating affected NF mouse models with an
antioxidant medication it reduced vessel disease. Discoveries related to cardio-
vascular disease in NF1 are likely to be more broadly informative, including for vet-
erans and active-duty military personnel.
Psychosocial and Cognitive Disabilities.—NFRP research has revealed common
threads between NF1 learning disabilities, autism and other related disabilities. Re-
search being done within the NF Clinical Trials Consortium, NFRP created clinical
centers, has led to important findings and expanded research in this area. This re-
search contributes to our broadening understanding of how brain signaling can im-
pact on behavior and psychosocial difficulties. Members of the military returning
from service can suffer from psychological trauma and it is not easy to understand
how this can be effectively treated. As we learn more from the NF population about
psychosocial function, we will be able to shed light on this area for the benefit of
the military.
Nerve Tumors and Repair.—Nerves are the most common location for tumor de-
velopment amongpatients with NF1, NF2, and schwannomatosis. Tumor growth
alone, or treatments for the same, commonly cause nerve injury and associated defi-
cits. Identifying mechanisms to improve nerverepair would benefit patients with
NF, as well as advance the science needed to better treat nerve injury common in
warfighters.
DOD’ CONTRIBUTION TO NF RESEARCH

While other Federal agencies support medical research, the Department of De-
fense (DOD) fills a special role by providing peer-reviewed funding for innovative
and rewarding medical research through the Congressionally Directed Medical Re-
search Program (CDMRP). CDMRP research grants are awarded to researchers in

---

334
every State in the country through a competitive two-tier review process. These
well-executed and efficient programs, including the NFRP, demonstrate the govern-
ment’s responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars.
Recognizing NF’s importance to both the military and to the general population,
Congress has given the NF Research Program strong bipartisan support. From
FY1996 through FY2023 funding for the NFRP has amounted to $427.85 million,
in addition to the original $8 million appropriated in FY1992. In addition, between
FY1996 and FY2021, 471 awards have been granted to researchers across the coun-
try.
The CDMRP funds innovative, groundbreaking research which would not other-
wise have been pursued, and has produced major advances in NF research, includ-
ing conducting clinical trials in a nation-wide clinical trials infrastructure created
by NFRP funding, development of advanced animal models, and preclinical thera-
peutic experimentation. Because of the enormous advances that have been made as
a result of the NFRP, research in NF has truly become one of the great success sto-
ries in the current revolution in molecular genetics. In addition, the program has
brought new researchers into the field of NF. However, despite this progress, Army
officials administering the program have indicated that they could easily fund more
applications if funding were available because of the high quality of the research
applications received.
In order to ensure maximum efficiency, the Army collaborates closely with other
Federal agencies that are involved in NF research, such as the National Institutes
of Health (NIH). Senior program staff from the National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), for example, sit on the NF Research Program Inte-
gration Panel which sets the long-term vision and funding strategies for the pro-
gram. This assures the highest scientific standard for research funding, efficiency
and coordination while avoiding duplication or overlapping of research efforts.
Thanks in large part to this subcommittee’s support, scientists have made enor-
mous progress since the discovery of the NF1 gene. Major advances in just the past
few years have ushered in an exciting era of clinical and translational research in
NF with broad implications for the general population. These recent advances have
included:
—In March 2020 the Food and Drug Administration approved the first ever drug,
co-developed by NIH and AstraZeneca, with seed money from the NFRP, for the
treatment of plexiform tumors in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1).
—Phase II and Phase III clinical trials involving new drug therapies for both can-
cer, hearing tumors, vision tumors, bone graft and cognitive disorders.
—Establishment of the Neurofibromatosis Clinical Trial Consortium which in-
cludes an operation center and 25 clinical sites. Allows for partnerships with
well-established NF Centers, pooling expertise and resources, quicker turn
arounds of scientific reviews and regulatory approvals, leveraged work with
pharmaceutical companies all towards the common goal of new treatments and
a cure for Neurofibromatosis.
—Successful elimination of tumors in NF1 and NF2 mice with the same drug.
—Development of advanced mouse models showing human symptoms.
—Rescue of learning deficits in mice with an already existing well known drug.
—Determination of the biochemical, molecular function of the NF genes and gene
products.
—Connection of NF to numerous diseases because of NF’s impact on many body
functions.
FISCAL YEAR 2024 REQUEST

