DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR 2025 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE 

KEN CALVERT, California, Chairman 

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky 

STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JOHN R. CARTER, Texas 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio 

MIKE GARCIA, California 

JAKE ELLZEY, Texas 

CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, 

Tennessee 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota, 

C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

PETE AGUILAR, California 

ED CASE, Hawaii 

NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking 

minority member of the full committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees. 

JOHNNIE KABERLE, ARIANA SARAR, JACQUELYNN RIPKE, DAVID BORTNICK, 

KIYALAN BATMANGLIDJ, MATTHEW BOWER, WILLIAM ADKINS, 

HAYDEN MILBERG, JOHN FORBES, KYLE MCFARLAND, 

MAXWELL MORGAN, and ALEC ESTABAN

Subcommittee Staff 

Page 

United States Navy and Marine Corps ........................................................ 1 

United States Army ........................................................................................... 147 

Department of Defense .................................................................................... 201 

National Guard and Reserve Forces ............................................................ 277 

United States Air Force and Space Force ................................................... 391 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2025 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR 2025 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE 

KEN CALVERT, California, Chairman 

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky 

STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JOHN R. CARTER, Texas 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio 

MIKE GARCIA, California 

JAKE ELLZEY, Texas 

CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, 

Tennessee 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota, 

C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

PETE AGUILAR, California 

ED CASE, Hawaii 

NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking 

minority member of the full committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees. 

JOHNNIE KABERLE, ARIANA SARAR, JACQUELYNN RIPKE, DAVID BORTNICK, 

KIYALAN BATMANGLIDJ, MATTHEW BOWER, WILLIAM ADKINS, 

HAYDEN MILBERG, JOHN FORBES, KYLE MCFARLAND, 

MAXWELL MORGAN, and ALEC ESTABAN

Subcommittee Staff 

Page 

United States Navy and Marine Corps ........................................................ 1 

United States Army ........................................................................................... 147 

Department of Defense .................................................................................... 201 

National Guard and Reserve Forces ............................................................ 277 

United States Air Force and Space Force ................................................... 391 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

57–432 WASHINGTON : 2024 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman 

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky, 

Chair Emeritus 

KAY GRANGER, Texas, 

Chair Emeritus 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

JOHN R. CARTER, Texas 

KEN CALVERT, California 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas 

CHARLES J. ‘‘CHUCK’’ FLEISCHMANN, 

Tennessee 

DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio 

ANDY HARRIS, Maryland 

MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada 

DAVID G. VALADAO, California 

DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington 

JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida 

BEN CLINE, Virginia 

GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania 

MIKE GARCIA, California 

ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa 

TONY GONZALES, Texas 

JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana 

MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas 

MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi 

RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana 

ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia 

JAKE LATURNER, Kansas 

JERRY L. CARL, Alabama 

STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma 

SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida 

JAKE ELLZEY, Texas 

JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona 

CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina 

ROSA L. DELAURO, Connecticut 

STENY H. HOYER, Maryland 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia 

BARBARA LEE, California 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, 

Maryland 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas 

CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine 

MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania 

GRACE MENG, New York 

MARK POCAN, Wisconsin 

PETE AGUILAR, California 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

NORMA J. TORRES, California 

ED CASE, Hawaii 

ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York 

JOSH HARDER, California 

JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia 

DAVID J. TRONE, Maryland 

LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois 

SUSIE LEE, Nevada 

JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York 

SUSAN ROSS, Clerk and Staff Director 

(II)


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
(1) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR 2025 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 2024. 

FISCAL YEAR 2025 REQUEST FOR THE UNITED STATES 

NAVY AND MARINE CORPS 

WITNESSES 

HON. CARLOS DEL TORO, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

ADMIRAL LISA FRANCHETTI, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

GENERAL ERIC M. SMITH, COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. Good morning. The Defense subcommittee will 

come to order. Today the subcommittee will receive testimony from 

the Honorable Carlos Del Toro, the Secretary of the Navy, Admiral 

Lisa Franchetti, Chief of Naval Operations, General Eric Smith, 

Commandant of the United States Marine Corps. Thank you all for 

joining us. 

I want to start by welcoming Admiral Franchetti. You have the 

distinction of the being the first woman Chief of Naval Operations, 

the first women in the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And today is your first 

time testifying before the committee, we are happy to have you 

here today. 

General Smith, this is also your first time testifying before our 

committee. You lost your chance last year, but we are glad that you 

are back. And we appreciate your service. And we were all worried 

about you for a while there. But God bless you and thank you for 

leading the Marine Corps, and thank you for being here. 

Finally, Secretary Del Toro, welcome back. It is always good to 

have you. Today, our Nation faces global all-domain threats. Conflict in the Middle East has sent our sailors to the Red Sea. And 

our strongest regional ally, Israel, is at war. The ongoing war 

waged by Russia and Ukraine continues to demand our attention 

and support. Despite these ongoing conflicts, capturing our time 

and resources, China remains, as you refer to it, the pacing threat. 

In a China scenario, the Navy is the cornerstone of our military’s 

ability to project power. The tyranny of distance cannot be surmounted without a robust fleet. And I am concerned that the Navy 

is falling behind, it is behind. 

The Navy continues to retire ships faster than it builds them. 

And I am troubled by the Navy’s request to decommission 10 ships 

before the end of their service life and build only six. The budget 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
2 

also proposes to buy fewer strike fighter aircraft than we previously planned, and delays production of critical next generation 

platforms in all domains. 

I understand the need to make tradeoffs, but these are pivotal 

years, and we must meet the challenges facing us today with credible capability. I am especially concerned about the delays in the 

construction of the lead Columbia-class submarine. This program is 

the Navy’s top priority and fundamental to our nuclear triad. Congress has funded every dollar requested for this program; now it 

is delayed by at least 1 year, leaving no more margin for failure 

for the rest of the decade’s long procurement and delivery schedule. 

I want to know how the Navy lost sight of the critical path to 

delivering this vital platform to the fleet. It is simply unacceptable. 

What is more, the budget proposes to buy only one Virgina-class 

submarine, production remains at a 1.2 submarine cadence per 

year versus the necessary cadence of two per year, further undermining our ship count and sending a bad signal to our AUKUS allies. 

I hope to learn more about how the Navy will get our submarine 

production back on track. Following three consecutive failed or no 

test events in the development of a Navy hypersonic weapon, the 

Navy is requesting deferral of its plan procurement by 2 years. I 

am concerned that after $4.3 billion invested in development we 

have not had yet a successful test. I want to hear the Navy’s plan 

to get a hypersonic weapon fielded to the fleet in the near term. I also want to note my concern regarding the nearly $2 billion 

requested for completing ship construction that was previously 

funded, this is historic level of additional funding that represents 

cost overruns driven by scheduled delays and poor program execution. 

In a time of constrained budgets, this reflects the gross inefficiencies and problems in our shipbuilding program. I hope to learn 

more about what actions the Navy plans to implement to get these 

programs back on track. Informed by the 45-day shipbuilding program review, I understand was recently completed. 

I note that the Navy intends to conduct a second review of challenges in the shipbuilding enterprise. I look forward to a robust 

discussion on the results of the review that you just concluded so 

we may be aware of the issues and challenges that were illuminated. 

The Department of the Navy’s capability and capacity is further 

eroded by the maintenance delays that plague the fleet. The issues 

range from lack of experienced manpower at our public shipyards 

to inconsistent demand signal and government paperwork delays at 

the private yards. 

The committee continues to see the Navy spend every cent appropriated for ship maintenance, but complete fewer maintenance 

availabilities than forecasted. This creates both near-term risk to 

the fleet readiness, and a bio wave of costly future maintenance requirements. Repeated extensions of the baton’s recent Middle East 

deployment and subsequent gap in the Marine Corps afloat in that 

region all because the baton’s replacement was delayed in maintenance is the latest example of the significant impact to global operation. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
3 

The conflict in Ukraine is teaching us how drones can have an 

asymmetric impact on the battlefield as chief platforms can inflict 

damage on multimillion dollar platforms. I am encouraged by programs like Replicator and Hellscape that are using these lessons 

to scale treatable kinetic solutions to deter and ultimately defeat 

a cross-strait invasion by the Chinese. 

Our progress in leveraging emerging technologies is defined by 

the successes we have when we partner with the private sector. If 

we are to succeed in a rapidly changing threat environment, the 

Navy must continue to experiment with incorporating commercial 

technology to address our evolving operation needs. 

Finally, I would like to hear General Smith’s thoughts on the 

continued evolution of force design and how this budget advances 

the strategy to shape the Marine Corps of the future. 

Before we hear from our witnesses, I would like to recognize the 

distinguished ranking member, Ms. McCollum, for any opening 

comments. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. MCCOLLUM

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Secretary, Admiral, General, thank you for being here today. 

Admiral and General, as was pointed out, we welcome you to your 

first appearance before the committee. 

The Department of the Navy’s budget request reflects the enormity of your mission to defend freedom, and to preserve economic 

prosperity, and to keep the seas open and to keep them free. The 

$258 billion, including military construction, is the largest request 

we have seen. I would like to point out what happens in MILCON 

affects your ability to maintain and to deliver ships and boats on 

time. 

It is fitting that the Navy and the Marine Corps work together 

to solve and address some of our most pressing challenges. You 

were at the forefront of all we do to compete with China and 

counter threats from Russia, Iran, and North Korea. As we know, 

the Navy is fighting daily in the Red Sea defending our ships and 

our sailors, while ensuring freedom of navigation. 

We thank all of our servicemembers involved in the operations 

there for their service, and wish them a successful mission and a 

safe return home when their tour is done. 

While the hearing today will cover a range of topics, I want to 

highlight a few that are important to me that often get buried 

under some of the other topics that the chair brought up that I also 

totally agree with his remarks on. 

First, I would like to talk about the Great Power competition 

that has expanded into a region that you have heard me talk about 

a lot—the Arctic. I would like an update on our training activities 

in that region and the Navy force planning with respect to the Arctic. 

Second, the recent legislation was enacted updating the compacts 

of the free association. I feel that having this compact work successfully is vital to our success in the Indo-Pacific region. 

I would like to know the Navy’s interactions with our allies in 

that region, and how this budget request supports that and if there 

is more that needs to be done. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
4 

And finally, the committee’s concerned about the recruitment 

and retention across the services, and I would like to hear how the 

Navy is addressing this. And what plans in funding proposals are 

included in the fiscal year 2025 budget to achieve your fiscal year 

2025 recruiting goals. 

But before I yield back, Mr. Chair, we do not get to say this very 

often, but I am excited and I am here to commend the Marine 

Corps on achieving an unmodified audit option. Thank you for 

doing that. You have become—yeah, you deserve a round of applause. We have been asking for audits forever. 

So General Smith, this is a tremendous achievement, you are 

now the North Star for how the rest of the services should be getting their audits done. You have set an example, and we sincerely 

applaud your efforts. 

I want to thank again our witnesses for appearing today. We appreciate your testimony. We look forward to hearing the answers 

to your questions in a follow-up. 

With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. I am sure the Navy is next with clean 

audit. 

Now it is my real pleasure to turn to the new chairman of the 

full committee, and my good friend and now chairman Tom Cole. 

Congratulations, Mr. Chairman. The floor is yours. 

OPENING REMARKS OF CHAIRMAN COLE

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

As my good friend, Chairman Calvert, mentioned this is your 

first rodeo. It is my first rodeo in this slot too, but fortunately not 

on this committee where I have had the honor to serve, thanks to 

my good friend Chairman Rogers for many, many years. He put me 

here in more ways than one. 

So good morning to our witnesses. Thank you for being here with 

us today. Our adversaries continue to challenge us across multiple 

fronts and all domains. Now more than ever, it is critical that we 

maintain a strong and capable Navy. Ship count remains a significant factor of our military readiness. However, the Navy’s proposed 

shipbuilding budget fails to grow the fleet in response to China’s 

pacing threat. Modern Naval warfare relies on mass dispersion. 

And I am concerned by the lack of a defined plan for growing our 

fleet. We cannot continue to divest ships without investing adequately in ship construction. 

I am particularly troubled with the Navy’s recent report finding 

four of our most important shipbuilding programs are years behind 

schedule. These programs Columbia and Virginia-class submarines, 

constellation class frigates, and forward-class carriers are vital to 

countering China in the Pacific. I look forward to hearing more 

about the Navy’s plans to address these delays. 

I am also concerned about the Navy’s decision to delay several 

significant modernization programs, including the Navy’s next generation submarine, destroyer and strike fighter. We must maintain 

technological superiority, particularly as China continues to advance its military capability. 

Finally, as the Marine Corps continues to modernize as part of 

force design, I am eager to learn more about your efforts to project 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
5 

power as an expeditionary force in the Indo-Pacific. It is critical 

that we maintain our forward posture to bolster deterrence and 

strengthen defense relationships with our allies and partners. 

I look forward to hearing from you all about a range of issues 

that continue to face the Navy and Marine Corps today. These include fleet readiness, Navy recruitment, improving quality of life 

for our servicemembers and their families, establishing stable and 

predictable plans, and for shipbuilding programs and strengthening 

our defense industrial base. 

Thank you very much. And with that, I yield back. And again 

thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is great to 

say that. Great to have you on board. 

Now, gentlemen and Admiral, your written testimony will be 

placed in the record. I would like to please have you all give a brief 

summary of your statements. 

Secretary Del Toro, the floor is yours. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SECRETARY DEL TORO

Secretary DEL TORO. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member 

McCollum, Chairman Cole, distinguished members of the committee. It is an honor to appear before you this morning to discuss 

the posture of the Department of the Navy. 

First and foremost, as you have done, I would like to thank General Smith and Admiral Franchetti for answering, again, the call 

of our Nation time and time again. They, like all who devote their 

careers, and in some cases, sacrifice their lives in defense of their 

fellow Americans represent everything that makes these United 

States a beacon of hope and freedom around the world. Together 

our combined years of service to our country totals over a century; 

a century marked by multiple deployments, time away from home 

and sacrifices that have been made by our families. 

And as we gather here this morning, thousands of our sailors, 

marines, civilians and their families are either stationed or deployed all over the globe. Making the same sacrifices and enduring 

the same trials that myself, General Smith and Admiral Franchetti 

have faced throughout our careers. 

In the Indo-Pacific, our Navy and Marine Corps sailing and operating alongside of our international allies and partners in support 

of a free and open maritime commons, one where nations are secure in their access to the seas, and where their rights within their 

exclusive economic zones are respected and upheld. 

Across Europe, we, in cooperation with our Navy allies, are supporting our Ukrainian partners as they continue their fight to restore their territorial national sovereignty as Russia’s illegal fullscale invasion now enters its third year. And I urge Congress to 

pass the National Security Supplemental in support of our Ukrainian partners as they fight to restore peace in their homeland and 

more importantly perhaps defend democracy for all free nations. 

In the Middle East, our sailors and marines have countered hundreds of missiles and drones launched by the Houthis. Our Iranian 

partner and a specially designated global terrorist group targeting 

merchant shipping in the warships of both the United States and 

our international allies and partners. We are confronting an adverVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
6 

sary that has no respect for innocent lives of civil merchant mariners, and one that is actively targeting our ships attempting to 

harm our sailors and marines because we dare, we dare to defend 

the defenseless. 

For any who may question why the American taxpayer should 

provide for and maintain a Navy and Marine Corps, look at what 

is happening today in the Red Sea, where we are defending the 

free flow of international commerce in support of the economic and 

national security of our Nation, our allies, and our partners around 

the global. 

Members of the committee, we appear before you today to ask for 

your continued support, your partnership and your commitment ensuring that the nearly 1 million sailors, marines and civilians to 

the Department that we lead are ready on all fronts. 

While the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 forces us to make 

very hard choices, the $257.6 billion in the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2025 for our Department definitely balances 

maintaining and modernizing the fleet and our force today against 

the planning of the future force, while also taking care of our people, which is so critically important to all of us. 

This budget directly supports our Department’s three enduring 

priorities, strengthening our maritime dominance, creating a culture of warfighting excellence, and enhancing strategic partnerships around the globe. We are requiring the most lethal, agile and 

capable warships, submarines, aircraft, weapons and systems that 

our world has ever seen. And they will replace the legacy systems 

that, perhaps, it is time to decommission. 

We are also funding the research and development of transformational technologies and fielding them as quickly as possible to 

make our fleet more lethal and persistent within our current 

FYDP. We are also investing billions of dollars into the industrial 

base that supports us while encouraging them to also invest more 

in themselves as they should be. And as responsible stewards of 

taxpayer funds, we will enforce accountability to ensure our sailors 

and marines have the platforms and capabilities that they need on 

time, and on budget as well. 

Above all else, we are taking care of our personnel and their families by focusing on improving housing, expanding childcare capacity and increasing access to mental health resources, amongst other 

critical areas. We are clear-eyed about the challenges that our Nation faces today in the maritime domain, both commercial and 

naval. And as a maritime Nation, we must confront the challenges 

of today and prepare for the potential conflicts of tomorrow by investing in a strong Navy and Marine Corps. 

Again, it is an honor to appear before you this morning. And we 

look forward to discussing with you how best to deliver the Navy 

and the Marine Corps that our Nation requires. It is an honor and 

a privilege for me to serve as the seventy-eighth Secretary. And I 

am proud that our Navy and Marine Corps is the most powerful, 

capable, lethal and flexible Navy and Marine Corps in the world, 

and we are committed to keeping it so. 

Thank you. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
7 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 141 here 57432.059
8 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 142 here 57432.060
9 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 143 here 57432.061
10 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 144 here 57432.062
11 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 145 here 57432.063
12 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 146 here 57432.064
13 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 147 here 57432.065
14 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 148 here 57432.066
15 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 149 here 57432.067
16 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 150 here 57432.068
17 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 151 here 57432.069
18 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 152 here 57432.070
19 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 153 here 57432.071
20 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 154 here 57432.072
21 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 155 here 57432.073
22 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 156 here 57432.074
23 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 157 here 57432.075
24 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 158 here 57432.076
25 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 159 here 57432.077
26 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 160 here 57432.078
27 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 161 here 57432.079
28 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 162 here 57432.080
29 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 163 here 57432.081
30 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 164 here 57432.082
31 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 165 here 57432.083
32 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 166 here 57432.084
33 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 167 here 57432.085
34 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 168 here 57432.086
35 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 169 here 57432.087
36 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 170 here 57432.088
37 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 171 here 57432.089
38 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 172 here 57432.090
39 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 173 here 57432.091
40 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 174 here 57432.092
41 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 175 here 57432.093
42 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 176 here 57432.094
43 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 177 here 57432.095
44 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 178 here 57432.096
45 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 179 here 57432.097
46 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 180 here 57432.098
47 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 181 here 57432.099
48 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 182 here 57432.100
49 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 183 here 57432.101
50 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 184 here 57432.102
51 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 185 here 57432.103
52 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 186 here 57432.104
53 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 187 here 57432.105
54 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 188 here 57432.106
55 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 189 here 57432.107
56 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 190 here 57432.108
57 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 191 here 57432.109
58 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 192 here 57432.110
59 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Now I recognize the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral 

Franchetti, for her remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL FRANCHETTI

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member 

McCollum, Chairman Cole, distinguished members of the committee, good morning and thank you for the opportunity to testify 

on the posture of the United States Navy. 

On behalf of the sailors, Navy civilians and their families deployed and stationed all around the world, thank you for your leadership and your continued support in providing and maintaining 

the Navy the Nation needs. 

I would also like to thank my teammate, General Smith, for his 

exceptional partnership and collaboration as we guide our services 

under the leadership of Secretary Del Toro. 

Flanked by two oceans the United States is and always has been 

a maritime Nation whose security and prosperity rely on access to 

the sea. And for over 248 years the United States Navy has guaranteed that access, operating forward, defending our homeland, 

and keeping open the sea lines of communication that fuel our 

economy and underwrite our Nation’s security. 

The events of this past year and the actions taken by your Navy 

and Marine Corps team in the Indo-Pacific, in the Mediterranean, 

Red Sea and beyond, underscore the enduring importance of American Naval power. With an average of 110 ships and 70,000 sailors 

and marines deployed on any given day, the Navy and Marine 

Corps team is delivering power for peace, deterring potential adversaries, and standing ready to fight and win our Nation’s wars if 

called and deterrence fails. 

I could not be more proud of this Navy team. No other Navy in 

the world can train, deploy and sustain such a lethal combat credible force that operates from the seabed to space at the scope, scale 

and tempo that we do. 

This year’s budget request supports the national defense strategy 

and my priorities of warfighting, warfighters and the foundation 

that supports them. It enables the Navy to continue to meet our 

congressionally mandated mission, both in peace and war. It is 

strategy-driven, maintaining our focus on the People’s Republic of 

China as the pacing challenge, and the acute threat of Russia. And 

other persistent threats like the Democratic People’s Republic 

Korea, Iran and violent extremist organizations. 

Given this discretionary spending cap prescribed by the Fiscal 

Responsibility Act and a top line increase of .7 percent, the Navy 

had to make tough choices, favoring near-term readiness, investing 

in our industrial base, and prioritizing our people while assuming 

risk in future capabilities. 

Within this physically constrained environment, the budget request fully funds the Nation’s top acquisition priority, and the most 

survivable leg of our strategic deterrence the Columbia-class submarine. It provides funds for six battle force ships, and incremental 

funding for two forward-class aircraft carriers in fiscal year 2025 

and continues our support to Marine Corps force design by maintaining 31 amphibious ships, procuring three LPDs, one LHA and 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
60 

eight medium landing ships. In total, the budget request prioritizes 

procures 57 ships across the FYDP. This budget request prioritizes 

warfighting by funding our operations, training and readiness accounts. It continues our strong commitment to our warfighters and 

our families through pay raises, for our sailors, and Navy civilians 

and investments in quality of service initiatives such as unaccompanied housing, education, childcare, and sailor resiliency. And it 

invests in our foundation with funding for our installations, for our 

Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, and for the broader 

defense industrial base, sending a strong signal to our industry 

partners on the need to increase our capacity to meet the growing 

demands of the present and of the future. 

As Chief of Naval Operations I am committed to pulling every 

level available to me to put more ready players on the field. Those 

are platforms that are ready to go with the right capabilities, weapons and sustainment, and people who are ready with the right 

skills, tools, training and mindset to defend our Nation’s security 

and prosperity wherever and whenever it is threatened. 

I thank the committee for your leadership and partnership in ensuring the world’s premier warfighting force remains ready to preserve the peace, respond in crisis and win decisively in war if 

called. 

I look forward to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
61 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 20 here 57432.001
62 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 21 here 57432.002
63 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 22 here 57432.003
64 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 23 here 57432.004
65 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 24 here 57432.005
66 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 25 here 57432.006
67 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 26 here 57432.007
68 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 27 here 57432.008
69 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 28 here 57432.009
70 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 29 here 57432.010
71 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 30 here 57432.011
72 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 31 here 57432.012
73 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 32 here 57432.013
74 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 33 here 57432.014
75 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 34 here 57432.015
76 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Admiral. 

I now recognize General Smith to comment on the Marine Corps, 

for his remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL SMITH

General SMITH. Good morning. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, Chairman Cole, ladies and gentleman, thank you 

for the opportunity to represent your Marines today. I would like 

to start by sincerely thanking this committee for its enduring support and your advocacy for a timely predictable and sufficient budget that enables the Marine Corps to remain first to fight. 

I would also like to express my deep gratitude for the partnership between Admiral Franchetti and me as we lead our respective 

services under the leadership of Secretary Del Toro. Whether deterring, responding to crisis, or in conflict, it will be the Navy and Marine Corps expeditionary forces who make first contact with partners seeking help or adversaries seeking a fight. Our partnership 

collaboration and integration is a decisive advantage. 

Last week, I published updated guidance to the force entitled 

maintain momentum. I chose this title as I firmly believe the Corps 

is on the right path under force design. 

A few points from that document. First, I believe the Corps must 

continue to strike a balance between high end modernization and 

our commitment to persistent forward deployed Naval expeditionary forces that campaign and respond to crisis globally. This effort is represented by our Marine expeditionary units, the crown 

jewel of the Marine Corps. 

Second, we must prioritize our operation with the Navy and its 

amphibious ships, and we must provide Marines with the organic 

mobility to rapidly maneuver from shore to shore, ship to shore and 

back again. 

Third, on recruiting. Our performance speaks for itself. We will 

continue to make mission without ever diminishing our standards. 

Additionally, our top performing marines are reenlisting at record 

rates and we must sustain this trend. 

Fourth, we must maximize the capabilities of our Reserves to ensure that our Nation has the ready bench of warriors that they 

have relied on since the founding of Marine Corps Forces Reserve 

in 1916. 

And fifth, I am dedicated to ensuring a quality of life for our Marines that matches the high demands we place on them every day. 

That means nutritious food, high-quality and accessible gyms, and 

a safe quiet place to recover from a hard day’s work. Our barracks 

2030 initiative is our most consequential barracks investment ever, 

and it is sorely needed. While aggressively pursuing these priorities 

I commit to you that our core will always be frugal and accountable 

with the resources you and the American people provide. I am 

proud of my marines and civilian marines who enable the Marine 

Corps to receive an unmodified audit opinion earlier this year, first 

of any service to do so. They told us what we had long known, 

when you entrust us with the taxpayers’ money it is money well 

spent and fully accounted for. All of these things are critical to 

maintain the strength and dominance of your Marine Corps. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
77 

This year marks 249 years since the founding of our Corps, that 

is 249 years of battles won and peace upheld in the name of democracy and prosperity for our Nation and for all nations who abide 

by the international rules-based order. But increasingly world 

events demonstrate this order is being challenged. Free trade, unrestricted access to the seas, peaceful cooperation between nations 

big and small are under assault. Our Nation’s prosperity is underwritten by a strong Navy and Marine Corps who maintain a global 

presence and keep maligned actors at bay. 

Thank you for the opportunity to represent your Marines today. 

I pledge to continue to work closely with each of you to ensure that 

your Marine Corps remains the most lethal fighting force on the 

planet. And I look forward to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
78 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 38 here 57432.016
79 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 39 here 57432.017
80 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 40 here 57432.018
81 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 41 here 57432.019
82 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 42 here 57432.020
83 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 43 here 57432.021
84 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 44 here 57432.022
85 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 45 here 57432.023
86 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 46 here 57432.024
87 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 47 here 57432.025
88 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 48 here 57432.026
89 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 49 here 57432.027
90 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 50 here 57432.028
91 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 51 here 57432.029
92 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 52 here 57432.030
93 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 53 here 57432.031
94 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 54 here 57432.032
95 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 55 here 57432.033
96 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 56 here 57432.034
97 

ASSESSMENT OF THE DOMESTIC SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRIAL BASE

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Commandant. 

I want to make sure that each member has a chance to ask questions. So 5 minutes, including myself. So when the timer turns yellow, you have 1 minute remaining. First, I will recognize myself for 

5 minutes. 

You have obviously heard, Mr. Secretary, of our problem with a 

number of ships that we have right now and the future of the shipbuilding program. The Navy’s proposing to buy only six ships in fiscal year 2025 and decommission 10 ships before we end their 

planned service life. The fleet would decline to 287 ships in fiscal 

year 2025, compared to 293 ships we have today. This is a far cry 

from the Navy’s 30-year force structure plan of 355 ships. Meanwhile, China’s Navy is projected to have 395 ships by the end of 

2025. And 435 ships by 2030. 

Mr. Secretary, what is your assessment of the domestic shipbuilding industrial base including its suppliers, its capacity to handle increases in shipbuilding? Does industry need a demand signal 

to ramp up its production capability? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Sure, and I think it’s a valid concern, obviously, actually the investments that are being made by the President’s budget 2025, we are looking at $15 billion of American taxpayer investment in the submarine industrial base loan to be able 

to get the production rates up where they should is—for example 

1.2 should be at 2.0 I believe, focusing on these major submarine 

industrial base investment and $7,507,348 invested in the service 

ship base the right tactic to take to help industry get to a higher 

production rate. Let me also add, this is a team effort, it involves 

all the team players on the team to do their part as well too. 

We need industry to develop more to the recapitalization of shipyard in this country so we can be more successful in the fleet. I 

think that there are opportunities and it is part of my Maritime 

Statecraft strategy basically to reach out to other investments, domestic and international, to come here to the United States an 

make investments here in the U.S., create even more American 

jobs throughout the country and help smaller and medium-size 

shipyards as well become that much more robust, and they contribute as subcontractors major crime to get those production rates 

up to where they should about be. 

Mr. CALVERT. Admiral. How, additional requests. Manpower. 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. As the Secretary said, we definitely need 

a larger Navy and we continue to invest all those resources in the 

industrial base this year’s budget to be able to set the conditions 

to increase that throughput to be able to meet the demands that 

we need. 

As far as the manning goes, as you know, we are about 18,000 

billets short at sea right now. This is a full-court press for us to 

be able to increase our recruiting. While we continue to maintain 

our very historically high retention of our sailors. So we are taking 

a lot of initiatives right now to reach out to every ZIP Code in 

America where all of that talent is, to be able to bring more people 

on to our Navy team. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
98 

I will just quickly say we are doing that in probably two key 

ways, first is improving our actual recruiting enterprise by appointing a two-star admiral to be in charge of that enterprise, to fully 

manning all of our recruiting stations and centers. By the end of 

May, we will be fully manned at those centers. We have taken people out of those centers to be able to man our ships at sea. 

So again, we are going to have the full manning so we can get 

out and make all those investments in all of the places we get to 

go in high schools, and coaches, and talking to all the different 

influencers. 

The other part of the recruiting equation is expanding the pool 

of folks that are able to join our team. We have increased the age 

of folks that can join to be able to join us to their 42nd birthday. 

We have put in place a future sailor preparatory classes for academics and for physical fitness, again, to be able to provide people 

more opportunities to join the Navy team and increase the number 

of specialties that they are eligible for. We are also enabling folks 

who don’t have a GED or a high school diploma to be able to join 

the team if they have a very AFQT score of 50, which will enable 

them to be in very many specialties across our force. 

So again, we are really optimistic that the investments that we 

are making and the investments and changes we are making in 

marketing and using data analytics to make sure that we are actually getting out to the population that we want to recruit. We are 

going to see promise and progress in recruiting. So that will help 

us man those stations. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. Ranking member McCollum. 

EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. I am going to follow up on a little 

bit of the shipbuilding for a second. But what you said about 

waiving the GED and the high school diploma. So for those young 

adults who maybe didn’t pay attention—I used to teach high 

school, we had bright kids who didn’t pay attention sometimes. Are 

you going to work with them so at the end of their service contract, 

that they will have either a GED or a high school diploma? 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Certainly. You know, we do provide a lot 

of educational benefits in the Navy, and we actually have a lot of 

senior enlisted that started out without a GED or a high school diploma and now have bachelors and master’s degrees. We are committed, again, through this academic prep course as well as continuing to support—— 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. I assumed that, but I didn’t want to just do that 

and not have that be accurate so that they can take advantage of 

advanced career opportunities after they leave the Navy. 

‘‘COLUMBIA’’-CLASS DELAYS

I am going to follow up a little more on some questions, and I 

am going to package them together and whoever wants to respond 

can. A little more in-depth about what you feel is happening with 

the Columbia-class submarine delays. And what can the committee—we have things that we could do in discussions that we 

have with business leaders in that. What more should this committee maybe be looking to do to assist you in changing that 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
99 

around? Could you tell us a little more about the proposed repair 

activities in Japan, and one of our important allies. We have the 

prime minister speaking to a joint session tomorrow. And then, you 

know, how that could impact and free up some things in maintenance as you work through your other maintenance plan. And then 

last but not least, what is the plan for not the Coast Guard, but 

for the Navy to have a heavy ice cutter in its near future, not the 

distant future? Thank you. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Member. Let me take on the 

question of Columbia specifically. So one of the most significant 

challenges that we have with Columbia that is specific to Columbia 

is actually the late delivery of the turbine generator to Columbia 

by subcontractor Northrop Grumman. That has had a major impact 

on the delay of the Columbia. Now there are other issues that actually transcend all of these 

platforms that are causing some of the delays. We have a shortage 

in blue-collar workforce in this country that is significantly impacting our shipyards and it is making it difficult for them to actually 

be able to recruit. I believe the shipyards need to do more in terms 

of retaining their own people as well, too. So industry has to do a 

bit more, bump it up basically when it comes to retaining the people that they do recruit. We have one shipyard in particular who 

has an extremely low retention rate. So we are trying to work with 

that shipyard to improve the retention rate, actually by even giving 

bonuses to potential workers; $5,000 for the first year, $5,000 if 

they stay at the shipyard by the delivery of the first ship for example. 

So we are trying to be as creative and innovative and supportive 

of industry as we can be, but ultimately, it is a response of the industry to recruit and retain their own people. There have been 

shortages in the supply chain that have been impacted by COVID 

across the board that has also caused the late delivery of a lot of 

materials to the shipyards, and that itself has caused problems, 

which by the way of moving forward, advanced procurement for a 

shipyard is a strategy that makes a lot of sense, whether it is for 

Virginia or for the aircraft carriers themselves. So those are the 

significant contributing factors to the delay of the Columbia submarine itself. 

With regards to Virginia, it is compounded by the shift from 

block 4 to block 5, for example. The Virginia payload module is a 

far more complicated submarine, it is significantly larger. And the 

design teams, both at the shipyard, and I would argue also—— 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Secretary, I have 50 seconds left. Can you 

touch on the other two please? 

REPAIR ACTIVITIES IN JAPAN

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, ma’am. With regards to repair activities in Japan we look forward to working with the Japanese shipbuilders, and other shipbuilders around the globe, including the Indians for example and the South Koreans to take a look at which 

shipyards we could actually conduct voyage repairs. Because this 

is something that we should explore now so that when we do, if by 

chance find ourselves in times of conflict, and we have damage to 

our ships in repairs that have to be conducted underway that we 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
100 

don’t have the need to bring them back, all the way back to the 

United States but we can conduct these forward as we should expect to do so. And seeing that would you like to comment on the 

ice breaker issue. 

ARTIC PARTNERSHIPS

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Ranking member McCollum, the Arctic is 

an incredibly strategic terrain. We know we need to operate up 

there. We are fully supporting the Coast Guard and their design 

of the ice breaker and support funding for their Department of 

Homeland Security for additional ice breakers. I think we have 

great opportunities to partner with our Arctic friends like Norway, 

now Finland and Sweden joining NATO to find opportunities to 

work together to develop that capability broadly with like-minded 

nations. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlelady. 

I want to make a point that my father joined the Navy, a lot of 

young people did before he finished high school in World War II. 

And got his GED while he was serving in the United States Navy. 

And he did okay after he got out of the Navy. 

So with that, I am happy to recognize the chairman of the full 

committee, Mr. Cole. 

SHIPBUILDING BASE CHALLENGE

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Again, I thank all three 

of you for being here. Thank you very much for your service. You 

will probably hear a common theme in what Chairman Calvert and 

Ranking Member McCollum had to say in my questions. Because 

I am very concerned, I will tell you bluntly I think this budget is 

too low. I think that has been consistently true this administration. 

But I also recognize we are under the constraints of the Fiscal Responsibility Act, and that is going to make it difficult for us to do 

some things that I think we need to do. 

But I am particularly concerned about this shipbuilding problem, 

I mean, the trim lines in terms of the size of the Chinese navy and 

ours and they are able to concentrate a lot more of their forces in 

a single region than we are in ours and we are a global power. 

Those things are concerning. Even more concerning to me is just 

lack of capacity, you know. We can give you a lot of money, but we 

clearly don’t have the capacity to produce as quickly as we would 

like to, as much as I think we need to. 

So I would ask you, again, on your investments in the shipbuilding base, but I also, Mr. Secretary, would ask you to tell us 

a little bit. I mean, we are not building very many—our private 

shipyards don’t produce commercial shipping anymore. We don’t 

have the kind of capacity. Actually, you are the biggest part of the 

shipbuilding that we do do in the country. So we don’t have the 

kind of base that we had in 1941 or the 1930s or well into the fifties and sixties. So how big is that challenge and with can we do 

to increase capacity to produce? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a great 

question and something I have been focused on very aggressively 

over the past 21⁄2 years launching this concept for the National 

Maritime Statecraft. That just doesn’t look at Naval shipbuilding 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
101 

but looks at commercial shipbuilding, which has been devastated in 

this country since about the 1980s after the Cold War as well, too. 

But we started—we stopped, actually, incentivizing and subsidizing 

the commercial shipbuilding industry, and it is because of that that 

actually our shipyards went from 30 down to eight shipyards today 

that basically work the Navy to produce ships. And that is a real 

challenge. It also results in our ships being far more expensive 

than they would be if we had a robust commercial industrial base 

in this country as well, too. That is where we need to get after. 

As part of my discovery, for example, we have discussed authorities that are already on the books to just Title 46 that allows the 

Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and myself, the 

Secretary of Transportation, to deem a ship that has dual military 

use for both commercial and for military use for example, to be 

able to receive subsidies. 

So if the ship costs, say, $100 million to build here in the United 

States, but actually cost $80 million to build it overseas, we could 

actually subsidize that shipbuilder with $20 million to support the 

construction of that ship. We need to get innovative of how we actually grow the commercial shipbuilding industry. And I have stood 

up actually a government shipbuilding council to try to look across 

government for all of the key agencies to work together to try to 

achieve this. And there has also been increasing interest on the 

part of Congress as well, too, and a request made for maritime coordinator, for example, for the White House to be designated to 

take a look at all these issues to try to get us to a better place. 

The CHAIRMAN. Are there things that Congress could be and 

should be doing to incentivize capacity building, frankly in the 

north military field. You kind of touched on that. Do you have any 

specific recommendations, because that is one of the things actually 

looking at the Tax Code and some other things we could do. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think one perfect example is that is the LNG situation. And we can’t build our own 

LNG ships.You know, if we could actually encourage domestic shipbuilders to invest in building LNG ships here we could actually 

have the ships that transport LNG around the United States and 

the Territories as well, too. And there might be international investors that are willing to, again, invest in shipyards here. The South 

Koreans and the Japanese are some of the best LNG shipbuilders 

in the world. If they could actually invest in smaller shipyards 

here, then we can start building our LNG ships domestically and 

that would be a big boon for the economy. 

JAPANESE SHIPYARDS

The CHAIRMAN. Great. Last question because I don’t have a lot 

of time and you touched on this, but a lot of us around this room 

served with our former colleague, our current ambassador to 

Japan, Ambassador Emanuel. Any time we go, he will rail at us 

about why aren’t we doing more to use Japanese shipyards and cut 

the amount of time now. So you talked about planning it, but what 

would it take to actually do that? And how quickly could that be 

done? And, you know, how big of an asset would that be to you and 

the Admiral? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
102 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir, there is a legislative proposal right 

now before the Congress in fiscal year 2025 basically allows us to 

do up to six, not CNO availabilities but voyage repair availabilities, 

basically, that would allow us for approximately 15 days to 30 

days, to be able to bring a ship into an international shipyard and 

have them actually do the work. That, of course, would ease up the 

load on the domestic shipyards in one manner. But more importantly, it will actually allow us to be able to certify these shipyards 

to be able to work with us so that in a time of conflict, we would 

actually be able to rely on these shipyards to do that type of work. 

And it could be done on MSG ships, but also done on Naval ships 

as well. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think we are all hearing from our good friend, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, lately. 

Let’s see, who is next? Dutch. 

NAVAL ACADEMY INFRASTRUCTURE

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Secretary Del Toro, as you know, I am 

chairman of the Naval Academy Board. I work a lot of with the 

Naval Academy. 

We also work very closely with the Army, too. Mr. Womack is 

chair of that board, by the way. 

The big issue the Academy leadership has is increasing number 

of flooding events on the yard. I mean, you went to the Naval Academy, you know that, and it is getting worse and worse. And we are 

just falling behind in infrastructure, and it is getting worse. Even 

where the midshipmen and whatever live, it is not good. And yet 

the Naval Academy, just last year, I am not sure this year, it was 

rated the No. 1 public 4-year institution in the country. So we are 

doing okay there. 

Now as you know, the Academy has put together a comprehensive installation residency plan to get after the problem. And now, 

before it is too late, we need to move forward. The plan includes 

several project needed over the next 40 years. However, I don’t see 

any of those projects in the project pipeline for program FSRM and 

MILCON funding, and that really concerns me. It always seems 

the Naval Academy is always left over, if there is anything left over 

after everything else is taken care of, and we have a lot to take 

care of, as you know. 

Now are there any shovel-ready resilience projects at the Academy that have been identified as a priority for FSRM and MILCON 

funding? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Congressman, let me first thank you for 

your leadership on this issue, and for Congressman Womack’s leadership at West Point as well, too, because these academic institutions are the very best in our military and we need to be sending 

our best and our brightest to these institutions, and they deserve 

to have the material readiness so those installations could be the 

very best that they can be. I have been extremely devoted to this 

for the last 21⁄2 years working very closely with you. We have increased FSRM funding over the last 2 consecutive years to fix 

things like the utility bridge. And again, I thank you for your inVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
103 

vestment in the seawall, for example. There are FSRM projects 

that are ready to go. In fact, they have a 15-year installation resiliency plan in place with numerous projects and we can certainly 

make that information available to your staff for additional investment as well. 

But we are committed, I can’t speak to why my predecessors did 

not make this a priority, but it is a priority, including the renovation of Bancroft Hall, for example, that has water leakage on the 

fifth floor, the roof needs to be replaced. So we are going to—— 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. It is the infrastructure and it’s water. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. The West Point doesn’t have water, and 

water is getting worse. We had one major project, and that has— 

well, but I am really concerned. 

And more broadly, how does the big Navy plan to fund and implement the resiliency plan laid out in the long-range plan to capture the effects of rising sea levels on the campus’ infrastructure 

and safeguard it for future generations of midshipmen? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Congressman, we are obviously extremely 

concerned about the rising sea levels and the impact that it has on 

all of our naval bases on the coastline for both the Navy and the 

Marine Corps. We have already made major investments at Camp 

Lejeune and Parris Island and numerous other places. But last 

year, we need to really coordinate this as one department. And last 

year, I directed both the Navy and Marine Corps and my own department, put together a 30-year infrastructure plan. And we are 

committed to doing that. 

We are about, in the planning stage about year 15 right now, and 

we are extending it out to 30 years, so that we can actually have 

all the different installation plans for all the different bases in 

place, and then we can prioritize with the focus on which projects 

are going to actually provide the biggest return on investment to 

develop the—I always say that installation-readiness is combatreadiness, and we have to work together in one department. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I see this, but I don’t see it in the budget. 

That is what bothers me, and I want to get your commitment, because you have given me that commitment for 21⁄2 years and you 

have been producing. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. To do this, but this is serious now, because 

water doesn’t stop. 

Secretary DEL TORO. We would be happy to come to your staff 

and show you the great lengths that we have made in the Presidential budget for 2025. But I will also add that the Fiscal Responsibility Act has actually also made it difficult for us to be able to 

grow that list of projects as well, too. And so, in some cases, we 

actually had to reduce MILCON in 2025 from what it was in 2024, 

which was a very productive year to make progress on the installation front. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. And one quick question on how would resilience work if identified as a priority when stacked against the 

Navy’s range of other infrastructure requirements? That is a big 

question. You have talked about it a lot, but it seems that the 

Naval Academy is always at the end. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
104 

Secretary DEL TORO. For the past 31⁄2 years, sir, you have had 

a Secretary of the Navy who graduated from the Naval Academy, 

has made more investments in infrastructure at the Naval Academy than any past secretary probably in decades. So we are focused on this as an important mission requirement basically for the 

combat readiness and training of those midshipman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Dutch. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER [continuing]. The Army Navy game too. 

Secretary DEL TORO. I am always willing to take an earmark for 

the Navy football team so—— 

Mr. CALVERT. With that, Mr. Rogers, you are recognized. 

PACING CHALLENGES OF CHINA

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We share your concerns 

about the advancement of China’s military and the risk it poses to 

our assets in the Indo-Pacific theater. Mr. Secretary, could you 

quickly highlight one area especially in which you have changed 

your 2025 budget request to reflect the pacing challenges associated with China in the Indo-Pacific. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. Of course, as you know, there are 

many challenges in the Pacific, but let me just highlight one, and 

I thank the support of the Congress on this issue as well, too. 

When we look at the important role that the Marine Corps, and I 

will let the Commandant to comment after I finish. When we look 

at the very important role that the Marine Corps will play in the 

Pacific with regard to the force design providing expeditionary advance basing operations stand in forces, maneuver reconnaissance 

and counter reconnaissance, for example, they need heavy lift to 

transport marines into the Pacific, and then once in the theater, 

they are going to also need the lift necessary to do inter theater 

transport as well, too. So in—one of the things I am most proud 

about is that we have three LPDs that are baked in now, into the 

FYDP basically. We have one in 2025, 2027, 2029 and we also have 

the first LSM that is also baked in for 2026 with additional LSMs 

in the FYDP as well too. 

That is one example of adjustments that we have made to be 

able to provide the Marine Corps, in this case, the ability to do 

their job in the Pacific. And perhaps I can have the commandant 

talk about that a bit more. 

General SMITH. I can, Mr. Secretary. 

Force design we are committed to it. It is a balance against crisis 

response and readiness, and invest in key capabilities, like strike 

unmanned systems, long-range fires, medium range intercept capability. And it enables modernization while retaining our capacity 

for competition and crisis response, meaning our muse, our crown 

jewels. The force-design effort continues a pace, and it requires a 

landing ship medium, which the request for proposal is out to industry now, so I will be mindful not to get ahead of myself. 

But as the Secretary said, the acquisition plan is the first LSM 

purchased in fiscal year 2025, and I am pleased with the fiscal year 

2025 SCM plan that produces 11222. We just need a ship that 

meets our key performance parameters to go inter island and to be 

able to beach itself and to come off a beach, in order to carry these 

capabilities of long-range fires and sensing and making sense and 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
105 

passing to the Joint Force what the PRC is doing throughout the 

first island chain. 

MARK 48S

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Secretary, let me ask you, last year we provided 

funding for 79 Mark 48 torpedoes. And you requested 79 more. Is 

that enough, is that too much? How important is that stock? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. The Navy could always use more. 

There is no question about that. I think that the 79 that we have 

requested is in line with what industry can properly produce at 

this time. And so, without creating opportunity costs in the future, 

I think it is the right number for now. But I think that continued 

investments in the submarine industrial base to be able to help increase the production of Mark 48s. In addition to many other missile systems as well, too, that we need in greater numbers is the 

right approach in 2025. 

Mr. ROGERS. I thank you. Thanks for your service to your country. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Kilmer. 

SIOP BANDWIDTH

Mr. KILMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thanks for being 

with us, Secretary Del Toro and Admiral Franchetti. 

As you know, our public shipyards are incredibly important for 

readiness, including Puget in my neck of the woods. And thank you 

for visiting. We have discussed the importance of the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, which is multiyear, multibillion dollar effort to modernize our shipyards. 

In my neck of the woods we have been dealing both with SIOP 

bandwidth, some seismic challenges, which frankly, you know, due 

to some fast-action hundreds of millions of dollars from Navy’s 

O&M accounts were deployed to repair three of the highest priority 

dry docks. 

So I have a few questions on this front. First how do we ensure 

that SIOP remains on track while also addressing the seismic mitigation efforts? And is the $2.8 billion requested for fiscal year 2025 

sufficient? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Congressman, I do believe it is sufficient for 

this year. We have made progress on the multiple projects that we 

have across all the four public shipyards. I am particularly pleased 

with the collaboration that existed between the local community 

and the Navy and being able to execute the seismic repairs that we 

had to conduct last year. We have done most professionally, most 

expeditiously in order to preserve the operation of that particular 

dry dock. 

As you know, the dry dock programs are all phased in. There will 

be more money that will be needed outside the FYDP for SIOP investment. There is no question in my mind about that. But I want 

to make sure that those projects are properly costed early on, so 

that we have a full understanding of how much resources will be 

needed before we actually make those requests of Congress, and 

perhaps I could ask the CNO to also comment. 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Thank you. I just wanted to add I was just 

out last week in Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and, you know, it 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
106 

is really good to see that Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard has learned 

from Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. So there are a lot of lessons 

learned through that first SIOP project are actually being transferred over there. And I know as we continue to design the two 

other SIOP projects that that continued lessons learned sharing 

will occur. I think the other pieces all the new dry docks are designed for all the seismic standards that we can anticipate. So 

again, I think that is already being planned in the design. 

PUGET SOUND MULTI-MISSION DRY DECK

Mr. KILMER. Probably the big decision that needs to be made for 

Puget is the multi-mission dry dock. Do you have a sense of the 

timing, how close is the Navy to making a decision regarding the 

construction of the MVT2? And how will that impact programming 

and planning for the necessary work? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I have to get back to you with specifics on 

the timing. I don’t want to misspeak. 

CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTERS

Mr. KILMER. All right. The other thing I wanted to ask you about 

was a workforce issue, the demand for additional child development centers with supporting staff has really exceeded the supply 

and installations in my State. Childcare in Washington State costs, 

on average, $1,000 per kid per month. I have heard real concerns 

from the workers at the shipyard, you know, the combination of 

relatively lower wages, high cost of housing the cost and lack of 

availability of childcare is really creating concerns, both with regard to recruitment into the shipyard workforce, but also being 

able to hang on to the folks that work there. So what do we do? 

How do we plan to assist in terms of addressing this need, both for 

servicemembers and for employees, who are looking for something 

to do with their kids? And are there plans to increase CDC’s nationwide? Should we be looking at community partnerships? How 

do we handle this? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Congressman, I am aware of the difficulties 

actually that exist in the Pacific Northwest on this particular issue. 

I am very proud that over the course of the last year, the Navy and 

Marine Corps have made enormous progress on this. The 2025 

budget actually has four CDCs in the Marine Corps, and four additional CDCs in the Navy. There are also an additional 12 that are 

actually baked into the FYDP across the board, but just in the last 

year alone, we have gone from a combined shortfall of 11,000 families that have been needing seats and CDCs basically spots in 

CDCs to 3,400 in the Navy, and 900 in the Marine Corps. 

That is an enormous change and it has also been fostered by the 

support that we have gotten for Congress, for example, in being 

able to provide families with additional moneys so that they could 

subsidize private CDC care as well, too. So I think we are making 

a marked difference from where we were just even a year ago, but 

we will need to continue to make more investments, particularly in 

the Pacific Northwest to accommodate this challenge. Do you want 

to comment further? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
107 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. I was just going to add in addition to the 

creating new spaces by MILCON, or building now centers or renovating old ones, part of the challenges, the workforce. 

Mr. KILMER. Staff. 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. The staff itself. We are about 88 percent 

manned right now, and that is improvement from where we were, 

but that’s about making sure that we are paying people the amount 

that is commensurate with what they could make out in town for 

that same thing. So we are incentivizing them by having a discount 

for their own kids to be able to be able to go to that childcare as 

well as providing more like a career path, so they can have retention bonuses, they can move the different CDCs if their spouse 

moves to another duty station. 

Mr. KILMER. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. Mr. Womack. 

MEDIUM RANGE INTERCEPT CAPABILITY

Mr. WOMACK. I have to respond to my friend Dutch’s comments 

about no water around West Point. Obviously, you were not there 

on Sunday, July 9 when 500-year storm flooded virtually that entire campus, lots of damage. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. That is just one storm. 

Mr. WOMACK. Of note, Dutch, I have to commend the West Point 

leadership for doing some resiliency stuff. They have now protected 

the area on which the commander in chief’s trophy which sit so 

that any future 500-year storms will not—— 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. What about the scholastic—— 

Mr. WOMACK. I am not going to yield any time to you. 

I also add my thanks to the panel here this morning in what terrific service you render this country. We are eternally grateful. 

Mr. Commandant, I want to jump down in the weeds on one program if I have time with the CNO. I want to talk a little bit about 

that Medium Range Intercept Capability, MRIC, we have put 

money into that program. And I know it is a vital piece of your 

force design. I want to give you an opportunity to talk about it in 

the innovative strategy Marine Corps has to implement and partner with Israel and bring this capability to the Corps. 

General SMITH. Mr. Womack, thank you for the question. We are 

using an Israeli Tamir missile paired with a TPS–80 G/ATOR 

radar to sense and make sense of inbound threats and take actions 

at great ranges. So the relationship is good with this Tamir missile. 

It fits our needs. It is light enough to be transported, and it has 

the range we require to protect our forces when paired with the 

TPS–80 G/ATOR radar. 

And I can come back to you in a classified setting and tell you 

the size of the targets that the TPS–80 radar can detect. But in an 

unclassified setting, I can say that—well, I’ll be mindful in the unclassified setting, but it is an incredibly powerful radar, and the 

Tamir missile is an incredibly good partner to that TPS–80 radar. 

Mr. WOMACK. Yeah. And look, I appreciate the fact that you were 

willing to take a proven capability, and to us here that sit on this 

committee, that is very important. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
108 

TOMAHAWK MISSILE CAPACITY

Admiral Franchetti, I want to ask a Tomahawk question. We all 

know the Tomahawk missile has demonstrated its continued utility 

in recent strikes against Houthi targets. I understand you expended a significant amount of Tomahawks in those strikes. Glad 

to see we are trying to degrade Houthi capabilities even in a limited way. The Houthis and all of the Iranian proxies are like that 

old schoolyard bully. They only understand strength, and they need 

to be—we need to punch back. I hope we see increased strikes to 

destroy their capability. 

To that end, I have noticed that while the Navy’s 2025 budget 

request includes Tomahawk modifications and research, it does not 

include any new production Tomahawks. Army, Marine Corps, on 

the other hand, are buying new production missiles. I understand 

the Navy does not believe it can buy any new production Tomahawks given the Army, Marine Corps, and recertification efforts. 

To that end, what investments do we need to make to expand our 

Tomahawk capacity? 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Well, thank you. And, again, the Tomahawk really is the premiere strike, land strike weapon. And we 

continue to really be impressed by its capability. And in our budget, we actually are buying new—in the fiscal year—in the PB 2025 

we are actually procuring about 181 new Tomahawks, as well as 

doing recertifications for about 1,800 of those Tomahawks, and that 

will also include 306 maritime strike Tomahawks. So again, we believe this is a weapon that we need to continue to invest in. 

I think, more broadly, you know, as we talked about infrastructure investments, we also have made significant investments in 

things like munitions over the last few years, and we appreciate 

the multiyear authorities that we have to do that. And again, when 

you talk about what do we need to do to get after the pacing threat 

of China, having ready players means having munitions and 

enough munitions to be able to prevent—to provide a credible combat deterrent. And, again, we really appreciate the support for all 

the munitions investments, including Tomahawk. 

Mr. WOMACK. Yeah. I thank you. 

With 30 seconds, I will yield back to my chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Case, you are recognized. 

RED HILL

Mr. CASE. Thank you very much. 

Good to see you all. 

Admiral, good to see you again. Hope you had a good trip to Hawaii. 

Mr. Secretary. Let me focus a little bit on Red Hill, Mr. Secretary, if I could. We have had a momentous change recently from 

the Joint Task Force Pearl Harbor, or Red Hill, I should say. It is 

now exclusively, again, in the Navy’s kuleana as we say in Hawaii, 

jurisdiction, and that is a development that we all have to be very 

careful about because, of course, it was on the Navy’s watch that 

it happened to start with. I think we would all agree the Joint 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
109 

Task Force Red Hill was very successful, at least that is my view, 

and I think it is most people’s views. 

We are now back to the Navy itself. Good, solid start, but a lot 

of things to watch for. And one of the things that has been concerning to me is that we had actually gotten Red Hill into a very 

focused line item in our budgets, and that is no longer the case in 

the current budgets. It is now split up, again, among the various 

components. And so, it is hard to track what is actually being put 

into Pearl Harbor. And I suspect it is very hard to supervise as 

well, and that is why we went there to start with during the original decision to focus everything into one line item. 

How are we going to be sure that your efforts on Joint Task 

Force Navy in the next steps of Red Hill are, in fact, coordinated, 

synchronized across numerous budget lines? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Well, Congressman, first of all, let me 

thank you for your leadership ensuring that the Department of Defense and the Department of the Navy have the necessary funds 

through the supplemental that was enacted for us to be able to accomplish the very important mission at Red Hill. 

But let me also reassure you, Congressman, the Navy has never 

been absent from Red Hill. We have been there from the very beginning as part of the Joint Task Force, making up most of the 

Joint Task Force, and most of the leadership of the Joint Task 

Force, whether it be Admiral Aquilino, Admiral Paparo, now Admiral Koehler, Vice Admiral Wade, Rear Admiral Barnett, they have 

all been engaged, as have I, as well, too, from the very beginning. 

And you have my strong commitment to continue to be as engaged 

today as I was in the very beginning to ensure that we safely take 

care of the servicemembers in Hawaii and the people of Hawaii, 

which is our number one responsibility, to act with caution and 

safety always first and foremost in their mind. 

We have made major changes to the C2 structure at Red Hill and 

all our fuel depots and installations across the Navy, in fact, as a 

result of some of the lessons that we learned at Red Hill. The funding is sound to be able to fulfill the remaining mission there. We 

have 35,000 gallons of sludge that still needs to be removed from 

the bottom of the tanks. We need to clean the tanks, decommission 

the tanks. We need to disable the 10 miles of pipeline actually between the tanks and Pearl Harbor itself, and then we need to remediate the ground around Red Hill in order to make it completely 

safe for the people of Hawaii and our servicemembers. 

We are tracking every issue at Red Hill extremely cautiously, 

from the very top of the Department of the Navy, down to the lowest person who is working there at Red Hill itself, and has the ultimate attention of both the CNO, myself, and the continued leadership out at Red Hill. And I was very proud to go to—and visit during the transfer of authorities at Red Hill and meet with the community while I was there as well. And so, the challenge continues, 

and we will be there on the ground doing everything that we can 

responsibly to remediate what needs to be done at Red Hill. 

Mr. CASE. I didn’t mean to leave the Navy out of my reference 

to the Joint Task Force Red Hill. I do commend the Navy for your 

actions in Joint Task Force in Red Hill, and I do realize that you 

had a leadership role. You personally have always been very transVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
110 

parent, very dedicated to this, so I didn’t want to leave that point 

unresponded to. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CASE. I get that. What about my basic question though, is 

how are you actually going to coordinate the budget authorities 

that you need? How are you going to be able to track what—who 

needs what and prioritize it across a number of line items again 

as opposed to one single line item where we can track it and you 

can track it? 

Secretary DEL TORO. No, sir, we are tracking it very closely. And, 

of course, the supplemental had one line item associated with it, 

but all the underlying activities that continued at Red Hill still had 

multiple line items. And both myself through the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Meredith Berger for EI&E are tracking those 

line items ensuring that they are fully funded, there is not going 

to be any withdrawal from full funding to do everything that we 

need to do there, as well as the CNO, who is also tracking it on 

the uniform side as well, too, and the leadership there on the 

ground and Admiral Barnett as well. 

Mr. CASE. Okay. Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CALVERT. Judge Carter, you are recognized. 

FRIGATE COMMITMENTS

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, and thank you very much. We are all concerned about 

the shipbuilding with the submarines and other things, but you are 

also starting to build frigates. Is that correct? And you did away 

with all your frigates and now you are bringing back frigates. 

I chaired MILCON—I mean, I chaired Homeland for a while, and 

we built what everybody told me in the National Defense Cutter, 

basically a frigate, just outfitted for—basically it was outfitted for 

the Coast Guard not the Navy. Is there anything—do you believe— 

do you agree that that largest ship that they built is basically a 

frigate? And if so, are you looking to people that have that kind of 

experience that maybe they could build up the—speed up the—and 

be geared up to build frigates in the future? Is there any—anything 

that I—am I just speaking out of my—out of stupidity, or is that 

a reality that that ship that they built for the National Defense 

Cutter was basically a frigate? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Congressman, if you are referring to the 

Constellation-class frigate that we have committed to, absolutely 

so. It is absolutely the right decision to build that ship. My very 

first ship in the Navy was a Garcia-class frigate, and I will tell you 

that this frigate is 10 times more capable than my old Garcia-class 

frigate was. And so, we are committed to the frigate. 

I think the Congress and the Navy made the right decision when 

we actually decided to also add additional SM–6 capability to the 

frigate as well, too, which will make it even that more capable as 

a multimission platform. It is what the Navy should have committed to actually 20 years ago. We are late to the game, but moving forward, it is absolutely the right investment. 

CNO, would you like to further comment? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
111 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Just, you know, the frigate really has, for 

a long time, been the workhorse of our fleet. We are really excited 

about getting that capability in there. You know, we are—have 

been able to work with the allied frigates all around the world, especially the FREMM-class frigate, and, again, incorporating a lot 

of those technologies that they will be building into our frigate up 

in Marinette. It is very exciting to get that ship under construction. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you. 

3D PRINTING

General, I have got a question for you. In the Pacific, we are basically going to be outfitting the islands with supplies and rebuilding runways for—so that if the Marines have to come quickly to a 

location, they could land a plane at a specific location. And I have 

been out there once looking at this stuff, and I will be out there 

again in about a month and a half, or 2 months. Have you ever 

considered using 3D printing for building runways? They can build 

a house in like 2 days. 

Have you ever looked at 3D printing for the building of runways 

and load dwellings on these islands where basically you don’t need 

it until you need it, and then is the Marines going to need to be 

moving both by sea and by air to respond to issues that are out 

there? 

General SMITH. Congressman, thanks for that question. We have 

considered the expanse of the Pacific, and we have surveyed all of 

the runways and potential runways that we can use, which is why 

we have—I won’t say we have begun to print runways, but we have 

begun to do additive manufacturing and digital printing of parts of 

aircraft and we have—we call it mobile matting, which is a replaceable, nonpermanent runway that we can lay down. 

The additive manufacturing is more for parts for engines, but the 

reason that we have our Harriers is precisely that they can land 

in a basketball court. But we have surveyed the vast amount of 

runways and we know where they are, and we have our mobile 

construction battalions along with our CBs, where we can repair 

them quickly to allow our aircraft to land. 

Mr. CARTER. So you just basically work with what you have got? 

General SMITH. We do, sir. 

Mr. CARTER. All right. Well, I would like for you to at least look 

at 3D printing for various things you are doing because it is the 

future. 

General SMITH. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CARTER. It really is the future as far as quick building with 

the very strong building materials, and the building materials that 

are available on those islands fit perfectly with what they do and 

they have portable units. I am not pushing any company. I just 

watched multiple companies build houses and dwellings in 2 days. 

That’s pretty fast. 

General SMITH. Yes, sir. You have my commitment that we are 

experimenting with and looking into all of those things because we 

need runways that are—can take a hit, be repaired quickly, and 

land our aircraft, to include our F–18 Hornets. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you. Yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Judge. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
112 

Marcy, you are just in time. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

GREAT LAKES NAVAL RECRUITING

Ms. KAPTUR. I have got to remember which subcommittee I am 

in. I am sorry. I have been running around. I think the leadership, 

now that Chairman Cole will be in charge, could plan the schedule 

in a way that we can give proper courtesy to those that come before 

us. That is just an observation. 

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. 

The first question I have is of the Secretary. I kindly gave some 

of your staff that are accompanying you maps of the Great Lakes, 

and I need your help with some information. I am looking at your 

recruitment numbers, both for the Navy and the Corps, Marine 

Corps. I notice they are down significantly, and I am sure others 

have asked this question, but I am interested in drawing to your 

attention that in some places in the country, such as the Great 

Lakes where you receive many, many, many enlistments, the investments of the Navy are not very stellar. 

Maybe over in the Chicago area for the Great Lakes investment 

of the Navy, you know, fine. But over where I come from, where 

we join Canada in the Great Lakes system, we have really been 

shortchanged by the Navy. I am just being very honest. And we 

had a big armory years ago. They—it still sits in the Bay. But I 

am just asking you to kindly look at the places in the country 

where you have high recruitment levels, and they could be better, 

but maybe the Navy could do something as well. 

And I have been working for 10 years with the Department of 

Defense and failed to be able to bring home a program like 

Starbase. And the excuse we are constantly given is, Well, you 

know, we can’t bring it there because you don’t have a base. We 

only work when you can be on base. Well, what if the Navy hasn’t 

given us any kind of base? How do we succeed? So if we are trying 

to provide a pipeline, help us. 

You don’t have to answer that question. I am just giving you a 

problem, and I’m really tired of it, because I think that our people 

distinguish themselves with military service. In fact, I am going to 

a big Marine Corps breakfast in about 2 weeks, and so, those who 

have served the Corps, you couldn’t find better Americans anywhere. But I just am asking you to take a look at your assets. 

Over in Lorain, Ohio, which I don’t any longer represent, we 

have facilities there that could—the Navy might use to speed up 

your shipbuilding program. All I am asking is, look at us. What can 

we offer? I think the Great Lakes have been shortchanged. Maybe 

Ranking Member McCollum has a different experience up in Minnesota. I don’t know. But, you know, California does real well, and 

I understand that they have got the Pacific Ocean, but we have got 

another kind of ocean, and it is going to become more important 

with what is happening with climate change. So I just ask you to 

take a look at that. 

CIVILIAN POWER PLANTS

And the other question you might be able to answer on the 

record, I represent northwest Ohio, where one of the two commercial nuclear power plants at the center of Ohio’s largest public corVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
113 

ruption scandal is located. And this plant called Davis-Besse has 

had a long and troubled history of safety violations under the ownership of FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries. It is tragic really. 

Back in 1986, when a series of pumps and valves failed and 

caused a temporary loss of coolant water to the Reactor Core, retired U.S. Navy Admiral Joe Williams, former commander of the 

U.S. Atlantic submarine fleet, and the NATO submarine fleet was 

brought in at my request to reform the plant and its safety culture. 

He is the only person I have known in 41 years that did the right 

job there. The rest of them are corrupt. They are going to jail. Horrible things are happening in Ohio now in the Federal courts with 

the people that perpetrated these crimes. 

But witnessing his leadership in the aftermath of this egregious 

event has made me a lifelong admirer of the nuclear Navy. If only 

his leadership could have continued at the plant, perhaps my constituents would have been spared living through the worst nuclear 

safety incidents since Three Mile Island, when in 2002 a pineapplesize hole was found in Davis-Besse’s reactor head. 

Given the preeminent expertise in the field, can you describe how 

the nuclear Navy engages with civilian power plants? If you can’t 

do it today, provide it for the record. And does it maintain relationships with such plants across our country? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Congresswoman, I would be happy to come 

back to you with a submission on the record, specifically how we 

interact. However, most of the responsibilities for operating the civilian power plants, as you know, fall under the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But certainly, I will 

give you specifics as to where the intersections actually lie, and 

perhaps what we can do to at least bring awareness of how much 

we actually focus on safety as the most important issue with regards to the operation of our nuclear power plants and the high 

standards that we impose on all our nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers as we operate them safely around the globe. 

Mr. CALVERT. Appreciate the Secretary for getting back with Ms. 

Kaptur with a written response on that. 

And with that, I recognize Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

PRIVATE SHIPYARD UTILIZATION

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And Mr. Secretary and Admiral and General, thank you. Sincerely, thank you for your service to this amazing country of ours. 

You know, the 2 weeks that we were not here, one of the things 

I did is I visited a number of private shipyards, and it seems to 

me that the Navy is not fully utilizing our own private shipyards. 

And since—as we all know, since 1993, the number of public shipyards has actually shrank from eight to four with, frankly, limited, 

you know, functional dry docks and obviously we had the issues of 

delayed maintenance schedules for our fleet. 

Fortunately, that is augmented by 22 private shipyards, but even 

there, three shipyards have left the industry and only one new 

shipyard I think has been built since, I guess, since the 1960s, 

right, since 1960. And so it would seem to me that since we are 

falling behind in maintenance, what is it now, we are looking at 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
114 

20 years behind maintenance, right, something like that? I mean, 

whatever it is—— 

Secretary DEL TORO. I wouldn’t agree with that number, but we 

are. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Well, yeah, and it’d be great to get the actual 

number, not right now, but just where we are. But I think there 

is pretty much an agreement that we are not where we need to be, 

right. And so I am just curious, why are we—or am I wrong that 

we are not fully using our own, you know, private shipyards? We 

keep hearing about the industrial base, obviously, which is a real 

issue. But I think there is some inconsistency in how we are using 

them, and I actually witnessed some, you know, open areas there 

that they are kind of waiting for a ship to come in and—so there 

seems to be some inconsistency potentially in scheduling. So just 

if you could help me kind of understand, what—how can we do a 

better job utilizing those shipyards? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, Congressman. First, let me say, we are 

maximizing the use of our private shipyards. There may be smaller 

shipyards that perhaps have not been able to successfully compete 

for contracts and we would be more than happy to work with your 

office to identify if any, for example, in Florida who may have had 

challenges in competing for smaller shipyard contracts. Obviously, 

all shipyards are not capable or certified to work on nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, and this is part of the problem. We 

want to help as many small- and medium-size shipyards become 

certified to be able to work as subcontractors to the major primes 

so that they can more fully engage in doing the shipyard work 

itself. 

But just in the President’s budget for 2025, we have $14 billion 

that have been invested in maintenance across these shipyards, 

and we have 57 actual availability—excuse me, 58 availabilities for 

private shipyards, both for submarine work and surface craft work, 

large and small. So we are making maximum advantage of the capacity of our shipyards. 

But again, as the Secretary of the Navy, my job is to keep ships 

at sea, not to have them in shipyards all the time either, and so 

I want to be able to minimize the amount of time that they actually 

are in shipyards by making those shipyards as efficient as humanly 

possible. And that is part of the submarine investment in the industrial base of $14 billion over the next 5 years and $750 million 

on the surface ship side. 

So we are perfectly willing to work with your office, Congressman, if there are shipyards in Florida or other shipyards that you 

may be aware of, including Bartlett in Ohio, Congresswoman. I am 

more than happy to work with Bartlett to have them be more effective and actually integrating into the supply chain for all shipyards 

to get them to a better place. 

And I have been actively going around the country visiting shipyards in Maryland and Philadelphia and all across the country, so 

I am willing to continue those efforts to integrate even more into 

our supply chain. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
115 

INCREASING TORPEDO CAPABILITY

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Great. Great. I have a minute left. Let me just 

follow up with what the Dean of the House asked about torpedoes 

and you answered. And, I believe, Mr. Secretary, you talked about 

that is what we can do now with the current capability out there, 

right. Is there anything that we can do to increase that capability 

of—to increase our capability to build torpedoes? It would seem to 

me obviously that, if we are dealing with an issue in the Indo-Pacific, we are going to need some large numbers, right? And anything that we need to be doing on our side to increase that capability of manufacturing of building of—of producing torpedoes. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Well, continued investment into the supply 

chain is always welcome. I mean, I fully understand that, again, 

we are restricted by the Fiscal Responsibility Act this year in terms 

of the choices that we can make, but additional investments on the 

civilian side and to those companies is always welcome. 

Perhaps the CNO could comment further on the torpedo issue. 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Again, I think it is—for the suppliers and 

the supplier base, it is really about increasing the throughput. So, 

again, you know, it takes a long time to make a torpedo. How can 

we make them more quickly, more effectively, and that will help 

us get more munitions that we need out there into our units. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I apologize for going 8 seconds 

over my time. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. We will forgive you. 

Mr. Garcia. 

JUNIOR ENLISTED PAY

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, all, for your service to this beautiful country. 

I personally have no doubt that we would win a war against 

China. I think it would be protracted, very bloody, extended, probably not popular after time. But I do believe that because of the 

Marines with the rifles and the sailors who launch and project 

power overseas from carriers and vertical launch tubes that we 

would win that war. 

What I do have concerns about is our ability to deter that war, 

and frankly the pivot to the Pacific has not been fully realized, and 

I think that is, by any metric that you look at, a reality. We are 

either falling behind or losing our lead relative to China. The most 

important weapons system, in my opinion, and frankly did not get 

enough attention today, is that young Marine, that young sailor, 

the young Army soldier, the junior enlisted E1 through E6. 

In California, they just raised the minimum wage to $20 an hour 

last week, okay. And so that means that a McDonald’s worker, 

right now, his starting salary is making almost double what an E1 

makes when they join the Navy. Now, that doesn’t account for 

housing, BAH, BAS, and all these things, but those incentives are 

also lagging, right. BAH in San Diego is not keeping up with the 

pace at home value. 

So I would encourage you to—you have got on the President’s 

budget request a 4.5 percent increase in base pay. I would encourage you to look at my RAISE Act, which takes the starting salary 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
116 

of an E1 from $22,000 and brings it up to $31,000, which at least 

gets it to that $15 equivalent per hour, okay. It compresses the pay 

table, so that doesn’t ripple all the way up. General, you are not 

going to get that kind of raise, but the E1s through E6s deserve 

that raise to get above the poverty line to get off of food stamps. 

The request is that you support that, and we are going to try to 

work that through Congress. 

MILITARY SPOUSE LICENSING RELIEF LAW

The other request I have is that you continue to remind the 

young marines and sailors that the military spouse licensing relief 

law is now law of the land. Spouses who have a professional license 

should be able to get reciprocity across State lines. As I visit units, 

they don’t know that, so we need to do a better job making sure 

that our troops know that the spouses should be able to just crossdebt their licenses across State lines, if they are a real estate 

agent, nurse, doctor, teacher, whatever it is. 

A lot of talk today about shipbuilding. I am more concerned 

about ship readiness in the fleet. And, Secretary, you mentioned, 

you know, getting as many ships to sea as we can. That is the metric you look at. As my classmates start becoming one- and two-star 

admirals, they start becoming skippers of amphibs and aircraft carriers. I am hearing stories that are frankly just blowing my mind, 

and we visited Seventh Fleet, what, last year and the Seventh 

Fleet commander was talking about cannibalizing cruisers to make 

destroyers whole or vice versa. The metrics are bad. 

So we are going to submit a series of questions for the record 

that I would like to get a better understanding of what our troop 

readiness issues are, specifically in the INDOPACOM region, specifically around Japan and Seventh Fleet. 

In the aviation community, we use the FMC versus, you know, 

partial mission—full mission capability versus partial mission. I 

think the metrics are not just bad, but I also think that the metrics 

are not truly honest. And I am not accusing anyone of gun decking 

their logs here, but our readiness levels, when it comes to the ship 

availability numbers, is below where it needs to be, so we are going 

to submit some information—or some questions for the record for 

that. 

The repair issue, Secretary, I agree. The only thing I disagree 

with you is that the overseas ship repair capabilities and the partnerships with other countries should not begin today. It should 

have begun 10 years ago, to be honest. We need to lower the classifications of sensitivity levels of some of these repairs. I know that 

is not your fault, but we need to accelerate that and make sure 

that we are doing that mindfully. 

So just to sum up, a couple asks, support for higher pay for junior enlisted, especially the RAISE Act. We are going to be continuing to fight that fight. That was in the HAC–D bill last year. 

The Senate stripped it out, and unfortunately, it didn’t come to the 

floor in the end, in the final version. We have a lot of metrics that 

we are falling behind in, and recruitment is probably one of the 

most scary metrics that we are falling behind on. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
117 

STRIKE FIGHTER SHORTFALL

If I can ask a question here, Mr. Secretary, what is the status 

of the strike fighter shortfall? This has been a well-documented 

issue. I thank you for finally getting the prime on contract for the 

Hornets. We lost three as a result of all that churn. The American 

taxpayers are now getting 17 instead of 20, but if you can comment 

on the status of the strike fighter shortfall and what are the plans 

to mitigate that moving forward? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, Congressman. You covered a lot of 

ground. I am not sure I can answer it all in a short period of time, 

but I certainly would welcome submitting responses. 

Mr. GARCIA. I will submit all of the other QFRs and just the 

strike fighter shortfall. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. Be happy to do that. But thank 

you on your leadership on the strike fighter shortfall. Actually, the 

strike fighter shortfall will be down to zero, I think, by the end of 

2025, and so that is a tremendous accomplishment, and I attribute 

it so much to actually being able to extend the service life of F– 

18, which has been an extremely successful program in the Department of the Navy due to the investments that Congress has made 

on depot-level maintenance for on the aircraft side as well, too. So 

that is very, very exciting. 

I think the bigger challenge that we face on the aviation side is 

actually getting to tech refresh three on the F–35 side with Lockheed Martin, and I am hopeful that, of course, by the end of this 

year that we will overcome those challenges so that we can actually 

get those F–35s back into the fleet. But we will actually have a 

zero fighter shortfall by the end of fiscal year 2025, and it is a testimony to the aviation community and Department of the Navy and 

Marine Corps actually doing the things that they have done over 

these last several years. 

CNO, would you like to further comment? 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, when you get back with some of the written 

responses to the gentleman, that would be great. 

And, again, we appreciate getting those 17 Hornets under contract finally. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. And by the way, there is a huge 

advantage—forgive me, my mic wasn’t on. There is a huge advantage actually, because, well, the big success of the Boeing negotiation—and I am thankful to Boeing for having finally closed a deal 

with us—is the advantage that we get from the data package actually, which is enormous. Protecting the—getting the intellectual 

property rights to those jets so that we can actually conduct emergency repairs on them in the future should it be forward is a huge, 

huge advantage, and that is the big return on investment that the 

taxpayers are getting out of this as well, too. And hopefully, it will 

also serve as an example for future negotiations on MQ–25, which 

will be extremely important moving forward. 

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Aguilar, you are recognized. 

SUBMARINE INDUSTRIAL BASE

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you, Chairman Calvert. Apologies for stepping away. I had a press conference to attend. And the first quesVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
118 

tion I got was about Mr. Cole, so I wanted to—I said some nice 

things. In the spirit of our committee, I said some very, very nice 

things about our colleague, Mr. Cole. Congratulations to you. We 

all look forward to working with you and your leadership here, as 

well, working with Chairman Calvert and Ranking Members 

McCollum and DeLauro. 

Mr. Secretary, I wanted to start where you started, which is the national security supplemental we know included $3.4 billion to 

support the Submarine Industrial Base. What happens, what is the 

impact if this doesn’t pass, and can you talk to me about how the 

funding would affect specifically our AUKUS relationship and those 

commitments? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Congressman. Our goal is to get 

to 2.3 on Virginia-class submarines as just one example. And so 

these Submarine Industrial Base investments are critical in order 

to help the industry get there with—under our oversight. So if we 

don’t get the $3.3 billion in additional supplemental money, that 

means that we will have to actually slow down the workforce training programs, the advance manufacturing programs that we hope 

to implement over the course of the next year or so, and it will simply slow the process of us being able to get there, and that is why 

it is so critically important to have this supplemental pass in Congress in addition to the support that we need to provide, the $60 

billion or so that we need to provide our Ukrainian brothers and 

sisters who are fighting for our freedom in Ukraine. 

ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING CENTER

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, a critical component 

that we have spent some time here, and I appreciate the conversation talking about recruiting on retaining skilled workforce. 

Admiral, I did want to ask you if you have anything to offer on 

the national security supplemental, please feel free. But specific to 

the Additive Manufacturing Center for Excellence, you know, are 

we beginning to see the results of these efforts? What is the retention level of those recruited? What does the future of that, you 

know, look like as well? 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Thank you. And just on the supplemental, 

you know, it is really important to maintain the momentum. So, 

you know, we have made investments over the last couple of years. 

This continues that momentum. And again, it has taken a little bit 

of time for these investments really to percolate through the system to be able to have the effects we are trying to achieve to increase the throughput, both in the Submarine Industrial Base and, 

as the Secretary mentioned earlier, in our shipbuilding industrial 

base for surface ships. 

On the Danville center, you know, this is one of the many initiatives we have working with industry to create a pipeline, you know, 

for the workforce to be able to come from wherever they are, enter 

one of these training programs that is, you know, it is a State industry Navy partnership to be able to come out with a certification 

and a direct path into a job. So we are really excited about both 

of these pathways, as well as the promise of additive manufacturing and the different opportunities that it is going to give us 

going forward. So, again, these investments really help, I think, upVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
119 

lift the entire workforce that will be able to help us in any one of 

our shipyards going forward. 

Mr. AGUILAR. Can you talk about other partnerships that we 

should know about, specifically as it involves our universities and 

existing, you know, institutions that you guys are working through 

and that you think could yield some benefit? 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Well, I think we have a lot of good relationships with different academia through different laboratories 

that we use. I would even say, some that you might not think 

about, which is partnering on getting out into the high schools and 

into middle schools with STEM, because, again, if we really want 

to grow our workforce, our engineering designers that we need in 

the future, there are different programs. RoboSub is a great example of one of those. You know, we are really getting kids interested 

early on in technology and really introducing themselves to the 

Navy, to academia, and then really engineering and design. 

So I think beyond just the ones that we are doing with industry 

and with State to produce the workforce we need at the more senior level, I think these are some good opportunities. There is also 

a lot of partnering going on with community colleges. And again, 

this is another place not just for recruiting but for training the 

workforce we need in the future. 

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you. Thank you, Admiral. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Ellzey. 

RESUPPLY IN THE RED SEA

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very honored and 

grateful to be on this subcommittee. And as a former Navy pilot, 

with my friend Mike Garcia, I am grateful that we are starting 

these budget hearings with the best service. 

I appreciate the three of you being here, but I would also like to 

point out someone who I have known since 1988 who I knew was 

destined for greatness and when she was my upper classman at the 

Academy. I don’t remember too many of them, but I remember her, 

and I’m really proud of her, and I am proud to see her here, and 

that is Major General Shay. She is a great person and a great leader, and I am really, really glad to see you again. 

Mr. GARCIA. He is your fault. 

Mr. ELLZEY. From the top, bro. 

Bases, boats, barracks, and airplanes. This service, unlike most 

of them, has to leverage all those four things with the current requirements plus future requirements in a way that no other service 

has to. They really don’t. And at some point, with limited abilities 

to pay for that stuff, something gets leveraged every once in a 

while, which is why we are seeing what is going on with our bases 

and our barracks as compared to our Air Force brethren that are 

just falling apart because we have to build new ships. We have to 

go fight at war. 

Every time we are in deployment we are on a wartime footing 

in the sea service, and you are forced to think about EW capabilities that we may or may not have but we need, contested logistics 

that we are dealing with from time to time and is going to be loomVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
120 

ing in the INDOPACOM, tanking which suddenly rears its ugly 

head with new scenarios, magazine capacity issues, construction of 

missiles, which aren’t airplanes, but everything that we shoot off 

out of our aircraft or drop off of. 

Now with the Chinese capacity to out build us 10-to-1, those are 

issues that we always have concern. And admittedly, on our side, 

CRs, not passing the budgets that you have asked for, the FRA, 

and mandatory spending, which has eaten up more and more of 

our capacity over time. 

But you mentioned something, SecNav, about the competition for 

your blue-collar workers. So what we have with the shipbuilding 

and the industry versus what you are doing is the two in uniform 

are competing for the very same people that we need for that industrial complex. And when we are talking about where are we 

getting these folks when the number one killer of Americans at 

wartime numbers, similar to World War II, is fentanyl killing 200 

Americans, aged 18 to 49 every day. That pool is getting thinner 

and thinner and thinner, so we have to find other ways to build 

that industrial base that may not be based on ours. 

And the two in uniform are in competition with police, law enforcement, welders, plumbers, trades, all across the country, and 

suddenly we find ourselves at a crisis of manpower capabilities for 

the blue-collar trades in our country. So it is a difficult problem to 

over—you can’t buy yourself new people. 

Secretary Del Toro, I appreciate your frank dialogue on the industry and how to improve delivery in our shortfall. 

CNO, thank you for the opportunity to join you and Mr. Case on 

ICEX. It is a once-in-a-lifetime trip that I never intend to take 

again, but it was fantastic. I also want to commend you on getting 

more players on the field for autonomous platforms. 

And General, your work on the Marine Corps transformation is 

commendable. And even if you don’t believe the warnings coming 

out of INDOPACOM, one only needs to look at Europe and the 

Middle East to see that we need to be approaching our defense 

needs through an immediate wartime lens because we are at war 

in the Red Sea with the Houthis. The Philippines is at war with 

China. We are at war with the cartels, and that must mean we 

must properly fund our force structure and deliver ships and aircraft on time and on budget. 

We also need to accelerate the fielding of new technology. On 

that front, it is good to see the Navy advancing the work of Disruptive Capabilities Office, and that is a game changer. 

Admiral, in the short time I have got left, because I tended to 

talk too much, are you pleased with the resupply in the Red Sea, 

and are there some needs that have manifested themselves in a 

way that we didn’t foresee? Very quickly, please. 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Thank you. And I am really proud of our 

team operating the Red Sea. It is really years of investment that 

we have the equipment that is operating as it is designed. We have 

the people that are trained and ready to use it. I think on the capabilities that we think about for logistics and contested logistics and 

that theater and other theaters, I am really pleased with our logistics force as being able to deliver. We had been developing some expeditionary reload capabilities as well, and we have been able to 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
121 

put those in practice. And again, a lot of lessons that we can take 

to use in other theaters going forward. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, Admiral. 

And, General, I am about out of time, but I did want to talk 

about contested logistics, and I will get those questions on the 

record. I didn’t want to ignore you today, but I ran out of time. So 

contested logistics and aerial refueling capability in the Navy are 

questions I would like to see answered. I will submit those for the 

record. And thank you, all, for being here. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

I just have some last comments and I will turn it over to the 

ranking member and then we will close it up. 

DEFENSE INNOVATION UNIT

But one thing, Mr. Secretary, and as you know, I have been talking about innovation for some time now, and certainly a high priority for me since I have come to Congress and for both of us, obviously. I think it is a collaborative effort on innovation across the 

services, certainly across the enterprise. And DIU, right now, is 

scaling manpower the support increased appropriations in fiscal 

year 2024 and going forward. 

Secretary, I would like to get your commitment you will support 

the DIU with the manpower billets and detailees as needed before 

we can get this program off to a robust start. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Mr. Chairman, absolutely. I mean, we are 

really tied closely to DIU. In fact, when Replicator came out, we 

were probably one of the biggest contributors to the Replicator program with funding provided by DIU as well, too. So our Disruptive 

Capabilities Office is simply working side by side with DIU. 

Mr. CALVERT. Yeah. I am hopeful that they don’t use the DIU 

money that we just appropriated as a pay-for for all of this, but I 

would like to find some other avenues to pay for that with if we 

move forward on reprogramming. 

With that, Ms. McCollum. 

RECRUITMENT FUNDING

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We had a robust discussion in the office, and Mr. Garcia rightly points up the competition 

for pay. 

But I would like for you, Admiral and General, to kind of touch 

on—you have been successful with recruitment, but it is not—it is 

the barracks, it is the daycare, it is the healthcare, it is everything 

that we also have to account in our budget when we go to balance 

it at the end of the day. So recognizing that we have done bonuses, 

we need to do more. Could you maybe elaborate what you are hearing and what is keeping with recruitment and how we have to keep 

moving forward in making sure the funding is there for other those 

other things that are touching those sailors’ and marines’ lives that 

is making them stay. If you could just take a minute and do that 

as you did in my office, I would appreciate it. 

Admiral FRANCHETTI. Well, thank you. I mean, I think, you 

know, our most important resource is our people. We can have 

great platforms. We can have all the good equipment. But if we 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
122 

don’t have the people that can operate that, I think they are really 

our true secret weapon, and we really have to invest in their quality of service. And, you know, we have been very focused on making sure that we are a world-class employer, that we can attract 

and retain those people that will do that warfighting for us. 

You know, we have focused on improving our barracks, making 

sure they have a high-quality standard of living. We are working 

hard to improve 24-hour access to gyms, making sure that people 

have access to parking, making sure that we can put our mental 

healthcare providers, make them embedded with our units so people can quickly and easily access some of that healthcare that they 

need at their time of need. 

We are also working to make sure they have access to high-quality food. We have just changed our policies so they can cook food 

in their rooms in the barracks. Again, that is something that is 

very meaningful for the younger generation being able to take care 

of themselves and, again, we want them to be able to have that 

standard of living. 

I think for our families, of course, we are focused, as I mentioned 

earlier, on childcare and making sure—access to childcare. 

And, again, I think the other thing we were looking hard is quality of life while ships are in shipyards, making sure that our sailors 

have an opportunity to serve at sea, that they don’t spend their entire first enlistment while they are in a shipyard yard in the shipyard, that they get off and do what they joined the Navy to do, and 

also that they don’t have to live on the ship when they are in an 

availability. So those were just some of the things that we are looking at. 

I would also—last one I would say is, younger people really love 

to have WiFi, access to WiFi, setting up a lot of pilots so we can 

make sure that people have access to free WiFi and things that 

they need to get their jobs done and their life taken care of. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you for your testimony. 

And, Mr. Garcia, we will figure out a way to balance all this out. 

I know we will. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

And before we conclude, I would like to thank our witnesses. 

Mr. Secretary, as always, I appreciate your frankness and coming to meet with us in this committee. 

CNO, thank you again for your service, and Commandant. We 

appreciate all of you. We appreciate your service. 

If there is any questions for the—that you would like to be submitted, I would encourage the members to do so, and please respond in a reasonable amount of time. 

And with that, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Answers to submitted questions follow:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
123 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 117 here 57432.035
124 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 118 here 57432.036
125 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 119 here 57432.037
126 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 120 here 57432.038
127 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 121 here 57432.039
128 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 122 here 57432.040
129 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 123 here 57432.041
130 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 124 here 57432.042
131 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 125 here 57432.043
132 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 126 here 57432.044
133 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 127 here 57432.045
134 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 128 here 57432.046
135 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 129 here 57432.047
136 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 130 here 57432.048
137 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 131 here 57432.049
138 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 132 here 57432.050
139 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 133 here 57432.051
140 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 134 here 57432.052
141 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 135 here 57432.053
142 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 136 here 57432.054
143 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 137 here 57432.055
144 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 138 here 57432.056
145 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 139 here 57432.057
146 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 140 here 57432.058
(147) 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 2024. 

FISCAL YEAR 2025 REQUEST FOR THE UNITED STATES 

ARMY 

WITNESSES 

HON. CHRISTINE E. WORMUTH, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF THE 

ARMY 

GENERAL RANDY A. GEORGE, CHIEF OF STAFF OF THE ARMY, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. The subcommittee will come to order. 

Today the subcommittee will receive testimony on the posture of 

the United States Army. 

First, I would like to welcome our two witnesses, Secretary of the 

Army Christine Warmuth, and General Randy George, Chief of 

Staff of the Army. Thank you for joining us. We look forward to 

your testimony. 

The U.S. Army provides our Nation with our best fighting force 

in the world. We face a variety of threats from across the globe, 

which require a well-trained and well-equipped Army. As new 

threats evolve, it is imperative that we prioritize investments that 

not only contribute to current readiness but also provide us with 

a decisive advantage on any future battlefield. 

I am pleased to see your ongoing efforts to improve force posture 

in INDOPACOM, the over 70,000 soldiers serving in the region, 

your work with our regional allies and partners, and investments 

in critical munitions will help secure greater operational access to 

the region and provide a much needed deterrence posture. I look 

forward to discussing more about how your fiscal year 2025 budget 

request invests in the INDOPACOM theater. 

We are keenly aware of the need to modernize the Army of today 

and to address the great power competition in the future. And I appreciate this process began several years ago. I think you will agree 

that the subcommittee worked with you to balance supporting your 

strategy while ensuring that successful ongoing programs continue 

to receive an appropriate level of resources. However, I see a disturbing trend in the success rate of your modernization programs, 

particularly the Army’s big dollar investments. I am thinking of $2 billion for a helicopter program that has now been canceled, a $3 billion long-range hypersonic weapon that has 

not yet had a successful test flight and was well past its fielding 

date, and $1 billion for a long-range artillery cannon that was recently canceled due to engineering challenges. That is $6 billion invested into three major programs, no operational capability. Imagine the number of 155 rounds for other critical munitions we could 

have bought with that funding. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
148 

I support innovation and modernization, but I would like to have 

a higher level of confidence that the Army is investing their limited 

budget appropriately. I am hoping you can tell us how you are 

scoping modernization to identify non-feasible programs earlier and 

working to incorporate successful technologies more rapidly. 

Threats from unmanned aerial systems are increasing, and the 

technology for these systems is also maturing at a rapid rate. We 

have watched this evolve during the past 2 years in Ukraine, and 

have unfortunately suffered the consequences of not addressing the 

threats of this technology as we continue to mourn the three U.S. 

soldiers who were killed in January at Tower 22. 

That is why I am a supporter of the efforts to rapidly prototype 

and field UAS and counter-UAS technologies. Initiatives like the 

deputy secretary’s Replicator program are a step in the right direction. I understand that the Army is already leaning forward by investing in these capabilities. I am interested in learning more 

about your initiatives today. Modernized capabilities are only as 

good as the soldiers operating them. 

I was pleased to see that the fiscal year 2025 request includes 

significant funding for new and modernized barracks, as well as a 

sustainment cost to ensure that our soldiers have improved living 

conditions. I am interesting in hearing about these efforts, including receiving assurances from you that you are addressing important quality-of-life programs for all our soldiers worldwide. The 

Army continues to face recruiting challenges, and I would like to 

hear about your efforts to address that issue. 

Finally, I am pleased to see your recent investments in production lines to boost monthly deliveries of key munitions. The Army 

has overseen a significant transfer of equipment to Ukraine, and 

I applaud your efforts; however, I continue to be concerned about 

domestic stockpiles and therefore our readiness rates. I hope you 

will discuss today how your fiscal year 2025 budget will improve 

the production of munitions and address any shortfalls that we 

may have in inventory. 

With that, I recognize the distinguished Ranking Member, Ms. 

McCollum, for any opening remarks. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. MCCOLLUM

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the 

courtesy. 

Secretary Wormuth, General George, thank you for being here to 

testify before us today. 

General George, this is your first appearance before the committee. Welcome. 

The Department of Army’s fiscal year 2025 budget request reflects the priorities for personnel and for procurement. At $182 billion the Army, again, is having to make difficult choices and what 

is essentially a flat line budget when not accounting for inflation. 

You are also managing personnel deployments to EUCOM, 

CENTCOM, and INDOPACOM, keeping our Nation safe in the face 

of threats from abroad all around the world. 

Well, the hearing today, we will cover a wide range of topics, but 

I want to highlight a few topics that are especially important to 

me: First is personnel. The Army continues to strive to meet reVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
149 

cruiting goals, and we must do all that we can working together 

with you to assist you in this effort. I would like to hear an update 

on what programs and activities the request has included in it to 

address the recruitment challenges that the Army faces. 

Second, the Army has personnel deployed in Europe, in the Middle East, performing activities in support of Ukraine and to keep 

our troops safe in Iraq. But the funding for many of these activities 

all reside in the supplemental. Everyone here knows, and I think 

most of the committee, we strongly support a supplemental moving 

forward, but the House, as you know, continues to struggle with 

passing it. 

I am concerned that in order to cover these deployments the 

Army is now robbing Peter to pay Paul, or I could even say Elizabeth to pay Beth. And unless the supplemental funds are provided 

soon, the Army will have to restrict its activities for fiscal year 

2025. 

Finally, the request for fiscal year 2025 includes increased investments in counter-unmanned systems. I would like to better understand how these investments will advance the Army’s position 

on the battlefield, that given drone technology is constantly evolving at a rapid rate. 

I want to let you know that we stand ready to work together 

with you to give those who are on mission the equipment that they 

need to achieve success and come home safely. Thank you again to 

our witnesses for appearing here today. We appreciate your testimony and answers to our questions. 

Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlelady. 

I would like to now turn to the new chairman of the full committee and my good friend, Chairman Tom Cole. Mr. Chairman, 

again, congratulations, and the floor is yours. 

OPENING REMARKS OF CHAIRMAN COLE

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

China’s military modernization efforts and increasing assertiveness have raised concerns about the potential for conflict with the 

United States. At the same time, Russia’s continued unprovoked 

attack on Ukraine underscores the range of threats that we and 

our allies face. It is vital that the United States Army maintain a 

robust and responsive force posture to deter potential threats and 

ensure the safety and security of U.S. interest. 

The United States Army is faced with a variety of issues that demand our attention and require us to ensure that our soldiers are 

properly equipped and prepared to face the challenges of the 21st 

century. 

As chairman of the committee, I am committed to supporting our 

soldiers and ensuring that they have the resources they need to 

succeed. The Army must prioritize investment in modern aircraft, 

strategic long-range fires, ammunition and missiles, and trained 

personnel to support the force of today while also working to modernize the force for tomorrow. 

I look forward to your testimony, gentlemen, today, and the 

Army’s plans to maintain and improve its capacity and capabilities, 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
150 

including the development of new technologies and programs to 

support our soldiers. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

I would now like to turn to the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, Ms. DeLauro, for any opening comments. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. DELAURO

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thanks to the ranking member. 

And let me offer my congratulations to the chair of the Appropriations Committee, a good and dear friend, Congressman Tom 

Cole. Look forward to our opportunities to work together on what 

is, in my view, the central committee at the center of the Federal 

Government in its role in what it does with regard to the American 

people. So, again, my congratulations. 

I want to say a thank you to today’s witnesses, Secretary 

Wormuth and—General George, we had this conversation in the 

past. I am sorry that Iowa won and defeated the women at 

UCONN, but we will get another chance at this and so forth, so. 

But go Huskies, is all I can just say, General, but welcome. Welcome to you, my dear. 

I want to thank you both for your dedicated service to our Nation. You do keep our Nation safe. You keep our troops safe. You 

ensure that our allies are supported wherever democracy and freedom are threatened around the globe. 

Through the fiscal year 2025 budget, Congress has the duty to 

ensure the Army has the resources to be able to fulfill its mission 

to keep our country secure, our troops protected, and well 

equipped. The President’s budget includes a $400 million increase 

for the Army that will ensure we are doing all that we can to support our soldiers and their families. 

I will get parochial for a moment. I am proud that in my district 

Sikorsky Aircraft manufactures the UH–60 Blackhawk, a utility 

helicopter that has been used by the U.S. Army and other military 

branches in numerous roles around the world since its introduction 

in 1979. So I am especially pleased that the President’s budget includes $25 million for research and development to upgrade the 

Blackhawk platform, keeping it in service for many, many years to 

come. 

While we are here to discuss the 2025 budget, I must underscore 

how critical it is that Congress immediately pass a supplemental 

funding bill to address multiple ongoing national security concerns. 

It is as much for our national security issues, it is as much to provide aid to Ukraine and others, but, as well, it is the—what this 

means in terms of what is spent domestically that ensures our national security. Sometimes we lose track of that or maybe people 

don’t know or understand what is involved in that and what the 

benefits are for national security for the U.S. 

The U.S. Army is currently deployed spending hundreds of millions of dollars in Europe and the Middle East, and the longer we 

wait to buttress the Department of Defense resources the more our 

military will have to dip into annual funding to cover its rising 

costs. Every moment this funding is delayed helps our adversaries, 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
151 

hurts our allies, and risks damage to America’s military readiness 

and reputation. We must ensure that we are adequately backfilling 

our military equipment, stockpiles that are being used in these theaters, and we must ensure we are sufficiently restoring our own industrial base. I look forward to discussing these items today. 