The highly successful NF Research Program has shown tangible results and direct
military application with broad implications for the general population. The pro-
gram has now advanced to the translational and clinical research stages, which are
the most promising, yet the most expensive direction that NF research has taken.
Therefore, continued funding is needed to continue to build on the successes of this
program, and to fund this promising research thereby continuing the enormous re-
turn on the taxpayers’ investment.
We respectfully request that you include at least $25 million in the Fiscal Year
2024 Department of Defense Appropriations bill for the Peer-reviewed
Neurofibromatosis Research Program. With this subcommittee’s continued support,
we will prevail. Thank you for your support.
[This statement was submitted by Kim Bischoff, Executive Director, The
Neurofibromatosis Network.]

---

335
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL AND
ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
On behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), we
are pleased to provide this written testimony to the Senate Appropriations sub-
committee on Defense for the official record. In this testimony, SIOP urges the sub-
committee to increase social science funding within the Department of Defense, in-
cluding through the Minerva Research Initiative.
CONTINUED SUPPORT FOR SOCIAL SCIENCES

SIOP encourages Congress to continue funding for social science research at the
Department of Defense. Inquiry into social and behavioral sciences, including topics
covered by industrial and organizational (I–O) psychology, is critical to ensuring our
National security, allowing military and civilian officials to better understand our
adversaries and the social and political context that influences future conflicts. I–
O psychology is the study of human behavior in the workplace, including pressing
national security topics such as hiring and selection of individuals suited to high-
risk jobs, enabling better collaboration between service branches using team science,
improving morale and productivity, and examining training and onboarding proce-
dures. I–O psychology research contributes to the Department’s readiness mission
by improving warfighter performance and providing evidence-based best practices on
organizational structure and teaming. We therefore ask that you continue to support
I–O psychology by providing no less than $37 million to the Minerva Research Ini-
tiative part of the Department’s Defense Wide Basic Research Initiatives program,
a $20 million increase.
Minerva is the Department’s premier social science program, informing topics like
cyber defense, social impacts of autonomy, deterrence, and sociopolitical instability,
and supporting the societal and technological objectives of the 2022 National De-
fense Strategy by providing a basis for integrated social sciences (religion, politics,
social culture, and history) into DOD’s tactical and strategic operations. Leveraging
the social sciences helps the military understand, anticipate, and prevail in the face
of challenges defined by rapid technological change, adversaries in every operating
domain, and a combination of conventional threats with state and non-state actors
and individuals capable of interrupting diplomatic and political activities through
disinformation and cyber activities.
The knowledge created through sound social science research—the hallmark of
the Minerva program—is critical to the Department’s development of complex mili-
tary strategies that address threats and challenges across the full spectrum of mili-
tary action. Minerva’s cutting-edge social science research sets the foundation for a
better understanding of current and future conflicts and arms decision-makers with
knowledge about the social, cultural, behavioral, and political dynamics that shape
our global interactions.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer SIOP’s support for DOD research. Please
do not hesitate to contact SIOP should you have any questions. Additional informa-
tion is also available at www.siop.org.
[This statement was submitted by Dr. Mo Wang, President and Tracy L.
Vanneman, Executive Director, Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology.]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TB ALLIANCE
TB Alliance is pleased to submit this testimony to the Senate Committee on Ap-
propriations, subcommittee on Defense for consideration in fiscal year (FY) 2024 ap-
propriations. TB Alliance is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the discovery,
development, and delivery of better, faster acting and affordable tuberculosis drugs
that are available to those who need them. We submit this testimony and urge the
subcommittee to once again include Tuberculosis (TB) in the Congressionally Di-
rected Medical Research Program’s Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program’s
(CDMRP PRMRP) list of eligible diseases in FY 2024 as it did the previous fiscal
year.
As you know, the men and women in our armed forces are responsible for pro-
tecting our Nation from threats both domestic and abroad. A critical element of
DoD’s mission is supporting infectious disease research, which it conducts at various
facilities such as the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and the Naval Med-
ical Research Center. Since DoD cannot programmatically fund every disease that
could cause harm to our Nation’s military personnel, Congress fills this gap in re-
search through the CDMRP, which presents a critical opportunity for Congress to

---

336
directly influence research funding by providing a list of approved diseases eligible
for competitive peer reviewed grant opportunities via the PRMRP.
TB, an airborne disease, is the second leading global infectious killer globally—
just behind COVID–19—with about 1.6 million deaths in 2021 according to the
World Health Organization (WHO). The global TB pandemic, including the rapid
spread of drug-resistant TB, poses a serious global security threat. Although consid-
ered a low-incidence country, every US state continues to report TB cases each year
and the airborne disease continues to be a significant public health issue. According
to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there are up to 13 million
individuals in the U.S. with latent TB infections; a future reservoir of active TB
cases. In 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported nearly
8,000 cases of TB in the U.S. The cost to treat and care for a patient with TB in
the US averages $20,000 for drug-susceptible TB, $182,000 for MDR–TB, and
$568,000 for XDR–TB according to most recent estimates.
TB also remains of particular concern for the Department of Defense (DoD) be-
cause of its potential impact on our armed forces. Our global military footprint
means that American military men and women are posted in countries and regions
that experience high rates of both active TB disease and TB infection. For instance,
in Europe, where over 100,000 U.S. troops and dependents are stationed, there were
nearly 164,000 cases of TB and 73,000 cases of MDR–TB in 2021. In the Western
Pacific region, nearly 82,000 troops live amidst over 1.8 million cases of TB and
70,000 cases of MDR–TB according to the most recent WHO estimates. Ukraine
alone had an estimated 31,000 cases of TB and 11,000 cases of MDR–TB. With the
war in Ukraine sadly ongoing, millions of Ukrainians are seeking refuge in NATO
ally countries, some of whom are on TB treatment or have undiagnosed TB. Out-
breaks of MDR–TB around the world could cause drug shortages, severe economic
consequences, and possibly extensive fatalities as well as global destabilization.
Funding research and development now can make this scenario less likely in the
future.
Additionally, through programs like the Pacific Pathways, thousands of US mili-
tary members rotate through countries around the Pacific Rim like the Philippines
and Thailand to strengthen our military alliances, where a combined 844,000 cases
of TB occurred in 2021, including thousands of cases of MDR–TB. However, the
WHO estimates that global TB numbers are actually much higher than currently
reported due to disruptions in diagnosis stemming from the COVID–19 pandemic
and resource diversion.
For these reasons, more research into TB and related treatments, vaccines, and
diagnostics is imperative if we want to avoid tragic scenarios of MDR- and XDR–
TB outbreaks in the future. Having adequate treatments on hand in case our
warfighters fall ill with TB is critical to our military’s mission readiness and our
National security. Today, we are at a unique and unprecedented point in TB re-
search due to positive advancements in key areas of development. Recently, the
FDA approved a new drug regimen to treat XDR–TB and complicated MDR–TB—
demonstrating that better diagnostics, a fully effective vaccine, and shorter, less
toxic treatment regimens are the only way we will successfully eliminate TB. The
DoD CDMRP funding has been integral in these efforts.
We thank the subcommittee for its previous inclusion of TB in the CDMRP
PRMRP in FY 2023. However, we urge you to build off the progress already made
and continue to include TB in the list of eligible diseases for FY 2024.
Respectfully.
[This statement was submitted by Pietro Turilli, Senior Vice President, External
Affairs, TB Alliance.]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE TRISERVICE NURSING RESEARCH PROGRAM
We are writing to ask you to consider an issue critical to military health care in
the FY 24 NDAA budget: line-item funding in the DHP budget and an amount of
$12 million for the TriService Nursing Research Program (TSNRP), a program that
continues to have a positive impact on servicemembers and the health care profes-
sionals that care for them and their families.
TSNRP has a 30-year history of providing value-added research conducted by PhD
prepared active duty, reserve component and retired military nurses on relevant
healthcare issues that are important to servicemembers and their families, as well
as combat-related care not replicated elsewhere in the DHA or civilian medicine.
TSNRP is the Nation’s first and only Federal research program that supports mili-
tary nurses to conduct research on the reserve and active-duty populations and