Additionally, I want to hear about how the Army is addressing 

the recruitment issue and the challenges that attend to recruitment. The majority chose last go-around to inject culture war debates into last year’s Department of Defense funding process. I am 

concerned with how that may further hurt recruitment efforts, especially among women. We must do all that we can to ensure that 

any American who wants to bravely serve in the United States 

armed forces, defend our Nation, feels that they belong and that 

they are not going to be drawn into political warfare while confronting legitimate threats to freedom, democracy, and our national 

security. 

I thank you for being here, and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Secretary Wormuth, please take 5 minutes for your opening remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SECRETARY WORMUTH

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Chairman Calvert, Ranking 

Member McCollum, Ranking Member DeLauro. 

And congratulations, Chairman Cole, to your new responsibilities 

leading the full committee. 

Thank you all, distinguished members of the subcommittee, for 

your continued support for our soldiers, our Army civilians, and 

their families. 

General George and I appear before you today at a moment of 

profound transformation for the United States Army. We are transforming our capabilities, our force structure, and our recruiting enterprise to ensure that the Army is ready and able to defeat evolving threats, keep pace with technology, and attract the best talent 

so that we remain the world’s best land fighting force. 

As we pursue this transformation, we must also take care of our 

people, ensuring that our soldiers and families have the quality of 

life they deserve to sustain our readiness now and into the future. 

This year, like last year, the Army’s fiscal year 2025 budget continues to support the most ambitious modernization program the 

Army has undertaken in the last 40 years. We are making significant progress in transforming our capabilities by staying consistent 

in our goals and meeting most major milestones for development 

and fielding. The Next Generation Squad Weapon, the Integrated 

Battle Command System, our midrange capability, and the precision strike missile are just some examples of the critical new systems we have recently delivered. 

As we bring these new systems into our inventory, we are also 

transforming our force structure to meet the priorities of the National Defense Strategy. We are building out new formations, such 

as our five multi-domain task forces, and making sure they are 

equipped with the capabilities we need to conduct large-scale combat operations against advanced military peers. And we are shrinkVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
152 

ing excess force structure so that the units we have are manned 

and ready. 

While these force structure decisions bring down our authorized 

troop levels by about 24,000 spaces, our goal is to increase the 

Army’s authorized end strength from 450,000 active soldiers to 

470,000 active soldiers by fiscal year 2029. To meet that goal we 

are working around the clock to overcome our recruiting challenges, and I am pleased to say that we are making very solid 

progress this year. Building on successful initiatives like the future 

soldier prep course, we are fundamentally transforming our recruiting enterprise to better compete in the 21st century job market. 

Most significantly, we are professionalizing our recruiting workforce by creating new, permanent talent acquisition specialties for 

both enlisted soldiers and warrant officers. The assessment and selection of the first cohort of our new warrant officers is complete, 

and this group will be out in the field by the end of the summer. 

As we transform, we also have to take care of our soldiers and 

families. A key part of that responsibility is providing safe, highquality housing and barracks. And, Chairman, as you noted, over 

the next 5 years, the Army will invest an average of $2.1 billion 

each year in the construction, sustainment, restoration, and modernization of barracks for unaccompanied soldiers. 

This investment will also fund sustainment at 100 percent, something we haven’t done in several years. We are also leveraging the 

expertise of the Corps of Engineers to stabilize our project costs, 

and we will hire civilian barracks managers to oversee our barracks so that our soldiers can focus on their warfighting responsibilities. 

Physically and emotionally healthy soldiers are more resilient, 

they are higher performing, and they are less likely to engage in 

harmful behaviors. To build resilient soldiers we are expanding our 

holistic health and fitness programs to 71 active brigades, we are 

investing in financial management services so that our soldiers 

know how to budget, and we are encouraging programs in our divisions that focus on soldier well-being. Our goal is building cohesive 

teams and proactively working to reduce harmful behaviors from a 

soldier’s first day in the Army. 

Even as we transform, and we have to because it is a very dangerous world out there, we are continuing to provide combatant 

commands with trained and ready formations. This year’s budget 

seeks $1.5 billion for activities associated with the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, and we have asked for hundreds of millions of dollars for Operation Pathways, our exercises in the region that 

strengthen deterrence and build interoperability with our allies 

and partners. 

In Europe, our troops are demonstrating our commitment to deterring Russian aggression. The Army has been leading the effort 

to support Ukraine from training over 17,000 Ukrainian troops to 

providing hundreds of vehicles, different kinds of equipments, and 

millions of munitions. The chief and I strongly urge the passing of 

a supplemental appropriations bill that will maintain this critical 

support for Ukraine, invest in our own readiness, and create jobs 

for Americans all around the country. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
153 

With your support, we will continue to take care of our people 

and sustain the transformation that will keep the Army the world’s 

best Army. I am proud of all that our soldiers and civilians are 

doing, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
154 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 208 here 57432.111
155 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 209 here 57432.112
156 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 210 here 57432.113
157 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 211 here 57432.114
158 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 212 here 57432.115
159 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 213 here 57432.116
160 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 214 here 57432.117
161 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 215 here 57432.118
162 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 216 here 57432.119
163 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 217 here 57432.120
164 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 218 here 57432.121
165 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you for your comments. 

Now, General George, please take 5 minutes for your opening remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL GEORGE

General GEORGE. Okay. Thank you. Chairman Calvert, Ranking 

Member McCollum, Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, 

thank you for the opportunity to talk with you today about our 

Army. 

The world is more volatile today that I have seen it in my 36- 

year career, and there is clear cooperations between adversaries 

than I have seen in a while. A spark in any region could have global impacts. Meanwhile, the character of war is changing rapidly, 

which we see from what is happening on battlefields in Ukraine 

and in the Middle East. 

Our Army is as important as ever to the Joint Force. We must 

deter war everywhere and be ready to respond anywhere, so we are 

focused on providing the best Army with the budget we are given. 

Our soldiers deserve it, the joint team deserves it, and our Nation 

deserves it. That means making some tough decisions and finding 

ways to get better every day. 

As the Secretary already highlighted, our planned investments 

reflected in our fiscal year 2025 budget will help our Army win the 

future fight and ensure that our soldiers and their families remain 

ready and resilient. 

Across the Army, we are learning from global events and continuously transforming how we operate, how we train, and how we 

equip, and I would like to highlight a handful of things. We are 

learning that designs for things like unmanned systems must be 

modular, adaptable, and software defined. We are working to get 

relevant technology in the hands of our soldiers immediately. 

We are learning that counter-unmanned systems must evolve as 

the threat does to protect our formations and critical infrastructure. We are also moving out on that while being mindful of the 

cost curve. We need cheaper solutions. 

We are learning that, in some cases, the right tech already exists 

to support transformation. For instance, the tech exists to make 

our command-and-control modes more mobile, low signature, and 

more effective right now, and we are fixing our network. And we 

are building our magazine depth and modernizing our organic industrial base, because we know that wars never end quickly as we 

hope. They take a lot of ammo. 

We are also transforming how we recruit, ensuring that we have 

the right talent and the right tech and that we are getting the 

word out about how our Army is a great place to serve because of 

our mission and our people. 

Finally, we are also looking at where we need to reimagine our 

processes and where we can afford to stop doing things that don’t 

support warfighting or building cohesive teams. 

I am proud of what our soldiers are doing around the world to 

help defend our country. We appreciate your support, and I look 

forward to your questions. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
166 

COUNTER UAS INVESTMENTS

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. I want to make sure all the 

members have a chance to ask questions so we will have a 5- 

minute clock on, even for myself, and we will go around and get 

as many questions in as possible. 

Obviously we spent some time in my comments and the ranking 

member’s comments and your comments about UAS and counterUAS strategy and what we are going to do to defeat that. The 

threat from kamikaze drones and unmanned aerial systems has intensified, and it changes almost daily. I see that your budget request includes $400 million for systems to counter small drones. I 

would like to talk more about your approach to countering UAS 

threats. 

So, Secretary, how are you ensuring that the Army investments 

in counter UAS flip this cost curve so we are not just shooting 

down $500 drones with $1 million missiles? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Chairman. We are trying to do 

that in a couple of different ways. As you noted—first of all, I 

would say, since 2020, we have had $3 billion that we have invested in counter-UAS and UAS systems, and there is several hundred million dollars in this year’s budget request for that, and 

there are also some on the chief’s unfunded priorities list as well. 

I think, you know, we all are very focused on growing our investment here. 

One, we are very much looking at how can we find lower cost attributable systems, and we are working with companies like 

Aderol, for example, to try to invest in smaller, very effective but 

less expensive types of UAS and counter-UAS systems. Another 

thing I would highlight, Chairman, is our investments in directed 

energy. So, for example, we have directed energy M–SHORAD. 

There are four prototypes for that system out in CENTCOM right 

now. We also have a couple of high-powered microwave programs. 

And one of the things that—I highlight DE M–SHORAD, for example, because we are still working on the costing, but in theory, 

you know, the laser is essentially unlimited ammunition, so it offers the possibility of us being able to shoot down hundreds and 

hundreds of UASes and have a very quick reload rate. So I think 

there is a lot of potential in that kind of a platform. 

Chief, I am sure you want to add. 

General GEORGE. Yeah, I just would add, Chairman, that—and 

what the Secretary talked about, what we are trying to do in the 

Middle East by sending over the user, the developer, and the 

tester, and them all being together, I think what we are learning 

from the battlefield, for example, what is happening in Ukraine is 

things are changing in weeks and months, and we are going to 

have to be able to adapt and so that is what we are doing. 

So we are sending everything that we possibly can into tougher 

environments and putting all of those people together, and it is— 

a lot of the—there is a lot of small companies out there that are 

doing a lot of great things. We just got done with a big experimentation with Project Convergence that was out at our national training center, inviting them in. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
167 

The Army is also—is the executive agent for the joint counterUAS office and is getting a lot of R&D to make sure that we are— 

there is a lot of great ideas out there, but we are getting all of 

those from American industry in addition to what we are developing. 

IRON BEAM

Mr. CALVERT. Obviously, you know, Israel, in this supplemental 

that hopefully we will be able to figure out how we are going to 

pass, has some money in it for Iron Beam. And Rafael has made 

significant progress in this, and I know that our contractors have 

been working with them. I am curious if we have personnel in 

Israel that are working with the Israelis as they test in realtime 

Iron Beam. Is any of that going on? 

General GEORGE. I am not—I can tell you, Chairman, is that we 

are—I just had met the IDF ground commander and several of his 

staff and we were just together, so we are exchanging lessons and 

having that kind of interchange and we are looking at sending 

some people over there, so—and I have also had some discussions 

with Rafael. So for our part, what we want to do is whatever is 

working out there and is adapting we are looking to bring that into 

the system. 

Mr. CALVERT. And the systems that you have already put on 

some of our equipment and the testing you are doing, are you satisfied that it is moving in the right direction? 

General GEORGE. I mean, I think we have more work to do, and 

this is one—there is probably three areas, Chairman, where I think 

that we need to be more flexible in our funding approach: Counter 

UAS is one of them, unmanned systems is the other, and then EW, 

which is related to both of those efforts. And our challenge was 

with the continuing resolution, if we wanted to spend more money 

we could not reprogram and put other money in there to make adjustments. 

And so, again, that was a big—that was a problem for us. I think 

we lost time with that. So that is one area that I would recommend—those are three areas that I would recommend that we 

would have more flexibility in our funding so that we could—when 

something is working in prototype that we could immediately—if 

those systems are working that we could procure it. 

Mr. CALVERT. Okay. Ranking Member. 

RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION ABILITIES

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. 

And the chairman and I and this committee have been working 

on trying to adapt and respond quickly to some of the situations 

we find ourselves in, and so I know that we want to work together 

to put into place what you were talking about with getting things 

tested and out and then in production. But behind all the equipment is personnel, and so I am going to back into personnel for a 

few minutes. 

Madam Secretary, General, the committee knows that recruitment was a problem for the Army last year, and it was true for 

most of the other services, too. You have requested an increase for 

recruiting activities, and I would like an update on where the Army 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
168 

currently stands with both recruiting and retention. We heard just 

a couple hours ago from the Navy that they had the recruiting offices empty because they had people out to sea, and now they are 

starting to staff them up again, so if you could enlighten us a little 

more about what you are doing. 

And so I know that you had mentioned when we talked that you 

were making some progress, if you could share with the committee 

what you think that—what caused that shift. And then we talked 

about retention as well. So part of the package for recruitment and 

retention are a lot of things, pays plays a big part of that, but there 

is other things that are part of that too. 

So if you could maybe help the committee, because we are trying 

to find that sweet spot, because for some people it is more than just 

pay, it is childcare centers, it is access to gyms, it is barracks and 

the other things that you talked about. So could you tell us what 

you think has been successful in your recruitment abilities moving 

forward, and what has been successful and made people stay in 

when you are doing the retention? Thank you. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Congresswoman. I am pleased 

to report, as I said, I think we are making very good progress this 

year on our recruiting goal. The chief and I have set a goal of recruiting 55,000 new soldiers and putting another 5,000 into our delayed entry program, so that is sort of the bank account. And we 

still have 6 months to go in this fiscal year. So I don’t want to be 

over confident, but I think we both feel that we have a good shot 

at making that goal this year, which I think would be very, very 

important. 

Part of the reason that I think we are doing better this year is 

we continue to have great success with our future soldier prep 

course. We have actually expanded that. We now are running that 

program at Fort Jackson and at Fort Moore. We continue to see a 

lot of interest in that effort. We are also selecting our recruiters 

differently. We are doing more of an attribute-based selection, and 

I think that means we are picking soldiers that are a little bit more 

inclined to be good salespeople for the United States Army. We 

have evolved our recruiting college curriculum by about 40 percent, 

so we have really updated that, and, again, I think that has helped 

our recruiters be more effective in the field. 

The soldier referral program, where soldiers can, you know, bring 

a friend from high school or something, if that person actually 

signs a contract, you can get promoted more quickly and that program is also bringing good success. 

So there is a lot that is kind of—you know, we have had multiple 

pieces to our efforts and to our broader transformation that I think 

are now starting to bear fruit. We have also put—we have surged 

some medical folks into our MEPS stations to be able to work 

through all of the different waivers that kids sometimes need for 

different health conditions, and that has allowed us to get more 

contracts through the pipeline. 

So I think that is a lot of what is behind why we are doing better 

this year. Retention remains historically high. We are, I think, already on track to exceed our retention goals for this year. You 

know, I think the fundamental reason we are retaining well is that 

when people join the Army, they like it. They are a part of someVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00172 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
169 

thing bigger than themselves. There is a sense of family, a sense 

of community, and a real purpose to defending the country. But, of 

course, we have targeted retention bonuses and things like that 

that also help us keep key specialties. But I think we are feeling 

a lot better about recruiting this year. 

I don’t know, Chief, if you want to add. 

General GEORGE. I would add—and the Secretary did a great job 

running that down. And we spend—there is probably not a day 

that goes by actually that we are not having some conversation 

about what we are doing. It is critically important to us and to our 

whole formation. 

We are also trying to get the right tech into the hands of our recruiters. You know, there is a lot of things that happen on—I look 

at Indeed or some of the other—so we are getting commercial offthe-shelf stuff. We have had a couple of innovation companies that 

are actually trying to go out there and innovate a little bit, which 

I think is helping. 

And then the other thing is, what we also want to approve is 

have good analysis on what actually is working and what isn’t. For 

example, we are finding that a lot of people are choosing location, 

is very important to people. There is different things that are important to people, a job specialty. Twenty-five percent are picking 

location, so that is—I think we are trying to get better at understanding the dynamics of recruiting as well. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Chairman Cole. 

PALADIN INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

And good to see both of you again. Again, I enjoyed our personal 

visit. Thank you for taking the time to do that. 

Let me ask you one parochial question. I am disappointed to once 

again see in the President’s budget a reduction on the Paladin Integrated Management program down. This is the fourth year in the 

row that number keeps coming down. We raise it every year here, 

because you are asking for 20, it takes 36 to maintain the production line minimum. Is there a problem here, or is your budget just 

stretched that far? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Chairman. I think the investment in Paladin is a good example of where we are having to make 

hard choices given our relatively flat top line, and there are—you 

know, you can see that whether it is equipment for our armored 

brigade combat teams, you know, things like Bradley, things like 

Striker, you know, we have not been able to invest as much as 

ideally we would and continue to modernize the new systems. 

I would add though that, again, this is another place where if we 

get the supplemental we are planning to invest in 18 additional 

Paladin systems. So between what we have gotten in our base 

budget, and hopefully if the supplemental comes through, we 

should be above the minimum sustainable rate for the foreseeable 

future. 

The CHAIRMAN. That is good to hear. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
170 

INDUSTRIAL BASE MUNITIONS PRODUCTION

General George, you mentioned in your testimony, you talked 

about the magazine depth, and that is something I think that concerns us all, relates back to our own industrial base. And so could 

you just give us an overview on, you know, how much have things 

improved, what—I would assume this is another place where the 

supplemental would help us a great deal if we were able to get that 

done, and just thoughts in general on—I mean, it is pretty bad 

when you are worried about, you know, 155-millimeter shells and 

things that are pretty basic things that we ought to have an abundant supply. 

General GEORGE. Chairman, it is—obviously we want to—we are 

putting a lot of energy in the Organic Industrial Base. I think it 

is important not only just for the Army but for the Joint Force in 

what we are doing. So we have invested, I think, more than $3 billion ourselves. We are—the supplemental has, I think, $4.5 billion 

that is in there that, you know, would go into improving the industrial base and buying the munitions that we need, you know, back 

to the magazine depth. 

So I think what is important, and I have been to several of these, 

is that we are, you know, trying to automate a lot of these places 

so that we could scale and increase production that we have with 

the workforce. 155 is a perfect example; we started off at about 

14,000 rounds a month in 155-millimeter. We are up to a little over 

30 right now, and we are ready to scale to 70. 

With the money that goes in the supplemental we can go up to 

100, and I think we need that capability again. I think one of the 

lessons a lot of people have learned over the last year is just how 

good U.S. equipment is, and there is a lot of people buying, you 

know, those same systems, so the magazine depth is critically important for us. 

LESSONS FROM THE WAR IN UKRAINE

The CHAIRMAN. I am going to ask you one other question because—and you don’t have enough time to do this, but I know obviously you are very keenly, and the Secretary is as well, looking at 

what is happening in Ukraine, so I am just—if you can give us lessons learned, what do you think a year into this—2 years into this 

but that you might not have thought about before, and how is that 

changing the way you think and what you need? 

Secretary WORMUTH. I would highlight a couple things, and I 

know the chief and I—there are a lot of lessons that are coming 

out of Ukraine. You know, one obviously is the importance of unmanned aerial systems and counter-UAS systems. You know, I was 

just in Germany seeing some of the training we are doing to—with 

the Ukrainians and was fascinated to talk to one of the Ukrainian 

BTG leaders but also see what our forces were doing in terms of 

actually welding little sort of droppers on the bottoms of drones to 

be able to drop small kinetic payloads. We are learning as much 

from them, I think, as they are learning from us, and so that is 

a huge lesson and I think is reflected in our budget. 

The importance of long-range fires, obviously, which, again, I 

think speaks to the importance of continuing to invest in things 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
171 

like precision strike missile or the long-range hypersonic, which, 

you know, we have had some challenges with but we are working 

quickly on that. 

And the last thing I would highlight, Chairman, is in contested 

logistics, you know, how—we are going to have to disperse in a future battlefield where everything is transparent. We can’t have 

these big sort of supply bases, and we are starting to really bring 

those lessons into our combat training center rotations. I have seen 

that myself at Fort Johnson where we are doing a lot to change 

how we are approaching logistics, recognizing how contested the 

environment will be. 

General GEORGE. Oh, I will be really quick here, Chairman, and 

we could go on a long time about what we are doing. And we talked 

the difference between observing a lesson and actually learning it, 

and the learning it is changing how we are going to train and fight, 

how we are training our people at the—like at Fort Sill and the 

places that are going—all our professional military education and 

how we buy things. 

I think on the—you can’t hide on the modern battlefield anymore 

is the big thing, and so it has—that has really changed, you know, 

signature management, network. We have to be more mobile. We 

are going to have to be more dispersed, and it is really going to impact every potential system. 

I will tell you, there is three big things that are happening at 

Fort Sill that are—we have a lot of lessons in, long-range fires, how 

effective ground-based, long-range fires that are very hard to find 

in the clutter and to kill, and we have seen that. They are very effective on the battlefield. Integrated air and missile defense, another thing that we do a lot at down at Fort Sill is very, very important to the Joint Force and what we are doing for protection. 

And then the counter-UAS, which we are doing—also doing down 

at Fort Sill, is something that we were talking about earlier that 

we are going to have to, you know, continue. That is going to be 

a growth industry, I think, for all of us. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. I think we are all going to have to get out to Fort 

Sill. 

Ms. DeLauro. 

BLACKHAWK HELICOPTER

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And, again, thank you both for being here today. 

I am going to follow up with a parochial issue as well. I think 

it is something that you are well aware of, it is important to the 

district, and that is the Blackhawk helicopter. Sikorsky makes the 

finest helicopter in the world, and Connecticut is their district. 

So let me direct my first question to you, Madam Secretary. I understand the Army is going to be focusing on purchasing the Mike 

models of the Blackhawk. I am concerned though that since the 

multi-year contract expires in 2026 there could be a gap in the contract with the industry. Can you tell me how you and the team will 

work to shrink or eliminate that gap so production can continue 

without interruption? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
172 

Secretary WORMUTH. Absolutely, Congresswoman. When the current multiyear contract expires it is our plan to have essentially a 

heel-to-toe arrangement so that the next 5-year multiyear contract 

will start immediately. We will buy 24 helicopters annually for 5 

years for a total of 120. That is the plan. So we will work closely 

with the company to make sure that the negotiations are worked 

out so that we can have no break between the two multiyear contracts. 

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very, very much. 

And just in terms of the Army’s commitment to the Blackhawk, 

how many Blackhawk helicopters will remain in the force, for how 

long? What will the Army do to ensure an adequate number of 

Blackhawks for the Army National Guard? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Let me take that a couple pieces at a time. 

We expect the Blackhawk to remain a very important part of our 

overall aviation portfolio for years to come. The Mike model is a 20- 

year airframe, and those are the ones that we will be buying with 

the new 5-year multiyear. So they will be in the fleet for a very 

long time. 

I am sure you are also aware, you know, there are—reflecting on 

the quality of American equipment, there are a lot of allies who 

would like to buy Blackhawks, and so I expect we will continue to 

see quite a bit in foreign military sales. So I think those will go 

on for quite a while. 

And we will be—in terms of the Army Guard, who had originally 

been intended to get the Victor model, which only has a 10-year 

lifespan for the airframe, we will be providing the Army Guard 

over time with the Mike models, so I think they are quite pleased 

about that. 

Ms. DELAURO. What is the focus of the Army’s Blackhawk modernization plan, characteristics, and performance needed to improve the Blackhawk to keep pace with the rest of the force during 

its remaining decades of service? And has the Army identified 

funding for 2025 over the future year’s defense program to execute 

the planned modernization? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Let me say a few things and then, Chief, 

if you want to add anything. 

We do have R&D in the budget as we did the rebalancing of the 

overall aviation portfolio for continued upgrades to Blackhawk. 

Some of that is looking at open system architectures. Some of that 

is also going to be doing the integration work to bring the ITEP 

engine, the new engine eventually into Blackhawk as well as the 

Apache, so those are some of the things that we will be doing with 

the Blackhawk going forward. 

General GEORGE. I guess, the only thing that I would add, Congresswoman, is—and I have spent a lot of time in the back of 

Blackhawks, and it is a great aircraft—is we are also looking at 

sensors, we are also looking at how you would match launch effects 

that come with these aircraft. So kind of what we said upfront, we 

are look—these are areas we are going to have to continuously 

transform, and the Blackhawk is going to be a part of our formation, a very important part of it, and we will have to continue to 

transform as we move forward. 

Ms. DELAURO. Great. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
173 

I appreciate your indulging me in these questions. As you can 

tell, it really is a top priority for me. It is a top priority for my community, as you have known, for a long time. 

ADDITIONAL SECURITY SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING

If I could just ask about the security supplemental. The Army 

has requested approximately $10 billion to support activities in and 

for Ukraine and for additional activities in the Middle East. How 

are you funding activities to support Ukraine and the Middle East, 

and what will happen if these activities are not funded with additional supplemental funds? What will suffer without these additional funds? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that. 

There is really—I think there is three pieces of the supplemental 

that are really important to the Army. You know, first of all, we 

have given the Ukrainians $10 billion worth of equipment and material, and we have been essentially planning on the supplemental 

coming through so that we can replenish that equipment that we 

have given to the Ukrainians. So we intend to, you know, use that 

money to buy AMPVs, to buy some of the Paladins that I talked 

about earlier, to buy more JLTVs. So that replenishment is really 

important. The second piece is the investment in munitions, particularly the 155-millimeter shells and getting up to 100,000 

rounds a month that General George spoke about. 

And the last piece I would highlight in the supplemental that is 

really hitting us right now is we have cash flowed about $800 million to train the Ukrainians and also to do some support in 

CENTCOM. So if we don’t get that supplemental, we are going to 

not have money, basically by the end of May, to be able to get the 

current units who are over there in Europe doing the reassurance 

mission. We don’t have the transportation money to have them redeploy. We don’t have the transportation money to send units to 

backfill them. We won’t be able to support our participation in 

things like K4 or exercises in European Command in the third and 

fourth quarter. So there is some real problems for us that are going 

to come out if we don’t have that supplemental. 

Ms. DELAURO. I will yield back in just a second, but I just want 

to make the point on the replenishment. I am not sure how well 

widely understood it is the that we are paying a price for not moving forward on a supplemental. And obviously continue that 

Ukraine will pay a very, very big price if we are not there, and our 

own ability to be able to keep our word and let our allies know that 

we—our commitment—our word is our bond in these areas. But 

above all, we cannot replenish unless we have the supplemental. 

That hurts the industrial base here. 

Thank you so much. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. All right. Probably need to get out to Stratford, 

Connecticut, too. 

Ms. DELAURO. Amen. You are welcome. It really is a wonderful 

experience, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. CALVERT. There you go. 

Mr. Rogers. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
174 

FURTHER AID TO UKRAINE

Mr. ROGERS. President Zelenskyy says that without the further 

aid from the U.S. the Ukraine will assuredly succumb to the rapturous war of Putin. Can either of you confirm President 

Zelenskyy’s characterization of where we are? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Congressman, I think, you know, General 

Cavoli, our head of U.S. European Command, was on the Hill earlier today, and I think he said if you can’t—the side that can’t 

shoot back loses. And at this point, Ukraine is really starting to be 

pressed to be able to shoot back. So I am very concerned, you know. 

We saw Ukraine lose some territory, you know, a couple of months 

ago, and I think, you know, there is a real danger that they could 

have—that the Russians could have a breakthrough somewhere in 

the line. 

So I am sure Chief would want to say more about that. 

General GEORGE. I think that was well stated. I would agree 

with that. I mean, they need the ability to have, you know, return 

fire, long-range fires. I would be concerned about what they have 

for air defense and the ability to defend their critical infrastructure 

and their formations, all of those, so I would agree with that. 

Mr. ROGERS. Do you worry about the image that we are throwing 

out there, particularly to the Eastern European former SSRs who 

see us not defending them? Is that a problem for us to worry 

about? 

General GEORGE. I will just comment, Congressman, that I think 

every Chad or Army chief that comes to see me is very concerned 

about that. They, you know, looking at that as commitment and, 

you know, where is our commitment. And what I have found interesting is it is not just in Eastern Europe, there is a lot of countries 

that ask the same question around the world, so same thing in the 

Pacific that are watching what our support is. 

LAND MINES IN UKRAINE

Mr. ROGERS. One of the main problems in Ukraine are land 

mines, which apparently are being sold throughout the country by 

the Russians. What can you say about that, and what can we do 

about it? 

General GEORGE. Again, I think that comes down to, you know, 

what you are providing. It is a perplexing problem with all the obstacles and everything that has been placed over there. It is not 

only danger to a force, it is danger to anybody who is around in 

that environment. So I think it would—it is going to take a lot of 

engineering assets to clear that, and I think it would also take a 

lot of time whenever we have seen that with mines. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you for your service, both of you. Yield. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. And I thank the chairman for the 

quick time, because we need to finish this hearing by 3:55 because 

we have a special meeting we need to attend to. 

So with that, Ms. Kaptur, you are recognized. 

HYPERSONICS, PERSONNEL, AND ABRAMS TANKS

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for your testimonies today. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
175 

I regret the inability of this current House of Representatives to 

pass legislation so essential to the defense of liberty and do not 

count myself among those who are holding up the process. And it 

makes your life exceedingly difficult, and all of this is completely 

unnecessary. 

Now, I have four topics real quickly. I am going to ask about 

hypersonics and advancements there. I am going to ask about personnel and your ability to staff with mechanics and people who are 

technicians, any shortages there. I am going to mention Abrams 

tanks and Ukraine, and then, finally, Iran and its capabilities. 

So on the first one, just a quick update on the progress you are 

making on hypersonics, both offensive and defensive. 

Number two, in terms of your staffing, are you having any difficulty in Army in having enough mechanics and people who are 

trained technicians to work on equipment, and if you are, are you 

working with your Reserve units around the country that do have 

excess equipment and could be doing training on some of the Reserve bases? 

Number three, Abrams tanks have their capabilities, those are 

made in Ohio, we are proud of them. Congressman Joyce and I 

support them. And have they made a difference in Ukraine, and 

what more could we do if they are being effective? 

And then, finally, on Iran, give us your assessment of Iran’s intent in the region that she is having a tremendous influence on. Is 

her capacity growing? Is she receding in some of her capabilities? 

I don’t have a real sense of that, but I think it is a really important 

question. Thank you. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Okay. Lightning round. I will start with 

Ukraine—start with Iran and say, you know, I think we are all in 

the Defense Department quite concerned about Iran and its capabilities. I think it is—you know, one of the things it seeks to do in 

the region is to be destabilizing, both directly but also through its 

use of proxies in Iraq and Syria. I think the relationship that 

seems to be growing between Iran and Russia is concerning, so 

that is just a snapshot of, I think, how I would see Iran. 

The Ukrainians, you know, I think have—very much value the 

tanks that we provided to them and find them very effective. I 

can’t comment extensively on how much they have used them, but 

I know when I talked to the Ukrainian leader in Germany, he said 

they have a lot of—the soldiers feel more confident going on offense 

when they are in the tanks or in our Bradleys because they feel 

protected and they have that additional protection while they are, 

you know, having mobility at the same time. 

On personnel, I think the challenge we have with mechanics in 

my experience, what I hear from soldiers, is because of the recruiting challenges we just—our soldiers who are mechanics have more 

work to do because we don’t have as many soldiers generally as we 

need. So that is what I have heard and, you know, we are working 

very hard on recruiting to try to make sure that we increase the 

number of soldiers overall. 

Long-range hypersonic weapon, we are working on that diligently 

with the Navy. We will have another test later this year. As I said 

to Chairman Calvert, you know, this is a 10-year program that we 

have sort of compressed into 4 years, so we are going very, very 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
176 

fast. And I think some of the testing we have done in parallel is 

part of—you know, it is harder to determine where the problem 

areas are when you are doing—testing multiple things all at the 

same time. So we are moving to trying to have a more sequential 

approach to our testing so that we can really nail down where we 

have issues. And I think, you know, we are hopeful that we will 

have a good test later this year. 

I don’t know, Chief, if you want to add. 

General GEORGE. I am just going to add a couple things. I just 

was out at Joint Base LewisMcChord. We have a hypersonics battery that is out there, and I will tell you, once we get this round, 

which I think is coming, that battery is training, testing, you know, 

ready to go, and so I think that will be a capability we are coming 

out. 

On the mechanics, the other thing that we are looking at and 

there is broadly—we are down on some of that. We need to, you 

know, recruit more mechanics and people with technical expertise. 

We do use the Guard and Reserve and we try to plan this out for 

exercises, Guard and Reserve—— 

Ms. KAPTUR. General, I want to help you on this, just know that, 

on the mechanics side. 

General GEORGE. Okay. To get them into, you know, into exercises and where they can help us and our ordnance companies. We 

are also trying to get rid of excess inside of our formation so that 

we don’t have—we are not maintaining things that we don’t need 

to maintain. We are in the process of doing that. 

On the Abrams tank, I will—it is the best tank in the world. And 

if—in all of these, for success on the battlefield and being out there, 

it requires combined arms, so it is with everything else. And I have 

heard the same thing that the Secretary has heard, and that you 

get a certain level of confidence though when you have an M1 tank 

inside of your formation. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. 

Next, Judge Carter. 

Mr. CARTER. Me? 

Mr. CALVERT. Yep. 

Mr. CARTER. Oh. 

Mr. CALVERT. You got here earlier. 

CREDENTIALING AND TUITION ASSISTANCE

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you both for being here. Let me apologize for not 

being able to meet with you the other day. It wasn’t my fault. It 

was an air controller who wouldn’t let us take off. 

I want to first ask about something that is near and dear to my 

heart. I would like to ask about the credentialing and tuition assistance. I have heard reports that the Army may be looking to reduce these programs. As you may know, the program for 

credentialing assistance was at Fort Cavazos. I am deeply concerned that cuts in these programs will not only hurt recruiting 

and retention but also hurt the soldiers’ ability to transition out of 

the military and be prepared for civilian life after they served our 

Nation for a long time. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
177 

Can you understand—can you let me—help me understand what 

the Army is reviewing in these programs and that no decision—I 

understand that no decision has been made yet, but I would like 

to know what you are looking at specifically cutting these programs 

and what analysis you have done as to how this will impact recruiting and retention? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Congressman Carter. Good to 

see you. You are correct, we have not made any decisions about the 

credentialing assistance program or the tuition assistance program. 

We have been looking at the credentialing program. It is a great 

program. We support it. You know, we know our soldiers value certifications that they can then use when they leave the Army. That 

was a pilot program essentially that has met with catastrophic success, and the challenge we have is we didn’t frankly really put any 

guardrails around the program to help us scope it. 

So what we are looking at, we haven’t made any decisions yet, 

but what we are looking at is, you know, rather than having soldiers be able to pursue an unlimited number of credentials every 

year in perpetuity, we may look at saying soldiers could do, you 

know, one certification a year, maybe have sort of a cap on the 

number of certifications they can get over the duration of their 

time in the Army, really just to try to manage the costs of the program a little bit better. But that is sort of how we are thinking 

right now, and those kinds of guardrails are very similar to what 

our sister services have done in the Air Force and the Navy. 

Mr. CARTER. General. 

General GEORGE. Yeah. Only thing I would add, Congressman, is 

how we transition our soldiers. We obviously want to keep them. 

That is our number one goal is to keep everybody, but how we 

transition them is critically important to us in doing that and making sure, and that is important to us also for our recruiting mission 

because we know that when people come into the Army they are 

going to get a skill, they are going to enjoy what they are doing, 

and then we want to send them back out there. So we are looking 

at all of this in total. 

Mr. CARTER. Well, thank you. 

APACHE MODERNIZATION FUNDING

The Apache helicopter is in my district. With the cancellation of 

the FARA, I have yet to hear what the Army’s plan is for funding 

modernization of the Apache. Could you speak to what plan you 

have and where the funding might come from? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly. We are very much—you know, 

the Apache is another great helicopter. My XO sitting behind me 

is an Apache pilot as well as a Blackhawk pilot. We are going to 

continue to modernize the Apache over time, and there is money 

in the budget to do that. You know, really what we are looking at 

with Apache is, again, how to have more open system architecture 

so that we can do upgrades over time more quickly and more easily 

than we have in the past. 

The other thing that we are looking with Apache is taking a little 

bit more time to figure out exactly how we are going to integrate 

the new ITEP engine into both Apache and Blackhawk. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
178 

Mr. CARTER. I have got some more time. I understand the Army 

is considering looking at privatization of barracks. Out of curiosity, 

have you looked at allowing the E–5s to move out of the barracks. 

They could potentially reduce the number of barracks we need to 

build and help reduce cause for maintenance. I don’t know the 

math on how this cause would work, but I would be interested in 

hearing this. 

And I also understand you are looking to recruit older people to 

be brought into the military and they are not going to be wanting 

to live in the barracks, especially if they are given special duties 

where they are not going to have a lot of promotion and they might 

spend 10 years in a barrack and the guy that you a 25-year-old is 

not going to be interested in being in a barrack until 35. Would you 

like to answer that? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Sure, I will start and then Chief if you 

want to add. We are looking at a couple—— 

Mr. CALVERT. Also if you want to do that for the record, we can 

get that back to you, Judge. And then that way we can—— 

Mr. CARTER. Yeah, maybe so. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Okay. Happy to do that. 

Mr. CALVERT. We will do that, and keep things going. 

Mr. Case. 

PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE

Mr. CASE. Thank you. 

Madam Secretary, I just wanted to take off on your brief comments opening on the Pacific deterrence initiative and I think we 

would all obviously agree that our challenge is in the Indo-Pacific 

and that we need to focus on that and we need to plan for it from 

budgetary perspective. But to be really honest with you I am trying 

to figure out what Pacific deterrence initiative actually means nowadays and whether it has the purpose that I think Congress envisioned which was to quantify our efforts in a joint coordinated way 

so that we were sure we are on the right path in terms of doing 

what we need to do in the Indo-Pacific and funding for it also, so 

the EDI model. And I understand there are questions about OCO, 

et cetera, et cetera. But I am just talking about the use of a mechanism inside the DOD and that we, in Congress, can use to quantify 

whether we are on the right track. I have a couple of concerns in 

that department. 

I think first of all as I look at the fiscal year 2025 overall PDI 

summary from DOD, including the Department of the Army, you 

cited $1.5 billion to PDI. If I look at the categories of things that 

you have stuck in PDI, frankly some of them are exclusively 

INDOPACOM so that is fair game. But some of them seem to be 

usable anywhere in the world. So then I ask myself, well, what is 

the good at that. That wasn’t what PDI was supposed to be about. 

PDI was not supposed to be about things that are designed—and 

I am quoting from your thing, design to address or deter broader 

strategic threats easily transferable between theaters, routine activities and exercises. Some of that seems to fit in that category so 

I am wondering how they were categorized there. Number one. 

And then number two, if I look at your FYDP over time the overall PDI is declining precipitously over the next 5 years, including 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
179 

the Army which is going down something like 60 percent. I think 

the figure I have got here is $1.5 billion requested down to .9 billion by fiscal year 2029. 

So I guess my real question here is again I want something that 

I can look at and go, okay, yeah, we have got everything in that 

box and we know what we have to do in the Indo-Pacific. We know 

what we have to do for the geopolitical challenge of China and all 

services, this is what you need to be doing, and this is how much 

it is going to cost, and this is what we have to do over the next 

5 years plus. And I don’t think I am getting that in the PDI. 

So I am thinking to myself well, do we have to fix PDI somehow 

in Congress or somehow in another way to get what we are after 

here. Do you have any comments on what PDI means to you nowadays? Why are we seeing such a loose bunch of stuff in PDI in 

my estimation? And why do we see it going down so precipitously 

over 5 years? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Let me take a shot at that, Congressman. 

I think what I would say and I can understand your frustration, 

I think as someone who was in the Defense Department, when the 

European Deterrence Initiative was created, there is I think a pretty significant difference between EDI and PDI, which is that the 

European Deterrence Initiative came with a pot of money from 

Congress that was sort of firewalled. Whereas when Pacific Deterrence Initiative was created, it didn’t have that. It was sort of the 

same concept, but very importantly without the money. 

And so now I do think you have a situation where we in Congress—one thing I can assure you is the Army is very, very focused 

on INDOPACOM as the priority theater and our whole strategy as 

a Department is very, very focused on INDOPACOM as the priority 

theater. That is how Secretary Austin and the deputy worked with 

us and the services to try to align our investments. They grade our 

POMs very much on whether they think it is meeting the challenge 

there. 

So I think I feel confident that our budget is putting the money 

that we need to put towards that theater. But I certainly can understand that from an accounting perspective it can be hard sometimes to get a real sense of whether you have everything. And 

there is also I think the report that INDOPACOM generates as 

well I think which is a very large list of requirements. 

Mr. CASE. Probably because and I am just guessing at this, because some of the PDI—it is not in PDI. 

They have to find it somewhere. They have to emphasize what 

is necessary in the Indo-Pacific. Do you think it is possible to have 

a PDI without an OCO style dedicated source of funding as in the 

EDI? Does it just at that point just become, as somebody actually 

referenced an accounting mechanism inside DOD? And an imperfect one at that, because obviously we are not just spending $9.9 

billion on the Indo-Pacific. 

Secretary WORMUTH. We certainly feel the loss of OCO. I think 

that is fair to say. And I would say that within the top line that 

we have, it would be hard for us to put more money than we have 

in our base budget towards INDOPACOM. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Next Mr. Garcia. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
180 

JUNIOR ENLISTED PAY

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, I want to thank you both for your service to our country. I want to focus on the troops here. In California last week, and 

we brought this up in an earlier hearing with SECNAV as well, 

and we have had discussions with SecDef about it as well. California last week raised its minimum wage to $20 an hour. Okay 

so you have got 18, 19-year olds working at McDonald’s who are 

making almost double what an E–1 makes when they come into 

the service. An E–1 right now even with the 5 percent raise last 

year and the 4.5 percent increase in this President’s budget request 

is still $22,000, $23,000 a year. And so we are competing from a 

recruitment perspective with fast food workers, right? And those 

guys aren’t putting their lives on the line everyday like our soldiers 

are. This isn’t just a problem in California, it is a problem in multiple States Virginia, Florida where the cost of living is higher and 

the pay is still low. 

I have been pushing and this committee’s done great job this 

subcommittee has done a great job, unfortunately the Senate 

stripped out our Pay Raise Act which would have started base pay 

of an E–1 from taking it from $22,000 a year to $31,000 a year. 

And that increase about a 35, 38 percent increase would have actually rippled up through the E–6 ranks, okay. 

So it takes E–1 through E–6 where we are recognizing not only 

the recruiting challenges but also the retention challenges at about 

the year 4, year 5 mark on the enlistment side. And at least from 

a salary perspective gets more competitive with their peer groups 

and the civilian sector. 

And ranking member McCollum has been very clear about this 

as well and this isn’t just a money pay salary issue. It is a quality 

of life, it is daycare on the base. It is quality of the barracks. It 

is not having to live in squalor where your civilian counterparts 

aren’t. 

But we need help on this, we need more pull from the Secretary, 

we need more pull frankly from the President and prioritizing this 

pay gap right now that is very significant and is a forcing function. 

There are other things driving the recruitment problems. There are 

other things driving the retention problems, but the pay is significant. 

To enact that Raise Act and it is my bill it is called the Raise 

Act it is takes it from $22,000 to $31,000 a year, that ripples up 

through the E–6 and compresses it, so generally you wouldn’t be 

getting that 30 percent pay raise but you do not need that 30 percent pay raise. Your soldiers need that, the junior enlisted do. But 

it basically gets them above that $15 minimum wage sort of Federal recognized minimum wage number, right? And it gets them off 

of food stamps frankly. It gets them above the poverty line. The 

cost of that is roughly anywhere from half to 1 percent of the total 

DOD’s budget to implement it. So we are not—we are talking, you know, $7 to $8 billion to implement this junior enlisted Pay Raise Act. So the 4.5 percent in 

the President’s budget request is barely going to keep pace with inflation. The last I think 5 years we have seen a cumulative of 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
181 

roughly 25 percent to 27 percent inflation while the sum of the pay 

raises that we have given our troops and especially the junior enlisted is something like 14 to 15 percent. So we are putting them 

further and further behind the power curve. 

So the ask is that we support higher pay and I know that that 

is not in the President’s budget request. We are going to try to legislate our way through that and create a new pay table that increases that E–1 through E–6 pay. But I think that goes a long 

way. 

And right now if you ask an 18-year-old if he wants to go work 

at In-N–Out for $22 an hour or join the Army for the equivalent 

of $12 an hour you are going to get 95 percent of them going to 

In-N-Out even if they love the country, even if they want to serve, 

they just cant afford to go join the Army right now and that is a 

fundamental problem. 

So we would respectfully request support for that. We can look 

at all the other elements that go to the quality of life and holistic 

pay and whatnot. 

I will submit for the record a question around the FARA 

cancelation. 

Mr. GARCIA. We sunk about $2 billion in an acquisition program, 

industry put in about $500 million of IRATA of their own money 

getting to a point where we did. It did kind of surprise a lot of us. 

I know you were communicating with some folks but I would like 

to get a deeper dive on the explanation of the sudden cancelation. 

I know Congress didn’t help, the CR didn’t help, but if we can get 

all the details. 

And the last thing I would recommend is beyond high energy lasers and high energy microwaves that I know are very useful in 

counter UAS, counter drone. There is new technology out there 

that I have gotten to do classified briefs on for high energy RF 

where it is basically an AUSA radar that uses larger brick size 

rays instead of little TR modules like you find in a fire control 

radar, the beam steering basically uses high energy RF capability 

and is a little more stable than high energy lasers for instance. 

Mr. CALVERT. You will get back to them. 

Mr. GARCIA. And I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. If you could get back to them for the record that 

would be great. 

Mr. CALVERT. Dutch. 

IMPACT OF SHORT-TERM SPENDING MEASURES

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I can’t even sit down? 

Secretary, congratulations on what you have done. You have 

done a good job. General, you too. You have got a good team and 

that is what counts. 

Secretary Wormuth and General, you can answer some questions 

here too, the question I am going to ask, not many. 

I don’t know what this year holds in store, but I do know that 

the last time that the Department went a fiscal year without operating under a continuing resolution was back in 1997. Now could 

you provide a brief overview of how short-term spending measures 

impact the Army? What do we put at risk when we don’t pass fundVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00185 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
182 

ing bills on time, especially when it comes to competing with 

China? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Absolutely—— 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Or other adversaries too but basically 

China. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Congressman. And I am sure 

the chief will want to add to this. I think of when we are operating 

under a continuing resolution, which you all know we were in the 

first 6 months of this year under CRs, we are basically trying to 

compete with China with one hand tied behind our back, you know. 

We are not able to spend the money that we have in the most efficient way. We are not able to do reprogramming. We can’t do new 

starts on some of the, you know, very important modernization programs that we have. Sometimes it can delay our military construction. So at a time where we don’t have a moment to lose in terms 

of all of the new modernization we are doing, operating under CRs 

can be very challenging. 

General GEORGE. Yeah, Congressman. I will just give you one example, the battlefield is changing, what our troops were over there 

in the Middle East and if we wanted to make some adjustment and 

bring something to counter UAS system for example and we can’t 

start something new, we can’t increase production on the missiles 

that we need. So it has a real impact. 

And then the other thing I will just say is then when you get the 

money you have a very limited time to spend it and that is also 

a challenge for us and has been. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. All right. Well thank you. In the past few 

decades is there any indication at all, it seems that the Department 

keeps getting put in these intractable solutions. And I will be honest I don’t know what the solution is. So do you have any ideas 

about other authorities and spending flexibilities that would enable 

the Army to overcome the challenges that continuing resolutions 

represent? Both of you. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, Congressman, the last thing I would 

want to do is to try to tell Congress how to do its business. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. It is a good idea. 

Secretary WORMUTH. I think the PPBES Commission that recently I think put out its final report had some good recommendations in a lot of areas for sort of how we in the Department can 

work more effectively with you all in Congress to have a more agile 

budgeting system. You know, there might be some good ideas 

there. But beyond that—the only other thing I would say, and this 

is something the chief feels very strongly about, it is not CR specific, but is it possible in some very targeted ways for us have more 

flexibility in where we invest the programs, you know, inside of a 

particular portfolio for example to allow us to be more agile in 

terms of going after new technology but that is not really CR specific. 

General GEORGE. Congressman, I mentioned this up front. There 

are three areas where I think we have to be more flexible and that 

is counter UAS, counter unmanned systems, unmanned systems 

ourselves, so that we can detect and do all the things that we need 

do on the modern battlefield and then the electronic warfare. All 

of that is changing really quick. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
183 

So I think internal to the Army what we are looking at doing is 

not having a specific program but we need to have a portfolio 

where—because the industry is changing really fast, there is a lot 

of small companies out there. American ingenuity is the best in the 

world and we need to have the flexibility do that. 

What I think would be helpful is because of the continuing resolutions if in those three areas that we had flexibility between research and development and then we would come over obviously for 

the oversight and say, hey, this is something, you know, we need 

this system, we want to procure it and it would be a notification. 

I think that would help us with the continuing resolutions. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. That is a good idea. Because we have got 

to do something. Because we are changing so much and the whole 

world is changing. And we have to stay dominant as a democracy. 

We have to start doing more of this and think out of the box for 

the future. 

Thank you for your answers. And I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Womack. 

COMBAT TRAINING CENTER ROTATIONS

Mr. WOMACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the two witnesses we have here today. Madam Secretary, Chief, great to have 

both of you here today. 

Before I get to my questions, a couple of things, I want to take 

a moment of personal privilege to recognize that gentleman sitting 

over by the camera in the very back of the room wearing that Navy 

shirt. To my colleagues this is Harrison Henry. He is soon to become part of the class of 2028 at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. He is a Fayetteville High School kid in Arkansas. He and his dad Mark are here. They are headed over to Annapolis this weekend. They missed the hearing this morning. Actually, I think that was on purpose. I think they are here spying on 

the Army. But Harrison we are really proud of you. And I know 

this committee is proud of you and your classmates that will join 

you at the Naval Academy. Congratulations. 