---

337
translate that knowledge into evidence-based practices. Neither the NIH/National
Institute of Nursing Research nor the VA fund research on this population.
Until FY 2023, when Congress more than doubled its budget, TSNRP funding lev-
els have remained static since 1992; in the past two decades, funding remained at
$6M annually. TSNRP has been funded either through congressionally directed
funding or by DOD, through use of USUHS O&M dollars that are fungible and mov-
able to meet other needs. Though authorized in 10USC 2116, TSNRP has an uncer-
tain future should budget cuts force the elimination of this valued research program
as was the case in FY 2020. Without this program, there is no dedicated funding
stream for military nurse researchers to continue the vital research that has saved
lives and significantly improved the care of our Nation’s warfighters. It is time to
place TSNRP in its own line item in the budget to ensure its sustainability and to
raise the funding level so more studies by nurse researchers can be funded. We need
your support to maintain funding for TSNRP ($12M) and create a line item for it
in the NDAA budget for FY24 and throughout the remainder of the 24–27 FYDP.
Military nurses have been conducting research to improve force readiness and pa-
tient care since the 1950s. With the financial support of the TSNRP in the 1990s,
military nursing research has expanded with notable results. TSNRP also supports
the dissertation research and translation projects of military doctoral students in
nursing schools around the country to improve health and quality of life outcomes
for servicemembers and their families. TSNRP requires that funded researchers pro-
vide mentorship to new researchers, ensuring knowledge and skills are passed from
year to year and along generations of military researchers.
SELECT TSNRP DISCOVERIES

—Home-based and field therapy with self-managed electrical stimulation devices
relieving both knee and back pain, helping service members return to duty more
quickly and maintain Force Readiness.
—Specific ventilator settings result in better methods of weaning patients from
life support.
—CoQ10 supplements decrease brain cell injury, potentially mitigating TBI.
—Powdered clotting agents stop hemorrhage in wounded soldiers, saving lives
after severe blood loss from injury on the battlefield.
—Pocket devices allowing women on the battlefield to care for personal and hy-
giene needs without embarrassment.
—Certain transport litters decrease the chance of skin ulcers in wounded service
members while in field situations and in transport to fixed military facilities.
—Blood markers exist for genetic Vitamin D deficiency, and Vitamin D supple-
ments in this population improves bone health, reducing stress fracture injuries
that often occur during physically demanding military training.
—Mental and ethical preparation and resilience training helps service members
function better mentally and emotionally in combat, and upon returning home.
—Complementary treatment modalities such as acupressure can be done in field
settings.
—Soldiers who receive their care in Soldier Centered Medical Homes recover and
resume basic training more quickly than those who receive care in a typical
medical clinic.
—Better nurse staffing in military hospitals is associated with fewer medication
errors. Burnout in military nurses is linked to low quality of patient care, job
dissatisfaction and intent to leave the job and/or the military. Ongoing TSNRP-
funded research during the pandemic will provide an update on the military
nurse workforce.
SELECT TSNRP OUTCOMES

—TSNRP research assisted families to cope with deployment; addressed gaps in
care for active-duty women; ameliorated long-term effects of PTSD on family
caregivers; improved the quality of life for burn survivors; and improved patient
safety.
—The TSNRP Women’s Health Research Interest Group (WHRIG) recently hosted
the inaugural virtual Women in Combat Seminar, which provided education to
thousands of participants globally and included topics such as operational per-
formance, mission readiness, and health and well-being.
—TSNRP has been the leader in evidence-based practice and implementation
science in the military healthcare system. The program funds not only research,
but also supports education and guidance to implement the research. It aims
to ensure that nurses are using the most up-to-date practices to provide bene-

---

338
ficiaries the best care possible on the battlefield, in transport, and in military
facilities.
In summary, TSNRP funded research has been responsible for enhanced injury
resuscitation protocols, improved air-evacuation processes, increased readiness of
warfighters through bench science research, behavioral and nutritional research,
and widespread implementation of evidence-based practices. One need only peruse
the funded studies to find sophisticated methodologies in a far-reaching array of re-
search from TSNRP funded scientists. For more about TSNRP, visit the website at
www.triservicenurse.org
[This statement was submitted by Hon. Linda S. Schwartz, Maj. (Ret), U.S. Air
Force; MG (Ret) Margaret C. Wilmoth, U.S. Army Reserve; BG (Ret) William Bester,
U.S. Army; COL (Ret) Patricia A. Patrician, U.S. Army; LTC (Ret) Deborah Kenny,
U.S. Army.]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF YOUNG MARINES
The Young Marines thank the Senate Committee on Appropriations, sub-
committee on Defense for this opportunity to provide testimony in support of the
Young Marines program. Young Marines is a 501c3 national youth program for boys
and girls ages 8 to high school. The program focuses on leadership development, citi-
zenship through community service, and living a healthy drug free lifestyle. This
includes fitness programs and extensive drug demand reduction education. We are
the largest single program with a focus on drug demand reduction education for
youth. Over 6 thousand youth members participated in FY22 nationwide, over 200
thousand have been members since our start in 1959. Historical data shows approxi-
mately 30% of alumni members enter military service with a similar cohort for
teaching and first responders.
The last few years have produced volumes of reports regarding the challenges to
our current generation of youth. Obesity, suicide, depression, poor overall fitness,
negative social media impacts, difficulties with personal interaction, and increased
dangers from new and extremely deadly drugs are all contributing to one of the
most dangerous and difficult periods for our Nation’s youngest member’s personal
development. This is reflected in numerous current studies about their declining
mental health and ability to be engaged members of our society and future work-
force. Young Marines does not profess to be the answer for all children, but our
unique combination of programs has proven extremely effective for its members.
Last year we spanned over 230 locations across 40 States, the District of Colum-
bia, and military bases in Okinawa, Japan. The Young Marines mission is sup-
ported by over 2 thousand volunteers and a paid staff of just ten, making it ex-
tremely cost effective. Program interest is strong coming out of COVID. New unit
starts are over double the previous averages of the last 5 years and we are spread-
ing into new areas of the country. Young Marines youth membership is also coming
back after the difficulties of meeting during the pandemic. Pre-pandemic member-
ship was over 8 thousand. We continue to receive the highest rating from multiple
independent non-profit reviewing organizations. A detailed map and other program
information can be found on our website www.youngmarines.org.
Young Marines has experienced tremendous growth in size and capability over the
last decade due in key part to an annual Congressional Grant for $4M started in
FY10. The grant has been placed in the Defense Appropriations Bill: Title VI, Other
Defense Programs, Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities Defense (DICD),
Drug Demand Reduction (DDR). Young Marines did not receive grant funds for the
last 2 years due to FY22 and FY23 Omnibus Appropriations process. The program
is running off residual grant funds and reserves but will soon be forced to make
hard choices on how to continue. These funds provide the structure and support to
run the general program activities, training and education for youth and adults, and
institutional risk management programs to ensure a sound and safe youth develop-
ment program. The funds keep programs affordable to larger cohorts and support
critical drug demand reduction education missions which are not a normal activity
for youth programs. The drug demand reduction mission is a main pillar of the pro-
gram, and Young Marines must complete required hours to advance or take part
in unique events within the program. Furthermore, Young Marines earn additional
credit for taking the drug demand reduction education mission to their local commu-
nities and peers. Last year we provided over 50 thousand hours of drug demand re-
duction educational activities in our communities even with COVID constraints, in
recent years past we routinely provide over 100 thousand hours of drug demand
education to local communities. Last year saw record drug overdose deaths across
the country. Young Marines works to educate its volunteers, parents, and youth