One of a note, I want to mention this as well because this could 

involve action of our leadership team here in the House and that 

is that 2 days ago the last surviving medal of honor recipient from 

the Korean War Colonel Ralph Puckett passed away down in Columbus, Georgia. 

My oh my, medal of honor, DSC, couple of silver stars, five purple hearts, probably the most—I develop know he was the most 

decorated in Korea, but he was one of for sure. And I know there 

will be a request forthcoming from people very close to that family 

about the potential for him to lie in state as I think we did with 

Woody Williams from World War II. And I hope our leadership 

team will give that some serious thought. We are losing a lot of our 

heroes these days and we should be mindful of the sacrifices that 

they have made for all of us. 

Madam Secretary, General George, I want to go back to comments made about the supplemental. I don’t want to beat this dead 

horse, but I am going to join the chorus of people that think that 

we need to act posthaste on a supplemental. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
184 

What concerns me as much as anything, General George, is the 

potential for us to be canceling combat training center rotations as 

a result of the our inability to move forces and train them appropriately. I personally think it is the secret sauce in readiness that 

be gets our warfighters prepared and ready to fight and win. 

So I want to give you an opportunity to comment on that. That 

is a real threat right now. I suppose that we could see some of 

these training center rotations go by the wayside. 

General GEORGE. I would just tell you, Congressman, we are 

going to have to make, based on what Secretary said earlier, we 

are going to have to make some tough choices that we are going 

to look, you know, look all around. CTCs will be very tough for us. 

I have been to I think four times already this year, it is kind of 

our crown jewel of where we are going to train and adapt for the 

future. So we don’t want to have to make those kind of tough 

choices and we need that for our readiness. 

Mr. WOMACK. Madam Secretary? 

Secretary WORMUTH. That is exactly right. I mean, I think we 

would really try to protect the 22, I think, CTC rotations that we 

have. You know, we could look at reducing participation, you know, 

skinnying it down a little bit, but I think we would really avoid 

canceling it all together. But those are the kinds of hard choices 

we are looking at if we don’t see the supplemental come across the 

finish line. 

Mr. WOMACK. I think we have a role in that and hopefully we 

can get to it. 

I want to go back to counter UAS. I note that in the budget nearly $450 million for counter UAS capability in your unfunded priority list. Now there is money for counter UAS but there is additional money in the unfunded list. Is it fair to assume that that is 

just something that you need but because of all of the other requirements you are just unable to get the full amount in the base 

budget? 

General GEORGE. We have, Congressman, we have some—we 

have a good amount in our base budget. We have some that we requested in the supplemental. And then when I was asked for unfunded priority list the world has changed a lot since we put in our 

budget and what happened last October 7th. And I know there are 

things on there that we would like to do like increase production 

for Coyote missiles that have been very effective. There are other 

systems from Andril for example so we would like to spend on that. 

So there is really two things in that unfunded priority list that 

is ramping up production for the things that we couldn’t quite get 

to and then a lot of it is how the battlefield is changing. 

Mr. WOMACK. I want to thank you both for your service and for 

your ascension to the chief’s role General George we are honored 

to have you here today. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Mr. Cuellar. 

APACHE MODERNIZATION

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you Mr. Chairman and ranking member for 

having this meeting. I want to thank both of you very much for 

your service to the country. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
185 

Madam Secretary, you are from College Station. What happened 

to Texas A&M? I am just kidding. 

Secretary WORMUTH. The last time I went back it has gotten 

enormous. Oh, my goodness. The new Kyle Field, like, blocks the 

sun. 

Mr. CUELLAR. And it has grown. I think John Carter and I know 

this. 

I want to follow up on something that the judge mentioned. My understanding it is $81 million for we are talking about Apaches, 

$81 million for modifications and $8 million to modernize the whole 

fleet. That certainly is not enough right? If those numbers are correct. 

Secretary WORMUTH. What I can tell you, Congressman, is you 

know, we are committed to Apache. It is going to stay in the fleet 

for a long time. I was just talking to the folks who build Apache 

and they felt I think pretty comfortable with where we are. So we 

do plan on continually upgrading it. It is not at any risk. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Okay. We certainly want to work with you on that 

Judge and I—— 

HUMAN PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION

Let me talk about one item that I am really proud of what you 

all are doing, the Army. I think the Army is leading all services 

in human performance optimization. And as you know, it is important to make sure that we get elite soldiers, mind, body, everything. And I certainly want to say thank you so much for the efforts that you all are doing. I know that through the help of the 

chairman and the ranking we are able at $15 million there for the 

UT Health Science Center in San Antonio working on optimization 

and we are working with your Department. 

But if you can tell us, right now my understanding is that the 

Army’s using that for active soldiers. Any plans for the Reserves 

or the guards or is it just for active soldiers right now? 

And again, I really want to—I have talked to your folks, my military fellow we spent a lot of time past military fellows have been— 

and the Army is doing a wonderful job and I hope that the other 

departments do the same thing. Human optimization, human performance optimization is to make sure we get the best soldiers. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Congressman. 

Yeah, we have found the health and holistic fitness program to 

be really, really effective. It is both helping our soldiers get more 

fit, but it is also helping them become more resilient. We have been 

accelerating the buy of those sets to brigades by about 15 to 20 a 

year. 

For the guard and Reserves our plan is to try to start bringing 

those types of capabilities to the guard and Reserves, sort of starting in fiscal year 2026, 2027 and going out to fiscal year 2030. Particularly with the Reserves and how distributed they are we are 

going to have to take a somewhat different approach, but we do 

plan to eventually get that kind of capability to the COMPO 2 and 

3. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Sir. 

General GEORGE. Yeah, I think the other thing that we had discussions with the guard and I have gotten together with a lot of 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
186 

the tags is how do we—you look at Peloton app or Nike fit app, 

what are ways that we can do this a little bit different. Every time 

I go to an installation we are going 15 more health and holistic fitness. It is making our warriors better. And it is not surprising to 

me, I mean, you feel better about yourself and you are more fit. 

You are just going to be more resilient on the battlefield and everywhere else. So we are going to continue to invest in that. 

The challenge that we have is obviously we are competing with 

everybody else to hire nutritionists, strength coaches, performance 

coaches and all of those things. And so some areas we are growing 

as quickly as we want and others we have to push a little more. 

Mr. CUELLAR. And again, we thank you. We just want to make 

sure we are very supportive. Because this work especially it does 

prevent a lot of the military injuries that can be prevented. And 

it is not only just what you eat and what you exercise, it is really 

your mind. 

Studies have shown that you could use that especially when you 

have soldiers working under pressure situations and they have to 

make a decision there is a lot of things. And, as you know, a lot 

of the research the Department of Defense does goes on to the general population and it is also on aging, you know, how do you age 

better? I mean just because you got old doesn’t mean that you have 

to be in a difficult situation. So it has not only good for our soldiers 

but certainly for our general population. 

So I want to thank you, my time is up. But I certainly want to 

thank you for leading the services on human performance optimization. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Joyce. 

LONG RANGE MILITARY PLATFORMS

Mr. JOYCE. Given that the Army’s tactical fire study revalidated 

the need for longer range military platform, what is the Army’s 

plan and timeline to get IRKA into the production phase with the 

proposed cut in fiscal year 2025? 

General GEORGE. I think our challenge was—is basically was the 

technology, you know, not being ready which is why it was extended. The requirement to have long range fires, Congressman, 

has not changed. I do think that the battlefield is changing. I do 

think that technology is changing. 

One of the things that we need to really focus on, this gets back 

to cost curve as well, is how do we adjust the round, how do we 

adjust the missile? What are the things that we can do I think to 

increase performance? But long range fires is critically important. 

It is ground based long range fires. So we are definitely focused on 

that particular aspect. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Congressman, if I could add to what the 

chief said, he mentioned the engineering challenges we had with 

the barrel. What we are planning to do because as the chief said 

we need—the requirement remains, we are going to do a performance demo this summer with industry. 

There are other platforms that we think could potentially meet 

our needs so we are going to have a bunch of folks who have capaVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00190 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
187 

bilities that they think might be useful and we expect we will probably select one of those for production in fiscal year 2025. 

Mr. JOYCE. You have spent a fair amount of money to date, 

though, in testing this equipment, correct? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, that is true. And I think, you know, 

what we have found you all in Congress have been great about giving us some new authorities to allow us to develop and acquire systems more quickly than we have had in the past. We have been 

making good use of those. 

And I think one of the lessons coming out of our experience with 

IRKA, is that which we will apply going forward to all of our modernization programs is we need to have more points where we can 

have off ramps if we see that a system isn’t working. 

Because I think we probably if we had to do it over again would 

have off ramped away from IRKA a little bit sooner. So we will 

build that into our acquisition plans as we go forward. 

Mr. JOYCE. So that is something you would need on your end, not 

so much we would have to put it in. 

Secretary WORMUTH. That is right. You have given us the authority, you know, we are making use of them and I think we are 

learning quite a bit as we go. We have been doing much more this 

kind of—and the chief alluded to it earlier bringing industry soldiers and our acquisition professionals together to do touch points 

as we go. 

So we have had a lot of learning in the last several years in 

terms of how we are using these new authorities. And I think we 

did learn some process lessons from the experience with IRKA. 

Mr. JOYCE. Fair enough. 

REENLISTMENT BONUSES

Madam Secretary, on March 1st 2024 the Army National Guard 

issued a memo suspending reenlistment bonuses effective immediately. The sudden suspension was due to a miscalculation by 

Army National Guards planners who forecasted the amount of 

funds needed and anticipated a volume of troops planning to continue their service. 

A week later, the National Guard restarted issuing reenlistment 

bonuses on March 8. However, the updated policy cannot be applied retroactively, meaning that those who signed reenlistment 

packages between March 1st and March 7th will not be eligible for 

those bonuses. 

A, how did this miscalculation first occur? And what actions are 

made to ensure that it doesn’t occur again. And secondly, what are 

we going to do with the people in the March 1 to March 7th space? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, Congressman, I think a couple of 

things. Obviously with all of the different tags and all of the different States it is a little harder I think sometimes to manage our 

pay, bonuses, reenlistment bonuses, than it is for us in the active— 

for the active part of the force. So I think there are some lessons 

learned for the Army guard in terms of managing these types of 

programs and putting in cost controls. 

And this is not the first time frankly we have had some times 

these kind of issues. So my understanding is the Army guard rate 

now is putting in those kinds of cost controls so that we don’t have 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
188 

the kind of situation where they find oops, we have got to stop giving these reenlistment or retention bonuses. And we, I think chief 

and I, can talk to General Jensen about whether there is something to be done with the individuals in that week period. We can 

certainly look it. 

General GEORGE. I will look into the—what I was talking to General Jensen was part of that was coming up against the continuing 

resolution and they were—you know, they had to go back and look 

at money. 

So I do think we have something to learn that would put the 

guardrails in place, but we will look and find out if there—I was 

not tracking anybody that didn’t get that, but we will go back and 

confirm. Close the loop with you. 

Mr. JOYCE. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Appreciate it. 

Mr. Ellzey. 

GAZA PORT

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for being 

here. 

A couple of quick questions. Somehow you all got stuck with establishing a port in Gaza. That is a big headache. How do you anticipate doing that with adequate force protection. What happens 

if things go haywire and you get shot at? And ma’am who is going 

to be building this temporary port? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Sure, happy to talk about that, Congressman. I actually had the opportunity to see the joint logistics over 

the shore capability in Australia this summer when it was out and 

it is a remarkable capability. 

Could say more in a closed session, but we are extremely focused 

on force protection for our Army soldiers who are going to be both 

on the floating peer and the Trident peer that will actually touch 

the beach. There is going to be a very robust and layered security 

approach that General Kurilla in CENTCOM has been working 

very hard with our general—at our Army CENTCOM. 

It is going to be a team effort, Army, Navy, Israeli defense forces 

will all be part of making sure that we have a layered system to 

deal with air threats, maritime threats, undersea threats, ground 

threats. We can give you more detail I think in a closed session because we want to make sure our soldiers are protected. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you. 

General GEORGE. Yeah, I think as you know, Congressman, these 

are joint efforts so that is what we will need to take place. And 

that is why we have talked to General Kurilla on down. We have 

taken a pretty extensive brief on what that is and I feel like they 

have the right force protection measures in place. 

A–10

Mr. ELLZEY. Another question is with the demise of the A–10 

which I know that the Army fought against for many, many years. 

How do you fill the gap caused by the loss of the A–10 in the close 

air support region? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Chief, you are probably better. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
189 

General GEORGE. Yes, I think yes did enjoy the support of the 

A–10. I think it was also a different environment that we were in. 

And I know that the Air Force just like us has to make decisions 

to advance technology and a lot of that technology would not survive on the modern battlefield. 

So I think there are a lot of different ways that we are giving 

the sidebar our own internal support that we have. And we have 

a lot of systems that are coming online right now with long range 

precision fighters that have significant capability to be provide long 

range fires. 

Same thing we are still going to rely on the Air Force and the 

Navy. We have mid-range capability, which I know you are familiar with. So I think again it is a joint battlefield. 

GUAM DEFENSE

Mr. ELLZEY. Okay. As long as they fill the gap. I mean, the A– 

10 it was time for it to go. I just had not heard recently, if you guys 

feel like that was being filled. 

Finally, with the remaining time one quick question, you guys 

are responsible for again a joint way but the defense of Guam is 

that going along as planned? You have got it covered on the budget 

and execution. 

Secretary WORMUTH. I think we have a good approach Congressman. First of all, that is another place joint mission. No, it is not 

just the Army, it is going to be the Navy, the Marines, and the Air 

Force, we all have a role to play. Our responsibility is to come up 

with the architecture for the acquisition system. We are going to 

go have that strategy by the end of May. And the plan is still to 

have a capability by fiscal year 2027. 

One thing I think that has been helpful is the deputy secretary 

established what we are calling the Guam Oversight Council, it is 

chaired by Erik Raven the undersecretary for the Navy. That 

brings all of us services in the MBA together to make sure that we 

are synchronizing. I mean, one thing for example and I was in 

Guam last summer, they have finite construction capability. So we 

have got to all work together to make sure that we are prioritizing 

the projects so that we are all kind of moving together as a group. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Great. Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

And before we conclude, I want to thank the witnesses for their 

testimony today. The subcommittee members are welcome to submit questions for the record. I would hope that the witnesses would 

respond in a reasonable amount of time. 

And with that, we are adjourned. 

[Answers to submitted questions follow:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
190 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 278 here 57432.122
191 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 279 here 57432.123
192 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 280 here 57432.124
193 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 281 here 57432.125
194 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 282 here 57432.126
195 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 283 here 57432.127
196 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 284 here 57432.128
197 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 285 here 57432.129
198 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 286 here 57432.130
199 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 287 here 57432.131
200 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 288 here 57432.132
(201) 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 17, 2024. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

WITNESSES 

HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, DEPARTMENT 

OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR., CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF 

STAFF 

HON. MICHAEL McCORD, UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (COMPTROLLER)/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. The Defense Subcommittee will come to order. 

Today the subcommittee will receive testimony from Lloyd Austin, the Secretary of Defense; General CQ Brown, the Chairman of 

the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Mike McCord, the Under Secretary of Defense for Comptroller. 

The Department of Defense is requesting $833 billion within this 

subcommittee’s jurisdiction for fiscal year 2025. This is 1 percent 

higher than fiscal year 2024 enacted level and would keep defense 

spending within the cap imposed by the Fiscal Responsibility Act, 

which is an interesting number considering the nondefense discretionary request is about $23 billion over the same cap. 

President Biden frequently reports a quote from his father: Don’t 

tell me what you value, show me what your budget—show me your 

budget, and I will tell you what you value. 

It seems this administration will continue to value its domestic 

agenda over national security. I, on the other hand, agree with the 

former secretary, Jim Mattis, who advocated for annual 3 to 5 percent real growth in defense top line to both fight tonight and adequately invest in capability to deter and win in tomorrow’s wars. 

That said, this subcommittee will closely scrutinize a request to 

ensure that we provide a strong military as we develop fiscal year 

2025 defense appropriation bill. Our job is made more difficult 

when our enemies are emboldened to act with impunity. 

Secretary Austin, with the deteriorating global security environment as a scorecard, I assess that your emphasis on integrated deterrence is failing. 

China is positioning itself to realize Xi’s vision of building a force 

capable of taking Taiwan by 2027, reducing capability at scale and 

bullying our allies and partners across the Indo-Pacific. Xi is not 

deterred. 

Russia is in the third year of an unjust war of aggression against 

Ukraine, with no signs of stopping its ongoing invasion attempt. 

Putin is not deterred. 

China is waging asymmetric warfare against the American people by providing base fentanyl components to Mexican drug cartels. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
202 

The fentanyl products flowing across the porous southern border 

killed 112,000 Americans last year and devastating communities 

across the Nation. The Chinese suppliers and the Mexican drug 

cartels are not deterred. 

And over the weekend, Iran, for the first time, launched a direct 

attack on the state of Israel. The Iranian barrage included over 100 

ballistic missiles, 30 cruise missiles, 150 attack drones launched 

from Lebanon, Yemen, and, for the first time, Iran itself. Ninetynine percent of their missiles and drones were intercepted. But 

make no mistake, Iran is not deterred. 

Unfortunately, the Department is plagued by bureaucracy that 

impedes the actions necessary to restore deterrence. This is most 

notable over cost and significantly delayed weapon system acquisition. Pick a service. I can point you to systems that fit this mold. 

The Navy’s Columbia and Virginia submarines are both delayed 

despite being dubbed the service’s number one priority. Air Force 

Sentinel experienced a Nunn-McCurdy breach. The Army spent 

over $2 billion developing FARA, only to cancel the program. The 

Space Force GPS ground system is more than $3 billion over budget, more than 7 years late, and is still not delivered. And, of course, 

there is the Department’s entire hypersonic program, which has 

cost over $10.5 billion so far and produced not a single fielded system. 

Our warfighters need modern technology now. A part of the solution must be a true commitment by the Department to embrace 

and adopt an agile and innovative approach to acquisition. 

In Fiscal Year 2024 Defense Appropriations Act, I invested in 

this solution by ensuring that defense innovation unit received $1 

billion, along with the flexible authorities necessary to rapidly identify, contract, and deliver innovative technologies to the warfighter. 

Included in this funding is $220 million for combatant commanders to procure and rapidly field their capabilities they need 

most urgently. The hedge portfolio investment is critical to addressing the emerging dynamic and materializing threats I discussed 

earlier. 

This funding is separate and distinct from the Replicator effort. 

Fiscal year 2024 appropriations reinforced this fact, providing $1 

billion for DIU and more than $200 million for Replicator tranche 

one. 

Additionally, to achieve an effective and efficient military, the 

Department must also reoptimize its workforce. I am pleased to see 

the fiscal year 2025 request includes a net reduction in civilian fulltime equivalence, and I am encouraged by the progress the Department is making to incorporate artificial intelligence and process automation to eliminate manual business processes. More must be 

done here. 

And finally, our people are an asymmetric advantage that our 

adversaries could never replicate. They deserve the best from barracks to business systems and from livable wages to robust family 

support. 

We as a committee have long championed significant boosts in 

pay for our junior enlisted servicemembers, and I am happy to note 

this seems to be a popular initiative in Congress this year. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
203 

Together with their families, our servicemembers are the foundation upon which our Nation’s strength is derived. Supporting and 

investing in them is a priority, and I know we can all agree on 

that. 

Before we hear from our witnesses, I would like to recognize the 

distinguished ranking member, Ms. McCollum, for any opening 

comments. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. MCCOLLUM

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Secretary, General Brown, and Under Secretary McCord, 

thank you for testifying before us today. 

General, we welcome your first appearance before the committee 

as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. 

For fiscal year 2025, the President has proposed $823 billion 

within our subcommittee’s jurisdiction. It conforms with the enacted level in the Fiscal Responsibility Act, which passed the 

House by a vote of 314 to 117. This allowed for a $7 billion increase 

above fiscal year 2024 enacted levels, even though it is below the 

rate of inflation. 

I voted for the Fiscal Responsibility Act, not because I agreed 

with the spending levels in the deal, but because this country could 

not afford to default on its debts. 

Mr. Secretary, as you know, the Department has received criticisms from its authorizers for the top line budget requested. I think 

that criticism is unfair and unjust, especially from authorizers who 

do not have the responsibility for allocating the funding. 

Mr. Secretary, you personally did not impose a Fiscal Responsibility Act on the Department of Defense. Congress did. And I think 

those of us who voted for that law, we need to remember that when 

talking with you. 

I hope Congress has learned a hard lesson: that we should not 

hold our national debt limit hostage over arbitrary spending caps. 

The Department and the administration are conforming to what 

the law of the land is. Asking the Department to ignore the law 

is not advisable. 

I note each of you and the service chiefs have made difficult 

choices this year to follow the law. As I said last year, Congress 

must be better about making hard choices when it comes to the defense budget. We need to continue to train, equip our servicemen 

and women, and to support them and their families here at home. 

We must prioritize modernization of our force and support investments, which will support future modern combat. And most of all, 

we need to meet the requirements included in the National Defense 

Strategy. Every dollar allocated in your budget request represents 

an increased effort to defend our Nation and to deter threats. 

As you know, we finally enacted fiscal year 2024 bill on March 

23, 6 months after it was supposed to be completed. This delay 

triggered multiple continuing resolutions and impeded your ability 

to start new programs. None of this should have happened. 

Now turning to the security supplemental. The Senate passed it 

over 2 months ago, and it is deeply unfortunate that it has not 

been brought directly to the floor of the House for a vote. Funding 

that bill would provide much needed support for Ukraine, Taiwan, 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
204 

Israel. And it will make sure that we have the critical munitions 

we need here at home to protect the United States. 

The supplemental will support our military and provide them 

with the ammunition necessary to defend us here at home and support our allies abroad. And it also includes much needed humanitarian assistance, which is long overdue to the people who need it. 

As the chair mentioned, evidenced by Iran’s actions this weekend, Israel will require more interceptors to defend itself from Iranian missile attacks. 

Last week, our subcommittee was briefed by U.S. European Command on the prognosis for Ukraine without American support. As 

you know, it was chilling. Without the United States’ assistance, 

Ukraine will literally run out of ammunition and more civilians in 

Ukraine will be murdered by Russia. For these reasons, the supplemental must be enacted as soon as possible. 

While the hearing today will cover a range of topics, I want to 

highlight a few that are very important to me. 

First, I am concerned about our Nation’s ability to address 

emerging threats. Many of the major systems that we rely on from 

each of the services are delayed and require additional funds from 

their original stated contracts. This needs to stop. 

Our industrial partners seem to be losing workers right and left 

after they have been trained, particularly in the shipbuilding industrial base. This is unacceptable, and it is extremely concerning 

to me. 

The Department, Congress, and industry must work together to 

ensure that there is consistency because of those jobs and the people in them are important to the national security of our Nation. 

Second, the subcommittee has heard from the Army and the 

Navy about how they are addressing recruitment and retention 

issues. I would like to know what you think the progress is that 

the services have made in recruitment goals in the past year, and 

do you believe this will get us back on track on the near term future. 

And finally, given the focus on the Pacific, which is important, 

and the recent visit of Washington by the Japanese Prime Minister, I would like to hear your thoughts on our relationship with 

Japan. How can the Department work with Japan to better utilize 

maintenance and repair facilities in Japanese territory that our 

forces can execute their missions more effectively and efficiently? 

And what are some of the ways that the Department has worked 

to strengthen our relationship with allies, such as the Philippines, 

Australia, and South Korea? 

Again, thank you to the service for our witnesses who are appearing before us today and all those who serve and work under 

you. We appreciate your testimony and answers to our questions. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the courtesy, and I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Ms. McCollum. 

And now I would like to turn to the chairman of the full committee, my good friend, Chairman Tom Cole, the floor is yours. 

OPENING REMARKS OF CHAIRMAN COLE

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chairman Calvert. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
205 

And good morning to our witnesses. Certainly, Mr. Secretary, 

General Brown, Under Secretary McCord, it is great to have you 

here this morning. 

Iran’s missile and drone attacks on Israel and the persistent and 

aggressive actions of China and Russia are reminders that we need 

a strong military to deter war, protect U.S. interests and, when 

necessary, win in conflict. 

We are witnessing an evolution in warfighting through the proliferation of technology. Small, cheap, and autonomous systems 

provide regional actors with the ability to threaten their neighbors 

and endanger the global order. 

With that backdrop, the Department’s fiscal year 2025 request 

makes tough choices to stay under the Fiscal Responsibility Act 

cap. It trades long-term modernization of capabilities to preserve 

near-term readiness of force. 

Frankly, like my friend Chairman Calvert, I would like to see an 

increase in defense spending to more completely address these 

threats. I certainly, as my good friend, Ranking Member McCollum 

said, support the supplemental, both for its immediate impact and 

its long-term, you know, assistance in developing and sustaining 

our own industrial base. 

However, additional funding would not absolve the Department 

of its responsibility to deliver capabilities on time and on budget. 

In that regard, I certainly associate myself with the remarks of my 

good friend Chairman Calvert. 

From hypersonic programs to shipbuilding to aircraft like the E– 

7, I continue to be concerned by the Department’s inability to deliver weapons to the warfighter in a reasonable timeframe. 

Successful weapon system acquisition requires clear standards, 

adequate funding, competent program management, and a trusting 

partnership between the Department and industry. It also requires 

constant communication and transparency with the Congress. 

These are some of the areas—excuse me. There are some areas, 

such as munitions, where the Department is working directly with 

this committee in providing the funding and demand signal necessary to ramp industrial base production. 

I am interested in your thoughts, Mr. Secretary, on how to go a 

step further and develop surge capacity across the industrial base. 

This would increase our readiness for whatever the global security 

environment throws at us. 

I want to note that the Department is enduring the most challenging recruiting crisis since the creation of the all-volunteer force. 

The junior enlisted force is the lifeblood of the military, and this 

committee is committed to recruiting and retaining the best America has to offer. 

There is no shortage of challenges for this Department, and I 

look forward to hearing how the fiscal year 2025 budget request addresses those issues. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the chairman. 

Gentlemen, your full written testimony will be placed on the 

record. Please give a brief summary of your statements. 

So, Secretary Austin, the floor is yours. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
206 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SECRETARY AUSTIN

Secretary AUSTIN. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, distinguished members of the committee, thanks for the opportunity to testify in support of President Biden’s proposed fiscal 

year 2025 budget for the Department of Defense. 

And, Chairman Cole, I look forward to continuing to work closely 

together as you take the gavel of the full committee. 

I am pleased to be joined by our outstanding Chairman of the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff, General CQ Brown, and by Under Secretary 

Mike McCord, the Department’s comptroller. 

Let me start by thanking this committee for all that you do to 

support the U.S. military, our troops, and our military families. 

We began seeing the exceptional skill and professionalism of our 

forces after Iran’s unprecedented and reckless assault on Israel. 

Alongside Israel and our allies, we had enormous success in defeating Iran’s attack, and we will continue to stand ready to protect 

our troops in the region and to support the defense of Israel from 

attacks by Iran or its proxies. And our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad. 

And let me be clear, while we have not seen renewed attacks on 

U.S. Forces or facilities, as President Biden has said, we will not 

hesitate to take all necessary actions to protect our people. 

Now, let me turn to this year’s budget request. 

[Disturbance in hearing room.] 

Mr. CALVERT. The meeting will be suspended. 

The committee will be in order. 

The chair notes a disturbance of the committee proceedings. The 

chair reminds our guests that disruptive demonstrations in the audience is in violation of the House rules. Any additional disruptions 

to the hearing will require law enforcement to remove protestors 

from the room and restore order. And I will do that. 

Mr. Secretary, please continue. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thanks, Chairman. 

As Secretary, I have always been guided by three priorities: defending our Nation, taking care of our people, and succeeding 

through teamwork. Our budget request for fiscal year 2025 will advance all three of these priorities. 

[Disturbance in hearing room.] 

Mr. CALVERT. The committee will stand in recess until the Capitol Police can restore order. 

Capitol Police, please remove the demonstrators from the room. 

The committee is in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. CALVERT. The committee will come back to order. 

Mr. Secretary, please proceed. 

Secretary AUSTIN. As I said, Chairman, our budget request for 

fiscal year 2025 will advance all three of the priorities that I mentioned. 

First, the President’s request will invest in cutting-edge capabilities across all domains. This includes $48.1 billion for naval and 

shipbuilding capabilities, $61.2 billion to reinforce U.S. air dominance, and $13 billion to bolster Army and Marine Corps combat 

capabilities. Our request will also provide $33.7 billion to strengthVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00210 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
207 

en our space architecture and $14.5 billion to develop and field advance cybersecurity tools. It will direct $49.2 billion to modernize 

and recapitalize all three legs of our nuclear triad, and it will 

sharpen our tech edge through a $167.5 billion investment in procurement and a $143.2 billion investment in R&D. 

Second, this budget request will support our outstanding troops 

and their families. That includes raising base pay and housing allowances, investing in better housing, making childcare more affordable, and funding vital work to prevent sexual assault and suicide in the military. 

And third, this request will help the Department further deepen 

our teamwork worldwide. Our network of allies and partners remains a strategic advantage that no competitor can match. And 

you can see its power in our strengthening ties across the Indo-Pacific, in today’s expanded and united NATO, and in the 50-country 

Ukraine defense contact group that I convene. 

Our budget remains rooted in our 2022 National Defense Strategy. Our request positions the United States to tackle the Department’s pacing challenge—the People’s Republic of China—with confidence and urgency. It will help meet the acute threat of Putin’s 

increasingly aggressive Russia. It will help us tackle the persistent 

dangers that we have just seen from Iran and its proxies in their 

attack on Israel. It will help us take on the threats from North 

Korea, global terrorist organizations, and other malign actors. And 

it will help us continue to deter aggression against the United 

States and our allies and partners and to prevail in conflict, if necessary. 

Now, today I want to underscore three key messages. First, even 

as our budget request abides by the mandatory cap set by the Fiscal Responsibility Act, it is aligned to our strategy. We made tough 

but responsible decisions that prioritize near-term readiness, modernization of the joint force, and support for our troops and their 

families. Our approach dials back some near-term modernization 

for programs not set to come online until the 2030s. 

Second, we can only fully reach the goals of our strategy with 

your help, and I am grateful that Congress passed the fiscal year 

2024 appropriations in March. The single greatest way that Congress can support the Department is to pass predictable, sustained, 

and timely appropriations. 

My third and final message is that the price of U.S. leadership 

is real, but it is far lower than the price of U.S. Abdication. 

As the President has said, we are in a global struggle between 

democracy and autocracy, and our security relies on American 

strength of purpose. And that is why our budget request seeks to 

invest in American security and in America’s defense industrial 

base. 

It is also why the administration has requested nearly $60 billion 

in the National Security Supplemental for the Department, and 

that supplemental would support our partners in Israel, Ukraine, 

and Taiwan, and it would make key investments to increase submarine production. In fact, about $50 billion of this supplemental 

would flow through our defense industrial base, creating good 

American jobs in more than 30 States. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
208 

Now, we are more than 2 years into the Kremlin’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and Putin is betting that the United States 

will falter, abandon our friends, and leave Ukraine in mortal danger. If the Kremlin prevails in Ukraine, it would embolden wouldbe aggressors around the globe. And we know that China, Iran, 

and others are watching what Putin does and how we respond. 

So we look to our partners in Congress to help us make the investments needed to strengthen America’s security through both 

the supplemental and the President’s budget request. 

The United States military is the most lethal fighting force on 

Earth, and with your help, we are going to keep it that way. 

I am truly grateful for your support for our mission and for our 

troops, and I look forward to your questions. 

Thank you. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
209 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 307 here 57432.133
210 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 308 here 57432.134
211 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 309 here 57432.135
212 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 310 here 57432.136
213 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 311 here 57432.137
214 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 312 here 57432.138
215 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 313 here 57432.139
216 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 314 here 57432.140
217 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 315 here 57432.141
218 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 316 here 57432.142
219 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 317 here 57432.143
220 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 318 here 57432.144
221 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 319 here 57432.145
222 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 320 here 57432.146
223 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 321 here 57432.147
224 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 322 here 57432.148
225 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 323 here 57432.149
226 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 324 here 57432.150
227 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 325 here 57432.151
228 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 326 here 57432.152
229 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 327 here 57432.153
230 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

General Brown, you are recognized. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL BROWN

General BROWN. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, 

Chairman Cole, and distinguished members of the committee, I am 

honored to join Secretary Austin and Honorable Mike McCord to 

appear before you today. 

On behalf of the joint force, the Department of Defense civilians, 

and our families, I want to thank Congress for your steadfast support and the opportunity to testify on the fiscal year 2025 defense 

budget request which reflects our shared commitment to national 

security. 

The global security environment is increasingly complex. The 

2022 National Defense Strategy identifies five key challenges: the 

People’s Republic of China, our pacing challenge, continues its 

risky behavior around the globe. The newly aggressive Russia with 

its unprovoked war against Ukraine. A reckless Iran, who as we 

saw just this past weekend, attempts to escalate regional conflict 

with unprecedented attacks in support of proxy forces. A destabilizing North Korea which threatens regional security. And violent 

extremist organizations which leverage instability to advance their 

cause. 

These challenges are interconnected, which demands a strategic 

approach addressing the immediate threats while also preparing 

for future contingencies. 

Days after becoming the chairman, I laid out three expectations 

in my message to the joint force: honing our warfighting skills has 

primacy in all we do, modernizing and aggressively leading with 

new concepts and approaches, and trust is the foundation of our 

profession. 

Our military exists to fight and win our Nation’s wars. We train 

every day to ensure we are so good at what we do that we deter 

any adversary from engaging the U.S. in conflict. This budget requests $147 billion to sustain readiness and ensure the Department can counter near-term threats. We are also 

focused on better integrating our allies and partners in our planning and operations by investing in critical programs and capability, expanding security cooperation, exercises, training, interoperability. Our investments in readiness ensure the joint force can 

respond when the Nation calls. 

While we are focused on our readiness for today, it is critical to 

modernize and lead with new concepts to prepare for tomorrow. 

The Department continues to invest in capability and capacity to 

outpace our competitors, while transforming from costly legacy 

platforms that are no longer relevant to the threat. 

This budget strategically invests in $167.5 billion in procurement, underscoring our commitment to equip the joint force with 

unparalleled combat capabilities across every domain. This budget 

also invests $143.2 billion in research, development, tests, and 

evaluation of future capabilities that will retain our strategic edge. 

Finally, this budget invests significantly into nuclear modernization, digital innovation, multi-year procurement of critical munitions, and a strengthened defense industrial base. With rapidly 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
231 

evolving threats in technology, accelerating our modernization is 

crucial. 

Lastly, trust is the foundation of our profession. The joint force 

must build upon and uphold trusting each other, trust with our 

families, trust of our elected leaders, and trust of our Nation. Enhancing the quality of service and the quality of life of our personnel is not just a moral obligation; it is a strategic imperative. 

This budget includes investments in quality of service efforts, 

such as advanced training, educational benefits, and career development, while also investing in quality of life projects, like housing, 

medical clinics, and childcare facilities, as well as funding spouse 

employment initiatives, enhanced mental health resources, and robust programs to combat sexual assault. We must create an environment where all can reach their full potential. 

Trust that our joint force stands ready, ready to defend our national interest, ready to deter aggression, and ready, if necessary, 

to fight and win our Nation’s wars. 

I thank you for your support and collaboration in our shared 

commitment to face the security challenges of today and prepare 

for tomorrow. We are living in consequential times, and there is no 

time to waste. 

Thank you, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
232 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 332 here 57432.154
233 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 333 here 57432.155
234 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 334 here 57432.156
235 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 335 here 57432.157
236 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 336 here 57432.158
237 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 337 here 57432.159
238 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 338 here 57432.160
239 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 339 here 57432.161
240 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 340 here 57432.162
241 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 341 here 57432.163
242 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 342 here 57432.164
243 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 343 here 57432.165
244 

DEFENSE INNOVATION AND RAPID FIELDING

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. 

I want to make sure that each member has a chance to ask questions, so each member will have at least 5 minutes, 5 minutes to 

answer their questions. When your timer turns yellow, you will 

have 1 minute remaining. 

First, I will recognize myself. 

Innovation and rapid fielding to the warfighter has been a number one priority of mine since coming to Congress. There are many 

efforts underway, and I am encouraged by this momentum. However, as stated before—and I support the Replicator initiative. In 

no way should Replicator cannibalize from the hedge fund established in fiscal year 2024. 

General Brown, the transition of requirements to capabilities to 

a program of record is low, not well understood, and opaque to 

warfighters and industry alike. How will you address this issue 

during your tenure? 

General BROWN. Chairman, I appreciate the question, and I 

would also offer I have the same focus on being—accelerate capability to our warfighters. 

You know, part of this dialogue is really the collaboration that 

I try to do with the service chiefs but how we can engage with— 

from the requirements to our acquisition and to industry to best accelerate each of these capabilities to go from a prototype to production. 

This also is very important about the defense industrial base, so 

we can actually make sure we are able to deliver—once we identify 

the innovation, be able to move it much more quickly into the 

hands of our warfighters. 

And so it is going to require leadership, which I am happy to do, 

but it is also going to require for us to have, you know, on-time 

resourcing, consistent demand signal, and to build that trust across 

the spectrum to make sure we bring the capability forward much 

faster. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, I look forward to working with you on that. 

We can make sure that we deliver the funds on time. 

Secretary Austin, last week, Under Secretary Shyu inaugurated 

the Transition Tracking Action Group, which will employ advanced 

analytics to track how the Department delivers capability to the 

field. Will you commit that this effort will be collaborative with 

Congress and that you will support its success? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Absolutely, Chairman. 

Again, I commend Ms. Shyu, or the Honorable Shyu, on the 

things that she has done since we have been together. I think she 

has done a number of things, to include things like RDER and 

OSC, as you know, to help us bridge the value of death. 

And the programs that you mentioned or the initiatives that you 

mentioned are really mutually supported, and we are going to do 

every—continue to do everything we can to move capability as 

quickly as we can across the valley of death and get it into the 

hands of our warfighters. 

Mr. CALVERT. Ms. McCollum. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
245 

EXECUTION OF SUPPLEMENTAL DEFENSE FUNDING

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Secretary, General Brown, Under Secretary McCord, the 

Senate passed a supplemental, and it includes funding for allies 

and partners in UCOM, CENTCOM and INDOPACOM, as well as 

much needed humanitarian assistance. 

Mr. Secretary, I am going to ask a couple of questions together. 

Could you please let this committee know how our allies and partners are reacting to our delays in the enhancement of the supplemental? 

General Brown, please share with us your military assessment of 

the situation in Ukraine today and what it looks like for tomorrow. 

Mr. McCord, we know that the services are utilizing base funds 

to cover the cost of deployed personnel operating in EUCOM and 

CENTCOM. If we do not enact a supplemental, how will this impact the services’ fiscal year 2024 base activities? 

So, in general, why do we need to pass the supplemental right 

away? And is the United States losing stature in the world community? 

Thank you, gentlemen. 

[Disturbance in hearing room.] 

Mr. CALVERT. The committee will not allow for disruption. If any 

more disruption happens, we will recess and have the disruption 

removed. 

Mr. Secretary, you are recognized. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, thank you, Chairman. 

You know, delaying the supplemental sends a terrible signal to 

our allies and partners, and they will question whether or not, you 

know, we are committed to this cause and whether or not we are 

a reliable partner. And we have—as you know, we have led every 

inch of the way in terms of making sure that security assistance 

is provided to Ukraine. We have united NATO, been instrumental 

in uniting NATO in ways that we haven’t seen. Actually, NATO 

has expanded. And so I think that American leadership in this endeavor has been really, really important. 

I think that it is also—you know, the supplemental is also important to us for our security as well. This supplemental invests in our 

industrial base. 

As you know, we don’t provide funds to Ukraine. The Department of Defense doesn’t. We provide materials in terms of weapons, 

vehicles, munitions. And all of those things are replaced by us, and 

the replacements are designed and built in our industry. And so 

that means good jobs, good jobs for people in America. 

So if that supplemental was passed, and when it gets passed, 

some $50 billion or so would flow through some 30 States here in 

America, and I think that is really important. 

And again, the supplemental not only provides support for 

Ukraine, but it also provides much needed support for Israel and 

also for Taiwan. 

[Disturbance in hearing room.] 

Mr. CALVERT. The committee will stand in recess until the Capitol Police can restore order. 

[Recess.] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
246 

Mr. CALVERT. The committee will come back to order. 

Mr. Secretary, you are recognized. 

Secretary AUSTIN. So to sum it up, this supplemental is really 

important for a number of reasons. And, again, it is important to 

us for our security as well, and it is really important that we have 

the ability to replenish the stocks in our inventory that will be critical for us going forward. 

General BROWN. Ranking Member McCollum, you asked about 

my military assessment on Ukraine, and I will just tell you that 

Ukraine right now is facing some dire battlefield conditions. And 

it is partly because their capability from a resourcing standpoint, 

from—whether it is munitions, whether it is vehicles, whether it is 

platforms, they are not being outmatched by the Russians. 

They have had some pretty—the Ukrainians have had some positive gains in the course of the 2-plus years that they have been in 

this conflict, regaining more than 50 percent of the territory that 

the Russians seized at the beginning of the conflict. 

Those hard-fought gains can be lost without our support, and so 

it is important that we continue to provide them the capabilities 

that they require. 

And so when I think about this, I think about the supplemental, 

those three things. One, it supports Ukraine’s ability to defend 

itself. It shows—it puts money into our defense industrial base, not 

just for Ukraine, but for many of our allies and partners because 

the U.S. equipment is valued around the world. And last, it shows 

U.S. leadership. 

I have been in this job 6 months, and I have had about 115 engagements with my counterparts from around the world, and they 

often talk about U.S. leadership. I can tell you it is watched, it is 

desired, and the actions we do are sending a message of where our 

commitments are. And it also sends a message to our adversaries. 

And I think it is important that we continue to show leadership 

like we have done throughout my entire career wearing this uniform, and I want to make sure that we do that. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. McCord, if you could be brief. 

Mr. MCCORD. Ranking Member, thank you. 

Well, the security assistance is, of course, the most urgent, timesensitive part of the supplemental. It cannot be replaced with anything in the base budget. 

You highlighted the lesser known part is that the Secretary and 

the President, of course, can deploy forces quite legally where they 

choose to, and we have surged forces in Europe the entire fiscal 

year to date. Navy and particularly CENTCOM the same way. 

We have incurred over $2 billion and counting of operational 

costs that, if we can’t get the supplemental, will have to be absorbed in the base budget. We would have to work with this committee and the other committees to try and reprogram funds hopefully not from direct readiness but from, if not that, readiness enabling things like facilities maintenance and equipment maintenance. So there is an impact on our forces and our readiness as 

well if we cannot get the supplemental approved. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, gentlemen. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
247 

Mr. Cole. 

DEFENDING ISRAEL

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary and General Brown, I want to ask you, if you 

would—first of all, I want to compliment you. Thank you for the 

performance of our forces and your leadership in the recent attack 

by Iran on Israel. Our personnel was just outstanding, and that reflects well certainly on both of you and our military. 

What additional things in your professional opinion do we need 

to do to provide Israel with what it needs to defend itself in the 

short term? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thanks, Chairman. The most important thing 

that we can do right now is to pass the supplemental, and that will 

provide us the opportunity to continue to provide security assistance to Israel in the form of air defense interceptors, you know, 

munitions, and things that it critically needs to be able to defend 

itself. 

But that supplemental, I would say, Chairman, is truly the most 

important thing that I would highlight for you. 

The CHAIRMAN. General? 

General BROWN. Chairman, I would echo those comments. As I 

have a chance to talk to my Israeli counterpart and my other counterparts, region, it is important that we provide that capability 

through the supplemental. 

But I also think about what it does for us and for our forces. And 

I will just also highlight, I mean, I couldn’t be prouder of the work 

done by our forces over the course of this past weekend. It shows 

the professionalism of our force, and that is why we had the most 

combat credible and most respected force in the world, because of 

events like that. 

U.S. FORCE PROTECTION

The CHAIRMAN. I will also ask you both, obviously, when we employ our forces in this way, you know, they are exposed themselves 

to being attacked, and we have certainly had plenty of incidents 

from Iran attacking. 

So where are we at in terms of force protection for our men and 

women on the ground that are engaged in these activities? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Force protection is of utmost importance to me 

and to the Department and to the President, and we have done a 

lot in the last several months to reinforce our force protective posture in the region. As you know, we deployed a number of additional assets over the last several months to ensure that we accounted for, you know, just about any contingency that could arise. 

As I said earlier, while we know that—we haven’t seen any additional attacks from Shia militia groups over the last several weeks. 

We know that that could change in a moment’s notice. If it does, 

then you can expect that we will do what is necessary to protect 

our troops, and we will respond at a time and place of our choosing. 

General BROWN. Again, I would echo exactly what the Secretary 

said. It is very unfortunate we lost three servicemembers back in 

January. But the tremendous work by our forces, the force protection, to be able to respond like we did back at the beginning of FebVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00251 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
248 

ruary sent a pretty clear message that we will defend ourselves, 

and the Secretary and I will continue to do so. 

DELIVERY OF WEAPONS TO TAIWAN

The CHAIRMAN. Obviously, this supplemental has a lot of different components to it. We talked a lot about Israel and Ukraine, 

the importance of both of those, and I certainly agree and hope we 

can get that done literally this week. 

But there is another component portion, of course, and that is directed at the Western Pacific, both our own forces and to Taiwan. 

Widely known that Taiwan has ordered billions of dollars worth of 

weapons from our country that haven’t been delivered. Can you 

give us some insight as to the difficulty, why we have not been able 

to help a country that literally is under enormous pressure from 

China, receive weapons that it has actually paid for? 

Secretary AUSTIN. This has been an area of focus for us, Chairman. From the very beginning, you know, I asked my team to bore 

into what was causing the delays or is causing the delays, and 

there are a number of things that come together to create those 

delays. And we are working hard to make sure that in every way 

possible we do everything we can to speed the process up. 

I agree with you that this is critical capability that is very much 

needed by Taiwan, and so we are going to continue to work on this. 

But it is a complex picture, but, nonetheless, we are going to make 

sure that we are doing everything we can to move as quickly as 

possible. 

And, you know, we continue to communicate to our allies and 

partners—where we are in terms of getting them the needed capability. And again, I could not agree with you more, this is really, 

really important. 

E–3 CAPABILITIES

The CHAIRMAN. One last question, and I will direct this to you, 

General Brown. You are very familiar with Tinker Air Force Base. 

We have talked about it a lot over the years. As you know, the 

AWACS Wing is primarily based out of Tinker. Those are really old 

air frames, E–3s. We know we are beginning to try and address 

that problem, but it is something I have raised in this committee 

for many, many years. 

Tell me where we are at in terms of the E–7. I am a little disturbed. I think in the Department budget we are zeroing out that 

line. Again, I know you are under a lot of pressure for money for 

that right now, but let me know where we are at, because I do 

worry. 

With the Russians, this is, you know, airborne early warning 

combat control capability. We have lost a lot of that as we have retired E–3s. We haven’t been able to replace them anywhere near 

as rapidly as we should. So give us an update on how we are doing 

there. 

General BROWN. Well, Chairman, I am a little bit removed from 

my time in the Air Force, but I will defer to the Air Force to get 

you some specifics and will do that. 

The CHAIRMAN. I will have that opportunity next week with 

them. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
249 

General BROWN. Okay. But, you know, one of the things we are 

really trying to do is, first of all, as you know, you have got to buy 

the green aircraft and then convert it over. And, you know, we 

were looking at the long lead items to make sure we are able to 

do that, but also at the same time working with our allies and 

partners, particularly the Australians who have the platform today. 

And we have, you know, airmen in Australia that are training. 

So not only, you know, it is the aspect of getting the capability 

like you described with the prototype, but also marrying up our 

servicemembers so they can operate it as soon as it becomes available. 

And we’ll continue to work very hard to make sure we bring that 

capability forward as well. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I look forward to working with you on that, 

but I just want to highlight it is a matter of real concern. I think 

this really relates to Chairman Calvert’s larger point about delivering weapon systems on time and on budget. And I think we have 

got a problem across the board. 

We have used a lot of—eaten up a lot of our immediate capability 

on the assumption certain things would be ready at a certain time, 

and it hadn’t happened. So we have a gap where the capability is 

gone, and we haven’t gotten the replacement online. Worries me a 

lot. 

With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. DeLauro. 

SHIPBUILDING AND SUBMARINE DELAYS

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, welcome. Sorry we are kind of hearing hopping 

this morning. So welcome you to the committee. 

Mr. Secretary, it is well known that the Navy is experiencing significant issues related to shipbuilding and, in particular, submarines. We know we need more ships, more subs, but we lack the 

infrastructure and the workforce to stay on track. I want to be 

clear that the private sector could do more to help. 

There are delays in several programs, including both the Columbia and Virginia-class submarines and a future aircraft carrier. We 

also have a significant backlog of ship and submarine maintenance, 

all of which have a footprint in my State. 

These delays will impact the Navy’s readiness, and the Navy 

completed a 45-day shipbuilding review to address some of these 

issues. And I noted in a recent article here, Sea-Air-Space, that it 

says that the Secretary of Navy says 45-day shipbuilding review 

will be followed by another review. 