---

339
members along with local communities of the extraordinary dangers of current
drugs. These efforts have seen the Young Marines program win the annual Depart-
ment of Defense Fulcrum Shield award for Drug Demand Education excellence 12
times, numerous awards from the Drug Enforcement Administration, and multiple
awards from other public organizations.
The Young Marines program directly supports future personnel needs of the De-
partment of Defense, National Security workforce, the Intelligence Community, Fed-
eral Government, over 7 million critical transportation jobs, and professions requir-
ing a drug free workforce. The Young Marines program exposes youth to the value
of service in and out of uniform. Contact at Bill.davis@youngmarines.org.
We appreciate the consideration of the subcommittee members in supporting var-
ious FY24 requests by members of the Senate. We also appreciate the support of
the subcommittee in reconciliation with the House of Representatives Defense Ap-
propriations efforts in support to our program.
[This statement was submitted by Col William P. Davis, USMC (Ret), CEO,
Young Marines.]

---

LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND
PREPARED STATEMENTS

Page

American Urological Association, Prepared Statement of the ............................. 325
Austin, Hon. Lloyd J., III, Secretary, Office of the Secretary of Defense,
Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 185
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 190
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 236
Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 188
Baldwin, Senator Tammy, U.S. Senator From Wisconsin, Questions Sub-
mitted by ..................................................................................................... 84, 177, 242
Bellon, Lieutenant General David G., Commander, Marine Forces Reserve,
Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 269
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 271
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 322
Berger, General David H., Commandant of the United States Marine Corps,
Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 30
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 32
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 86
Boozman, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Arkansas, Questions Submitted
by ............................................................................................................. 81, 85, 88, 181
Brown, General Charles Q., Jr., Air Force Chief of Staff, Department of
Defense .................................................................................................................. 95
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 99
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 136
Capito, Senator Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator From West Virginia, Questions
Submitted by............................................................................................. 138, 182, 247
Collins, Senator Susan M., U.S. Senator From Maine:
Questions Submitted by ................................................................................... 244
Statements of ...................................................................................... 2, 92, 186, 252
Daniels, Lieutenant General Jody J., Chief of Army Reserve, Department
of Defense ............................................................................................................. 257
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 258
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 320
Durbin, Senator Richard J., U.S. Senator From Illinois, Questions Submitted
by ........................................................................................................................... 239
Feinstein, Senator Dianne, U.S. Senator from California, Questions Sub-
mitted by ............................................................................................................... 79
Gilday, Admiral Michael M., Chief of Naval Operations, Department of De-
fense ...................................................................................................................... 16
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 18
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 81
Government Accountability Office, Prepared Statement of the ........................... 326
Graham, Senator Lindsey, U.S. Senator From South Carolina, Questions
Submitted by..................................................................................................... 178, 247
HALO Trust and Mines Advisory Group America, Prepared Statement of
The ......................................................................................................................... 329
Healy, Lieutenant General John P., Chief of Air Force Reserve, Department
of Defense ............................................................................................................. 286
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 287

(341)

---

342
Page
Healy, Lieutenant General John P., Chief of Air Force Reserve, Department
of Defense—Continued
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 322
Hoeven, Senator John, U.S. Senator From North Dakota, Question Submitted
by....................................................................................... 136, 137, 181, 184, 319, 323
Hokanson, General Daniel R., Chief, National Guard and Reserve, Depart-
ment of Defense .................................................................................................... 251
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 254
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 315
Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 253
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Prepared Statement of the ................ 330
Jump Aero, Prepared Statement of ........................................................................ 332
Kendall, Hon. Frank, Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Department of the
Air Force, Department of Defense ...................................................................... 91
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 99
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 133
Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 93
McConville, General James C., Chief of Staff, Department of the Army, De-
partment of Defense ............................................................................................. 148
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 149
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 183
McCord, Hon. Michael J., Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief
Financial Officer, Department of Defense .......................................................... 185
Milley, General Mark A., Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Department of
Defense .................................................................................................................. 199
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 201
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 248
Moran, Senator Jerry, U.S. Senator From Kansas, Questions Submitted
by ................................................................................................... 80, 85, 144, 178, 183
Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska, Questions Submitted
by................................................................................... 79, 84, 134, 138, 244, 319, 323
Murray, Senator Patty, U.S. Senator from Washington, Statement of ............... 53
Mustin, Vice Admiral John B., Chief of Navy Reserve, Department of De-
fense ...................................................................................................................... 263
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 264
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 321
Neurofibromatosis Network, Prepared Statement of The .................................... 332
Saltzman, General B. Chance, Chief of Space Operations, United States Space
Force, Department of Defense ............................................................................. 97
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 99
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 138
Schatz, Senator Brian, U.S. Senator From Hawaii, Questions Submitted
by ....................................................................................................................... 241, 316
Shaheen, Senator Jeanne, U.S. Senator From New Hampshire, Questions
Submitted by ........................................................................................................ 318
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Prepared Statement
of the ..................................................................................................................... 335
TB Alliance, Prepared Statement of ...................................................................... 335
Tester, Senator Jon, U.S. Senator From Montana:
Opening Statements of............................................................... 1, 91, 143, 185, 251
Questions Submitted by ........ 75, 81, 86, 133, 136, 176, 183, 236, 248, , 315, 320,
321, 322
Toro, Hon. Carlos Del, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Navy,
Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 1
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 5
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 75
Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 3
TriService Nursing Research Program , Prepared Statement of the .................. 336

---

343
Page
Wormuth, Hon. Christine E., Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Department
of the Army, Department of Defense .................................................................. 143
Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 149
Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 146
Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 176
Young Marines, Prepared Statement of ................................................................. 338

---

SUBJECT INDEX

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Page
Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 132
United States Air Force ........................................................................................... 105
Air Force’s Role in:
Defending the Nation ....................................................................................... 105
Succeeding Through Teamwork ...................................................................... 108
Taking Care of People ...................................................................................... 107
United States Space Force ....................................................................................... 102
Space Force’s Role in:
Defending the Nation ....................................................................................... 103
Succeeding Through Teamwork ...................................................................... 104
Taking Care of People ...................................................................................... 104

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
50 Years of the All-Volunteer Force ....................................................................... 154
Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 175
Delivering the Army of 2030 ................................................................................... 151
Enduring Army Priorities ....................................................................................... 149
People Are Our Greatest Strength and First Priority .......................................... 152
Ready to Fight and Win .......................................................................................... 149

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 75
Amphibious Warfare Ships ..................................................................................... 40
Building a Culture of Warfighting Excellence ...................................................... 11
Capabilities .............................................................................................................. 26
Capacity .................................................................................................................... 28
Childcare .................................................................................................................. 46
Climate Change Resilience ..................................................................................... 52
Contributions to the Joint Force, Nested in the National Defense Strategy ...... 20
Doctrine .................................................................................................................... 48
Enhanced Infantry and Leader Training ............................................................... 49
Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) ........................ 51
Fiscal Year 2024 President’s Budget, The ............................................................. 7
Force Design:
and Current Operations ................................................................................... 34
and Marine Forces Reserve ............................................................................. 42
and Marine Special Operations Forces ........................................................... 42