Can you share with us your impressions of the findings of the 

first review, particularly the delays in the Columbia-class submarine, and how this might impact the shipyard industrial base 

and what this committee can do to assist you? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Regarding the delays, you know, I share your 

concern. As you know, we are requesting to invest in one Virginiaclass this year, versus two, and the reason that we are doing that 

is because there is a backlog. And rather than increase that backlog, the right thing to do, in my view, is to invest in the industrial 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
250 

base in terms of giving the industrial base the means to expand capacity by recruiting and retaining the right people, making sure 

that they can strengthen their supply chains. And so in 2023 and 2024, we asked you for $1.9 billion to invest 

in the submarine industrial base. And this year, we are asking you 

for, in this budget, for some 25—some $4 billion, excuse me, for the 

industrial base for the 2025 budget. That is in addition to the $3.3 

billion that is included in the supplemental. 

So as you can see, there is some pretty significant investment in 

the industrial base, and I think we have to do everything we can 

to put those resources to good use. 

Now, I met with the CEOs of General Dynamics and Huntington 

Ingalls here recently, and we talked about what their challenges 

were in terms of workforce challenges and supply chain challenges. 

And we talked about, you know, how we could best use those resources that you are allowing us to invest in. 

So, certainly, they are doing things on their own to invest in increasing capacity, and I think the right things are going to happen. 

It is just going to take a bit more time. 

And as you know, because of AUKUS, Australia is also investing 

in our submarine base. So the amount of money, the amount of resources that we are putting against expanding capacity I think is 

material. It is real capability, and we have to make sure that we 

are putting it to good use. I know that industry is serious about 

it, and, again, it is just going to take a bit more time. 

Ms. DELAURO. I understand. And if we could, we can speak offline, but the findings of the 45-day review, I understand it, and I 

think the committee has tried to provide resources. But then I just, 

you know, read that we are then looking at additional review to 

deal with ordering another review to take a deep dive into the opportunities for improvement. I don’t know how many dives we need 

with regard to submarines. You know, how many dives are we 

going to accommodate here? 

But I just—I would like to know, I hope the committee would 

like to know the results of that review, where you think it takes 

us, and what is going on with an additional review of this? 

And I appreciate your working with General Dynamics and others and getting their view, and the Australians. 

CONSEQUENCES FROM CONTINUING RESOLUTIONS

If I can ask you a question about continuing resolutions. I appreciate your comments and your testimony regarding the—about the 

importance of passing government funding bills on time to ensure 

our Nation’s safety, keep the industrial base strong, outcompete 

our adversaries. 

Many of my colleagues speak at length about wanting to achieve 

these goals, yet, as you know, we passed a defense spending bill 

this year over 5 months late. I repeat, 5 months late. I hope that 

we do not continue to play games with our Federal spending process this year. 

Can you an elaborate on the negative effects of continuing resolutions for the Department of Defense, American manufacturers, the 

industrial base, and for our readiness generally? What would be 

the consequences of another CR this year, Mr. Secretary? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
251 

I hope General Brown and Mr. McCord can chime in as well. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, the effects of the CRs are significant, especially if you have CRs that last that long. You obviously can’t initiate new starts. You lose a lot of time on initiatives. And the one 

thing that you can’t buy back is time. And so, over the course of 

years, these things compound, and they create—they add some of 

the friction that we have been discussing. 

But, again, I think the best way that we can help ourselves is 

to make sure that we receive an on-time budget. And as you know, 

our budget request is directly linked to our strategy. So without a 

budget, we can’t execute the strategy to its fullest. 

And, you know, I have been pretty deliberate in asking my staff 

to maintain course on making sure that, you know, everything that 

we ask for is directly linked to the strategy. And, you know, we 

have done a good job of that over the last 3 years. But if you don’t 

get a budget on time, you know, you are not executing to your full 

capability. So it has a significant impact on our ability to do a 

number of things, but you can’t buy back time. 

Ms. DELAURO. General Brown. 

General BROWN. Thanks for the question. I will tell you I have 

been a general officer for about 15 years, and we spend about a 

third of that in continuing resolutions. And the challenge we have 

there is—and I will use this year as an example. There is about 

400 things we couldn’t do, whether it was new starts, change our 

levels of procurement, or to do MILCON. 

And so the concern I have there is that what it does to us is it 

drives uncertainty; it erodes trust, particularly when we work with 

our defense industrial base; and then it increases cost and it increases time. 

And we talked earlier about that we want to deliver capability 

on time. The best way to do that is to have the resourcing on time. 

But I think the same thing for us as a Department is that we have 

a consistent demand signal, which is why multi-year procurement 

is another piece that helps that demand signal. It allows the defense industrial base to do their supply chains, have a workforce 

that has consistency in employment. And so it is important. All 

that comes together for our national security. It is really—it is 

hugely important. 

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you. 

Mr. McCord. 

Mr. MCCORD. As Secretary noted and General Brown noted, we 

have now emerged into a pattern over many years of spending 

about a third of each fiscal year in a CR, which is much more problematic on the acquisition side, to go back to Chairman Cole’s comments about trying to deliver things on time. Our contracting gets 

delayed. We have a better time managing on the operating side 

than we do on the acquisition side. 

In this year, the particular issues were the difference between 

our request and the CR was about $25 billion. So think about losing $2 billion a month, falling behind, hoping that you will catch 

that up. But also, just given the way that the Fiscal Responsibility 

Act was written, there was a chance, however remote, of a full year 

CR, of a sequester. And so myself and others spent considerable 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
252 

time planning for things that didn’t happen, which was also time 

that could have been used on other—you know, more productively. 

Ms. DELAURO. Just this final comment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think it—and the ranking member mentioned it a moment ago. 

This winds up being a terrible waste of taxpayer dollars, and people who care deeply about that should think about this, as well as 

people who care about our national security and our being able to 

do—you can’t buy time. I think that is a critical comment, Mr. Secretary. And thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

And I think that we would all agree, no one on this committee 

enjoys continuing resolutions. 

Ms. DELAURO. I understand that. 

Mr. CALVERT. I hope that we can talk to some of our friends and 

colleagues over on the other side of the building in the United 

States Senate. We got our bills done relatively on time, and, unfortunately, the Senate seems to be in the habit of not passing appropriations on both sides of the aisle. 

Ms. DELAURO. Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I think we 

have to talk to people on our side who proclaim that continuing 

resolution would be great. Even shutdown of the government would 

be great. We know and I know and others know that ain’t the 

truth. 

Mr. CALVERT. That is not anybody on this committee. 

Ms. DELAURO. No—hey, I am not talking about this. Please, people shouldn’t feel, you know, threatened, but it’s out there. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Rogers. 

RAMIFICATIONS OF THE WAR IN UKRAINE

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Gentlemen, welcome to the subcommittee. 

And, General Brown, congratulations on your elevation. First 

time in front of us, you are with us as Chairman of the Joint 

Chiefs. So congratulations and welcome. 

Let’s talk a moment about the ramifications of what we do in 

Ukraine. Obviously, our most severe noncombatant is absent from 

the scene, but the ramifications of what we do there or don’t do 

there is heavy. 

Mr. Secretary, would you care to tell us what you think is the 

bigger picture, the strategic and moral importance of the situation 

in Ukraine as it relates with us? 

Secretary AUSTIN. You know, what we said from the very beginning, sir, is that we want to see, at the end of the day, a Ukraine 

that is a democratic, independent, and sovereign state that has a 

means to defend its territory and deter aggression. And Ukraine is 

not asking for us to fight the fight for them. They are asking for 

us to assist by providing some of the means that they need to protect themselves and defend their territory. And we have done that 

over the last 2 years, and that is why they are in the place that 

they are now. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
253 

I mean, they have defended against a much superior force and 

not only held their ground but also taken back some 50 percent of 

what Russia—the ground that Russia occupied initially. And I 

think, for a much smaller force, I think that is commendable. 

But unless they have, you know, the air defense interceptors, the 

artillery munitions, and others things that they need, it is going to 

be very difficult for them to sustain their efforts. 

Now, if they are not successful, to your question, it has ramifications not only for Europe but for the United States of America, because we all know that Putin won’t stop in Ukraine. This will continue. And, you know, our allies on the Eastern front there are 

very, very concerned about that, and rightfully so. 

It will also signal to other autocrats around the globe that, you 

know, the United States is not a reliable partner. And so all of the 

alliances and partnerships that we have worked hard to develop 

over the years will be in question in terms of their eyes. 

So it has significant ramifications, but, again, I think Ukraine 

has done an incredible job of inflicting significant damage on the 

Russian military with a much smaller force, and they have done 

that with our help and the help of some 50 nations that we have 

rallied in their support. 

Mr. ROGERS. Well, with Mr. Putin saying very openly and repeatedly that he wants to restore the old Soviet Union, and all of the 

nation-states in Eastern Europe especially, as you have said, are 

looking to us. And if we fail them, I think it fuels further the belief 

that Putin will try to succeed in restoring the old Soviet Union. 

Do you agree with that? Do you agree with that? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I absolutely agree, sir, and you know, I think 

Putin believes that he can wait us out. He believes that the resolve 

of the Western countries will soon fade and our coalition will fracture. But Putin’s wrong, and, you know, we are going to continue 

to try to find ways to support Ukraine. 

LANDMINES IN UKRAINE

Mr. ROGERS. Let me quickly ask you about land mines in 

Ukraine. ‘‘60 Minutes’’ on CBS last week did a story about the land 

mines that have been sewn all through Ukraine by Putin and his 

forces. What can you tell us about that problem? 

Secretary AUSTIN. The Russians have made extensive use of land 

mines, and we saw the Ukrainians go up against that last spring 

as they launched their offensive. And they have done that—the 

Russians have done that in every place they fought, but in this 

case, the territory, the terrain is littered with just, you know, with 

land mines, and it will take years to police this up, to clean this 

up. 

We have stood up a capability coalition with countries who are 

volunteering to pull together their capabilities to assist Ukraine in 

acquiring the right capabilities to address this problem going forward, but it is going to be something that is going to require a lot 

of countries to work together on in the future. 

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

I recognize Mr. Cole for an announcement. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
254 

The CHAIRMAN. I think probably good news on all fronts. Just 

want folks to know that the three component bills of the supplemental have been filed—three: one for Israel, one for Ukraine, one 

for the Western Pacific. 

My understanding, there will be a fourth bill that relates to border security, but those will be—the component parts of the supplemental will be considered independently. 

So just wanted people to be aware of that. I think that is good 

news all around. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman for that announcement. 

Mr. Ruppersberger. 

CHINA’S MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO RUSSIA

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Yes, thank you. 

First thing, thank you all for being here today and for your service to our country. This is a very important time. 

Honorable McCord, thank you for all you do and your expertise. 

You know, we are going through the President’s budget and the 

supplemental, and I share your concerns about the current global 

security environment and the multiphase challenges that we face. 

Just last weekend, Iran directly attacked Israel for the first time 

in decades. What happened in the Middle East this past weekend 

is a snapshot of what happens every day in Ukraine. But right 

now, Ukraine is running dangerously low on ammunition and other 

equipment, as you have stated before. Without additional aid, I 

don’t see how much longer they can hold out. 

And amidst all these conflicts, there is China. The National Defense Strategy identifies the PRC as our pacing threat, and while 

the global security environment is rapidly changing, we continue to 

be in a great power competition with China. 

So in that vein, General Brown, can you please describe how 

China is helping Russia reconstitute its military since its invasion 

of Ukraine? How is the PRC strategically exploiting the conflict to 

gain advantage in this great power competition with us? 

General BROWN. Thanks for the question. And so how the PRC 

is helping Russia is, you know, it is very low level but, by and 

large, it is by not condemning the acts of Russia invading another 

country. 

And how that has impacts is how the PRC is watching what Russia is doing, they are watching what we are doing, and are doing 

things to prepare themselves should they decide pursue any type 

of conflict in the Indo-Pacific. 

And so it is hardened our capabilities from an economic standpoint but also looking at their military capabilities and what they 

can learn as they watch current events there in Russia—in 

Ukraine, excuse me. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Well, thank you for that. It is apparent 

that it is not helping Ukraine. We are helping China. 

Now, in March, the Senate passed a national security supplemental that provides foreign aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. It 

sounds like we are set to consider some version of that in the 

House, hopefully. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
255 

IMPORTANCE OF MILITARY AID TO UKRAINE

Now, Secretary Austin, why is it critical to our own national security that we get additional military aid to Ukraine as soon as 

possible? If we care about the threat of China, why does it follow 

that we should also care about Ukraine and whether it wins or 

loses? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, thank you, sir. Again, in terms of our 

own national security, we know that—or we believe—I believe— 

that Putin won’t stop with Ukraine. I mean, I think he will continue to seek to pull back in some of those countries that were in 

the former Soviet Union. And I think the—we can look for significant turbulence in the region going forward, if he is successful. 

We have provided a number of elements to Ukraine and hope to 

continue to do that in terms of security assistance. We have to replenish what we have provided, and so having the means to do 

that, I think, is really, really important for our readiness and our 

security. 

And you mentioned China. China, Iran, and others are watching 

what happens in Ukraine. And if the United States proves to be 

an unreliable partner, not only will it erode the confidence of our 

European allies in NATO, but it will also encourage players like 

the PRC and Iran to do the kinds of things that they would want 

to do anyway. 

So I think this creates more discord potentially in the future, but 

this is really important. Ukraine matters not just to Europe, it 

matters to the whole world. This is about the rules-based international order and making sure that a country—a leader of a country can’t wake up one day and decide that he is going to erase the 

borders of his neighbor and get away with it. I mean, there has to 

be some kind of a international order. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Yeah, I am very—I want to make this comment. I am very concerned that certain Members of this House are 

acting as if China is our—I mean, Russia is our ally. And I hope 

that if we can get the facts out, that this is a very serious issue. 

And I wish more people who feel that way in this House would attend this type of hearing to realize how dangerous that is. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman for his questions. 

Mr. Womack. 

CONTINUING RESOLUTIONS AND TOPLINE CONSTRAINTS

Mr. WOMACK. Thank you. 

My thanks to the gentlemen before us for their long-standing 

service to this country. 

I want to follow up on a conversation that we were having with 

the ranking member of the full committee, Ms. DeLauro, on budget 

process and on continuing resolutions and that sort of thing. 

Secretary Austin, have you ever known Russia to operate under 

a continuing resolution? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I have not, sir, and I have never known China 

to operate under a continuing resolution either. 

Mr. WOMACK. Well, I am glad you asked that question because 

my next question was to General Brown. Have you ever known 

China to operate under a continuing resolution? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
256 

General BROWN. I have not. 

Mr. WOMACK. So if they have needs, they take care of those 

needs? 

Secretary McCord, Kim Jong-un, does he operate ever under a 

continuing resolution? 

Mr. MCCORD. He does not, Mr. Malone [sic]. 

Mr. WOMACK. And I won’t bore you with the others. I had listed 

ISIS–K, violent extremist organizations. 

The fact is, adversaries to our way of life and to the way of life 

of free nations all around the globe, they don’t operate under continuing resolutions and they don’t threaten to shut their government down. And to me it places a heavy risk on our men and 

women who serve in the greatest military on the planet that we 

would ever consider delaying the budget, like we did this past year 

for 5.5 months in the fiscal year, because I think that does endanger our way of life. I will leave it there. 

Secretary Austin, the DOD budget request for 2025 is capped at 

a 1 percent increase compared to 2024 under the FRA. It is clear 

the DOD prioritize increased funding for some services more than 

others. For example, the Army saw a 0.2 percent increase in funding. The Air Force got 1.1 percent. 

Can you outline the risks that we buy in this budget proposal to 

the Army if we adopt those top-line constraints? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Because of the top line, you know, we had to 

make some choices, but, again, we linked our request to our strategy, and these were difficult but, I think, prudent choices. And, 

again, as we have worked with the services, I think that, you know, 

the investments that we have made in near-term readiness and in 

modernization and in taking care of our people will pay significant 

dividends for us in the near to midterm and in the long term as 

well. 

And we also recognize that, in the outyears, the top line is going 

to have to grow a bit in order to make sure that we maintain pace 

and speed with modernization. 

So it is something that we don’t take lightly in terms of, you 

know, how we resource the entire force. And choices have to be 

made. The services participate in our deliberations. And so, again, 

I think it is—these—it is—the risks are acceptable at this point in 

time. 

MULTINATIONAL TRAINING EXERCISES

Mr. WOMACK. General Brown, both of you are keenly aware that 

joint multinational large-scale training exercises enhance our 

forces’ readiness. Can you describe how these exercises help our 

formations in learning how to integrate at scale and across domains and how the continued repetitions set the joint force up for 

success in the face of conflict? 

General BROWN. You know, every time we get to train, whether 

it is individually within our services, train as a joint team, or train 

with our allies and partners, it just makes us stronger. And what 

that does, it allows us to work on our areas of interoperability, but 

it also identifies some areas we can improve upon, because we 

want to continue—every time we have an exercise is to step away 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
257 

from that exercise and learn something about ourselves as a force 

that will be applicable to the threat. 

And so every time we do this, it is—you know, we try to take the 

lessons learned. And they are not just lessons learned or observed, 

it is how we implement those to ensure that our joint force, with 

our allies and partners, can do what the Nation asks for, but also 

for our national security and the security of our allies and partners 

as well. 

Mr. WOMACK. So if we were forced to make some decisions, buy 

some more risk because of budget constraints that we have, where 

would those joint exercises fall in the list, if you will, of candidates 

for either scaling back or doing without? 

General BROWN. Well, in this particular budget, we focused on 

readiness. And so, as the Secretary highlighted, we deferred some 

of the modernization to maintain that readiness. And so, you know, 

one of the responsibilities I have as the chairman working with the 

Joint Chiefs is to balance that risk between our readiness and our 

modernization, and we take a hard look at all the various exercises. 

I would also highlight the fact that now because of technology, 

we can do a fair amount, you know, through simulation and the 

like. But we are trying to use every tool we can to ensure our readiness and take advantage of the exercise opportunities that we do 

have. 

Mr. WOMACK. I thank you, gentlemen. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Cuellar. 

COLLABORATION BETWEEN NORTHCOM AND SOUTHCOM

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. 

And to all of our witnesses—Secretary, General, and Mr. 

McCord—thank you so much for what you all do. 

I would like to bring your attention to the Secretary and General 

Brown. Want to get your thoughts what the Department looks at 

sharing information and resources across combatant commands, 

and in particular, I am talking about NORTHCOM and 

SOUTHCOM when it deals with the southern border, what is happening in Mexico. 

You know very well what is happening there, and I am talking 

about drugs and criminal organizations. The amount of money they 

make, not only passing drugs, but if you look at, what is it, 7 million, 8 million encounters at the border the last 3 years, multiply 

that by an average of $8,000 that the coyote charge, they are making billions of dollars to our southern border. 

And, you know, we have NORTHCOM that has Mexico, and then 

SOUTHCOM has everything south—Central America and south. 

And I want to see how we can get NORTHCOM and SOUTHCOM 

to work better and sharing information and resources, because, as 

you know, part of the work that you all do is the national security 

and defense of our country also in that particular area. So just 

want to get your thoughts. 

And we have already talked to both commanders, both 

SOUTHCOM and NORTHCOM, and we have asked them if they 

can align themselves because they are apart. They see Mexico very 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
258 

differently. Just want to get your thoughts on what we can do to 

get those two commandant areas to work better. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, thank you, sir, and thanks for your interest in this topic. 

I do believe that we do a credible job of working together currently. Both commanders are great commanders, and I have tremendous confidence in both of them. 

Having said that, there are always things that we can do to improve our collaboration, and I think this gets to your point. And 

from my perspective, what I see the commanders doing is just that, 

finding ways to support each other, finding ways to make sure that 

there are no gaps that can be exploited. 

But, you know, the environment is dynamic, and there will always be a new challenge that presents itself that will require us 

to develop additional capabilities and also work with allies and 

partners to develop their capabilities so that they can, you know, 

control and protect their sovereign space. 

So to answer your question, I do believe that there are always 

things that we can do better, and we will continue to focus on that. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Thank you. Yeah. 

General BROWN. If I could, I would add, it is not only the Secretary, we have got tremendous commanders. But it is also the 

work that happens between the staffs, between the Joint Staff, between the staff at SOUTHCOM and NORTHCOM, to work in the 

next level of detail in how things are interconnected and to flatten 

that communication and using some of the digital tools we have to 

be able to share information to visualize. 

And then the last thing I would highlight is just the relationships—relations with the interagency but also relationships with 

our partners within both combatant commands; to get their perspective as well helps us to raise our awareness and have those 

two commands work better together. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Yes, sir. Yes, we need to see everything south of 

our border together instead of two—and both commanders are fantastic. We just want to see if we can push a little bit more on that. 

CHINA IN LATIN AMERICA

I would ask you also, the unity of government is so important. 

China is just—you know what they are doing in Latin America. 

They are in almost every country. And last night, somebody sent 

me a video—and I remember, we had gone to El Salvador, and the 

new President at that time wanted to work with us and said, we 

want to keep China away. And whatever happened, our relationship with El Salvador, you know, the video that they were showing 

was this brand-new library, and they were showing off this new library, as you know, China gets involved. And right next to him 

was the Chinese ambassador. 

And some years ago when we went to go see him at a codel, he 

was trying to keep China—I guess he felt that the U.S. was not 

providing the support, and guess who is right there with him. And 

that, I can name country after country. You know what they are 

doing down there. 

So, you know, just showing up, and I know you all are doing 

that. We are working our Guard also, our State Guard, that, you 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
259 

know, we have our relationships. But I just want to make sure— 

we got so many problems across the world, but we cannot wake up 

one of these days and right across our southern border, you know, 

we see the, you know, the work that China, and Russia to an extent, but mainly China is doing down there. So we appreciate that 

and the focus that you all can provide with that. 

Secretary AUSTIN. To the point that you are making, sir, it does 

require not only the tremendous efforts of the military but also a 

whole-of-government approach. And so, you know, a few dollars 

spent in the right places or invested in the right places can certainly buy us credibility and goodwill, access that is very important 

to us, and also displace some other elements that would want to 

enter that space as well. 

Mr. CUELLAR. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you so much. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

I would point out too, to Mr. Cuellar—and we share the same 

concern on Mexico being in NORTHCOM—the decision of putting 

Israel into CENTCOM turned, I think, to be the correct decision. 

Obviously, the coordination between Jordan, UAE, and other countries within that region proved very valuable during this last encounter with Iran. 

I think the same thing could happen if we could work out some 

kind of agreement to put Mexico into SOUTHCOM. 

With that, I recognize Mr. Carter. 

DIALOGUE BETWEEN U.S. AND CHINESE MILITARIES

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And welcome. Very proud of the service each of you give to our 

country. 

General, I also understand you had a meeting with the Prime 

Minister of—or the Minister of National Defense for the PRC, or 

a conversation at least, yesterday. Can you talk about the call and 

how it went? And are there plans to continue dialogues between 

our militaries? And what efforts are we taking to address the unsafe, risky behaviors of the PRC military and prevent conflict in 

the region? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, thank you, sir. This is very important to 

us, and I think we have seen—across our governments, we have 

seen a number of engagements over the past several months, including Secretary of State, Secretary of Treasury, the National Security Advisor. So we are engaging at a number of levels. 

This is the first time that I have had the opportunity to engage 

the new Minister of Defense. And, of course, its predecessor, we 

never had an opportunity to talk, and that was very disappointing, 

even though we reached out a number of times. 

You have heard me say, sir, that I think it is critical that great 

powers continue to maintain open lines of communication, because 

if we are operating in the same areas, if, you know—there are a 

number of things that can happen that could quickly spiral out of 

control. And the inability to talk to senior leadership and make 

sure that, you know, we have the ability to dial down tension I 

think is really, really important. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
260 

So the initial engagement, I think, was really good, and we spent 

an hour talking to each other, and I hope to continue that at some 

point in the future. 

And, again, the things that we are interested in is making sure 

that, number one, we dial back the unsafe activity that we see in 

the region, you know, the unsafe intercepts of our aircraft and 

ships, and also the aggressive behavior that we see in the region 

against our allies and partners. And a good example is what we 

just saw with the Philippines there at Second Thomas Shoal. So we 

talked about a number of things during that conversation, and it 

has been pretty widely reported. 

But, again, the most important thing to me, sir, is that that dialogue is there. Those communication lines are now opening up 

again, and we are going to try to do everything we can to maintain 

those open lines of communication. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you for that. 

PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE FUNDING

So your budget is based on strategy. The fiscal year 2025 budget includes $9.9 billion for the PDI. However, there are concerns that 

we are not investing fast enough in the region. 

Could we be moving faster with investments in that region or do 

you feel we are doing enough in our investments we are making? 

Are they going to be enough to deter China? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, sir. And let me again thank you 

for your support over the years for PDI. You are right, sir, we are asking you for $9.1 billion in this 2025 budget. Over the last couple years, we have asked you for some $20 

billion-plus in support of PDI. We are investing in those things 

that we can—that are achievable, you know, things that we can actually accomplish in the time period that we want to accomplish 

them in, in the near term. So improving infrastructure, enabling 

our forces to be forward position in theater, making sure that we 

have the ability to continue to conduct exercises, and invest in the 

right things. 

I think, you know, there are always things that we—additional 

things that we can go after, but I think we have made the right 

choices in investing in things that we can actually achieve here in 

the near term. 

Mr. CARTER. Well, thank you. I visited that region once. I am 

going to do it again probably in August. I have real concerns. So 

thank you very much. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

I would like to briefly pause the proceedings to recognize our 

newest member of the subcommittee. My friend from Tennessee, 

Chuck Fleischmann, just joined us. 

Chuck was chairing his own hearing over in Energy and Water 

Subcommittee with the Army Corps of Engineers this morning— 

good luck with them—so he couldn’t be here this morning. 

But, Chuck, welcome to the Defense Subcommittee. Pleased that 

Chairman Cole appointed you. I look forward to benefiting from 

your dedication and knowledge. Welcome aboard. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a privilege. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
261 

With that, I recognize Mr. Aguilar. 

SUSTAINMENT OF UKRAINE’S DEFENSES

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you, Chairman Calvert. 

Mr. Secretary, many of us in Congress are committed to passing 

this national security supplemental. Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, giving our allies the security assistance that they need to combat the 

threats that you have discussed posed by Russia, the PRC, and violent extremist actors that threaten global peace and stability. We 

have been asking for this vote for a number of months, in light of 

what the chairman of the full committee said. 

And I would just like to offer to the chairman of the full committee, it is our hope, and our side genuinely hopes, that we have 

an opportunity to vote on this this week, and that other extraneous 

pieces of this aren’t part of it, so from a speed perspective we can 

deliver this aid as quickly and as soon as possible. It would be unfortunate if that was held up with other additional votes that 

weren’t germane to our national security and the importance of 

helping our allies. 

General Cavoli told the authorizers earlier this week in open session that the side that can’t shoot back loses. If Ukraine cannot 

shoot back to take out drones, they won’t be able to hold the line, 

and Putin could be able to take more land. 

The U.S. is obviously the main supplier of air defense and artillery shells. 

Mr. Secretary, is it fair to say, if we don’t pass the national security funding, that we can’t provide those artillery shells to help 

combat Russia? And from a timeliness perspective, can you put a 

finer point on what the next few weeks means for our ally in 

Ukraine? 

Secretary AUSTIN. You know, what we have done is try to invest 

in our industrial base to increase our capacity to produce, you 

know, artillery munitions and other things. And so what we have 

asked for in the supplemental, some of that is focused on increasing capacity in the industrial base. And if we fail to do that, then 

it is very difficult for us to keep pace with the requirements there. 

In terms of, you know, what happens going forward and how long 

Ukraine will be able to sustain its efforts, I think we are already 

seeing things on the battlefield begin to shift a bit in terms of— 

in Russia’s favor. We are seeing them make incremental gains. We 

are seeing Ukrainians be challenged in terms of holding the line. 

They are doing a very good job, a credible job, but in order to continue to do that, they are going to need, you know, the right materials, the right munitions, the weapons to be able to do that. 

So passing this supplemental is absolutely critical, and it—and 

our request is that we pass it as quickly as possible, because time 

matters. And Putin, again, is trying to exploit this time period 

where there is doubt created about the U.S.’ resolve. 

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

General, I wanted to give you an opportunity to—kind of building 

off of what Judge Carter’s question about the PDI. Aside from obviously the importance of the national security requests that we have 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
262 

been talking about, all of us have been pleased to see the Pacific 

Deterrence Initiative and the European Deterrence Initiative contained within this proposal. 

Can you elaborate on the effectiveness and how the Department 

and how you plan to implement plans to execute funding for the 

PDI? 

General BROWN. As the Secretary described, the PDI is going to 

allow us to build out the capability within the region so we can posture our forces. So some of that is in MILCON, military construction. Some of it is in weapons capability. It is also things we can 

do to work with our allies and partners. 

And I will just tell you, I was the director of operations for 

United States Air Force in Europe, and I got there the week after 

Russia went into Crimea, and watched how the European Defense 

Initiative came about to better posture ourselves for today’s current 

events. 

I think the PDI will do the same thing in ensuring we are doing 

all the things to prepare ourselves for a potential future conflict. 

And the key here is to be so good at what we do that we deter a 

future conflict, and this is where PDI is going to help us be able 

to do that. 

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you. Thank you, General. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, we will all have a chance to vote on the supplemental on Saturday night. 

With that, Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

HOMESTEAD AIR FORCE BASE

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And, gentlemen, thank you for your service. 

I really have one point and then two questions. So first point is 

that history is full of dismal failures that are never forgotten; you 

know, peace in our time. After Putin invades Georgia, that infamous reset by the then Obama-Biden-Clinton administration. 

And then recently, Mr. Secretary, I have seen a very catchy word 

that has been used to try to dissuade our adversaries and Iran’s 

proxies: don’t, don’t, don’t. 

Unfortunately, that has been met by another—I guess our adversaries have been using another phrase, which is ‘‘just do it’’, and 

they have been doing it. It is pretty evident that they feel that they 

can do so with hardly any real consequences. 

So here is the question—and this may require maybe a SCIF to 

talk about it. First question is, are there going to be serious consequences to those who did not listen to all of the don’t, don’t, 

don’t, don’t words from the administration and have done it? And 

including, obviously, we know that some of our GIs have died. 

Question number one. 

Question number two is this. At present, the current future 

year’s defense program indicates that the Air Force Reserve plans 

is to divest in the F–16 program at Homestead Air Reserve Base 

through 2028. 

I don’t have to tell you all of how China feels emboldened, and 

they are making strides in this hemisphere, in our own hemisphere. And while they don’t have a base yet, they do have things 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
263 

that are starting to look like bases. You know, refer to Argentina 

as an example. 

And so Homestead is the closest defense against any potential future hostile action. 

So in light of this divestiture plan, can you confirm whether we— 

I can’t even say that—recapitalization efforts are being considered 

to ensure that the continuity and enhancement of air combat capabilities at this key facility, shouldn’t we look at, frankly, Homestead’s mission with F–35s rather than continuing with the older 

F–16 Post Block upgrades? 

Again, we use Homestead—we always think of Homestead Air 

Reserve as a place that is essential for emergencies, for hurricanes, 

et cetera. But I will argue that when you look at what is happening 

in this hemisphere, I think we need to be a little bit more concerned about what Russia, China, et cetera, is doing in this hemisphere. 

So two questions, and I appreciate hearing from you all. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, sir. Well, first of all, Homestead 

is an important base because of its location, and it has—you know, 

gives us reach that I think it is pretty important. And so Homestead is going to—the plan for it is to be in the inventory for some 

time. 

So if you are asking as to whether or not we are closing down 

Homestead, the answer is, no, that is not in the current plans. 

And then I will let the Air Force speak to some of the specifics 

there in terms about—in terms of what is planned for the future. 

CONSEQUENCES OF ADVERSARIAL ACTIONS

Regarding consequences and what people have learned from 

what has happened here in the Middle East here recently, you 

know, Iran did launch an unprecedented attack against Israel from 

its—from Iran with an unprecedented number of weapons. What it 

should learn from that is that not only does Israel have the ability 

to defend itself against significant challenges, but its allies—principally the U.S.—has significant capabilities as well. 

And so what you saw come together there in defense of Israel, 

I think, was quite remarkable. And, again, that doesn’t happen at 

the 11th hour. That happens because, you know, countries are 

working together, making sure that we have the right procedures 

and processes in place to enable us to do that. And the skill of our 

pilots and the ability to pass information between countries and 

share insights on battle space, I think all of that came together the 

way it was supposed to come together. 

And General Kurilla and others have been working on this issue 

for quite some time, and I think you saw some of the outcomes on 

Saturday night. 

But what Iran should learn is that, number one, their assumptions are wrong, and, you know, number two, that, you know, we 

are going to do what is necessary to help in the defense of Israel. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. But, Mr. Secretary, I am running out of time, 

but the key here, though, is that the administration, you, the President, said don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t to a number—it wasn’t 

just Iran. It was their proxies. And what they did is, did, did, did, 

did, did. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
264 

And what I would like to hear from you—again, probably this 

may not be the place—what are going to be the specific consequences for those who basically thumbed their nose at the President of the United States, at you, at others in the administration? 

When you said don’t, they said did. And I hope that we are able 

to see some serious consequences, because otherwise, with all due 

respect, just like peace in our time, just like the reset, that is going 

to be one of those words that will be kept for history’s sake as, 

frankly, a very sad joke. 

I am out of time. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Kilmer. 

NAVAL HOSPITAL BREMERTON

Mr. KILMER. Thank you, Chairman. 

And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us. 

Naval Hospital Bremerton in my district closed its labor and delivery unit in April of 2022, as a result of the military health system downsizing several military treatment facility capabilities and 

staff. 

In my neck of the woods, the local healthcare network has simply 

been unable to manage the additional patient load, and it is unrealistic to have our servicemembers travel all the way to Madigan 

Army Hospital, which is 43 miles away, not to mention having to 

cross a toll bridge, for consistent general and maternal care. 

Without continued pressure on DHA to expedite reassigning additional personnel to the naval hospital and reopening the labor 

and delivery unit, healthcare for our sailors and their families will 

continue to deteriorate. These shortages are unacceptable and dangerous at a critical time when the Navy plans to expand its missions and maintenance in the region and when the DOD recently 

announced the stabilization of the military health system by bringing patients and families from the heavily referred off-base providers back to understaffed MTFs. 

With this in mind, have you discussed the impacts of these personnel shortages on our sailors’ readiness with DHA? 

Secretary AUSTIN. We have, sir, and we have also discussed it 

with the services. And to the point that you are making, we do 

need to make sure that we invest in our healthcare system by making sure that we have the right personnel on board in the right 

numbers to be able to provide that service that our servicemembers 

and families expect. 

Mr. KILMER. So with that in mind, do you plan on urging DHA 

to reassign personnel to Naval Hospital Bremerton to respond to 

the significant degradation of care in Kitsap County? 

Secretary AUSTIN. We are looking at rebalancing our footprint 

across the board. And, of course, that is a part of it, but we are 

taking a holistic look at this. And as you know, we complied with 

congressional guidance in terms of consolidation of resources and 

that sort of stuff. But as we look at this and as we endeavor to 

make sure that our families and our—our troops and our families 

are getting the right kind of healthcare, it requires that we relook 

some of the assumptions and relook some of the manpower allocations that we have made in the past. And we are doing that. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
265 

Mr. KILMER. I am making a personal plea that you look at this, 

specifically related to Naval Hospital Bremerton and labor and delivery. I can tell you stories that I have heard from sailors and 

from their families that are heartbreaking, and it is as a consequence of these decisions that have been made. I understand 

tough decisions have to be made, and sometimes they are the 

wrong decisions, and we can make this right. 

I will tell you we are also working on a bill called the Midwives 

Act, which would direct the DOD to establish a 5-year pilot to 

evaluate the use of professional midwives under the TRICARE program to help alleviate some of these challenges. I hope that we can 

work with you and your team to secure that bill through the NDAA 

this year and just wanted you to be aware of it. 

PUBLIC SHIPYARD MITIGATIONS

With the time I have left, I wanted to talk to you about our public shipyards, obviously a critical part of maintaining the readiness 

of our submarines and our carrier fleets. 

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is in my district. We have discussed 

the importance of the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, which is a multiyear, multibillion dollar effort to upgrade 

our four public shipyards. 

Puget faced significant seismic risk and had to go to work quickly to repair three of the highest priority dry docks this past year. 

My question for you is, how can Congress provide the resources 

to ensure that the SIOP remains on track while also addressing ongoing seismic mitigations? And, additionally, how close is the Navy 

to a decision point on the construction of the multi-mission dry 

dock, M2D2, understanding how this is going to impact programming and planning for the necessary work? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, in terms of what Congress can do to help 

us stay on track, I think we have already talked a great deal about 

that, and that is getting the on-time appropriations. Even though, 

as you pointed out, we have invested—we have decided to invest 

billions of dollars into SIOP, it doesn’t matter unless you get those 

appropriations on time and you can start the construction and that 

sort of stuff in a timely fashion. So your help in supporting that 

I think would be much appreciated. 

In terms of the Navy’s decision process, I will let the Navy speak 

to where they are specifically and how close they are to a decision, 

and I will make sure that Secretary Del Toro and his team get up 

to brief you on where they are. 

Mr. KILMER. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

And thank you, Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Joyce. 

CURRENT INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY LIMITS

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. 

Secretary Austin, I would like to follow up a little bit on what 

my colleague, Mr. Womack, brought up before, and just wondering, 

what are the current industrial capacity limits for producing key 

weapons and equipment, including precision-guided munitions? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
266 

And how quickly could industrial capacity for producing key weapons in that equipment be increased? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Clearly, there are limits in each line of—each 

munition, each weapon system is different. And we have worked 

with industry on those critical items, things like Javelin, artillery 

munitions—or artillery pieces, to expand capacity and to increase 

production rate as rapidly as possible. 

Because of a number of challenges, this is not instantaneous, and 

there are some clear lessons learned here. If we want to be able 

to expand rapidly in the future, we need to think about how we are 

doing things and whether or not there are certain processes in the 

overall system that we can compress, you know, where there are 

things that we can buy ahead to be able to have on hand so that 

we can rapidly expand production. Those are the kinds of things 

that we are working with industry on. But it will vary by munition, 

by weapon system. 

But, you know, what you have done in terms of providing us additional procurement authority, multiyear procurement authority 

has been very, very helpful in sending the right signal to the industrial base. And, again, I think we are going to need that support 

that is baked into the supplemental to be able to continue our work 

in expanding the industrial base capacity there. 

But it is critical. This is work that me and my Acquisition and 

Sustainment Under Secretary are focused on routinely, and we are 

also working with allies and partners to get them to expand their 

industrial base as well. You know, our Acquisition and 

Sustainment Under Secretary meets routinely with European—his 

European counterparts to talk over issues of, you know, how we 

can consolidate efforts and expand lines of production and that sort 

of stuff. And that is having some effect, but, again, it is not instantaneous. It is going to take time. 

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you. And certainly as we deplete our resources 

to help our allies, we want to make sure we have our—that readiness available for you at all times. 

CHINA’S ILLEGAL SOVEREIGN MARITIME CLAIMS

General Brown, what has been taking place over in China? We 

continue to see them continue to make illegal and illegitimate sovereign claims over maritime areas in autonomous regions. In the 

South and East China Seas, China is conducting island-building 

campaigns to expand their exclusive economic zones, and they have 

militarized those islands with new ports, airstrips, bunkers, radars, 

and jamming stations. They are deploying advance anti-ship and 

anti-aircraft missiles. 

How are we working in concert with our allies and partners to 

counter China’s continual steps into acquiring an increasing presence in areas where they have no legitimate or legal claim? 

General BROWN. Well, the best way for us to do it is to challenge 

those claims, and it is the operations we do throughout the South 

China Sea, the East China Sea, with many of our allies and partners. A good example of that is how we support the Philippines and 

resupply the Second Thomas Shoal. It is the air operations and the 

maritime operations we do throughout the region. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
267 

I would also highlight to you, having spent time as the commander of Pacific Air Forces and watched over the past really 6 

years the growing strength of our partnerships with many of our 

allies and partners and how they are adjusting their visions, their 

strategies, and their National Defense Strategies to align, to 

counter what the PRC is doing in the region. And all that together 

is a way for us to push back. And it is not only what we do from 

a military standpoint but also with the rest of our government and 

the other governments, from an economic standpoint, and how that 

plays into—to counter what the PRC is doing in that part of the 

world. 

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Case. 

INDOPACOM READINESS AND MODERNIZATION

Mr. CASE. Thank you. 

Mr. Secretary, I appreciated the dialogue you had with my colleagues earlier on the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. I have been 

asking questions in our hearings this year to try to figure out what 

PDI actually means, and I have to admit, I am a little more confused than when I started. 

If it is meant as a itemization or a confirmation of focus on 

China and the Indo-Pacific, clearly $9.9 billion is not that. So it is 

not supposed to be a summary of how good we are doing in terms 

of a budget against the China threat and our big picture response. 

If it is meant to be kind of a—more of a short-term laundry list 

for things that we need—isolated things that we need to be doing 

in conjunction with ancillary to a specific part of our budget, I can 

understand that. 

But when I take a look at the PDI list that we have for this year, 

clearly some things, I think, fit into that category, but others—for 

example, weapons acquisition—it seems to me should be kind of 

more of a base budget as opposed to PDI quantified. 

So it is not necessarily a question, just an observation, and I am 

not sure what it means nowadays, and I would love to work with— 

you know, we have had—some answers have been to the effect of, 

well, you know, it can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. It 

is accounting. If it had an OCO-style component to it, if there was 

more flexibility in the Indo-Pacific region to apply it to things like 

campaigning, maybe it would work better. 

But I think it is kind of a work in progress, and I am not sure 

it is exactly matching what we are trying to achieve. But that is 

more of a rhetorical statement. 

My question has to do with this comment. I think we all realize 

in spades that wherever in the world it is, we can’t do this alone, 

we shouldn’t do this alone, we are not going to do this alone. And 

we need to have our partners and allies be full contributors along 

the way, full participants. 

We certainly have seen this in Europe, as you pointed out in 

your opening statements, and we have seen a real increase in the 

Indo-Pacific as well. 

And an important component of that, I think we would both 

agree, is, I guess what we euphemistically call campaigning, so the 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
268 

sum total of the connections that we develop with other militaries 

throughout the region, throughout the world, joint training exercises, interoperability, that whole range. 

I wondered if you might just give some comment to how that is 

going with specific regard to the Indo-Pacific, where we clearly 

have needs with key allies, such as Japan and Korea and the Philippines, of course here this week, Australia, New Zealand, and beyond. But also, I was concerned with whether this budget does give 

sufficient attention to the overall area of connections between our 

military, strengthening those bonds, giving them the resources, the 

tools, the training, the incentives, to undertake a greater share of 

the overall defense. 

I did note that, for example, in INDOPACOM’s unfunded priorities, they came in, one of their highest unfunded priorities was 

about half a billion for campaigning. 

So I just wondered, if that is how INDOPACOM feels about campaigning—and I value their input—why didn’t that get into the 

base budget, or, you know, where does campaigning stack up? How 

do you think it is going, and how do you think we fund it properly? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I thank you, sir. As the gentleman indicated 

earlier, you know, these operations and exercises are fundamental 

to our readiness, and you see us investing some $147 billion into 

readiness. That is a decision that we made in light of the fact that 

there is a cap on the top line. So we chose to invest in readiness 

and some modernization and also taking care of our people. 

In terms of the kinds of things that we are doing in the region, 

you live in the region, so you are witnessing this firsthand. We 

probably have the best relationship that we have had with Japan 

in a very, very long time. We see Japan investing in a significant 

way in its own defense. We see them investing in long-range strike 

and other things, and they are looking to work with us to coproduce certain items. 

We have a great relationship with the Republic of Korea, and we 

are working with the RoK and Japan in a trilateral fashion to ensure that we can share missile early-warning data, and that is 

going really, really well. And we saw recently the two leaders of 

those countries conduct a summit with the President here in the 

United States. 

The Philippines. 3 years ago, the Philippines were about ready 

to decide to not allow our troops to remain in the Philippines. You 

fast-forward to today and we have probably one of the best relationships with the Philippines that we have seen in a long time. 

And we just had President Marcos here, and, again, we opened up 

four new sites where our military can work with his military on a 

number of issues. And those sites are in addition to what we already had. 

Australia. We just, you know, put in play a generational initiative here that I think is going to continue to provide tremendous 

capability to our allies in the region and to us, quite frankly. This 

is the AUKUS initiative. Again, this provides Australia with a nuclear-powered, conventionally armed submarine capability. It will 

take years to put all the things in place, but we are moving out, 

and that is—that is progressing very, very well. And we are also 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
269 

working with Australia to do a number of things in terms of potentially co-producing a long-range strike and some other things. 

India. We have, you know, a great relationship with India. We 

recently have enabled India to produce jet weapon—jet engine in 

India, and that is—that is kind of revolutionary. And that will provide a great capability to them. And we are also producing a—coproducing an armored vehicle with India. 

So all of these things, when you add them up, are probably more 

than we have seen happen in that region in a very, very long time. 

And they all promote interoperability, and they all help to increase, 

you know, our ability to respond to a number of different things. 

But, again, these are real meaningful steps that I think we have 

taken in the region that I think a lot of people are not aware of. 

But we have made tremendous progress, and we will continue to 

do so. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Mr. Garcia. 

JUNIOR ENLISTED PAY

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you all for, the gentlemen, for your service to our 

beautiful country. 

General Brown, congratulations. Pretty good for a Viper guy to 

be where you are right now, so—— 

I see our biggest near-term tactical threat is our open southern 

border, and obviously the biggest strategic threat, which I treat as 

an existential threat to our country, being China, as well as our 

debt, but that is not your fault. 

I don’t think we have a capability gap. I think we have the high 

end exquisite technology in most domains, but I do see us losing 

the lead or having lost the lead in several domains in terms of capacity. 

And I am encouraged by hearing, I think we are all aligned on 

the problem set and the challenges that we have. We have some, 

obviously, readiness and end-strength issues, especially in executing and finishing this pivot to the Pacific that we have been 

talking about for, what, almost 20 years now. We need to actually 

execute that, complete that, and deter war before China gets aggressive against Taiwan. 

And I think the bottom line is, is that whether the number is 

$825 billion or $850 billion, we have got to make it behave like a 

trillion dollars, so relative to what we are trying to accomplish here 

and get those efficiencies. 

I think any investments—and you are spot on, the CRs are the 

most deleterious move that we can do in that regard. But I think, 

beyond the CRs, if we are going to make investments in our industrial base, we also have to make sure that we are streamlining contracting and valuing speed as a measure of merit out of the Pentagon. And I don’t think we have that right now. 

You all know my number one priority is our troops, especially 

our junior enlisted, E–1 through E–6. They are the most precious, 

they are the most potent, and they are the most powerful weapon 

system that we have. Without them, the B–21 is nothing, the Columbia-class submarine is nothing, and our nuclear triad is futile. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
270 

So last year, we missed our recruitment numbers, retention numbers by a net 41,000 personnel, recruits across all the services. I 

was encouraged that the President signed my military licensing, 

Spouse Licensing Relief Act, into law, and I think that helps. 

And this committee did God’s work last year. We passed, out of 

HAC–D, a bill that took the starting salary for an E–1 from 

$22,000 to $31,000, which is the equivalent of $15 per hour. Unfortunately, the Senate stripped that out in their version, and the 

NDAA ended up coming back to us without that pay raise. 

And so recognizing the challenges that we have, recognizing that 

our troops are our most precious weapon system—and I want to 

push on this issue of base pay again because, right now, even with 

the raise that we got in the NDAA last fiscal year, the one we just 

signed, the E–1 is now starting at $12.80 an hour. 

In California, we just started a $20-an-hour minimum wage. 

Okay. So for the DOD to be competitive in most States, but especially in States like California and Virginia, it is very difficult to 

keep up. BAH and BAS aren’t keeping pace with the market values. 

And so I would like to submit, Mr. Chairman, for the record, a 

review of the basic pay table in support of the 14th QRMC, without 

objection. 

Mr. CALVERT. Without objection. 

Mr. CALVERT. We are going to stick to our 5 minutes because the 

Secretary has to leave, so—— 

Mr. GARCIA. Okay. Sorry. 

What I am asking for, Mr. Secretary, is a commitment to help 

get our troops above the poverty line, above that $15 minimum 

wage. The President threatened to veto the HAC–D bill because of 

this pay raise that we put in our HAC–D bill. He was citing the 

QRMC as the reason. He wanted to wait for that. The QRMC has 

come out and validated the findings and said that our HAC–D bill 

is the right path forward. 

Can we get a commitment from you that you will help us get our 

junior enlisted E–1 starting salary above $15 per hour in the next 

year or so? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, as you would guess, you know, this is a 

very important issue to me, and so taking care of our people is 

something that I am always focused on. 

I want to thank you and your colleagues for supporting a 5.2 percent pay raise for our troops. That is the largest pay raise in 20 

years. And before that, the year before that, we had a 4.6 percent 

pay raise. 

And in this budget, we are asking you for a 4.5 percent pay raise. 

So my goal is to reduce the costs that our troops and families are 

facing and increase the resources. Whether it is childcare, whether 

it is prices in the commissary, a number of things that we have 

done—and you are right, BAH is a thing that we are focused on 

to try to make sure that we are coming close to keeping pace and 

keeping pace. But the market in certain areas is pretty dynamic, 

and it is no easy task to keep pace, but we do remain focused on 

this. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
271 

If you can get us a written response on that. I know you have 

committed to getting us a compensation review to us as soon as 

possible. We would love to have it as soon as possible so we can 

review that for the fiscal year 2025 proposal. 

With that, Ms. Kaptur, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

COMMUNICATING RUSSIA’S THREAT

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry to be late. We had 

our own hearing. 

Secretary Austin, great to see you. Welcome. 

Your written testimony rightly states, ‘‘The world of chaos and 

conquest that Putin seeks—one in which autocrats think they can 

rewrite borders by force—would leave the United States far less secure,’’ unquote. 

You understand what is fully at stake at this pivotal moment in 

Ukraine, Central Europe, and, indeed, the free world. 

Generations of immigrants from Central Europe sought security 

on our shores. I am a descendent blessed by the survival of our 

grandparents’ struggle to escape Bolsheviks, Russia. Yet many 

Americans appear not to fully know the history of Central Europe 

and what is at stake today. 

What are you and the Department of Defense doing to better 

communicate to the American people the gravity of the current real 

threat to the free world represented by an armed Russia, the third 

largest military in the world? 

And then secondly, do you have any concerns that the defense 

medicine in your department could be compromised by the complete growing dependence of our country on imports of pharmaceutical ingredients from foreign countries, some of which are adversaries? 

Thank you. 

Secretary AUSTIN. So in terms of what we are doing to communicate on this issue, we seize every opportunity to point out how 

important this is to us in terms of our national security, how important this is to us for our defense industrial base, and the fact 

that Ukraine matters not just to Europe but to the entire world. 

This is about the rules-based international order. And, again, as 

you have heard me say a couple times this morning, the rest of the 

world is watching, and they are watching to see whether or not the 

United States of America is going to be a dependable partner or 

not. And if it is not, then it is going to change their behavior. 

If it is one of our adversaries, they will feel emboldened. If it is 

one of our allies or partners, they will then question whether or not 

they can depend on us, you know, when times are tough. And so 

this is really important to us. 

But it is—you know, I think that Ukraine has done a commendable job in terms of, you know, protecting its sovereign territory, 

taking back some of the territory that the Russians have taken, 

and holding their own. And they have done that because of the security assistance that we and 50 other countries have provided to 

them. 

They haven’t asked us to fight for them. They just ask for help 

in terms of security assistance. And so I think the right thing to 

do is continue to do that. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
272 

DEFENSE MEDICINE AND PHARMACEUTICALS

Ms. KAPTUR. On defense medicine and the pharmaceuticals being 

used in theatre by our own soldiers and the purchase by the Department of Defense of pharmaceuticals, what are you doing to assure their purity and manufacture in this country? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, you know, the health of our troops, 

again, is important to us. And if there is a threat here of us not 

having the, you know, pharmaceuticals that are up to speed, then 

certainly that is something that we will delve into. But I will get 

back to you on that issue. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you very much. And thank you for your service. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Ellzey. 

EW AND AEW NEED

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, gentlemen, 

for being here. 

He left but I want to point out that Steve Womack and I don’t 

like each other very much on one day and that is Army-Navy day. 

But we are very good friends other than that. 

I would argue with General Brown that my Super Hornet will 

kick your tail in a Fighting Falcon. I know you like to call it a 

Viper. But for most days, and as it is today, we should all be 

united. 

Mr. Secretary, you and I on social issues probably don’t agree on 

a single thing. But today is April 17, 1940, in my mind, and I am 

on your side, because the winds of war are already blowing overseas in a way they haven’t in 80 years. 

We have four dictatorships, all of which are involved in genocide. 

Iran, genocide of the Jews. Russia, genocide of the Ukrainians. 

China, genocide of the Uyghurs. And North Korea wants to redefine their relationship with the south through armed combat. 

I wish it was April 17, 1946, when we could talk about cuts, but 

we can’t. 

Furthermore, I would argue that we are already at war on our 

southern border against the cartels because they are killing wartime numbers of Americans, 200 a day from fentanyl poisonings, 

which, in my mind, is a weapon of mass destruction, on a chemical 

basis aided by China, controlled by the cartels. 

In addition, we are losing that many number of people that you 

are trying to recruit that need to be going to the police force, to the 

Reserves, to teaching, to having families in this country. You are 

in a struggle against a group that is being killed at wartime numbers, not seen since World War II. 

We should be on a wartime footing in this country right now. So 

the border is an issue, but those four regimes that I just talked 

about make it look like it is April 17, 1940. 

And we have been fortunate enough to see a constellation of 

stars on shoulders this week, and what they have all told us from 

the EUCOM commander, he says he needs EW and AEW. They are 

not building any 18 Growlers anymore. We need more of them. The 

Israelis need tankers. I talked about that in June when we went 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
273 

there before October and talked about that with the prime minister. 

INDOPACOM and the Marines need contested logistics capabilities with C–130Js and their landing ship medium. 

In Ukraine, most of the money that we are going to spend goes 

to weapons for us. 

You know, we won World War II with Liberty ships, and this 

LSM that the Marine Corps needs 35 of and identified that in 2022 

would have cost $100 million a piece. But requirements got in the 

way, and here we are 2 years later, we still don’t have them. They 

have got ballooned up to $350 million because of the requirements 

office. And we won’t get them until 2027, and that’s assuming we 

pass these spending bills. 

If we go on a CR, now we are in 2028 when we have identified 

that Xi Jinping wants to act before 2027. So in the supply and demand and equip realm, I would say that our acquisitions process 

is broken. We need to be on wartime footing. We need to bypass 

some of the requirements that we have. Otherwise, we would have 

had a Presidential helo by now. We would have had an LSM by 

now. F–35 wouldn’t have been so costly, and our newest version of 

the aircraft carriers wouldn’t be 3 years behind and billions of dollars over budget. 

Because I am a little worried about what we have right now. We 

are not ready for the war that looks to be looming, and I am interested in preventing that. 

So I would like to hear from you, General Brown, how you feel 

about the EW need, because they are not making any more Growlers, but the line is about to close on the Super Hornet. If we lose 

an aircraft carrier and we don’t have any Growler capability, all 

that EW need goes away. We are losing our E–3 capability. 

So how do you feel about the EW, AEW need right now? 

General BROWN. Well, let me start out with what you just laid 

out as far as the sense of urgency that is required and understanding where the threat is. And EW is an area that we have 

watched that threat increase, and we haven’t had to deal with it 

for the past couple of decades, and we need to up our game in this 

area. 

Doesn’t actually have to be a Growler, but I do think we do need 

to approach this with seriousness on our focus on EW, on tankers, 

on munitions, the range of capability and capacity that we need in 

order to be able to address all the challenges you highlighted. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you for that answer. 

And as far as the LSM goes, we need the high priority for that 

because that is specifically needed for the Marine Corps. The requirements office needs to drop its opposition and the raising of 

cost because we don’t have the money to deal with that. 

We won on Liberty ships that didn’t have requirements, didn’t 

have shock trials. We need to move forward. 

In the time I have remaining, if Article 5 happens and we lose 

Ukraine, and they step one foot in Poland, the FRA is out the door. 

The investments we are making in Ukraine are small. For the 

return on investment that we are getting for the Ukrainians to 

fight on our behalf is a small amount of money, and they are doing 

it for us. The last thing I want is for Americans to die on a hill 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
274 

in Poland when the Ukrainians are willing to do it for themselves 

with our help. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Fleischmann. 

NNSA DEFENSE PROGRAMS

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you again for 

your kind words welcoming me to this subcommittee. 

I want to also thank Secretary Austin, General Brown, and Mr. 

McCord for their testimony today. 

As the chairman alluded to, I chair the Energy and Water Subcommittee of Appropriations. Ms. Kaptur and I, she is my ranking 

member, we just had the Army Corps before us, but we fund the 

Department of Energy. And as part of that funding of the Department of Energy, the NNSA, the National Nuclear Security Administration, we are responsible for funding our Nation’s nuclear arsenal for the ultimate customer, the Department of Defense. 

And I represent the people of the Third District of Tennessee, 

gentlemen. That encompasses the great city of Oak Ridge, birthplace of the Manhattan Project, Y–12 National Security Complex. 

We are also building the uranium processing facility. So I am working very, very heavily in the nuclear sector. 

In that regard, I am going to address my one question today 

dealing with our Nation’s nuclear deterrent. 

Right now, the NNSA defense programs are intertwined with the 

Defense Department’s programs replacing all legs of the triad, and 

we are thankful for that. 

It will come as no surprise that I have concerns, given we see 

that Russia has essentially fully recapitalized its nuclear forces; 

China rapidly expanding its numbers and fielding a triad of its 

own; and the looming prospect, sadly, of a nuclear Iran. We also 

face the termination of New START in less than 2 years. 

We are entering unchartered territory dealing with potentially 

two pure nuclear adversaries as we are in the middle of recapitalizing our entire deterrent. 

My question, gentlemen, is, given this troubling strategic threat 

picture, I am interested in hearing your outlook on the current 

pace of recapitalization of our nuclear deterrent. Are there any 

ways we in Congress can better support the Department’s efforts 

to meet these increasingly tight deadlines? 

And with that, I will await your response. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, let me begin by thanking you for what 

you have done to date. 

As you know, over the course of this administration, we requested to invest some $149 billion in the modernization of our nuclear program. It is the bedrock of our defense, in our nuclear triad 

here, and I personally believe that all three legs are important, and 

I think that we should continue to invest in the modernization of 

all three legs. 

Now, because of the fact that, you know, we are now faced with 

two major nuclear countries or potential adversaries, conditions 

have changed. And whether or not we are going to need to do more 

in the future is something that we are going to have to consider. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
275 

But I think following through with our current modernization 

program is the right thing to do. And again, I support you for what 

you are doing to support—I thank you for what you are doing to 

support us. And, again, I think we should maintain course and 

speed here. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

And I will say, we work bipartisan. We have the Nuclear Security Working Group. We work with the NNSA. We want to link up 

and work very closely with the Department of Defense so that we 

can have them make sure that our ultimate customer, you all, are 

pleased with what is going on. We will continue to fund that I 

think in a bipartisan and bicameral way. 

I will close by saying this. Again, thanks to each and every one 

of you all for your tremendous service to our country. I did mention 

I represent Oak Ridge. I am very proud of that great city. 

But my home city, which I am not native to, actually, is Chattanooga, Tennessee. I will let everyone here know that we are 

going to be having our 75th uninterrupted Armed Forces Day Parade. 

Mr. Secretary, I know we have reached out to you. I will ask you 

to maybe contact me offline in that regard. 

Uninterrupted. I would maintain that Chattanooga is probably 

the most patriotic city in America. Our veterans are near and dear 

to us, as are our great men and women who are serving our Armed 

Forces today. 

And with that, I will yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman and thank the gentlelady 

from Minnesota for her interest in this and doing the great job that 

she does. 

And I want to thank all three of you for your service. And before 

we conclude, I want to thank you for your testimony. 

And also, if you have any—any members who have any questions 

for the record, I ask witnesses to respond in a reasonable period 

of time. 

With that, thank you. The subcommittee is adjourned. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
(277) 

TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 2024. 

FISCAL YEAR 2025 REQUEST FOR THE NATIONAL 

GUARD AND RESERVES FORCES 

WITNESSES 

GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON, CHIEF OF THE NATIONAL GUARD 

BUREAU, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS, CHIEF OF ARMY RESERVE 

AND COMMANDING GENERAL, U.S. ARMY RESERVE COMMAND 

VICE ADMIRAL JOHN MUSTIN, CHIEF OF NAVY RESERVE, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

LIEUTENANT GENERAL LEONARD F. ANDERSON, IV, COMMANDER, MARINE FORCES RESERVE, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY, CHIEF OF AIR FORCE RESERVE, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. Good morning. The subcommittee will come to 

order. 

Today, the subcommittee will receive testimony on fiscal year 

2025 budget requests for the Reserve components of the United 

States Armed Forces. 

To discuss the budget request and other issues related to the Reserve components, we welcome our panel, consisting of General 

Daniel Hokanson, the Chief of the National Guard Bureau; Lieutenant General Jody Daniels, the Chief of the Army Reserve; Vice 

Admiral John Mustin, the Chief of the Navy Reserve; Lieutenant 

General Leonard Anderson, commander of the Marine Corps Reserve; and Lieutenant General John Healy, the Chief of the Air 

Force Reserve. 

Welcome to you all and thank you for your years of distinguished 

service. We are looking forward to your testimony today. 

The Reserve components provide our Nation with a critical force 

multiplier in a time of war and indispensable national response 

force in times of peace. 

We all know that the National Guard is our Nation’s 911 response when it comes to natural disasters. In California, the 

Guard’s firefighting capabilities save lives every year. But the 

Guard is also desperately trying to repel an invasion across our 

southern border. This invasion, encouraged by President Biden’s 

failed immigration and border policies, is bringing deadly fentanyl 

and criminals into our communities. 

While most Americans are aware of the Guard’s domestic responsibilities, they should also be aware of the great work the Guard 

is doing internationally. Working with our partners around the 

world through the critical State Partnership Program, the Guard 

is enhancing the security of our allies. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
278 

Our Reserves also demonstrated their importance during the periods of peacetime peril. At the height of the pandemic, our Reserve 

forces deployed around the country to augment overwhelmed civilian medical personnel in places like New York City. 

So for all that you do, we salute you. But to ensure that our Reserve components can continue their great work, they must be adequately resourced, especially given the dangerous global environment we find ourselves in. 

Unfortunately, the President’s budget has failed to request the 

resources necessary to support our Guard and Reserve. While inflation is running over 3 percent, the overall funding request for the 

Reserve components in fiscal year 2025 for programs under the 

subcommittee’s jurisdiction is nearly 2 percent lower than fiscal 

year 2024. This equates to a reduction of over $1 billion. While 

there are some Reserve components that receive increases in this 

budget over last year, those appear to have come at the expense 

of other Reserve components. 

Now, some may argue that this strategy of robbing Peter to pay 

Paul was made necessary as a result of the caps imposed by the 

Fiscal Responsibility Act. However, the President has ignored those 

caps when it comes to nondefense spending. 

One need only look at the National Guard’s unfunded priority list 

as an example of the woeful inadequacy of the President’s budget 

request. The fiscal year 2024 list of unfunded priorities totaled 

$662 million for programs under this subcommittee’s jurisdiction. 

For fiscal year 2025, that list has grown to a whopping $2.4 billion. 

That is a 263 percent increase in unfunded priorities. 

While the President’s budget is obviously deficit, let me be clear 

that this committee’s strong support for the Guard and Reserve is 

unwavering. In fact, last year we added $1 billion above the budget 

request for the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account, 

and $200 million above the budget request for the National Guard 

Counter-Drug Program. 

But we need to understand your actual shortfalls. So I will be interested in hearing from each of you regarding any risk this budget 

is posing to mission requirements and the quality-of-life improvements for your personnel as well as where you would use this additional funding. 

Specifically, I want to hear your perspectives on how confident 

you are that you will meet your required end strength in fiscal year 

2025, the impact of NATO’s expansion on the National Guard’s 

State Partnership Program, the challenges posed to your National 

Guard units by the F–15EX fielding timelines, and the timeline for 

the KC–46A bed-down at March Air Reserve Base. 

I will also be interested in the Guard’s perspectives regarding the 

proposed move of Guard personnel into the Space Force, an issue 

which has generated considerable debate recently. 

With that, I recognize the distinguished ranking member, Ms. 

McCollum, for her opening statement and remarks. Thank you. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. MCCOLLUM

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. 

I was going to start out saying I agree with all your remarks, but 

I have to take just a slight moment to talk about my disagreement 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
279 

with your remarks about what is happening at our southern border. 

We do need to bring order to the border, but to lay all of the 

blame on the current President of the United States I think shortchanges the reality of how Congress has failed. We have failed to 

produce any meaningful legislation to reform our broken immigration system. 

But, Mr. Chair, I couldn’t agree with you more on the rest of 

your statement about how we need to make sure that the Reserve 

and the Guard has the equipment, the training to fulfill its mission, and to return home safely when called upon. 

I want to welcome each of you before the committee today, and 

a very special warm Minnesota welcome to Lieutenant General Anderson. 

General Anderson, it is 47 degrees in Duluth and 48 in Minnesota. So welcome to steamy D.C. and your first appearance before the committee. 

Our sincere thanks to General Hokanson and Lieutenant General Daniels and Vice Admiral Mustin for what may be your last 

appearances before the committee. So we have got the new kid on 

the block. So take lots of notes, Lieutenant General Anderson. 

Each and every one of you have dedicated your life to service and 

know how indebted we all feel to you. And on behalf of the people 

I represent in the Fourth District, thank you. 

Each of your components are a vital part to our national security. 

Each of you has personally deployed into areas of conflict, assisting 

your Active Component counterparts in a seamless manner. Thank 

you for the work that you do in leading our Guard and Reserve personnel. 

Today, I am particularly interested to hear how the administration’s fiscal year 2025 request will enhance your ability to meet 

your mission’s goals, and if any capability gaps exist, as the chair 

pointed out. 

Our National Guard and Reserve components are called upon to 

support a variety of missions, including humanitarian missions, the 

continued support to the southwest border, overseas operations, 

and for the Guard in particular, the State Partnership Program activities, which this committee dearly is invested in. 

It would be helpful to receive an update on the pace of deployments affecting your troops’ morale, readiness, and retention efforts. It would be helpful for each of you to share how your budget 

request will impact the current pace of operations for each of your 

services. 

Serving your country on top of managing a civilian job, and in 

many cases, supporting a big busy family is one of the highest 

forms of service. We thank you, and we thank everyone who serves 

alongside and under you. You are truly putting country above self. 

Thank you for all your efforts. And I look forward to a productive 

dialogue today. I thank you for the courtesy. And I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. General Hokanson, please take 3 minutes for your opening remarks. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
280 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL HOKANSON

General HOKANSON. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, and esteemed members of the subcommittee, as mentioned, 

this is my final testimony before you as the 29th Chief of the National Guard Bureau. 

It has been the honor of my life for Kelly and I and all of team 

29 to represent the soldiers, airmen, and families of the National 

Guard. I am tremendously proud of their service and sacrifices, and 

I am grateful for this subcommittee’s support. Thanks to you, we 

continue to increase the combat readiness of our formations and 

improve the quality of life of our soldiers, airmen, and their families. 

Our Nation’s investment in the National Guard comes at a pivotal moment. Our strategic competitors are seeking advantages in 

every domain, land, sea, air, space, and cyber. If we are to compete 

and deter successfully and, if necessary, prevail in combat, we 

must invest in our people. 

Our soldiers and airmen, with the support of their families, are 

the ones who carry out these missions. They stand watch in the 

turbulent corners of the world. They monitor our airspace. They 

train with our allies and partners. They respond to our communities in time of need. It is our people who make the difference. 

They make us lethal, resilient, and responsive. 

Our people, like our pilots, maintainers and support personnel 

and our Air Guard fighter squadrons, are experienced, capable, and 

provide the capacity we need to keep pace with global demands, 

deter our adversaries and, if necessary, prevail in combat. 

With significant fighter pilot and maintainer shortages in the Air 

Force, we believe, through temporary cross-component aircraft 

transfers, we can retain the critical fighter capabilities in all 25 of 

our existing fighter squadrons until aircraft procurement efforts 

can replenish them. 

Our people, like our full-time support personnel, build readiness 

in our formations and are increasingly challenged to meet the 

growing requirements. The cap on Active Guard and Reserve positions and a Federal Technician Program that is no longer competitive, must be addressed to ensure we have the full-time manning 

necessary to meet our service-directed readiness requirements. Our 

people, as in every member of our force, continues to grapple with 

complex duty statuses and benefits disparity, which is why we need 

duty status reform. 

Lastly, our people include our National Guard space units that 

have nearly three decades of expertise and experience. We must 

find a way forward for these highly trained professionals as space 

becomes an even greater warfighting domain. 

These are issues that affect our people, the heart of our force. 

They are integral to recruiting and retention, and ultimately our 

ability to fight and win. As my time comes to a close, I will ensure 

a seamless transition to the next National Guard leadership team, 

and continue to position the joint force for success. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
281 

With your help, we will keep our promise to America to be always ready, always there. Thank you for your time, your friendship, and your support. I look forward to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
282 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 429 here 57432.166
283 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 430 here 57432.167
284 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 431 here 57432.168
285 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 432 here 57432.169
286 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 433 here 57432.170
287 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 434 here 57432.171
288 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. 

Next, Lieutenant General Daniels, please take 3 minutes for 

your opening remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIELS

General DANIELS. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to testify once again this morning. 

On behalf of Command Sergeant Major Lombardo, and the 

190,000 soldiers and civilians of the Army Reserve, we stand ready 

to protect American interests and posture ourselves to meet challenges at home and around the globe. 

On any given day, nearly 9,000 Reserve soldiers are mobilized or 

deployed worldwide in support of combatant commands, while tens 

of thousands more are engaged in training events and annual combined and joint exercises. They reinforce alliances and partnerships 

around the globe. 

The Army Reserve is also a key partner in the Homeland, facilitating large-scale mobilization operations and supporting First 

Army in the activation of more than 12,000 soldiers and civilians 

every year. As the joint force prepares to operate in a contested logistics environment, the Army Reserve will play a key role in delivering the critical enabling capabilities needed for large-scale combat operations. 

A ready and modernized Army Reserve is a crucial part of a joint 

force that can deploy, fight, and win our Nation’s wars. From the 

start of my tenure, I challenged our leaders to prioritize tough realistic training done safely well over administrative metrics. That 

message is resonating throughout the force and innovative readiness training, or IRT, is a textbook example of this. 

In 2023, more than 1,500 Army Reserve soldiers participated in 

16 IRT missions across 12 States and three U.S. territories, providing key services to almost 40,000 patients. 

The Army is undergoing a once-in-a-generation transformation. 

The Army Reserve requires robust investment to modernize our 

aging equipment, to enable interoperability with the joint force. 

NGREA represents roughly 30 to 40 percent of the Army Reserve’s 

equipment procurement budget. 

That said, the Army Reserve’s unfunded equipment requirements 

list continues to grow. With inflation and material costs rising, our 

buying power is no longer the same. The success of the Army Reserve’s modernization efforts hinges on NGREA funding, and we 

greatly appreciate the committee’s continued support. 

Additionally about half of our 18,000 Humvees are beyond their 

useful life, reducing our ability to respond to crises and risking soldiers’ safety without upgraded antilock brake systems and electronic stability control kits. Your support to these modernization 

programs will build readiness and enhance safety for decades to 

come. 

Despite the most challenging recruiting environment in decades, 

the Army Reserve’s end strength has remained above the fiscal 

year 2024 and 2025 strength objectives. I would ask that this committee support Reserve Personnel, Army, the RPA account, funding 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
289 

reflective of our current end strength to maintain a momentum and 

to continue to train, fight, and accomplish our mission. 

Caring for our soldiers and families and ensuring they receive 

the benefits that they deserve is vital. Last October, the Army Reserve developed a first-of-a-kind intergovernmental support agreement pilot to deliver childcare services to soldiers during weekend 

training. We still need assistance with getting additional weekend 

childcare providers. 

Once again, I would like to thank the committee for your support 

throughout my tenure. Thanks to Congress’ support, our soldiers 

are equipped and ready to face any conflict in the Domain. Command Sergeant Major Lombardo and I are ready for your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
290 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 438 here 57432.172
291 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 439 here 57432.173
292 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 440 here 57432.174
293 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 441 here 57432.175
294 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 442 here 57432.176
295 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 443 here 57432.177
296 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 444 here 57432.178
297 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 445 here 57432.179
298 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 446 here 57432.180
299 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 447 here 57432.181
300 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 448 here 57432.182
301 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 449 here 57432.183
302 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 450 here 57432.184
303 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 451 here 57432.185
304 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 452 here 57432.186
305 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. 

Vice Admiral Mustin, please take 3 minutes for your opening remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL MUSTIN

Admiral MUSTIN. Good morning, Chair Calvert, Ranking Member 

McCollum, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is 

a privilege to report to you today on the status and the vision of 

America’s Navy Reserve. 

I would like to begin by recognizing my wife, Kim, whose steadfast support for 31 years exemplifies the unsung sacrifices typical 

of our military spouses. 

I would also like to thank Master Chief Tracy Hunt for his tireless efforts in support of our enlisted Reserve sailors, as well as express my thanks and appreciation to Lieutenant General Jody Daniels, as we bid her fair winds and following seas. 

Given this will be my last hearing before this committee, I want 

to thank General Hokanson and my peer Reserve chiefs for their 

support and friendship during my tenure as Chief of the Navy Reserve. 

On any given day, the Navy Reserve provides 100,000 sailors, 

three dozen ship, wing, and squadron commanding officers, nearly 

150 aircraft, two SEAL teams, three expeditionary medical facilities, 2,200 strategic sealift officers, 450 civilians and nearly half of 

the Navy’s Expeditionary Combat Command and intelligence capability. 24/7 365, your Navy Reserve is standing at the ready, with 

nearly 15,000 sailors serving on Active Duty orders every single 

day. 

For more than a century, your Navy Reserve has reliably responded when and where needed. Today, our current operations extend around the world. You will find our sailors supporting operations throughout Europe, in the Indo-Pacific region, in the Red 

Sea, and even locally, including recent support operations in Baltimore, all showcasing the flexibility, readiness, and value our citizen sailors generate and contribute to our national security. 

And yet, these contributions merely hint at the demands required of our force in a great power conflict. We have 977 days 

until 2027, and the accelerating pace of that countdown clock 

drives our actions with a committed sense of urgency. 

During my tenure, the Navy Reserve has aggressively executed 

a multiyear transformation focused unambiguously and 

unapologetically on warfighting readiness to prepare the force for 

high-end, multi-domain warfare. 

This effort required the modernization of equipment, training 

systems, and mobilization processes to ensure our sailors are 

trained, available, and combat-ready from day one. The procurement of modern KC–130Juliet aircraft is the Navy Reserve’s number one equipment priority. This modernization to replace aging 

legacy airframes is essential to ensuring the Navy Reserve can effectively and efficiently meet the contested logistics requirements 

and operations demanded by our combatant and fleet commanders, 

particularly in the Indo-Pacific area of responsibility where this Reserve-only capability factors heavily into our operations plans. We 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
306 

share a strong bipartisan alignment on this priority, for which I am 

grateful and thankful. 

Beyond equipment, we are embracing technological advancements to improve work and training environments, harnessing our 

greatest asset, the minds, talents and ideas of our Reserve sailors, 

and propelling the Navy Reserve into a new era of operational and 

digital readiness and efficiency. 

Commitment to our sailors is central to our Navy’s enduring 

warfighting advantage, so we have amplified the personnel and 

professional development of every sailor, and instilled a culture of 

excellence so every sailor, civilian, and their families can thrive. 

I extend my gratitude for the committee’s support, which is crucial to maintaining the operational predictability essential for our 

sailors, their family, and our global combat readiness. 

Chair Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, and members of this 

committee, the dedication of our citizen sailors, civilians, and their 

supportive families is a gratifying source of daily inspiration. 

Commanding, representing, and advocating for the Navy Reserve 

has been the honor of a lifetime. Thank you for your continued support and for the opportunity to address you today. I look forward 

to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
307 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 457 here 57432.187
308 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 458 here 57432.188
309 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 459 here 57432.189
310 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 460 here 57432.190
311 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 461 here 57432.191
312 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 462 here 57432.192
313 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 463 here 57432.193
314 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 464 here 57432.194
315 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 465 here 57432.195
316 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 466 here 57432.196
317 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 467 here 57432.197
318 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 468 here 57432.198
319 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 469 here 57432.199
320 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 470 here 57432.200
321 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 471 here 57432.201
322 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 472 here 57432.202
323 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 473 here 57432.203
324 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Admiral. 

Lieutenant General Anderson, please take 3 minutes for your 

opening remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL ANDERSON

General ANDERSON. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to appear before you today and testify on behalf 

of the Commandant of the Marine Corps about your Marine Forces 

Reserve. 

I am honored to appear before you with my fellow Reserve Component service chiefs and with my senior enlisted leaders, Sergeant 

Major Edwin Mota and Command Master Chief Michael Mussett. 

The Marine Corps Reserve has always been a critical component 

of the Marine Corps total force. The emergent picture of the intricate and multi-domain warfighting environments of the future increasingly reveals the risk of relying on the Active Component 

alone. 

The problem set demonstrates why the Marine Corps strategically leverages its Reserve Component in two important ways. 

First, the Marine Corps Reserve provides support to global force 

management, employed as a vital contributor to meet combatant 

command requirements. 

The Reserve Component, in close partnership with the Marine 

Forces Command and Second Marine Expeditionary Force, continues to mature the utilization of service-retained forces in support of global crisis response operations. 

We provide Reserve forces for global deployments that span the 

spectrum of conflict, and we participate in combat-related training 

exercises in every geographic combatant command and 

CYBERCOM. 

Second, the Marine Corps Reserve is amplifying its talent management efforts. This subcommittee has been briefed extensively in 

recent years on the Marine Corps’ Force Design Initiative. Talent 

management is a major focus for the Marine Corps and the Marine 

Corps Reserve. 

We are identifying select individuals with high-demand, low-density skill sets that are inherently challenging to acquire and providing those Marines pathways to continued military service that 

are complementary with their civilian careers. 

Each year, this subcommittee provides National Guard Reserve 

equipment appropriation funding for the Marine Corps Reserve, 

and I am grateful for your continued support through NGREA. The 

Marine Corps Reserve is designed to be equipped at near parity 

with the Active Component, and NGREA funds allow the Marine 

Corps Reserve to resource the requirements set forth by Congress 

and the combatant commanders. 

The Marine Corps Reserve would realize an even greater advantage by receiving NGREA funding that restores its historical share. 

I ask that you consider this in your future funding decisions. 

The Commandant of the Marine Corps recently called the Marine 

Corps Reserve our backbone and emphasized to our senior leaders 

the need to maximize the potential of our Marine Corps Reserve 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
325 

forces by resourcing and equipping them to ensure they are prepared to meet the threats that face this Nation. 

Reserve Marines serve honorably while balancing their civilian 

careers and families. They bring a breadth and depth of knowledge 

to the Marine Corps that gives the total force an asymmetric advantage. 

Thank you. I am glad to be here, and I look forward to your 

questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
326 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 477 here 57432.204
327 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 478 here 57432.205
328 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 479 here 57432.206
329 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 480 here 57432.207
330 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 481 here 57432.208
331 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 482 here 57432.209
332 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 483 here 57432.210
333 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 484 here 57432.211
334 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 485 here 57432.212
335 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 486 here 57432.213
336 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 487 here 57432.214
337 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 488 here 57432.215
338 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. 

Next, Lieutenant General Healy, please take 3 minutes for your 

remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL HEALY

General HEALY. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, 

and distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the 

69,600 men and women of the Air Force Reserve, it is an honor for 

me to be here today with my senior enlisted leader, Chief Master 

Sergeant Israel Nunez. 

As a commander, I am continually amazed at the accomplishments of our Reserve airmen as they meet every challenge they are 

given on behalf of the Nation. The Air Force Reserve provides the 

Nation with operational capability, strategic depth, and surge capacity across every Air Force core mission set, both overseas and 

here at home. 

As a largely part-time component, 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 operational imperatives and the re-optimization efforts within the Department of 

the Air Force. 

Since October 7th, Air Force Reserve personnel and aircraft have 

mobilized to fill critical airlift and air refueling missions in support 

of U.S. Central Command and U.S. Transportation Command, 

some with only 72 hours’ notice. 

To date, in fiscal year 2024, Reserve airmen have accomplished 

over 68,000 man-days, supporting Levant operations, filling critical 

requirements amidst continued 24/7 operations. 

Reservists provide an experienced support to NATO allies and 

European partners, performing 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 Levant operations without Reserve airmen. 

To optimize our performance as the total force, the Air Force Reserve must transform for the future. This transformation requires 

the Air Force Reserve be proportionally modernized, and concurrently fielded with regular component equipment. 

Maintaining equipment parity with the regular component ensures our ability to match a pacing threat. Legacy aircraft investment without recapitalization and delayed modernization add substantial risk to sustaining combat credible air superiority and 

surge capacity in the future. 

We are grateful for Congress for the National Guard and Reserve 

equipment appropriation. NGREA enables us to modernize and replace obsolete equipment when recapitalization by the Active Component is not feasible. During the past year, NGREA funding enabled installation of the most advanced radars and secure communication equipment and self-protection systems, all designed to 

make our aircraft more lethal and more survivable in a contested 

environment. 

Our most important weapon system is and always has been our 

airmen. We are focused on ensuring that Reserve airmen and their 

families receive the support they need. Two of our most significant 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
339 

lines of effort focus on providing accessible, affordable childcare for 

our members, as well as making healthcare more accessible for 

family members with special needs through the Exceptional Family 

Member Program. 

Over the past seven decades, the Air Force Reserve has provided 

combat-proven readiness. I am certain that the Air Force Reserve 

will be prepared to defend the great Nation now and in the future. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and 

continued support of the Air Force Reserve, our citizen airmen and 

their families, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
340 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 492 here 57432.216
341 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 493 here 57432.217
342 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 494 here 57432.218
343 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 495 here 57432.219
344 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 496 here 57432.220
345 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 497 here 57432.221
346 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 498 here 57432.222
347 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 499 here 57432.223
348 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 500 here 57432.224
349 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 501 here 57432.225
350 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 502 here 57432.226
351 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 503 here 57432.227
352 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 504 here 57432.228
353 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 505 here 57432.229
354 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 506 here 57432.230
355 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 507 here 57432.231
356 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 508 here 57432.232
357 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 509 here 57432.233
358 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 510 here 57432.234
359 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 511 here 57432.235
360 

FENTANYL CRISIS

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. Thank you, General. 

I want to make sure that each member has a chance to ask questions, so each member will have 5 minutes for their questions and 

answers. When your timer turns yellow, you have 1 minute remaining. 

First, I will recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

Fentanyl, we are going to hear a lot about that I am sure from 

all of you, but we certainly hear about it all over the country. Fiscal year 2024 Appropriations Act provides $300 million for the National Guard Counter-Drug Program, which is $200 million above 

the President’s budget request. 

General Hokanson, how can the National Guard best utilize 

these resources to address the fentanyl crisis, which has claimed 

the lives of more than 100,000 Americans just over the last year? 

General HOKANSON. Chairman, first of all, thank you for the additional funding specific to our Counter-Drug Programs. As you are 

aware, in every one of our States our National Guard works closely 

with local law enforcement to provide additional support and capabilities that exceed what the State has. Not only that, we have 

counter-drug schools, five of them throughout the country. 

We will utilize this funding as best we can within the authorities 

we are given to help support local law enforcement and address 

this serious issue that we are facing. 

Mr. CALVERT. Can you be more specific on that? Obviously, intelligence data we have seen shows that the Chinese have been working with the two major cartels and getting the base chemicals into 

Mexico primarily to make the fentanyl, and then the fentanyl is 

distributed. And then apparently these Chinese criminals are 

working with the cartels to launder the money. 

Is there anything you are doing on that end to use some of your 

personnel to support activities that would track this money? 

General HOKANSON. Mr. Chairman, obviously, the stuff that is 

coming up from our southern border is monitored very closely by 

U.S. Northern Command that has that responsibility. 

We are in close coordination through them, through Joint Task 

Force North, to identify, and also work with the local border States 

to help mitigate that wherever we can. However, with our counterdrug specifically, we are just working within the States to provide 

additional personnel, in some cases, aircraft as well for surveillance, but we do have to follow the authorities when it comes to 

intelligence gathering and sharing that information. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, I would hope that we are all working with 

those various agencies as a team effort. I understand between the 

fentanyl, the opioid traffic—and that includes methamphetamine, 

cocaine, crack cocaine, all the rest of it—plus the human trafficking 

side of it plus the illegal farming, illegal logging operations, the 

FBI told me it is about $100 billion a year in activity that is controlled by the two major cartels, $100 billion a year. And it is killing over 100,000 U.S. citizens a year. 

And I can’t emphasize the importance of us focusing on this problem. That is more deaths than is happening in all the combatant 

commands combined that is happening along our southern border 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
361 

with this fentanyl crisis. So I would appreciate anything that can 

be done to facilitate that. 

With that, is Dutch here? Yeah, Dutch you are recognized. Excuse me, Ranking Member McCollum. 

SPACE FORCE TRANSITION

Ms. MCCOLLUM. I think we will probably have a round possibly 

for another session of questions, so I want to go to something both 

the chair and I have grave concerns about, and that is, the Air 

Force reservists and Space Force transition. 

General Healy, in your testimony, you said about 200 Air Force 

Reserve space operators and professionals are currently conducting 

space operation functions, as per the Space Force Personnel Management Act. This will give the airmen the option to transition into 

Space Force under their unique personal structure. 

I would like you to talk a little bit more about how you see this 

going forward and what percentage you expect to transform into 

Space Force. 

But what I do have a concern about is the decision that has been 

starting to take place to just move Air Guard around into other positions within Space Force. 

And I have with me—and, you know, Mr. Chair, I have never 

done this before. Do we put things into the record here? I do have 

a letter from—— 

Mr. CALVERT. I would be happy to submit that for the record. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
362 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 516 here 57432.236
363 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 517 here 57432.237
364 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 518 here 57432.238
365 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. The National Governors. And I just want to— 

I am speaking as a former State representative as well as a Member of Congress. States put significant amounts of money into National Guard, whether it is tuition reimbursement, whether it is 

into, you know, equipment, land, and other things like that. 

So the States not only have a role in having a National Guard 

to be there in times of disaster, to make sure that we do our bit 

as a State to make sure that they are trained and prepared to 

serve when called upon, as they have been. Especially, we see Iraq 

and Afghanistan, the heightened number of reservists and National 

Guard that were called out. 

But I am going to just read something here from the Governors’ 

letter. The legislation that is proposed, ‘‘The legislation that sidesteps, eliminates or otherwise reduces Governors’ authority within 

their States and territories undermines longstanding partnerships, 

precedence, military readiness and operational efficacy. This action 

also negatively affects the important relationships between Governors and DOD at a time when we need to have full trust and confidence between the two to meet the growing threats posed by the 

era of strategic competition as well as natural disasters.’’ 

Can you tell me, has there been a response back to the Governors, how you see in the future a dialogue between Congress and 

between the States on this? Because this is a fundamental change 

as to how the Guard works. 

And, with that, I will yield for time back. And, Mr. Chair, if 

there is something I missed in the question—— 

Mr. CALVERT. Maybe I could add to that just to emphasize this. 

Obviously, 48 of the 50 Governors signed this letter, and all the 

territories signed the letter. 

And one of the concerns that I think the ranking member and 

I both share is that once the precedent is set that the movement 

of Guard personnel to the regular force for whatever reason, that 

can continue. And I would like to add that to the gentlelady’s question. 

Do you agree with that, this is setting a precedent that has never 

happened before and this could erode over time the Guard? 

General HOKANSON. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member McCollum, obviously, this is a new precedent. Obviously, the fact that I 

did see the letter yesterday had 53 Governors that had signed it, 

obviously expressing a concern that it changes 100 years of precedent. 

It also ignores the non-federalized role of the Air National 

Guard, the role that they have in their States, which is very significant for all of our formations, to include our space formations 

as well. 

As a result, I think you are seeing a big concern coming from all 

the Governors as well as all the State adjutants general about the 

potential precedent that this could set. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. I would just add, we see the Navy and the Marine Corps sitting next to each other in a reservist sense. And, you 

know, the Space Force, in my opinion, was hastily put together. I 

am not opposed to the fact that we have a Space Force; but Congress, in my opinion, did not give all the due diligence as to how 

this was going to be organized, what it would look like in the fuVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00369 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
366 

ture, including—including—what a Reserve and a Guard component would look like in the future. 

Now is the time for Congress, working with the Governors, to 

weigh in. And so, I appreciate your answer. And just, I think, we 

are going to have the same discussion—I am going to, I am sure 

you are—with the Secretary of the Air Force later on this afternoon. 

This has not gone unnoticed, and it will not be done. You are not 

doing anything wrong by moving forward with this. I just don’t 

think it was as well-thought-out as it could have been. 

Before I yield, I just failed to mention this in my opening remarks. When the National Guard deploys, they deploy together as 

units. And I want to recognize the number of deployments I have 

been to over the years where there has been one or two reservists 

who have been part of that deployment. 

And sometimes—I know our Minnesota National Guards, when 

we are deploying we embrace them, we welcome them in. But it 

can be overlooked sometimes how when reservists deploy, they deploy and they don’t deploy as a full unit until they are—probably 

you have seen an Army term—mustered together. But I just want 

the reservists to know how much they are appreciated, and it 

doesn’t go unnoticed. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. And it has been my experience here to 

get 48 Governors to sign anything is remarkable in itself, including 

all the territories. So my recommendation to the Air Force, I think 

they need to work with the States in a reasonable way ahead, because obviously, this is not going to fly, I think, nationally. 

With that, Mr. Rogers, you are recognized. 

GRAY EAGLE RECONNAISSANCE DRONES

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Welcome, gentlemen, to the committee. There has been a longstanding effort to secure Gray Eagle reconnaissance drones for the 

Army Guard, so much so that in fiscal year 2023 we approved, with 

Senator McConnell’s help on the Senate side, we helped secure 

$350 million in funding to the Guard to acquire and field 12 Gray 

Eagle drones, which is, I understand, a company’s worth of drones. 

Where do we stand, General Hokanson, on fulfilling the orders 

of this committee and the Congress on the drones? 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Rogers, first of all, we greatly 

appreciate the support from this committee to purchase those 12 

Gray Eagles. 

And my understanding, we will be getting the new aircraft off 

the line in 2027. We are in the process right now of working with 

the States to identify where those aircraft will be fielded. Interestingly, we purchased 12. The Army has since changed the force 

structure from a company of 12 to a company of eight, and so, we 

are looking for the opportunity to potentially get four more so we 

can field two companies instead of one. 

This really sets the precedent for us as well. With eight divisions 

in the National Guard, some of those key capabilities are Gray Eagles as well as attack aircraft. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
367 

With the decision to cancel the FARA, we are looking to put attack aircraft in all of our divisions as well as Gray Eagles in all 

of our divisions so that we have the same capability as our ActiveDuty division so, when called forward, the combatant commander 

can expect the same capabilities coming from a Guard division as 

their Active-Duty counterparts. 

Mr. ROGERS. So what is the final deadline time? 

General HOKANSON. Sir, so later this year we will make the decision on the fielding of the first company, and then we will also decide where the second unit will be going as well. And the first four 

will be the half of that next company going forward. 

Mr. ROGERS. I assume you have the criteria at least in some 

form? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. The criteria has been given to all 

States. They are all applying, those that are interested. And, as I 

mentioned, later on this year is when a board consisting of leadership within the Army, the Army Guard, and also the adjutants 

general, will make those recommendations to the Secretary of the 

Army where those units will be fielded. 

DUTY STATUS REFORM

Mr. ROGERS. On another topic, I am a former guardsman, so I 

understand this issue is important to all of us. I am concerned that 

they receive the benefits that they deserve. 

It seems like for decades, we have been trying to address the 

issue of duty status reform. Our current duty status and pay and 

benefit system is complex, overly complex, burdensome, has resulted in multiple problems. 

Today, the most noteworthy problem is that similarly situated 

servicemembers can be doing essentially the same job and receive 

a significantly different pay and benefit package, simply based on 

the authority on which they were ordered to duty. 

Help me out here, why is status reform important to our soldiers? 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Rogers, sir, that is a great 

question. And since 2019, we have been working on this. And it basically streamlines 27 different duty statuses down to nine, to ensure whether the person is on Active Duty, Guard, or Reserve, if 

they are working side by side at the same time, same location, 

same duties, that they are eligible for all the same benefits. 

And it would streamline the process significantly, but also ensure 

that we no longer have disparity, as I mentioned in my opening 

statement, between our servicemembers. 

Mr. ROGERS. Do any other of the panel members wish to be 

heard on this issue? 

General DANIELS. So the Army Reserve is greatly supportive of 

duty status reform, and whatever we can do to help make that a 

success, we would appreciate that. It would help us with our efficiencies of processing pay actions as well. 

Admiral MUSTIN. I can tell you, the Navy is strongly supportive 

and disappointed that it has taken this long. We have talked about 

it for several years, since before 2019 in my case. We all enthusiastically support the concept. I would appreciate your direction to 

the Department of Defense to get it done. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
368 

Mr. ROGERS. What is the problem? How do we solve it? 

General HOKANSON. Sir, it is actually with OMB right now. It 

has cleared the Department, and almost everyone that I know of 

is supportive of that. I think the issue is getting it through OMB 

to come forward, sir. 

Mr. ROGERS. Anyone wish to be heard? 

General HEALY. That is my understanding as well. The Air Force 

Reserve is absolutely supportive. It has been in every one of my 

talking points at every visit to the Hill in the previous 2 years. It 

is about aligning and getting rid of the deficiencies that we currently have for the multitude of statuses. 

It is a retention issue as well. It makes it easier for our airmen 

to serve if they know it is a basic one, two, three, four, so to speak, 

of what I get paid and what entitlements I am due. 

Mr. ROGERS. I thank all of you for your service. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Next, Dutch, got you this time. 

BALTIC RELATIONS

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. First thing, I noticed with everyone there 

a lot of stars in this room. Thank you for your service. 

I want to talk about—the members of this committee are familiar 

with the National Guard State Partnership Program. And as you 

know, the Maryland National Guard works very closely and is in 

partnership with Estonia. And I have been to Estonia on numerous 

times, and I am very impressed with the Estonian people working 

with us. And they do a lot of good work, in my opinion. 

Can you please share how this relationship is contributing to 

strengthen the security of the Baltic region in the face of Russia’s 

invasion of Ukraine, as well as reassuring our allies in the region. 

And I guess, General, we will start with you, but I know everyone will be able to talk, so—— 

General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question. 

And so when you look at the partnership with the Baltic nations—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—those were the first partnerships we began over 30 years ago, and obviously Maryland with 

Estonia. 

Where we really saw the power of this was in 2007, when Russia 

had a crippling cyber attack on Estonia, which they were unprepared for. So the Maryland Guard has worked with them ever since 

to establish a Cyber Center of Excellence, where we share information with each other, because a lot of times, they are at the leading 

edge of seeing some of the things coming out of Russia. 

Shortly after the invasion, unprovoked invasion of Russia into 

Ukraine, I traveled to the Baltics, to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, to reassure not only our NATO allies, but also our state 

partners. While I was there, it was brought to my attention that 

Narva, which is a city in Estonia, that Putin had mentioned, that 

is actually a Russian city even though it is in Estonia. 

So they were very concerned about that statement. And so we 

worked very closely with them on their Reserve Component and 

really changed all of our training plans to focus on preparing them 

for a potential invasion from Russia. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
369 

Estonia has been very forward-looking on that and preparing 

their Nation as best they can, and we are doing everything we can 

to work with them on those areas where they feel they need the 

most help. That is a great thing for the Maryland Guard, but also, 

all of our other state partners in the region. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Anyone else on the panel have anything to 

say about that? Okay. 

Also, General Hokanson, many—how much time do I have? Two 

minutes, okay. 

CYBER CAPABILITY

Broadly speaking, what advantages or disadvantages do the Reserve forces have with respect to the attrition of cyber specialists 

to the private sector, especially compared to those by our ActiveDuty components? 

General HOKANSON. Congressman, I would say within the Guard, 

we have a very strong cyber capability, and the great thing is, is 

we offer a different option here. They can not only have their civilian career, but they can also continue to serve in the military. And 

some of, I would argue, our best cyber units in the country are in 

the National Guard and Reserve, because they take their civilian 

skill set, they bring it to work, and what they learn at work in 

their Guard role, they also bring to their civilian career. So both 

see great value added related to that. 

The other option is, folks get trained on Active Duty and they 

make the decision to get out. It gives us the opportunity to retain 

that experience in the Guard and Reserve so our Nation continues 

to benefit from all the training that we have put into them at a 

time when cyber professionals are in extremely high demand. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. We really have issues in Maryland, because 

NSA is located there. So it works a different way, because there is 

a lot of personnel there. 

I yield back. 

General HEALY. From the Air Force Reserve, if I could, sir, from 

our perspective, what we are particularly proud of is our cyber 

force retention right now is on the order of 86 percent. 

So we are actually retaining these cyber professionals, and I 

think it is through innovative things that we have done, like a direct commissioning source. So we are able to direct commission enlisted and folks off the street who have the necessary requirements 

to make those positions. 

In addition to that, we have constructive credit which we are allowing people to take from the civilian community and bring it 

forth and allow them to continue to work in a military capacity on 

the weekend. 

I think this is what is allowing us to keep this elite talent that 

is working out there in the civilian sector and allow them to be citizen airmen at the same time. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Good to hear. 

General ANDERSON. Sir, if I could, at the Marines’ 

MARFORCYBER there right at Fort Meade, we have what we call 

an Individual Mobilization Augmentee unit, IMA det there that 

captures the talent that leaves, potentially leaves MARFORCYBER 

from the Active Component. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
370 

A quick example of that is that we have a 6th Comm Battalion 

on the East Coast. And while certainly not directly involved in the 

country of Ukraine, they worked cyber with State Partnership Program in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, to really, you know, 

show our influence in that region countering some of the narrative 

that they are getting from Russia. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. That was a good question, Dutch. I 

think with Estonia especially, their proximity to Saint Petersburg, 

and most of the cyber operations for Russia ran out of Saint Petersburg, the old headquarters of the KGB and their training operations. But the Russians are very capable, unfortunately, when it 

comes to cyber. 

Mr. Carter, you are recognized. 

RESERVE INTEGRATION

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome to each of 

you warriors. I am very proud of each and every one of you. We 

are very proud of our Guard and Reserve. We want to make sure 

that you are treated equally. 