(345)

---

346
Page
Force Design—Continued
and the Ground Combat Element (GCE) ........................................................ 36
Campaign of Learning ...................................................................................... 40
Emerging Capabilities ...................................................................................... 37
Experimentation in Support of Contested Logistics ...................................... 39
Experimentation with Littoral Mobility ......................................................... 39
Guam and H2B Visas .............................................................................................. 52
Healthcare ................................................................................................................ 47
Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 51
Installations:
and Logistics ..................................................................................................... 51
Assessment and Resources .............................................................................. 51
Plan 2023 (IPLAN) ........................................................................................... 51
Maritime Challenges to U.S. National Security, The ........................................... 19
MILCON Priorities in Support of Force Design .................................................... 51
Modernized Marine Corps Training Environment (Project Tripoli), The ........... 49
Navy’s Unique Peacetime Mission ......................................................................... 19
Posture ...................................................................................................................... 32
Readiness .................................................................................................................. 22
Recruiting and Retention ........................................................................................ 45
Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) ......................................... 38
Resources .................................................................................................................. 33
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response .............................................................. 47
Strengthening:
Maritime Dominance ........................................................................................ 8
Strategic Partnerships ..................................................................................... 13
Substance Abuse Prevention ................................................................................... 46
Suicide Prevention ................................................................................................... 47
Talent Management ................................................................................................ 42
Way-Ahead ........................................................................................................ 44
Three Enduring Priorities Guiding the Department of the Navy ....................... 5
Training:
and Education ................................................................................................... 48
Areas and Ranges ............................................................................................. 50
U.S. Navy Priorities ................................................................................................ 22
Warfighting Readiness ............................................................................................ 33

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE
A Total Force ............................................................................................................ 272
Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 314
Addressing Harmful Behaviors .............................................................................. 260
Air Force Reserve Fiscal Year 2024 Posture Statement ...................................... 287
Air Force Reserve’s Role in:
Defending the Nation ....................................................................................... 288
Taking Care of People ...................................................................................... 292
Succeeding Through Teamwork ...................................................................... 295
Behavioral Health .................................................................................................... 277
By the Numbers ....................................................................................................... 258
Defense Support of Civil Authorities ..................................................................... 261
Design the Force: Capabilities ................................................................................ 265
Develop the Force: Sailors ...................................................................................... 267
Equipment ................................................................................................................ 274
Facilities ................................................................................................................... 275
Force Design ............................................................................................................. 283
Health Services ........................................................................................................ 276
Innovation and Experimentation ............................................................................ 284
Looking to the Future ............................................................................................. 256
Military Equal Opportunity .................................................................................... 280
Mobilize the Force: Capacity ................................................................................... 267
Modernization/Facilities/Shaping Tomorrow ......................................................... 262
National:
Defense Strategy ............................................................................................... 255
Guard support to the NDS ............................................................................... 255
Personnel .................................................................................................................. 273
Quality of Life .......................................................................................................... 280
Readiness .................................................................................................................. 261

---

347
Page
Ready Now! Shaping Tomorrow . . . ....................................................................... 258
Recruiting and Retention ........................................................................................ 259
Sexual:
Assault Prevention and Response ................................................................... 279
Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) ............................. 260
Soldiers and Families .............................................................................................. 259
Suicide Prevention ................................................................................................... 260
Supporting our Wounded, Ill, or Injured Marines and their Families ................ 283
Sustained funding is essential for continued NATO support. .............................. 261
Talent Management ................................................................................................ 285
Train the Force: Readiness ..................................................................................... 266
Training ................................................................................................................ 260, 274
United States Air Force Reserve ............................................................................ 287
United States Army Reserve, The .......................................................................... 258

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 236
Defending the Nation .............................................................................................. 191
Readiness and Modernization ................................................................................. 204
Strategic Environment ............................................................................................ 202
Succeeding Through Teamwork .............................................................................. 197
Taking Care of Our People .................................................................................. 195, 206