General Daniels, I will talk to you. And each of you might want 

to talk about this. Based on the most recent Army force structure 

design, the Reserve Component will take a larger role in providing 

support, especially in areas of logistics and engineering. 

We know that in the case of large-scale combat, effective integration between Reserve and Army components is critical. Does the 

Reserve Component have the resources necessary to take on this 

increased responsibility, particularly in the area of sustainment? 

And how is the Reserve Component integrating with the Active 

Component through training cycles to build cohesive and 

deployable teams? 

General DANIELS. So thank you very much for the question. We, 

the Army, just had a very large summit within the last couple of 

weeks looking at 2030 and 2040 and our future requirements. And 

so, one of the requirements that was placed back onto the Army 

Reserve to do a pilot, or series of pilots, looking at forward stationing some of our equipment for some of our logistics, engineering, and other kinds of capabilities, particularly in the 

INDOPACOM and EUCOM areas, see if we could station that 

equipment forward, use it for exercises, work with our counterparts 

in those different areas, and then maintain it when we are not 

using it. 

So, we are looking at the—when we forward station this equipment, it will then require us to be interoperable with the other 

forces and work with our partner nations. So for us, this is a great 

opportunity to explore some new relationships. 

Mr. CARTER. The ability to train together, from what I understand, is critical, especially in the big fights. You got to be part of 

one team working together. I don’t know whether everybody goes 

to the National Training Center or not, but if that is where they 

train, do you get the opportunity to go with the Active-Duty people 

and have the funds within which to do that on this new idea that 

you are going to do the logistics part? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
371 

General DANIELS. So the logistics will actually be stationed out 

within the areas—within the combatant commands. 

Mr. CARTER. Okay. 

General DANIELS. However, the Army Reserve does support 

every single CTC rotation, every single warfighter, with some of 

our capabilities. So we are actively participating, and we are actually looking to link a CTC rotation with one of the Army Reserve’s 

large exercises called a CSTX. 

We are looking to do those simultaneously next summer to further expound on using our logistics capabilities and make sure that 

they are being really tested and pushed to their limit to make sure 

that they work as they are going to be needed. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you. Any other comment from anybody else? 

Admiral MUSTIN. I would like to comment also about the importance of what we refer to as contested logistics and the Navy Reserve’s complete integration into the Navy and joint force operational plans. 

We talk about multiple Rs: Refuel, revive for medical, resupply. 

And every one of the capabilities is reflected in our force design. 

You are very familiar with my opening statement about KC– 

130Juliet. That is a part of the intra-theater lift capability. 

But also, if you are tracking, we are seeing a lot of missiles in 

the Red Sea. And we used to have to drive them back through the 

Suez Canal through Rota, Spain, but now we have got expeditionary vertical launch reload teams. That is a largely Reserve capability. So our sailors are doing that in real time in the Red Sea 

as well. 

So those investments from prior years are paying benefits today, 

but we continue to invest in the capacity so we can do more of it 

in more places. 

Mr. CARTER. Good. 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Carter, if I could add from the 

Army Guard side as well, with eight full divisions, our logistics is 

fully integrated into our divisions. And when we go to the National 

Training Center or the Joint Readiness Training Center, we send 

our logistics packages with them so they train exactly as they 

would fight. 

On the Air Guard side, as I mentioned, we had a lot of a lot of 

volunteers in our C–17 and other aircraft when we logistically had 

to surge weapon systems overseas. And we continue to rely on volunteers and on our air guardsmen to make sure we can fill that 

gap and get munitions where they need to be in a timely manner. 

Mr. CARTER. Well, I tell you, I will wait till the next round. 

Mr. CALVERT. Okay, Judge. 

Mr. Case. 

AIR NATIONAL GUARD

Mr. CASE. Thank you. 

And to all of you, thank you so much for your service. 

And General Hokanson, a special mahalo to you from our Hawaii 

Army and Air Guard. You have always been an incredible partner 

of our Hawaii Guard. And we are, you know, really proud of them 

and grateful for them, not only for the deployments overseas, but 

for some really key emergencies in Hawaii proper, to include 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
372 

COVID, Red Hill, most recently the Maui wildfires. And you have 

been fully supportive of all of that. So thank you very much from 

us. 

I feel like I have to channel our absent friend, Mr. Womack in 

joining in support of the State Partnership Program, because he is 

your biggest fan. And you have already heard mention of that. 

I just want to add to that. I was with five of our House colleagues last week in the South Pacific in Fiji and Tonga. And they 

have State partnership programs with Nevada. And it is truly 

amazing what an impact that Partnership Program has in terms 

of the overall relationship with those key countries. 

We met with the senior leadership of those countries. They are 

well aware of the Partnership Program. They value it, and it 

means a lot to them. So, you know, this is something that I don’t 

think we can overinvest in. 

I just want to follow up on my colleague’s questions on the Space 

Force, because, frankly, this is kind of a puzzle to me. I am going 

to put this in layman’s terms or at least my terms, whether it is 

layman or not. 

We have a Space Force. We are trying to turn the Space Force 

into a full partner in the Armed Services. To do that, the Space 

Force, it seems to me, needs some form of a Guard/Reserve construct. The Space Force has come up with their own construct that 

they believe works for them, which is a Space Force component, 

which is really a full-time/part-time component. 

Somehow, that has to be staffed. That has to be fully staffed out 

for it to really be an effective component. The most direct place to 

get that from is the Air Guard and I suppose Reserve to some extent. That is being resisted for various reasons, which I can appreciate. The response to that was the Secretary of the Air Force legislative proposal, which engendered a strong response from, you 

know, you all, and also from our Governors over precedent, and 

also the fear expressed and implied that if this was forced upon 

space-related Guard and Reserve units out there, that they would 

leave the service rather than go to the Space Force. I, frankly, don’t 

know whether that is true or not, but it is certainly an expressed 

term. 

So it seems to me that we obviously haven’t found the right answer yet. But one question that I think it does beg is that if the 

Secretary of the Air Force’s proposal to essentially require the 

transfer is not adopted, how does the Space Force effectively staff 

out its proposed component? And will that really do particular 

damage to, for example, the Air National Guard? I mean, these are 

space missions. In a time of mobilization, they would probably be 

mobilized to the Space Force, so why shouldn’t they get into that 

channel right now? 

So these are just—you know, I am just trying to sort this 

through in my mind. I don’t think any of us has come up with a 

particularly good answer. I signed the letter that supported our 

Governors, because I value their NR adjutant general, because I 

value their input on a fear of demobilizing their own existing Air 

Guard, and because I am also concerned about the precedent, but 

I don’t think anybody has answered the basic question. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
373 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Case, thank you for the opportunity to address this. And, as I have been very clear in all of my 

testimony since I became the chief, I feel the best option is just basically no cost to our Nation. Our air guardsmen are currently serving space missions. If they want to be in the Space Force, we can 

just change their name tape. They would still be in the National 

Guard. They would still have their same civilian job, same location, 

same mission. All we do is change the signs on their name tape. 

The concerns that we have, and our guardsmen have expressed 

this—and this is coming directly from the Space Force—is they 

don’t even have in place the admin processes for a part-time force 

to manage them, retirements, pay, benefits, any of that. That 

doesn’t exist. So they are going to have to create that bureaucracy. 

We already have it, and we have had it and it runs our Air Guard. 

And we have effectively continued to perform our mission, to include 11 overseas deployments, since the Space Force was established. And they continue to do that as guardsmen in the Air National Guard. 

And when you look forward, we have asked them very closely, 

because we are concerned. Space capabilities are very critical to our 

Nation right now. And when you look at the National Guard, we 

are actually units with equipment that perform missions. And we 

are not usually fillers or anything like that. 

And so when you look at the role that the Space Force is looking 

for their part-time force, they don’t see them in operational units 

anymore. They are seeing them in admin, educational, and institutional or test units or in staff positions. And that is really not what 

we do right now. 

And at the end of the day, whatever decision is made, it is my 

responsibility to make sure we continue to provide the absolute 

best space capability we can right now. And we do that. We have 

got another deployment scheduled very shortly. 

Our folks continue to do their mission, but many of them and up 

to 70 percent said, Look, I am going to stay in the National Guard. 

And my promise to them is, I will find a position for them in the 

National Guard if they do not want to go into the Space Force if 

they are forced to do so. 

BENEFIT PACKAGES

Mr. CASE. Okay. So if we solve for the basic lack of comparable, 

you know, benefit packages that you say that they are concerned 

about, how much of the problem does that solve? 

Do you think in that case, that if they were given a voluntary 

choice about whether to stay in the current Guard or transfer over 

to the Space Force side of things, would they take that? Because 

somehow, we have to do this. And that is the basic challenge here. 

If it doesn’t happen on a smooth voluntary basis then somehow we 

have to make it happen. 

Mr. CALVERT. If we can get that answer back for the record for 

Mr. Case, that would be great. 

With that, Mr. Fleischmann. 

READINESS LEVELS

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
374 

I want to thank each and every one on the dais for your respective service to your great branches and collectively to our country. 

Both officers, enlisted, thank you very much. 

A small point of privilege: Chattanooga, my hometown, is the 

venue of the Nation’s longest serving, lasting, uninterrupted 75 

years Armed Forces parade. 

I spoke with the Defense Secretary at our last hearing, and he 

was kind enough to give us General Mengus and I think Admiral 

Spivey to come and honor the men and women of Chattanooga. Uninterrupted, inclement weather, COVID, you name it. We are the 

most patriotic city in America. So a heartfelt thank you to you all. 

I have a question on force readiness, prioritization of readiness. 

We all recognize the ongoing challenges reinforcing NATO’s eastern 

flank, deterring and responding to further aggression by Iran and 

its proxies across the Middle East, and last and most serious, the 

threat posed in the Western Pacific. 

Since the Cold War, we have more than half the total force without an equivalent reduction in responsibilities. That seems increasingly untenable in today’s environment as our relative military advantage declines. 

I already had concerns about the readiness levels across the force 

from the regular deployment cycles, often of Guard and Reserve 

units, before these crises in Europe and in the Middle East. 

I very much appreciate the importance of demonstrating presence to both deter adversaries and reassure allies and partners, but 

I worry about the cost of this posture on our ability to then sustain 

forces in the event of a major war. 

My question for all of you all is, could you please briefly comment 

on the demands of the ongoing crises and deployments on readiness 

and potential impacts that might have on force generation in the 

event of a major war? And I thank you. 

General HEALY. Most recently, with the Levant operations, we 

saw a significant increase in the requirements for mobility aircraft 

air refueling to go over to CENTCOM. 

I think what we do well is we prepare our crews and our aircraft 

to be able to respond to those things. Each of those mobilizations, 

this one, the first time since the 1980s, within a 72-hour callout, 

has benefits that allows the Active Duty to continue 24/7 operations, which is what we are designed to do is augment surge if a 

requirement exists, a contingency exists. 

But it comes with a price as well. That price is a mobilization 

to dwell. So, for the 3 to 4 months that our units were mobilized 

in that case, they are going to get five times that where they are 

not approachable and not deployable again, the purpose of which 

is to ensure that they have the ability to reset, the ability to get 

the aircraft working and operable that might have been overused 

during that time period. 

In the case of an all-out war, if that were to occur during that 

five-time mobilization reset, all bets are off. In the event of—you 

know, what we talk about, if there is an actual conflict with the 

PRC, all bets are off. We are all in, and the mobilization to dwell 

restrictions I would expect to be waived by the Secretary of Defense 

in that case. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
375 

General DANIELS. So I am going to take a slightly different tact, 

which is the Army Reserve has—our overall requirements have 

come down over time. However, through an authority called the 

funded reimbursable authority, this is an authorization that allows 

the combatant commands and others to bring on Reserve personnel 

to recolor their money in times of a crisis, specifically for intelligence personnel only at this time. 

We are asking the committee to take a look at expanding that 

authority to include cyberspace and information operations types of 

activities so they can counter some of these activities that we see 

from our opponents. 

So it is called the funded reimbursable authority. 

Thank you. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you. 

General. 

General HOKANSON. So we have not seen a decrease at all in our 

operational tempo. In fact, it has kind of been above the standard, 

gone up. On any given day, we have 24,000 guardsmen deployed, 

supporting overseas our combatant commanders. 

And we talk about the impact to readiness. We actually gain 

readiness when we deploy because now we have our personnel on 

full-time orders, training up, deploying, and they are really at the 

peak of their readiness while they are there. 

Where we face challenges is when we have mission sets like 

along the southwest border where there is no military training 

value. And if you are not from a border State, it might as well be 

a deployment. 

So it does have an impact on readiness for them because they are 

not training on their military skill set. 

The other one I would highlight most of all is the need to have 

fighter squadrons. We have got a 60-fighter squadron requirement 

with 48. We have 25 of those in the National Guard, and our ability to retain that capability when we are already short fighter pilots and maintainers will be critically important in the next coming 

years as we start to modernize our fleet. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you. 

In the interest of time, I thank you for your answers. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Ms. Kaptur. 

RECRUITMENT

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just wanted to endorse Mr. Ruppersberger’s interest in Central 

Europe and our State partnership programs. 

Ohio is partnered with Hungary and Serbia. I guess we haven’t 

done that good a job, but I know our soldiers have. So I just want 

to put that on the record. I think it would be great to learn more 

about all of these Central European partnership efforts. 

We all come from different parts of the country, Generals and 

Admiral, and I am from up by the longest coastline in America, the 

Great Lakes. We are heavy industrial and agricultural, and we 

have just in my district five units that are Guard and Reserve. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
376 

I wanted to ask you some questions—oh, and, General Anderson, 

I began my Sunday, 7 a.m., at a marine landing in Toledo, Ohio. 

And the people came from all across the State and even—I don’t 

know how the Michiganders got in, but they got in. They had a 

great time. 

And so there is great esprit de corps in our part of the country 

toward the Corps and all services, but that one is particularly 

memorable. They really had a good time. 

My questions involve recruitment and workforce development, 

and I want to ask the questions and then you can answer. 

General Daniels, I represent a 983rd engineering battalion, all 

kinds of trucks, all kinds of equipment. No connection to our local 

school system in terms of recruitment and gaining skills in essential tasks as mechanics, as maintainers, as drivers. 

I have thought about that a great deal of the time. Maybe the 

Department has some programs I am unaware of, but the connection is very loose if it exists at all. 

In terms of the—General Hokanson, have I got that right? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. KAPTUR. On the medical front, we were hoping to get a 

Guard medical unit next to our medical university. They sent us 

an MP unit. You know, we do our best, but I worry about medical 

backup in theater, and I think we could do a whole lot better in 

Ohio by our Guard paying attention to medical units, which doesn’t 

appear to be happening, in my region, anyway. 

And I am wondering what the criteria is that the Guard uses to 

establish medical facilities and stations for medical units and the 

training that has to go with them. 

And thirdly, in terms of Air Force, we have an F–16 Armed 

Guard air wing in our area. We are very proud of them. I am concerned about what is going to happen to them with this Space 

Force proposal. And we have worked for almost half a century to 

build it into a real base and it is. We competed for F–35s, and I 

am angry to this day we didn’t get them because we weren’t close 

enough to, they told us, a training base. That is interesting. 

But we have got Northern Command, northern watch. That is 

part of their duty station—that is part of their duty, and they do 

a great job, by the way. 

So those are kind of my first-round questions. 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Congresswoman. With respect to the 

medical units, all of ours are part of the total Army, and so when 

they are in our divisions, we look at the floor structure we are authorized, and then we work with the adjutants general to determine the best locations for those. 

I will follow up with General Harris—— 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you. 

General HOKANSON [continuing]. On the interest within the 

State. 

With respect to the fighter aircraft, to the F–16s and, obviously, 

the space units in Ohio, obviously, our number one priority is our 

people. We want to keep them and retain them as best we can. And 

so, we are working, hopefully, to get a resolution for what our 

space professionals will do. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
377 

But obviously, when we look at the F–16, it is a great unit, and 

we look forward to continuing to modernize them in the F–16 and 

hopefully look for future aircraft. 

With just one touch on the recruiting, you mentioned access to 

the schools. We are actually doing a pilot program right now with 

the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association because within the Reserve component and the active, we run a star-based program 

where we teach STEM primarily in middle schools. 

AOPA and the Experimental Aircraft Association also do that at 

the high-school level. And so we are trying to develop a 

connectivity to encourage kids to pursue STEM degrees in STEM, 

but then also connect them to the local Guard and Reserve and active organizations there to show them potential careers in aviation. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I would really appreciate, for the 

record, each of you summarizing whatever connectivity programs 

you have to our younger people that connect service and workforce 

development. I am really, really interested in that. 

And you know what, working with the Department of Defense on 

that issue is misery, just trying to figure out what they are doing, 

where they are doing. 

And thank you very, very much again. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Joyce. 

PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen in the front and back row for 

your service to our country. 

Lieutenant General Daniels, according to a recent report on the 

Army’s shortage of psychological operations soldiers, I understand 

that 83 percent of the Army’s psychological operations soldiers are 

in the Army Reserve. 

How can we help ensure that the Army leverages those unique 

skill sets uniquely in the Army Reserve? And how does their position in the Army Reserve impact the overall—Army’s overall psychological operations mission? 

General DANIELS. So one of the initiatives that we have taken on 

this past year is to look at those programs, those skill sets, civilianacquired skill sets that can be brought on to Active Duty, brought 

into the Army Reserve, brought into the Guard that don’t require— 

we will accept the credentialing from the civilian agencies so they 

don’t have to go through training again. 

So the Army Reserve had—of the 44 that the active component 

was accepting, the Army Reserve only had seven. We are now up 

to that full complement of capability. So they spend less time doing 

training and are back at their employers. So we are trying to minimize that time away from work and that time away from their 

hometowns in order to conduct Army training. 

We are looking to further increase our direct commissioning, improve that process. It has been taking about 18 months. We are 

trying to get it down to about 9 months. That will be a piece of the 

new Army recruiting command. They are taking a look at how they 

can integrate that and have a single point of entry so we can, 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
378 

again, bring those civilian-acquired skills into the Reserve and then 

help keep them there. 

FLYING HOURS CUT

Mr. JOYCE. Lieutenant General Healy, the fiscal year 2025, budget shows a significant cut to flying hours for the Air Reserve, which 

is a nearly $160 million reduction. How does this budget request 

ensure maximum readiness for reservists as we continue to see 

pilot shortages across the Air Force? 

General HEALY. I appreciate the question. 

The flying hour cut that we are looking at in 2025 is 16,000. It 

could be as much as 10,000 below a 76,000-flying-hour budget that 

we require in order to meet our readiness needs. 

But based on the current contingency flying that we are doing, 

a different pot of money, TWCF, Transportation Working Capital 

Fund, which gets after contingency operations, if the amount of 

contingency flying, specifically for CENTCOM and the Levant operations continues, we are able to get that deficit made up with those 

TWCF hours. 

If it flatlines a little bit and there is not as much contingency in 

2025, the expectation is that we would come back for a roughly 

10,000 hour bump up, specifically for our C–5 and our C–17 flying 

hour operations. 

Mr. JOYCE. Seeing that I have a little more time, and following 

up on some questions from the chair, the ranking member, and Mr. 

Case, General, were you at all given the opportunity to advance 

your concerns? And how do you think the rank and file have accepted this reallocation of Space Force? 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Joyce, we have been involved 

in the process. Obviously, there is the legislative proposal that we 

discussed earlier about where the governors have all signed letters 

towards that. 

The committee, over the course of the years, has asked for I 

think six studies, and none of them—only one has made them over 

here. There is currently another proposal right now, a 924 report 

that is going through the process. So we are involved in that. We 

have our folks there. 

When it comes down to the rank and file, about 70 percent say 

they want to stay in the Guard. In fact, would even go to doing a 

different job in the Guard. And right now, frankly, our country 

can’t afford to lose that level of experience in the space field. 

Our units have been doing this for almost 30 years. Some are extremely good. I would argue some are the best at what they do, and 

so for me, I’m trying to retain that capability in our Nation because 

we absolutely need it. 

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Ellzey. 

KC–130J

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good to see you all. Thank you for being here. I haven’t seen this 

many stars since I did my last unsuccessful fly by. But I will say 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
379 

that I am truly afraid of the senior enlisted advisors behind them 

who have probably 8,000 years of experience combat time. And 

thank you all for all being here, including the folks in the back. 

General Hokanson, you are the right guy for your job. Class of 

’86 at West Point, I’m sorry, but you did go to PG school at the 

Navy War College to get to where you are today, so I am glad to 

see that. 

General Daniels, incredible resume, and especially for all of your 

background, you are the perfect person for this job, empirical data, 

in a time in which the money doesn’t seem to exist. Neither do the 

resources. 

General Healy, your career in tankers and logistics is going to be 

extremely important if the balloon goes up by 2027. You are the 

perfect guy for the job. 

And then, Lonnie Anderson—I’m sorry—General Anderson. It is 

on his bio, but it is kind of glossed over. Blue Angel. Right there. 

And he flew with my friend, Jerry Deren, who says to give you a 

hard time, which I am not going to do yet. 

And then Admiral Mustin. It is good to see you. I have known 

him for a long time. We have the most incredible group of folks 

with corporate knowledge for the Guard and Reserves that I have 

ever seen assembled in one place, which I think is timely based on 

what we are talking about in a world environment that looks very 

much like 1940. 

For my limited time, I am going to go ahead and address Admiral Mustin. And let’s talk about the unsexy stuff that we do: Logistics, tanking, things that we are going to need after day one. The 

war games talk about day one. What about day two? 

Contested logistics and INDOPACOM is an extremely important 

thing, and now that we are looking at a, perhaps, wider war in Europe, all of these things come to a very important peak that you 

all are going to be needed for. 

So let’s talk about C–130Js. The Navy’s unfunded priority list includes the KC–130J, which is a great picture—of a KC–130T 

tanking a H–53K carrying an F–35 that came out this week. All 

three integral pieces of our warfighting capability. 

So that aircraft is important for intratheater lift requirement, especially for INDOPACOM, for Pappy, where the U.S. faces a tyranny of distance. Our goal is to replace the T with the J by 2030. 

Can you detail the Navy’s need for everybody why we need the 

130J? 

Admiral MUSTIN. Absolutely. 

Well, Congressman, it is great to see you. Thank you so much for 

the question. 

And, you know, my opening statement heavily emphasized the 

need for the transition from the tango to the Juliet variant. 

So starting from requirements, my requirement is validated at 

32 airframes. That is predicated on a 75 percent mission capable 

rate, really 24 airframes. Again, that is a minimum number when 

you talk about Admiral Paparo and now Admiral Koehler. I will 

tell you they are going to say that that number is about three 

times that number. 

But as it relates to today, we are looking at a need for 24 operational airframes. Flying the tango, which, for me, averages per 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
380 

airframe at about 31 years, means that I’m struggling to maintain 

about nine airplanes that are mission-capable on a daily basis. 

Now, keep in mind, not just for INDOPACOM, but around the 

world I have got enduring detachments where we are flying these, 

most recently in CENTCOM where the request came in for my detachment to double the amount of C–130s that were on station. So 

the reality is the demand for them is persistent and real and the 

scale will only increase. 

Back to how we are going to get there. Originally, my boss at the 

time, the chief of naval operations, Mike Gilday, tasked me to recapitalize by 2030. So it is 32 airframes by 2030. 

We predicated a plan, from 2025 to 2030, six airframes per year, 

and now we are just at the point where we are beginning to realize 

with the first, thank you all very much, in 2024. But ultimately, 

what is going to happen is, we are probably going to need to increase that number per year. 

Next year, for instance, I will need nine to get us back on glide 

to get there. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Well, that answered my question. 

I am going to give back to reserve my time, Mr. Chairman, thank 

you. I will hold for the second round. 

General HOKANSON. Congressman, if I could just add one thing 

to that? 

Mr. ELLZEY. Go ahead. 

General HOKANSON. You bring up a great point. So we talk about 

capability, but we don’t talk enough about capacity, and it is the 

depth that the Reserve component provides. 

In one of the recent RAND studies commissioned by the Air 

Force, it took just the F–16, and they realized in the Reserve component, it cost 42 percent less to operate an F–16 and, in fact, 34 

percent less for our KC–135s. 

And when we look at the amount of area refueling capability we 

have in the Reserve component, we have to make sure we keep 

that capacity. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, General. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Garcia. 

MILITARY SPOUSE LICENSING RELIEF ACT

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for being late. 

We had the NASA administrator in the other room. 

So I want to thank you guys for your service, your continued 

service and your leadership in the Reserves. 

I had the pleasure of being in the Reserves for 3 years myself, 

and then I realized I was the most dangerous guy in the sky and 

decided to grow up and get a real job, which was not this one, by 

the way. So I want to thank you. 

We passed a piece of legislation back in December of 2022, that 

was actually signed into law by the President in January of 2023 

on the Active-Duty side called the Military Spouse Licensing Relief 

Act. 

It is now the law of the land, and it has actually helped a couple 

of hundred thousand family members on Active Duty where it alVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00384 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
381 

lows the spouses to basically cross-deck their professional licenses 

across State lines. 

So if they were a teacher, a nurse, a doctor, a real estate agent, 

whatever it is, when they got orders, when their spouse got orders 

from one State to the next, they didn’t have to get recertified, and 

they didn’t have to pay the money to get recredentialed and go in 

front of a board. Sometimes that takes over a year, a couple thousand dollars. It is cost prohibitive, time prohibitive, and they don’t 

do it. 

So now you have got an Active-Duty family going down to a single income for 2 to 3 years wherever they are based. 

That is now the law of the land on the Active-Duty side. 

I have got a mission now and, frankly, hopefully in partnership— 

I have spoken with a few of you all here already—that I would like 

to expand that. And that is not necessarily the purview of the Appropriations Committee, but I would like to expand that and enable 

that on the authorizing side with HASC to get that to apply to the 

Reserve side. 

So I think in terms of quality of life, there is a lot of issues we 

have got going on. We have got record low retention and recruitment. The pay is not where it needs to be. There is a whole lot of 

issues. It is a multi-faceted problem. 

I think getting that dual income, allowing the spouse to be able 

to stay in the workforce, but then the collateral benefit of also having that community, having access to more teachers and more 

nurses and more doctors where, in districts like mine, we are short, 

and then having that tax revenue at the local levels, the State levels, and Federal levels get reinjected, I think it is a win, win, win, 

if we do it right. 

So I wanted to float that idea. That is a two-putt, you know, 

process. It is not something probably you are going to get done in 

fiscal year 2025, but we didn’t think the Active-Duty side was 

going to get done in 2023, to be honest, and it ended up getting 

expedited. 

So I wanted to get your thoughts on that if you are hearing that 

feedback on the Guard side, on the Reserve side. And then, you 

know, can we get your support on something like that to get some 

pull from the leadership, especially affecting our junior enlisted 

and mid-enlisted, senior enlisted ranks as well. 

But I will open it up to anyone who has feedback on that. If you 

have got anybody that—or see any reason why that is a dumb idea 

to go run up that hill, let me know, but I am going to go run up 

that hill otherwise. 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Garcia, I will jump in. 

My wife and I went to a recent signing for the active component, 

and we are actually part of that process. My wife was a schoolteacher, and every time we PCS-ed, she had to go through—and it 

would take the duration of our time that we were there. 

And so, I would be greatly supportive of this because at the end 

of the day, as you mentioned, it is very difficult now without two 

incomes for many families to make it, and anything we can do to 

make their service easier is going to make a huge difference for recruiting and for retention. 

Mr. GARCIA. I appreciate that, General. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
382 

I see it as a cost saver. As an appropriator, we can either throw 

more money at pay and benefits and everything else, or we can 

help on the quality-of-life side. If we can get the local communities 

to pay for that second income to augment the total household income and get quality of life above the poverty line, then we can 

save American taxpayer dollars. 

And by the way, like I said, the government actually makes 

money on that when they are working and getting taxed, and we 

get the workforce in the local community. 

So that is all I have. I want to thank you guys for your support. 

RESERVE ASSETS

I am very concerned about the lack of, frankly, assets within the 

Reserve components, especially on the Air National Guard side to 

be that complementary force to the Active Duty right now. I think 

we have gotten below or are approaching below critical mass on 

some of the platforms that are being allocated to you all. And I 

think that is something we have got to keep looking at, as appropriators, to make sure that we are getting the right equipment at 

the right levels to the Guard, to the Reserve units, and making 

sure that, again, one plus one equals three, and you are not just 

seen as the ugly stepchild to the Active-Duty side. 

So you have got that commitment. We will keep pushing on that. 

General HEALY. I would certainly like to comment. 

As I said in my opening comments, concurrent proportional fielding, we absolutely want to see that continue with its intent so that 

we are able to have fifth gen aircraft participating as a surge capacity in a fifth gen fight in the future. 

Mr. GARCIA. Well said. Thank you, General, for that. 

And with that, I am out of time. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

We are going to do a lightning rod real quick because we have 

votes coming up. So I will start off quickly. 

KC–46A

One, with the March Air Reserve, I will be a little parochial here 

on that. General Healy, 2 years ago your predecessor indicated he 

expected to bed down the KC–46A at March by the second quarter 

of fiscal year 2025. 

Is that still on track? 

General HEALY. No, sir. Due to production delays, not of our control, the expectation is third quarter of ’27 will be the first aircraft 

arrival of 12. 

Mr. CALVERT. Well, talk to our friends at Boeing. We seem to 

talk to them often lately. 

F–15

Also, obviously, General Hokanson, the Air National Guard is 

dealing with the potential gap, as we talked about, in fighter jet 

capacity as it modernizes from the F–15C to the F–15EX. What are 

we doing to eliminate that gap? And I suspect you have some production problems there, too, but what is the answer to that one? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
383 

General HOKANSON. Mr. Chairman, obviously, you saw my unfunded priority list. I added six F–15EXs because they were cut 

from the Air Force buy, as well as six F–35s, to make sure that 

we can continue to field these units so that we don’t create what 

we call a bathtub where we don’t have enough capability at the 

most critical time as we face challenges from our competitors 

around the globe. 

So we are working everything we can to get those airplanes as 

fast as we can. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Ms. McCollum. 

QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

I am going to focus by talking to General Daniels. 

In your testimony, you talked about a childcare pilot program 

that started in the fourth quarter of 2023, and with an intergovernmental support agreement in Kansas City metropolitan area, which 

was offering no cost childcare options during the weekend and annual training. 

As Mr. Garcia pointed, there are a lot of things that go into recruitment and retention, both for yourselves and for your full-time 

partners. Why don’t you just take a minute and not only tell us if 

there are funds set aside in 2025 for going, but what this means 

when we can get not only the pay right, but the healthcare right, 

the housing right, the childcare support the families need. 

General DANIELS. Thank you so much for that. 

Our first pilot failed gloriously. We were not able to find providers. So the IGSA proved to be a really good venue to find sort 

of on-demand care. Sort of like ordering an Uber. They are vetted. 

They are credentialed. You know exactly what the product is that 

you are getting. These families are very comfortable. They are 

within a reasonable distance of where the family lives. 

So it is giving those soldiers a lot of relief and ability to go and 

attend when they may not have been able to. They may have been 

challenged. So for retention purposes, this has been tremendous. 

We have been working with the Guard at looking at some other 

locations. We are looking with the Navy Reserve at some other locations to expand the program. So we are looking to build this into 

future years’ budgets because it is truly, it is, a great retention 

tool. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. So if you could—this is a lightning rod. What is 

the one thing, it could be childcare, whatever, that keeps you up 

at night when it comes to having people stay on, or come into the 

Reserve or the Guard. What is one quality-of-life issue? 

General HOKANSON. Chairman McCollum, I will add healthcare. 

We have about 30,000 guardsmen that don’t have healthcare. And 

for me, we need them 24/7, not just for their overseas deployments, 

but, as we know, emergencies occur in a community at any time. 

We need them to be medically ready. 

And if they don’t have healthcare or access to healthcare, then 

they can’t be ready, and then they can’t perform the job that we 

have trained them to do. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
384 

To me, it is, for lack of a better term, like an insurance policy 

on investment we have made but also an investment that they 

have made. 

General HEALY. From the Air Force Reserve perspective, ma’am, 

you know, I would say that the access to TRICARE Reserve Select 

for our Reserve technicians and our Title 5 civilians, that is in excess of over 10,000 of the folks working for us. They don’t have access to TRICARE Reserve Select until 2030 is the wedged timeframe right now. 

In some cases, that is doubling, tripling the cost of the premiums 

for them. But what it lacks is the continuity of care. So if we have 

a Reserve technician who is a civilian during the week, the Federal 

Employee Health Benefit system, and then they are, perhaps, on 

a set of orders for an extended period of time, they are having to 

transition back and forth between multiple care providers, which 

provides a challenge. 

This is the force that trains our part-timers. It is critical to readiness, and it is certainly a retention issue and a recruiting issue for 

that full-time force. 

General ANDERSON. For the Marine Reserves, ma’am, I think access certainly to TRICARE Reserve Select needs to continue, but 

just to give you a little vignette of what that looks like for a sergeant that just left the active component, direct affiliate to the Reserves. 

Over the course of the weekend, if she is going to have TRICARE 

Reserve Select and pay for Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance 

at the same time, when she leaves that drill weekend, she has really got about $120 in her pocket at the end of the day for 2 days 

of work because of the expense of TRICARE Reserve Select and the 

travel to a drill site. 

Admiral MUSTIN. I think access to healthcare, we have beaten 

that sufficiently, but I would say what keeps me awake at night 

is the sufficiency of the training of our sailors. So what we are finding right now, believe it or not, I know we like to hear in the headlines that the military is struggling on recruiting and retention. 

And I always say those are two very different things. 

Right now, the Navy Reserve, in our selective Reserve capacity, 

is at a 7-year high for retention, and I attribute that to the quality 

of training. I think our sailors appreciate having a well-defined 

mission, a well-defined adversary for which we can prepare. And 

the sense of purpose and the professionalism that is associated 

with it is impacting positive retention in our case. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Judge Carter. 

3D PRINTING

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

General Hokanson, a few years ago the Texas National Guard 3D 

printed barracks, the first of their kind. Other State Guards have 

used 3D printing for aircraft parts. 

Overall, is the Guard looking at using more 3D printing? And 

where else would the Guard like to use this technology, and what 

benefit could it bring to you? 

General HOKANSON. Congressman Carter, thank you. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
385 

I have actually been there to see the 3D-printed barracks, and 

we did it in half the time, at two-thirds the cost. In fact, they also 

built a training center as well in Texas, and also, as you mentioned, we are using 3D-printed parts. 

We see great capability and great promise here because these facilities are actually enduring, very well made. But once again, we 

have the ability to save cost and get that facility up in a much 

quicker time. So we look to continue to invest in this across the 54 

National Guards in the environments that make sense to put those 

facilities in. 

Mr. CARTER. Well, I was very impressed with 3D printing, the 

speed and solid building it builds. And I hope that all the folks that 

are building buildings ought to take a look at this. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Dutch. 

CYBER PROFESSIONALS

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Thank you. 

General Daniels, you have mentioned your desire to grow and 

flesh out your cyber brigade but that there are challenges in the 

training pipeline for the cyber career field. Can you share some of 

these challenges and how you are addressing them within the 

Army Reserve? 

And if anyone else would like to talk on that, feel free. 

General DANIELS. So this is a place where we are looking to try 

and use as much of the civilian-acquired skills to receive credit on 

the Army side. So you don’t have to do training that you could possibly even instruct. So we are trying to have those credits available, reduce the amount of time that that cyber professional is 

away from their civilian career. 

So minimize the training pipeline that they must go through because they already have that expertise and go ahead and leverage 

that. 

So we have been working with the Army on not only the cyber 

career field, but lots of other civilian-acquired skills to make sure 

that the Army appreciates the training that these soldiers, you 

know, citizen soldiers already come to the force with. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Anyone else have a comment? 

Admiral MUSTIN. Yes, sir. And very similarly—— 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Where are your stars? 

Admiral MUSTIN. They are actually on my collar. I know you 

mentioned that I don’t have them on my shoulders here. They are 

right there. I was going to offer that in private, but anyway. 

But very similar to what you heard from Lieutenant General 

Daniels, we are investing heavily in cyber capability. We have also 

increased by adding a cyber rating now for our enlisted sailors and 

a cyber designator for our officers. 

And we are very interested in direct commissioning to increase 

the capacity across the Reserve Force, which we see as a growth 

industry. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Have you ever worked with a naval academy at all on this issue? 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
386 

Admiral MUSTIN. Absolutely. In fact, I frequently go to Hopper 

Hall, which is the cyber center. 

General ANDERSON. I will hit on the training aspect of this real 

quick, sir. I can have somebody flying an F–35 before they are fully 

qualified to operate on infrastructure as a cyber operator. 

So the footprint that is required if I am going to take somebody 

directly into the Reserves and they are not trained, I have to come 

up and find that Active-Duty time to train them and, oh, by the 

way, be away from their civilian career to get to that point. 

So we really rely on capturing the active component talent that 

comes to the Marine Forces Reserve because we can’t do it and 

train our own people. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Anyone else? 

General HOKANSON. I would say the same with the Guard. We 

have 66 cyber units in 42 different States, and we rely very heavily 

on the civilian-acquired skills that they bring. 

Not only that, but you will see, we also are very involved to ensure election security by leveraging that. We are in the process now 

of changing the way we had our—we had a cyber element in every 

State, and we are actually building them into a—we call it a defensive cyber element. It is kind of like a squad, so that if we need 

to, we can combine States to actually have cyber additional force 

structure to address not only on their Title 10 role, but also how 

they can help the communities and mitigate a lot of the 

ransomware attacks on our public schools and counties. 

Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Garcia, we only have a few minutes, so just— 

I want to try to get everybody real quick. 

VFMA–112

Mr. GARCIA. I will just be brief. 

First of all, I want to say it warms my cockles to hear an Army 

four star say that he asked for six F–35s and additional F–15EXs. 

That’s some good joint operation shaping you guys are doing there. 

General Anderson, for the Reserve F–18 squadron VFMA I believe 112, are they getting the APG–79(V)4 AESA Radar upgrade 

down in those jets yet, or what is the plan there? 

General ANDERSON. Thank you for the question, sir. 

We are upgrading the aircraft for VFMA–112 and plan on keeping them in the rotation. In fact, they will be going on their next 

GDP here in the coming years, just like we have battalions that are 

going forward into the first island chain. 

So certainly for TAC Air in the Reserves, while small, right, I 

would like to have more TAC Air squadrons, but for that particular 

component, as the F–18 community overall has gotten smaller in 

the Marine Corps, we have captured the bench, and that squadron 

is pretty deep. 

Mr. GARCIA. Yes. You are getting golden parts in there. 

But are you getting the AESA upgrade done? 

General ANDERSON. Yes, we are getting not only the upgrade, 

but certainly, when you talk about parts, we have excess capacity 

now as we get some more from the West Coast. 

Mr. GARCIA. Okay. I would love to come see that operation if we 

can. 

General ANDERSON. Absolutely. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
387 

General HEALY. And likewise, with the Air Force Reserve, the F– 

16s are preblocked. The oldest F–16s we have got running out 

there right now we have been using, and we are very wisely putting to use the radars in those. 

Mr. GARCIA. In the SABR, the Northrop Grumman SABR in 

there. Good. Awesome. Great. Thank you, guys. 

General HOKANSON. Lastly, Congressman, 22 will complete our 

buy. And as John mentioned, in the preblocked F–16s, in another 

setting I can tell you how successful they have been, and it is a 

huge investment. 

Mr. GARCIA. It is a game changer, absolutely. 

Well, thank you all. I appreciate it. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Great. 

Ms. Kaptur, real quickly. 

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND RECRUITMENT

Ms. KAPTUR. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

I am just wondering if you could provide for me, each of your 

services, an understanding of how workforce development and recruitment work to attract enlistees. 

And the Army Reserve civilian-acquired skills program, talk to 

me about my 983rd unit. How does what you do impact that and 

impact recruitment and workforce development in that region? I 

have no idea. 

Mainly, Reserve and Guard don’t come to see us very much. Active Duty does more, and it is really hard to—the commanding officer for that unit is in Chicago, so that creates another issue. 

But I am very interested in how each of your services connects 

recruitment to workforce development. If you could provide more 

specific information to the record, I would be very grateful for that. 

Especially in the fields of mechanics, machine tooling, truck driving, vehicular operation on land, and then in the air. 

General DANIELS. So if I could very briefly—— 

Mr. CALVERT. If we could get back on the record on that. 

General DANIELS. Okay. 

Mr. CALVERT. That way I will have enough time to recognize Mr. 

Aguilar before we probably then have to go vote at that point. 

Mr. Aguilar. 

NATIONAL GUARD STATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Mr. AGUILAR. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. 

I just wanted to briefly ask a question, and maybe it can be for 

the record, to highlight the National Guard’s State partnership program. This is something Chairman Calvert has discussed time and 

time again to highlight the partnership that California has with 

Ukraine. And it proved invaluable, as an invaluable resource for 

our ally in this war against Putin’s aggression. 

That partnership is a strong example of a proactive military-tomilitary relationship, as you all know. I was pleased to see the increase in funding for the State partnership program in fiscal year 

2025 request. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
388 

So I wanted to ask about insight as to how this increase will support the SSP program this year, including support for new partner 

nations as well. 

General HOKANSON. Congressman, if I could just touch this briefly. We have really leveraged Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to, in 

fact, we have actually spoken with a lot of former neutral countries. Sweden and Finland, obviously, became NATO allies. They 

also became a member of the State partnership program. 

Switzerland recently submitted an application to be a state partner. We have also talked to other neutral countries, yet to be 

named, but they have all expressed an interest that they need to 

develop a capability based on what they saw. No one thought there 

would be another war in Europe. There is now, and they realize 

that capability that they need. 

We are able to add seven countries this year, which is the most 

we have really since we started, because they realize the benefit 

that they can get by training with our guardsmen up to a high 

level of standard and addressing those shortages they have in their 

military. 

Mr. AGUILAR. I think California has expressed interest in that 

Sweden relationship as well. I appreciate the answer. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thanks. We all want to go to Switzerland and 

check out the program. All we need is more money for these state 

programs. So hopefully we can get through this budget process. 

I appreciate everyone coming out today. Before we conclude, I 

want to thank our witnesses for their testimony today. 

Ms. McCollum, do you have any comments you would like to 

make? 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Just once again to the folks who are—this is the 

last time before the committee. Sincerely, not only to thank you, 

but thank your family members who supported you in your journey. 

Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. And, Mr. Ellzey, I know you had a quick mark to 

make so—— 

Mr. ELLZEY. I did. Thank you, sir. 

The definition of Reserves is a military force withheld from action for later decisive use. And that is what the Reserves are. The 

Reserves mean if we attrite in war, we send in the Reserves, both 

the aircraft, the maintenance, everything that they need. That is 

the Reserves. We don’t have enough. 

The Chinese know that we have got KC–46 delays. The Chinese 

know that we are closing the F–18 line. The Chinese know we don’t 

have any more capacity for F–35s. 

So as we look at these line closings imminently and the inability 

to send Reserves, we can’t send Reserve F–16s to augment the loss 

of an aircraft carrier and its F–18s. We need to keep those lines 

open because the Chinese know the tanking capacity, the ability to 

infill our lines with what we are going to lose. 

Whether it is in Europe, EUCOM, or INDOPACOM, and we need 

more—as you said, all it takes is money. However, we need to keep 

those lines open because they are watching. 

Thank you. I yield back. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
389 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

We will go with the other 11 committees, take their money, and 

we will be able to get this all taken care of. 

With that, we are adjourned. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
(391) 

TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 2024. 

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND SPACE FORCE 

WITNESSES 

HON. FRANK KENDALL III, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR 

FORCE 

GENERAL DAVID W. ALLVIN, CHIEF OF STAFF, DEPARTMENT OF THE 

AIR FORCE 

GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN, CHIEF OF SPACE OPERATIONS, 

UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CALVERT

Mr. CALVERT. The Defense Subcommittee will come to order. 

Today, the subcommittee will receive testimony from the Honorable Frank Kendall, Secretary of the Air Force; General David 

Allvin, Chief of Staff of the Air Force; General Chance Saltzman, 

Chief of Space Operations. Thank you all for joining us today. 

General Allvin, I will note that this is your first appearance before this subcommittee. Welcome and congratulations on your new 

role. 

Increasingly, volatile world events since the hearing last year 

have underscored the importance of maintaining a strong and 

ready Air Force and Space Force. 

China has engaged in a historic military buildup, seeks to erode 

our military superiority. While China remains our pacing threat, it 

is not only a threat we face. Russia continues its assault on 

Ukraine, and early this month, Iran launched its first ever direct 

attack on Israel. 

I am pleased that we are able to get supplemental appropriations 

across the finish line to address emergent needs in these three regions. 

Our Air and Space Forces must be ready and able to respond 

across the globe if needed. We need to be innovative and agile with 

the goal of rapidly putting advanced capability in the hands of our 

airmen and guardians. For the Air Force, the fiscal year 2025 budget request is $228.8 

billion. This is 2 percent more than the enacted amount for fiscal 

year 2024, which I note does not keep up with inflation. 

When budgets are constrained, tradeoffs must be made, and a 

certain level of risk is assumed. Today, we will discuss your proposed tradeoffs in a constrained top line. 

One area that gets a lot of attention is the divestment of aircraft, 

and this budget proposes significant divestments. On one hand, 

older airframes are less suited for modern missions, expensive to 

maintain, and parts are at a premium. 

On the other, quantity has a quality onto itself, particularly in 

a perilous security environment. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
392 

I understand that you have to prioritize to your constrained top 

line, but we need to understand the capability gaps this will create 

and your mitigation plans. 

We also need assurance that your bet on modernization over 

sustainment will yield success, and, unfortunately, the track record 

is not encouraging so far. 

Just last week, we were notified of a Nunn-McCurdy breach for 

the MH–139 gray wolf. This follows the Sentinel’s Nunn-McCurdy 

breach. We need to understand the implications of both of these 

breach reviews for fiscal year 2025 and beyond. 

I also hope to hear how the Air Force plans to address the acquisition delays and mitigation plans to ensure there is no capability 

gap for the warfighter and the F–15EX, T–7, and E–7, to name just 

a few particularly of all of our concern. 

On the bright side, I am pleased to see that the Air Force continues to prioritize investments in the B–21 and Next Generation 

Air Dominance aircraft, especially with the recent down select of 

the Collaborative Combat Aircraft, two companies, one of which 

was founded just a few years ago. For the Space Force, the fiscal year 2025 budget request is $29.4 

billion, which is, effectively, flat funding compared to last year. 

Factor in inflation, this is a real dollar cut. In fact, the projected 

budget for Space Force remains flat at this amount for over the 

next 5 years. 

Budgets are, obviously, tight. However, given the increasing reliance on space capability and plans to pivot some missions from aircraft to space, I am skeptical that a flatline level budget is credible 

to deliver all the capabilities needed. 

I would like to know where you choose to take risk in the space 

portfolio in this year’s budget. 

This committee expects programs to be well managed. One of the 

key reasons for establishing the Space Force was to bring a focused 

discipline in delivering capabilities on schedule and within budget. 

The Space Force continues to work in progress in this regard— 

a work in progress in this regard, I should say, especially when it 

comes to delivering ground systems and user equipment. For example, the Global Positioning System ground control system is more 

than $3 billion over budget, more than 7 years late, and still has 

not been delivered. 

Further, your own assessment identifies a space command and 

control program and the family of beyond-line-of-sight terminals as 

another challenging program that failed to meet scheduled milestones and will be delivered late. 

The pattern is clear. The problem with space is on the ground. 

I hope to hear your plans to ensure ground systems keep pace with 

the satellite developments. 

On a positive note, I continue to be impressed with the progress 

of Space Development Agency and their rapid development to acquisition process. This committee is willing to give the Space Force 

resources to take risk and pursue new approaches when warranted, 

and SDA has lived up to its investments so far. 

I think we can agree that there are challenges that need to be 

addressed, but I also know that the devil is in the details, and it 

matters how things are being addressed. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
393 

I have been disappointed with the level of rigor in the analysis 

behind some of the Department’s program decisions and organizational proposals. This subcommittee is data driven and will not accept proposals that are presented simply as done deals. 

Another area of concern is the innovation of rapid fielding accounts, which has been a focus of mine. The request for AFWERX 

is 20.5 million, a substantial decrease from the last 2 years. 

AFWERX and the SpaceWERX are critical to the defense innovation ecosystem, essential to expanding opportunities of nontraditional defense companies and increasing use of commercial technologies. 

I will be interested to hear how you intend to get after various 

innovation, if not through the AFWERX and SpaceWERX. 

Finally, we are aware of the challenge that the entire Department is having with recruitment across all components. I want to 

hear about your strategy to recruit the airmen and guardians of 

today and the service leaders of tomorrow. 

We will be working closely with you throughout this budget process to find ways we can accelerate the fielding of platforms needed 

by our warfighters today. 

With that, I will yield to the ranking member, Ms. McCollum, for 

any opening remarks she would like to make. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. MCCOLLUM

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the courtesy. 

I would also like to welcome Secretary Kendall, General Allvin, 

and General Saltzman. 

For fiscal year 2025, the President has proposed eight—excuse 

me—$832 billion within our subcommittee’s jurisdiction for the Department of Defense, which is $213 billion for the Air Force and 

Space Force. 

The Air Force has requested a 1-percent increase, and Space 

Force remains relatively flat following a large growth year in 2024. 

Each of these dollars represents an effort to remain vigilant in our 

national defense and to ensure that America meets our pacing 

threats. 

We are operating under the umbrella of the Fiscal Responsibility 

Act, and I know that tough choices were made in this budget in 

order to conform to what the law will allow. 

As I said in the hearing with Secretary Austin, I hope Congress 

has learned a hard lesson, that we should not hold the national 

debt limit hostage to arbitrary spending caps. 

So, for those who have buyer’s remorse over their votes last May 

and those who are now criticizing the overall levels in the budget 

request, I wish to remind them that the fundamental strength of 

our Nation’s defense is in the strength of our military personnel 

and their families. And that requires a whole-of-government approach. 

Our national security is supported through our entire budget, 

which includes healthcare, education, transportation, and not just 

the defense budget. 

Growing our technological superiority in the air and space domain are also critical, and it is as important as ever to educate and 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
394 

train the next generation of mathematicians, physicists, aeronautical engineers, and computer scientists. 

In addition, Congress set the Department’s hiring and new start 

schedules 6 months back by enacting a final appropriations bill in 

March. We must do better to break the cycle of continuing resolutions. 

And I turn to the budget at hand now and the modernization, 

which we know is a key theme for the Department of Air Force. 

It is concerning that several Air Force programs are still struggling. F–35 deliveries are delayed, along with an associated plant 

repair and infrastructure projects. 

Mr. Secretary, we have discussed this several times in conversations now, and I hope that it is being resolved. It needs to be resolved. It needs to be resolved immediately. 

The Sentinel program is under a critical review because of time 

delays and major cost overruns. 

The E–7 program has been delayed, and the budget does not 

have an advanced program for procurement. At the same time, the 

Air Force is proposing fielding new capabilities and required complex technology development along with it. 

For example, I have to ask, how can we be assured that programs that support long range kill chains will be a success when 

the Air Force continues to struggle with the existing programs of 

record? 

I am also concerned about the state of the Air Force’s infrastructure. It is deficient, and it does not seem to be a high priority. We 

have discussed sinkholes at Vandenberg Space Force Base, the deterioration of runways, the early warning radar stations in Alaska. 

Climate change continues to have a high cost impact on our national security. Infrastructure at Guam still needs repair following 

last year’s typhoon, and Congress should have acted on that. I hope 

we do so in the future. 

But, most importantly, our servicemembers need all of us, Congress and the Department, to do a better job working together to 

provide and maintain infrastructure necessary for them to be able 

to even do their jobs. 

Mr. Chair, as I close, 10 days ago, we had a series of overwhelming bipartisan votes on the components of national security 

supplemental to support Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific. I 

hope that that will serve as a model for improving appropriation 

bills and getting them approved expeditiously through 2025, because, as you pointed out, we don’t have time to waste. 

Gentlemen, I thank you for your service to the country and for 

appearing here today. 

With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Ms. McCollum. 

Chairman Cole intended to be here today but is unable to 

present his statement due to obvious disaster in Oklahoma. And, 

certainly, our prayers for those who experience these terrible tornados in Oklahoma, Nebraska, and elsewhere. 

So, without objection, his prepared remarks will be included in 

the record. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
395 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 585 here 57432.239
396 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 586 here 57432.240
397 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 587 here 57432.241
398 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 588 here 57432.242
399 

Mr. CALVERT. I will now recognize Ranking Member DeLauro for 

any comments she may like to make. 

OPENING REMARKS OF MS. DELAURO

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. And thank 

you to you and to Ranking Member McCollum for holding the hearing on the 2025 budget for the United States Air Force and the 

Space Force. 

I want to thank our witnesses, Secretary Kendall and Generals 

Allvin and Saltzman for appearing before this subcommittee today 

and for your dedicated service to our Nation. You keep the Nation 

safe. You keep our airmen and women and guardians safe, and you 

ensure our allies are supported wherever democracy and freedom 

are threatened around the globe. 

Through the fiscal year 2025 budget, Congress has a sacred duty 

to ensure the Air Force and Space Force have the resources to fulfill its mission to keep our country secure and ensure our 

servicemembers are protected and well equipped. 

The President’s 2025 budget supports our brave airmen and 

women, guardians, their families with a 4.5-percent pay raise, furthers initiatives to improve access to healthcare and childcare 

while addressing housing and subsistence needs. This is a full compensation package that our servicemembers deserve, and we need 

to deliver on all of those components. 

In the President’s request, the Space Force budget is relatively 

flat, following a large growth year in 2024. Meanwhile, the Air 

Force has requested roughly $3 billion more than last year. 

I would be remiss if I did not point out that the combat rescue 

helicopter is not included in the request. This helicopter is still flying a critical mission, and Congress supported this mission in the 

final 2024 bill by ordering an additional 10 helicopters to maintain 

production. 

I will continue to support this program and hope to hear more 

about the Air Force’s plans for maintaining a strong combat rescue 

capability. 

I am also interested to hear today about how the forces plan to 

balance their modernization efforts with management of existing 

programs. Additionally, I want to hear about how the Air Force 

and Space Force are addressing recruitment issues. 

Regrettably, the majority chose to inject culture war debates into 

last year’s Department of Defense funding process, and I am concerned with how that might further hurt recruitment efforts, especially among women. 

We must do all we can to ensure that any American who wants 

to bravely serve in the U.S. Armed Forces and defend our Nation 

feels that they belong and that they are not going to be drawn into 

political warfare while confronting the legitimate threats to freedom, democracy, and, above all, to our national security. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Gentlemen, your full written testimony will be placed in the 

record. Please give a brief summary of your statements. 

Secretary Kendall, you are recognized. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
400 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SECRETARY KENDALL

Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, members of the 

subcommittee, General Saltzman, General Allvin, and I thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today on the Department of the Air 

Force’s fiscal year ’25 budget submission. 

The Department of the Air Force budget request supports the 

National Defense Strategy. We appreciate the committee’s support 

for the recently enacted fiscal year 2024 budget and your efforts to 

secure timely passage. 

As you are aware, the 6-month delay has had a real impact. That 

time cannot be recovered, but at least we can now move forward 

with our urgent modernization plans. 

As I have testified before this committee repeatedly, time is my 

greatest concern. We are on a race for military technological superiority with a capable pacing challenge. Our cushion is gone. We 

are out of time. As we have briefed the committee at a classified 

level, the pacing threat moves steadily forward. 

Continued failure to provide on-time authorities and appropriations will leave the Air Force and Space Force inadequately prepared. We know this committee fully recognizes this, and we appreciate your strong bipartisan support. 

Our fiscal year 2025 budget request complies with the Fiscal Responsibility Act. We are requesting 217.5 billion for the Department of the Air Force, which includes 188 billion for the Air Force 

and 29.4 billion for the Space Force. 

The fiscal year 2025 budget reflects an increase of 2.1 percent for 

the Department of the Air Force over the enacted fiscal year ’24 

budget, a 2-percent increase for the Air Force and a 2.4-percent increase for the Space Force. This does not keep pace with inflation, 

as was mentioned earlier, or with the 7-percent publicly acknowledged growth to China’s military budget. 

To stay within the levels of the FRA, the Department of the Air 

Force had to adjust our previous plans. The DAF 25 budget seeks 

to preserve the momentum behind our modernization efforts, particularly the work on operational imperatives that we initiated and 

that this committee supported in fiscal year 2024. 

In order to preserve modernization, we have marginally reduced 

procurement, and we have sustained our foundational accounts to 

levels we deemed acceptable, but no more. Because the Space Force 

budget is dominated by research and development accounts, we 

have had to marginally reduce the pace and scope of our Space 

Force modernization programs. 

Our first priority in the National Defense Strategy remains defense of the homeland, which the Department of the Air Force primarily supports through investments in domain awareness, air and 

space defense, early warning, and cyberspace defense programs. 

Our second priority is to deter strategic attacks against the 

United States, our allies, and our partners. The Department of the 

Air Force fiscal year 2025 budget request prioritizes nuclear modernization to maintain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
401 

Notably, the Sentinel ICBM program has experienced unacceptable cost and schedule increases and is currently undergoing a 

Nunn-McCurdy review. The Department of the Air Force will work 

closely with the committee as that review reaches its conclusions. 

The third National Defense Strategy priority is to deter aggression and be prepared to prevail in conflict when necessary. The Department of the Air Force needs immediate and significant capability modernization to keep pace with the growing military capabilities of the PRC. The Department of the Air Force operational 

imperatives and the closely related crosscutting operational 

enablers continue to guide our modernization program. The fiscal 

year 2025 budget request includes 6.1 billion for these efforts. 

Finally, the fourth national defense priority is to build a resilient 

Joint Force and enduring advantages. This budget request invests 

to ensure that we can recruit and retain the force we need and ensure that our airmen and guardians and their families have the 

quality of life they deserve and can serve to their full potential. 

As we have briefed the committee, the Department of the Air 

Force is also currently undertaking a Department-wide effort to reoptimize to meet the demands of great power competition. The intent is to minimize both cost impacts and personnel of our unit 

movements. 

We will work closely with the committee as we develop detailed 

plans. We do not anticipate any significant impact on the fiscal 

year 2025 budget, and we have not requested funds for this purpose. 

The Department also appreciates the committee’s support for the 

DOD quick start initiative that was enacted last year. The Department of the Air Force has obtained approval from the Secretary of 

Defense for two programs that will be initiated under this new authority. They are more resilient national position navigation and 

timing capability and C3 battle management for moving target indication. 

Time matters, but so do resources. The United States is facing 

a competitor with national purchasing power that exceeds our own, 

a challenge we have never faced in modern times. 

China is actively developing and expanding capabilities to challenge strategic stability, attack our critical space systems, and defeat our ability to project power, especially air power. Conflict is 

not inevitable, but it could happen at any time. 

General Allvin and I just returned from a trip to some of our key 

bases in the Indo-Pacific. We should all be very proud of our men 

and women serving in harm’s way and doing everything they can 

to deter and be ready for a conflict unlike any we have seen before. 

The Department of the Air Force fiscal year 2025 budget request 

is focused on addressing these realities. We commit to working 

with the committee to secure timely enactment of this budget request. 

Thank you. We look forward to your questions. 

[The information follows:] 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
402 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 597 here 57432.243
403 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 598 here 57432.244
404 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 599 here 57432.245
405 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 600 here 57432.246
406 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 601 here 57432.247
407 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 602 here 57432.248
408 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 603 here 57432.249
409 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 604 here 57432.250
410 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 605 here 57432.251
411 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 606 here 57432.252
412 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 607 here 57432.253
413 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 608 here 57432.254
414 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 01 here 57432.255
415 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

I now recognize General Allvin for his remarks. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL ALLVIN

General ALLVIN. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Calvert, 

Ranking Member McCollum, and distinguished members of this 

subcommittee. 

Today, I am proud to represent the 677,000 total force airmen 

serving our Nation. I want to thank you for your unyielding support not only for those airmen but for their families as well. 

As we look across the strategic landscape, we find ourselves in 

a time of significant consequence. Simultaneous demands of strategic competition with an aggressive and increasingly capable PRC 

and persistent acute threats from around the globe require the Air 

Force to maximize their readiness of today’s forces while adapting 

our structures and processes to offer the best opportunity to prevail 

in an environment of enduring great power competition. Time is 

not on our side. 

The fiscal year 2025 Air Force budget request reflects difficult 

choices. We made tradeoffs to keep the Air Force’s operational 

readiness today at the minimal acceptable to meet the Nation’s 

needs while seeking to preserve the previous year’s advances in 

modernization. 

The Air Force budget request also invests in the Air Force’s most 

precious asset, its airmen, to ensure they remain the decisive advantage upon which the Nation depends. 

Strategic deterrence is a key priority in our National Defense 

Strategy, and the U.S. Air Force remains committed to recapitalization of our nuclear force. We are actively supporting the process 

triggered by the Nunn-McCurdy breach of the Sentinel program 

and will continue to pursue the path of a safe, reliable, secure, and 

effective ground leg of the nuclear triad well into the future. 

Our ability to support the National Defense Strategy priority of 

deterring aggression and prevailing in conflict demands a modern 

Air Force that is connected to the Joint Force and can close multiple kill chains in minimal time to control the tempo of a complex 

fight with a peer competitor. 

To that end, the fiscal year 2025 budget proposes continued investments in the F–35 and the F–15EX, albeit with fewer than preferred quantities dictated by the constraints of the Fiscal Responsibility Act. 

We remain committed to the advanced air battle management 

system of the NGAT family systems, particularly the Collaborative 

Combat Aircraft, which will allow the Air Force to deliver the affordable mass required to be effective against a very capable PRC. 

We are also committed to building forward basing that is resilient enough to enable continued sortie generation even while under 

attack. 

To arrest the decline in our readiness, we have proposed modest 

increases in investments in flying hours and weapon system 

sustainment to support them while prioritizing investments in critical physical and cyber infrastructure. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
416 

Our airmen are and always will be the deciding factor in any 

conflict our Air Force faces, and we are committed to their health, 

development, and quality of life. 

We have made significant progress, thanks to Congress’ support, 

in increases in basic pay, adjustments to basic allowance for housing and subsistence to account for the macroeconomic factors they 

face. There is still work to be done. 

During our recent trip to the Indo-Pacific, Secretary Kendall and 

I saw dedicated airmen that were eager to accomplish the mission, 

despite infrastructure degradation caused by natural disaster and 

persistent environmental challenges, as well as limited access to 

the healthcare enjoyed by most CONUS bases. 

The job of your Air Force has not changed since its inception. 

Support the defense of this Nation through credible deterrence and 

unmatched combat prowess. To preserve that level of deterrence, 

we must maintain our readiness today, modernize our force for tomorrow, and provide the absolute best support to our airmen and 

their families. 

Success on any battlefield is a team effort. I want to thank the 

Members of Congress and this committee for your past and continued support. 

Thank you. And I look forward to your questions. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you, General. 

Now we will move to General Saltzman for his remarks. General, 

you are recognized. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL SALTZMAN

General SALTZMAN. Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for 

your continued support and for the opportunity to testify on the 

Space Force’s posture for fiscal year 2025. 

As the Space Force prepares to celebrate its fifth birthday, we 

are wholly dedicated to the work of forgoing a service purpose-built 

for great power competition. Space has never been more critical to 

the security of our Nation, and the success or failure of the Joint 

Force depends heavily upon the capabilities we present. 

It is our responsibility to contest and control the domain, to defend U.S. space capabilities, and to protect the Joint Force from 

space-enabled attack. Gaining and maintaining space superiority is 

the purpose for which the Space Force was established. 

With about 3.5 percent of the DOD budget, the Space Force offers a tremendous value proposition to the Nation. Every dollar invested in space brings asymmetric returns, but that means every 

dollar cut creates asymmetric risk. 

Against a near-peer adversary, space superiority is the linchpin. 

Without it, we cannot deter conflict. Without it, we cannot provide 

vital effects. Without it, we cannot protect the Joint Force. Until 

we have built the infrastructure to achieve space superiority, the 

Space Force is a work in progress. 

The Space Force’s theory of success includes three parts: avoid 

operational surprise, deny the benefits of attack in space, and conduct responsible counterspace activities. 

The Space Force budget request is designed to support the National Defense Strategy by building, training, and equipping the 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
417 

forces the Nation needs to perform each activity, preserving freedom of action in space while deterring and denying adversarial objectives. 

Avoiding operational surprise requires us to maintain an accurate understanding of the space domain at all times. 8.3 percent of 

our budget is dedicated to this aim. Operating across disaggregated 

sensor frameworks, the Space Force provides the maximum information possible to decisionmakers from the tactical to the strategic 

level. 

Denying the benefits of attack in space demands that we make 

any attack against U.S. space capabilities impractical and self-defeating. 43.4 percent of our budget is devoted to this objective, investing in resiliency for missile warning and tracking, satellite 

communications, and positioning, navigation, and timing. 

Hybrid architectures and proliferated constellations impose a 

heavy cost on aggression. 

Finally, responsible counterspace activities describes the mechanism by which the Space Force contests and controls the space domain. The fiscal year 2025 budget dedicates 24.7 percent of the 

Space Force budget to space superiority. 

Within the constraints of the FRA, fiscal year 2025 Space Force 

budget reflects hard choices to maintain legacy space services and 

preserve current readiness, but it also slows the fielding of a modernized force. 

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Space Force’s fiscal 

year 2025 budget and posture. Even in the face of accelerating 

threats, the Space Force remains the preeminent military space organization in the world. 

With the support of this committee, our guardians will preserve 

and expand our strategic advantage, and we will step up to meet 

our pacing challenge. So long as you continue to trust and invest 

in your Space Force, the Space Force will respond with unparalleled value for the Nation. 

I look forward to your questions. 

KC–46 DELAYS

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

And we will begin with the questions. Each member will be given 

5 minutes for their questions and answers. When your timer turns 

yellow, you have a minute remaining. 

First, I will recognize myself. 

Obviously, the KC–46 is an important aircraft for us to obtain. 

The Air Force is in the process of recapitalizing this aging fleet of 

KC–135s, which I think was the old 707 airframe, which is probably the only plane on the—707 is still flying on the planet, our 

fleet of that aircraft. 

There has been some issues, obviously, with the KC–46. But one 

that seems to keep—never seems to go away is the remote vision 

system, the RVS, and the stiff refueling boom. Efforts to resolve 

both these issues are underway. It has been underway for a long 

time. I understand there is a final design solution expected for RVS 

by the early fiscal year 2026 and mid-fiscal year 2025, respectively. 

Until the deficiencies are resolved, the KC–46A will not be fully 

mission capable. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
418 

Secretary, we just heard this morning from the chief of the Air 

Force Reserve that the delivery of the KC–46, for instance, at 

March Air Force base in my area will be delayed. What is the problem, and what are you doing to resolve it? 

Secretary KENDALL. As you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, the issue 

with the remote viewing system has been there for quite some 

time. It does not completely limit the aircraft. The aircraft is capable for transmitting fuel to every aircraft in our inventory except 

the A–10. I think that is the only one at this point that we can’t 

refuel. 

And there were certain lighting conditions, which make it difficult to do refueling. So the aircraft is largely operational, and we 

are continuing to take delivery of them while we work through 

solving this problem. I think the dates you said were roughly the 

dates. 

We are continuing to procure the KC–46 at a rate of about 15 

per year, including fiscal year 2025. And we are starting the work 

on the transition to the Next Generation, which will have to be 

able to survive in a more contested environment. 

INNOVATION CAPABILITIES

Mr. CALVERT. Okay. We are looking forward to getting that resolved and getting delivery on the KC–46 aircraft. 

Innovation and rapid fielding to the warfighter have been, obviously, top priorities of this committee and mine since coming to 

Congress, which I consider a collaborative effort with DIU. Establishing a strong infrastructure for the defense innovation ecosystem 

is critical. 

In fiscal year 2025 request, it includes 20.5 million for AFWERX 

prime, which is a decrease of 83.3 million in 2024 and over 130 million in 2023 request. 

Agility and autonomy prime efforts dropped from 70 million in 

fiscal year 2024 to 6 million in 2025. I am concerned the Air Force 

has decided to slash resources in a well-known innovation hub. 

Mr. Secretary, what message are you sending to innovators if 

AFWERX’s budget request has been gutted in fiscal year 2025? 

And, given the importance of innovation, can I get your commitment to support DIU with manpower billets and detailees so we 

can get this thing off the ground? 

With that, Secretary, you are recognized. 

Secretary KENDALL. You won’t find anybody more supportive of 

innovation than myself and my colleagues here I think. 

As I mentioned in my opening statement, we are putting about 

$6 billion into modernization under the operational imperatives. 

The guidance I have given to our acquisition people is to structure 

programs to give meaningful capabilities into the hands of our operators as quickly as possible. So that is what we are trying to do 

with our programs. 

But there is also an observation that goes back some time that 

we have been starting more things than we can finish by a significant margin. We have to be more careful about the things we start 

and be certain that they are going to be cost-effective, and they are 

going to fit into our budgets in the future and lead to real field of 

capability. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
419 

So we have been trying to pare back some of the things which 

have little, if any, chance of actually transitioning across the valley 

of death to focus on the things that will. 

I have recently reached out to the directors of both DIU and SCO 

to set up day-long briefings with them to go through all their programs and give them feedback on the things that they are working 

on that we think will actually get into our budgets. 

And, in general, what we are working to do is try to ensure that 

we have a much more efficient and effective pipeline of new capabilities coming into the inventory as quickly as we can. The threat 

demands that. 

So you wouldn’t find anybody, you won’t find anybody more interested in innovation and getting it fielded, but we also have to, 

given the budget constraints we have, make wise decisions at the 

front end about which things to pursue. 

Mr. CALVERT. Anything else, General? 

General ALLVIN. The only thing I would add to what the Secretary said is also in one of our reoptimize for great power competition. One of the things that we are looking at is having this integrated capability command. When we talk about the valley of 

death, we need to have the other side of the valley of death pulling, 

saying bring this to me. 

And having this integrated into one entity that says I have a single force design, I need this, I need this, I need this, and be able 

to match the innovative ideas to something that will make it into 

the force design so, as the Secretary said, that dollar has a better 

chance of making it into meaningful capability sooner. 

So we are trying also to work on the other end to make sure 

those innovations are targeted and focused on a force design that 

is going to use them. 

Mr. CALVERT. Ms. McCollum. 

SPACE NATIONAL GUARD

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

This morning we heard from the National Guard, during the 

budget hearing, a lot about a legislative proposal to move the Air 

National Guard members to Space Force. In the hearing, we were 

informed that 70 percent of Guard members wish to stay in the 

Guard. 

And I expect that you are more than aware that our Governors, 

the chair’s and my Governors included, were very unhappy about 

this proposal. 48 of the 50 Governors signed a letter in opposition, 

as well as all the States and territories. 

And, as I mentioned this morning, as a former State legislature 

that had the purview over the Minnesota National Guard, I can tell 

you that the States need to be consulted and need to be full partners moving forward in any major change such as this. 

So, you know, one would wonder why Congress should seriously 

consider this if our Governors and the National Guards are so opposed. Maybe, I wonder, were they opposed because they weren’t 

consulted and their input wasn’t sought before this proposal. 

So, right now, this morning, it would appear that this would be 

dead on arrival. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
420 

And the creation of a space National Guard might not be the 

most cost-effective idea either. In fact, the Congressional Budget 

Office said in 2020 that the estimated one-time cost of $400 to $900 

million for additional facilities in each State and then anywhere 

from $385 to $490 million in annual operating costs. 

So I know the authorizers are looking at that. This is their purview. I look forward to their decision, and then we will work with 

them as finding funding as they move forward. 

So we had the conversation this morning. I thought it was only 

fair that you hear what this committee had to say. 

CANCER RATES

What I want to ask you about, though, today, is cancer rates. 

Last year, we discussed about the high cancer rates in pilots and 

ground crews. Air crews and members had an 87-percent higher 

rate of melanoma and a 39-percent higher rate of thyroid cancer. 

Men had a 16-percent higher rate of prostate cancer; women, a 16- 

percent higher rate of breast cancer. 

Overall, air crews 24-percent higher rate of all types of cancer. 

In addition, ground crews had a 19-percent higher rate of brain 

and nervous system cancers, 15-percent higher rate of thyroid cancers, 9-percent rate higher of kidney or retinal cancers, while 

women had a 7-percent higher rate of breast cancer. 

Now, a new 2-year Air Force study has found what appears to 

be a higher rate of brain and spinal cord cancer among children of 

servicemembers at Cannon Air Force Base in New Mexico. The Air 

Force has been saying that the three instances of the rare cancers 

are not significantly significant—statistically significant, yet those 

rare tumors are showing up among children with parents stationed 

at Cannon Air Force Base at higher rates than children with parents stationed at other bases or in the civilian population. 

And, of course, the Air Force is still investigating cancer concerns 

among missileers, nuclear missile maintainers, and support staff. 

So, if this is about how we are keeping our troops and their families safe, if our servicemembers are signing up to serve, and they 

are getting cancer at 30 to 40 years old, or their spouses or their 

children now have life-threatening tumors, how is their quality of 

life affected? 

Not only do they have to worry about their own personal health, 

they have to take time off of duty for extended hospital stays and 

doctors’ appointments. This will certainly impact retention and will 

impact overall DOD healthcare costs. 

Secretary Kendall, your posture statement in a lengthy session 

is outlining in the Air Force’s role in taking care of its people, but 

it fails to mention about the healthcare or cancer. So please tell me 

that you are working to address this and what we can expect to 

see from the Air Force about these cancer rates. They are alarming, and I want you to know this committee is very concerned. 

Secretary KENDALL. Ranking Member, we are very concerned 

about the possibility of increased cancer rates among people that 

are serving in certain locations in particular. We have a study, as 

you mentioned, on missileers that has been going on for about a 

year now. It is well underway. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
421 

We are trying to be very transparent about our findings and 

work very closely with our people. We are reaching out to people 

who have served to try to get a better sense of what cancer it really 

is. And we are working very closely with the VA on this. 

So we are just as concerned as you are about this. We are trying 

to get to the bottom of it and understanding exactly what has happened and try to make sure that our people work in a safe environment. 

Do you want to add anything to that? 

General ALLVIN. I would just state, as the Secretary said, the Air 

Force School of Aerospace Medicine is doing as much longitudinally 

forward as backward as we can do because there is the correlation 

and the causation. We really need to figure out what some of the 

root causes are so we don’t spend money where it is not going to 

be most effective for them and their families. 

But, to the Secretary’s point on the transparency, that is the one 

thing we can do. That doesn’t cost any money, and we are being 

very aggressive about that. Our commanders and our leaders are 

letting the people know in the communities what is going on when 

it is going on. However, until we get to the final answer, we understand that that is not going to be satisfactory. 

So we are putting the Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine on 

this as hard as we certainly can. 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Well, being of the Agent Orange generation 

and—I will just—I won’t get too personal about this. Being to reunions and that, Marine Corps reunions, hearing the stories of how 

things were impacted, knowing how difficult the Department of Defense and the VA made processing Agent Orange claims, the lesson 

we learned in passing the PACT Act and moving forward on that, 

I know that you are working and looking at studying it. 

But, for these families affected, looking and studying, we need to 

start making sure that they are included in how we are moving forward and addressing this. 

And I hear what you are saying. I just don’t know that people 

are feeling the care the way that we want them to. So would you 

keep the committee informed on a quarterly basis where you are 

on this? 

If you need more funding, more resources, we have to work with 

the NIH. We have to do whatever we have to do. But the atomic 

war veterans are, you know, still not recognized for their health 

concerns in my opinion, and I don’t want on my watch to be part 

of this committee, nor do I believe you gentlemen want to be on 

your watch not addressing this expeditiously. 

I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlelady. 

Ms. DeLauro. 

COMBAT RESCUE HELICOPTER PROGRAM

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, 

Mr. Womack. 

Secretary Kendall, General Allvin, again, thanks for being here. 

I understand you have to make difficult budget decisions. In my 

view, a top priority should be the capability to rescue our men and 

women who are in harm’s way. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
422 

I am concerned about the service’s decision to terminate the combat rescue helicopter program. In my view, the moral imperative 

to, quote, 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. 

Last year, the Air Force told this committee that a decision to 

truncate CRH would limit the capacity for dedicated combat search 

and rescue, combat search and rescue forces available to the Joint 

Force. 

How does this decision ensure that no one is left behind? How 

do you plan to protect the men and women in uniform moving forward? You know, what will you be doing in the future? Is there a 

replacement for what we are doing with the combat rescue helicopter? 

Secretary KENDALL. The search and rescue mission, the recovery 

mission is a critical mission for our force. What has changed and 

caused to change our program is the threats that we face and the 

operational environment which will likely be committed. 

When we look at the mix of systems that we have and our capabilities that are in the Joint Force, the type of helicopter that the 

60 Whiskey is will work in certain circumstances but not in others. 

In particular, not against the most stressing threats that we face. 

And, also, for a lot of recoveries in the Pacific over water, for example, you don’t need that kind of capability. You can use a helicopter that is not specially equipped or very expensive. 

So we are looking at the mix. We think we have acquired enough 

of the 60 Whiskeys that will be able to do the mission where it is 

an appropriate tool to do it. And we are starting to look at more 

survivable ways to do recoveries and provide airmen the chance to 

survive in other environments, particularly in more contested environments. 

I will let General Allvin add if he wants to. 

General ALLVIN. The Secretary really covered just about all of it. 

We are not only looking at our joint partners who do have additional capabilities but also our allies and partners in the environments in which we may also need them, which is, when we think 

about the European context, we do believe that between our joint 

partners and allies and partners who have that capability, we will 

be able to have enough capacity sufficiently. 

But the Secretary really nailed it. When we talk about the IndoPacific theater, it is a different ball game, and we have to understand how to get there over vast distances and try and survive. 

We have our folks at the warfare center doing weapons school, 

integration exercise and tasks to figure out how through tactics, 

techniques, and procedures we can make it more survivable. 

And the combat rescue helicopter and the HH Whiskey is not 

that significantly more survivable than the Gulf’s War or in any of 

the other that our joint partners have. So anymore of that capacity 

did not yield that much more capability for us to do that. 

So we do need to solve that problem in the Indo-Pacific, and I 

would say with the additional 10 that was added in 2024, we are 

almost to the program of record anyway. So the program record, as 

designed with that additional 10, it almost gets us there anyway. 

So we almost have the capacity that was envisioned to begin with. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
423 

Ms. DELAURO. Is it possible for you all to share with us, given 

what you have talked about in terms of changing environments, 

changing theaters, et cetera, to really let us know what your—what 

are your plans in terms of replacing that capacity? 

And, you know, at what stage is the development—at what stage 

are we in that planning for the future? The Indo-Pacific is in the 

future, you know, but today we are operating in the Red Sea. So 

it is—how do we operate there? What is our capacity going to be? 

And, you know, again, for the future, to let us know where that 

is going, but I worry about the near term versus what that future 

environment is going to be. 

General ALLVIN. Yes, ma’am. Absolutely. I agree. 

And I would say that the Indo-Pacific is not only the future. It 

is approaching us rapidly. 

But your point about today being the Red Sea and the Middle 

East, with that, we do have the capacity. And again, between us 

and our joint partners, we do have the capacity to meet those 

needs. 

Ms. DELAURO. You believe we have the capacity? 

General ALLVIN. I do. I do. 

Ms. DELAURO. You do. 

Okay. I think it is important for this committee to understand 

and to know because what we don’t want to do, as I say, last year 

you told this committee the decision to truncate would limit the capacity for dedicated combat search and rescue forces available to 

the Joint Force. That was just last year. 

General ALLVIN. From the Air Force, yes. And so that is why we 

are working with our other joint partners and allies and partners. 

And, with the addition of the additional 10 percent of the capacity 

that was added into last year, I believe we have sufficient capacity. 

Ms. DELAURO. Okay. If you can lend more clarity to that for us, 

I think that would be helpful, at least for myself. I don’t know 

about others. 

F–35 ADVANTAGES

Let me just try to focus on another aircraft. In full disclosure, it 

is tied to my home State of Connecticut. That is the F–35. Many 

capabilities with the F–35. We cannot discuss them all here in open 

session, but do you know of any other tactical fighter in the world 

being produced that is as capable as the F–35? 

Secretary KENDALL. No. 

General ALLVIN. No. 

Ms. DELAURO. Okay. 

What advantage does the F–35 and the fifth generation aircraft 

bring to the fight? What positive feedback have you gotten from the 

recent deployments on the jet? And what additional investments 

can Congress make to increase readiness of the F–35 fleet? 

General ALLVIN. I would say, to begin with, the F–35 offers additional survivability, an advanced suite of sensors, and integration 

into the fight that really we haven’t seen before in modern combat. 

So that survivability, the lethality of it, and the ability to penetrate 

deep in places that other of our fourth generation aircraft can’t, including the sensors and the radar that is coming. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
424 

That is why I want to say this is the difference. The F–35 we 

have is a good F–35. The F–35 on the horizon is the F–35 that we 

really need for the China fight, the one that has the tech refresh 

that gives us the capability to have those future—the future capabilities that meet the threat where it is. 

So it is capable, and it will defeat the threats that we have 

today. We continually need the modernization and the new capabilities to meet the threat that is rapidly approaching. 

Secretary KENDALL. Let me add to that. I have been with the F– 

35 since its inception, and it is the best aircraft all around, multirole aircraft certainly in the world and will stay so, but it has got 

to get to the next set of technical upgrades. Block four is what it 

is called. 

And, for the years I was in my previous position, we were trying 

to get to block three. The threat has not stood still, and we have 

got to continue to modernize and upgrade the aircraft as we go forward. And right now the contractors are really struggling to deliver 

block four to us. 

And that is our priority is to get those aircrafts. That is one of 

the reasons we reduced our buy of F–35 a little bit in this budget. 

We had financial constraints as well, but we also are really in 

great need of getting that next generation of capability out of it. 

Ms. DELAURO. So does that—so you are meaning additional investments from Congress to assist in that process or is it—— 

Secretary KENDALL. What we need fundamentally is for the contractor to deliver the capability that we have been promised. 

Ms. DELAURO. What are the obstacles to getting to block four? 

Secretary KENDALL. The struggle with the technology, with the 

software in particular but also with some of the hardware involved 

in the—each major upgrade includes both hardware and software 

upgrades, and both have been a problem for this aircraft. 

I can’t—as you said, it is classified. I can’t go into a lot of details, 

but we can get you a briefing on the details if you would like to 

see that. 

And some of the subsystems are struggling as well. So it has 

been a combination of problems with different parts of the major 

upgrade. 

Ms. DELAURO. Thank you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentlelady. 

Mr. Womack. 

FOREIGN PARTNER TRAINING

Mr. WOMACK. Thank you. 

I am so glad you brought up the F–35 because I am going to 

throw a softball question at the Secretary. 

You know, we are not the only people that are going to be flying 

the F–35. We have got a lot of allies and partners buying it 

through the foreign military sales program, and after an exhaustive and very lengthy process, the decision was made to train foreign military pilots in my district, in Fort Smith, Arkansas. 

And I can tell all of you the river valley in Arkansas is very excited to hear the sound of freedom beginning this fall, I guess, 

when the Polish show up. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
425 

Secretary Kendall, how important is it to get our foreign partners 

trained on this amazing airframe and the impact it has on national 

security? 

Secretary KENDALL. It is critically important. I think one of the 

best testimonials to the value of the aircraft is that the number of 

countries buying it keeps increasing. You know, we started with 

seven partners, and now we have got quite a few additional people 

acquiring it. 

And it is critical for a number of reasons. A, it is cutting-edge 

technology, but, B, it allows us to interoperate very effectively, 

train with, and fight alongside of our partners in the same way to 

be as effective as a total force as possible and to integrate into the 

rest of the elements of the force. 

So we are delighted that we are moving forward on that and getting that under operation as well. That is going to be a major step 

forward to be able to train in the United States, which is what we 

have planned. 

Mr. CALVERT. General Allvin. 

General ALLVIN. I was just going to second what the Secretary 

said about the value of the being able to hold training on fifth generation platforms, and I am a little bit biased, but I would say we 

have the best pilots in the world. And, if you are going to train, 

you want to train with the best. 

And I just think that helps our combat capability as the United 

States Air Force, as the Department of Defense, and as a Nation, 

if we can maintain the ability to train in the common tactics, techniques, and procedures and be able to proliferate that throughout 

like-minded nations, I think that is a value proposition that makes 

the foreign military’s training in the United States that much 

more. 

Mr. WOMACK. To stand up a mission like that is not easy. There 

are facility improvements that need to be made, and this committee has been very good to help us fund those. And all of you 

have a standing invitation to come down and see the work that is 

going on and to see some of that training once it commences a little 

bit later on this fall. 

PACIFIC AIR FORCE EXERCISES

I want to ask you a question about exercises because I note that 

there is an unfunded requirement amount of nearly a quarter of a 

billion dollars for the pacific Air Force exercises. 

General Allvin, help me understand the importance of conducting 

these theaterwide exercises. How do they help our formations? How 

do they help us integrate at scale and across domains? 

General ALLVIN. Thank you for that, Congressman. 

We certainly are looking to change the manner in which we do 

exercises. We have done exercises in bits and pieces, and a lot of 

the exercises are done on the backs of the wing commands who understand how they want to try and get their formations within 

their wings more ready for their piece of the fight. 

But, if we are going to enter a fight in the Indo-Pacific where we 

have to do agile combat employment, complex situations where we 

need to be able to aggregate for effect and disaggregate for survival, that is complex and that takes training at a larger scale. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
426 

If you just do it in bit pieces, you won’t find out where the holes 

in your swing are. You have to understand fitting it together in 

something that looks more like you may actually have to experience in combat before you will do that. 

So the increase in being able to do larger scale exercises, that is 

where you are going to find out where some of your weaknesses 

are. We haven’t had the ability to do that as much as we would 

like to. And so, moving forward, I think that will help us advance 

our capability more effective in the Indo-Pacific fight. 

Mr. WOMACK. Yes. 

LP 480

Finally, Mr. Chairman, you know, I am going to reserve, you 

know, an opinion on this whole LP 480, this legislative proposal 

that Ms. McCollum brought up. I do think it is a bit dangerous, 

though, for us to enter into an era where we are usurping the authority of our Governors. Forty-eight of them have expressed some 

discontent with the proposal. 

There is the option of status quo, and I don’t know—you know, 

I have not thought through it completely, but as a guardsman, as 

somebody who has some unique insight into the dual mission of our 

Guard, I guess I would say this. I am a little concerned. I saw some 

numbers on polling among these personnel. We are talking about 

a thousand people here, and the prospect of some of them looking 

for other missions so that they can remain part of the Guard is a 

bit of a concern for me. 

So I guess my last question would be, are we going to create a 

gap in here in capability? That would ultimately be my biggest concern. 

Secretary. 

Secretary KENDALL. There has been a lot of confusion I think 

about this. First of all, we deeply value the Guard itself. It is an 

enormously important component of our overall force. And we deeply value these people and the units that they are in. There are only 

about 578 people that will be affected by this. You know, the Guard 

is over 100,000. So it is a very small fraction. 

This is a very unusual situation we have. We created this Space 

Force, and we took people out of the Air Force and other services, 

and we are taking people out of the Reserve component. 

And under the act we just passed last year created a personnel 

management system for the Space Force so they could have fulland part-time people and manage that very small force as efficiently as possible. 

We have got 578 people in the Guard, in the Air Guard who are, 

essentially, orphans right now, and they really need to be integrated into the Space Force. The attempt is to integrate them exactly as they are, to keep them in place, keep them in the same 

job, serving the same way, doing the same thing. So there is not 

going to be any change here. 

This is also—this is not a precedent for anything else. This is a 

very unusual, unique situation that we created because of the creation of the Space Force. So we are trying to essentially clean up 

the battlefield and fix this loose end, if you will, in the creation of 

the Space Force. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
427 

General Saltzman has a very small entity—I don’t mean to say 

that in a derogative way—but a very important one. His mission 

is absolutely critical in the country, and he needs to be able to 

manage that force, including the personnel in that force as efficiently and effectively and with little bureaucracy as possible. 

So we don’t want to go in the opposite direction that the Congress went in last year of giving the opportunity to do that under 

the Space Force Personnel Management Act by creating a whole 

new entity or by leaving, for that matter, the people in the Air 

Guard where we can work that out. We can make any of these 

things work if we have to, but, by far, the best solution is to actually integrate these people into the Space Force. 

And, again, this is not an attempt to undo the Guard. It is a very 

small number of people. It is only six States that are affected. It 

is not a precedent for anything else. It is just a way to make the 

Space Force into the entity that it needs to be to be effective. 

Mr. WOMACK. Thank you for clarifying. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much. 

By the way, I have got to leave here in a minute and go meet 

with the city of Fort Smith board of directors who are here today, 

and I am sure the first thing they are going to ask me is, how is 

our F–35 mission coming? So thank you so much. 

UAE ACQUISITIONS

Mr. CALVERT. Since you brought up the F–35, just really quickly, 

what is going on—since I heard from some of our friends on UAE 

the other day, what is going on with the proposed purchase, UAE 

acquisition of the F–35? Any progress on that? 

Secretary KENDALL. I don’t have anything new on that. Let me 

take that and get back to you, Mr. Chairman. As far as I know, 

there is no obstacle that I am aware of right now. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

PILOT RETENTION

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Secretary Kendall, as you are well aware, 

the Air Force is having trouble retaining as many pilots because 

of the private sector paying so much more money, better benefits, 

and those type of issues. The Air Force is competing, and I don’t 

know how they can continue to compete. So it is a major issue that 

we have to deal with. 

What are the incentives that we have, if any, that they can do 

that? There are people that can leave the Air Force, fly, and then 

also be in the Reserves or National Guard or whatever you would 

call that. Have you seen any an improvements over the last 2 years 

of this issue? 

And then, finally, what about the percentage of pilots who leave 

active duty for private sector and—I have asked this before—joined 

the Reserves or National Guard? 

Secretary KENDALL. We can get you some numbers on that. We 

do have a shortage of pilots, and we have been working to reduce 

that. The greatest obstacle to higher pilot production is the pipeline, particularly the availability of training aircraft. And that is 

one of the reasons we need to get the T–7 fielded to have a more 

reliable aircraft. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
428 

So I have been visiting the contractors involved in the maintenance of the T–38, and just it is a constant struggle to try keep 

those airplanes flying and get people through the pipeline. 

We are using bonuses very effectively. The Congress just gave us 

the authority to increase our bonuses for pilot retention, and I 

think that was just put in place. And I think early indications are 

that that is going to be effective. 

We have a lot of pilots who are in the Reserve and Guard who 

are commercial pilots, you know, during their civilian lives and 

then still remain in the service part time. And that is a very effective way to retain those people as well. 

Do you want to add something? 

General ALLVIN. I would just add to the retention initiatives, you 

know, we have often offered the incentives for reenlistment or retention bonuses. What we have done, though, is we have actually 

taken some data. And it turns out that the way we have done it 

in the past, sometimes we ask those who are eligible for it maybe 

within a year or a year and a half of when their sort of commitment is up, and we found out after lots of surveys that they may 

have already sort of made up their mind by that time. 

So, in working with Congress, this new incentive program allows 

us to actually request it earlier, and they can help shape their future rather than be shaped by a decision at the last minute. And 

we also find that it is not just about the pay for them. There are 

opportunities where, depending on where they are in their life, 

with their family, the opportunity to perhaps get a preference for 

getting stationed somewhere or not moving, that is an alternative 

for them. They value that over the actual financial incentive. 

And we are starting our second year of doing that. So we are 

doing a longitudinal analysis. As the Secretary said, the early returns are good, but we are finding out that we can just find more 

creative ways to meet them where they are at. And it is not just 

about the dollars and cents, because they love to serve. We are 

going to continue to seek those to be able to maintain the retention. 

I will add that, while we do have retention issues, we are still 

filling 100 percent of our combat cockpits. Those are being filled as 

well as our training. Where we are taking the risk in mitigating 

is in the rated staff positions and some of the other, but we still 

do need to plus up and retain as many of those pilots as we can. 

PILOT TRAINING BACKLOG

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. On the other hand, there is also a training 

backlog for pilots. What are the root causes of this backlog, and 

how are you addressing it, and what additional resources do you 

need from us? 

General ALLVIN. Well, thank you, Congressman. As the Secretary 

said, it really has been getting them through the pipeline because 

of aging aircraft. So the T–38, much older, and we had issues with 

the J85 engine. And, as the Secretary said, getting that T–7 here 

as soon as possible with the aircraft that we need is really what 

we are focusing on with the contractor. 

We also are looking at new ways of doing pilot training and understanding ways that we can get them through the pipeline faster. 

And those are things like, if you have a multiseat aircraft where 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
429 

it is more like what the airlines do as far as the training, you can 

do more in the simulator. If you can do more in the simulator, you 

can preserve the pilot’s time, fewer aircraft hours. 

So we are seeing those. We are seeing gains there. But, unfortunately, they have been masked by the supply issues and supply 

chain issues that are limiting the availability of the aircraft. So, if 

we can get through those supply and supply chain issues, I think 

that is where we are going to see the fruits of the labor of these 

other initiatives that, on their own, are increasing the number of 

throughput pilots that we can get. 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Aderholt. 

SPACE COMMAND LOCATION

Mr. ADERHOLT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to mention, you know, that Congress has remained troubled about how 

the Space Command location was selected and as you saw the language in both the NDAA and the fiscal year 2024 budget. 

Mr. Secretary, I just wanted to get your commitment that you 

will continue to follow congressional intent, as expressed by the 

laws that we passed, and especially let the independent investigation run their course on this. 

Secretary KENDALL. I am obviously very familiar with the issue, 

Congressman. And we will certainly follow the law and cooperate 

with the investigation the entire way. 

SPACE ACCESS, MOBILITY, AND LOGISTICS

Mr. ADERHOLT. Thank you. I appreciate that. And let me ask 

about the Space Access, Mobility, and Logistics. In recent testimony, General Saltzman, to the Senate Armed Services Committee, 

you talked about $20 million in this year’s President’s budget for 

Space, Access, Mobility and Logistics, and said the funding would 

be, quote, ‘‘used to study and figure out if there is military utility 

for much-needed capabilities like in-space refueling.’’ 

According to public reports, China has already found utility for 

in-space refueling and have demonstrated this capability in 2021 

and 2022, and have integrated lessons learned into military doctrine. 

So would it be accurate to say that the DOD is going to study 

a capability that our adversary is already executing, and could you 

talk about that? 

General SALTZMAN. Yes, sir. Thank you for the question. I have 

two things to say on that. One is we are evaluating the military 

utility. As Secretary Kendall mentioned, we want to make sure 

that our S&T budget goes as far as we possibly can. And we want 

to make sure, if we are going to pursue a technology, there is a 

pathway to fielding an operational capability. So that is part of the 

assessment. 

And then, from a mission standpoint, we are rapidly trying to 

shift from large satellites in geosynchronous orbit whose lifespan 

requires them to have a lot of fuel where refueling could be valuable. We are shifting from that kind of architecture into a proliferated low Earth orbit set of constellations. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
430 

We are talking hundreds of satellites much smaller and more 

easily to replace. So the idea is that you wouldn’t need to refuel 

them, because you are trying to replenish that proliferated constellation on a more frequent basis. So 3 to 5 years on orbit, replace 

it with updated technology, wouldn’t necessarily require the same 

level of servicing on orbit. So we are trying to get the balance just 

right and make sure that all the dollars that we invest will be 

properly utilized. 

Mr. ADERHOLT. Secretary Kendall, do you have anything you 

want to add to that? 

Secretary KENDALL. I think General Saltzman had it just right. 

Mr. ADERHOLT. How would additional resources for the Space Access, Mobility, and Logistics be helpful and ensure the continued 

U.S. space superiority? 

General SALTZMAN. Well, one area, of course, is the launch infrastructure. A lot of this comes—when we talk about Space Access, 

Mobility, and Logistics, one of the key pieces is space lift infrastructure. 

And the dramatic increase of commercial launches at our two primary launch locations near Cape Canaveral, at Patrick’s Space 

Force Base, and out at Vandenberg, that is taking a toll on its infrastructure, and we need to recoup that and keep that up. 

So keeping that infrastructure current and capable of supporting 

the ops tempo is going to be a primary resourcing concern. 

Secretary KENDALL. I would just add to that that the biggest— 

and General Saltzman should comment on this too. Our greatest 

regret, if you will, in the constraints that we had this year was we 

couldn’t more forward more quickly on counter-space capability in 

particular. 

Our pacing challenge is fielding a number of systems that threaten the joint force and that essentially are targeting assets like aircraft carriers. We need to have the capability to do something 

about those assets so that they can’t provide that targeting service 

to the Chinese military. 

And that would be the highest thing on our list of things that 

we aren’t able to move forward as quickly as we would like to on. 

Mr. ADERHOLT. I see my time has gone out. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Case. 

BUDGET REDUCTIONS

Mr. CASE. Thank you. 

General Saltzman, your budget came to us at a reduction of 2 

percent after, of course, 4 years of significant growth, but we would 

expect that growth, given that you are 5 years old. So we are trying 

to obviously ramp up as fast as possible. 

And, although I guess you could say a 2-percent budget reduction 

is—well, thanks for that, because we got a lot of demands. Still, it 

begs the question of what risks we are accepting in your trajectory 

to get you there as fast as possible. 

Now, I understand that, I mean, the reason advanced really for 

the budget reduction has been a lower pace of space launches. And 

one of the questions is, what kind of risk does that present? But 

I also just took a look at your unfunded priority list, because the 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
431 

real concern here is that, in a budget-pressured environment, 

where the real consequences is being taken is in some of the baseline infrastructure. 

So, you know, staff training, infrastructure capability, MILCON, 

training facilities, exercises. So, you know, your UPL list does have 

some of that. It looks like some MILCON, some training exercises. 

So I guess my real question is, other than for us to just say okay 

to the 2-percent reduction, I mean, what are we actually doing 

here? What is this going to do to the direction you are trying to 

take? Because we are trying to get you to somewhere as fast as 

possible. 

General SALTZMAN. Well, I think you got it just right. And I 

think Secretary Kendall mentioned that the biggest regret, of 

course, is the lack of counter-space capabilities. 

So the budget includes a pretty substantial investment in this 

shift to more resilient architectures. So we are on a good path 

there. It has good investments in operational test and training infrastructure. So I like the idea of training our operators against a 

thinking threat. 

What I am most concerned about is how fast we are able to put 

those counter-space capabilities to hold that risk, the PRC targets 

that Secretary Kendall mentioned, the ones that can—it is spaceenabled targeting of the joint force. 

That is the biggest concern, and what this budget needed to do 

was slow that acquisition down. So the programs are still there. We 

are still making progress. We are just not putting it in place as fast 

as possible. 

Mr. CASE. Okay. I am sorry. Secretary, anything to add? 

Secretary KENDALL. No. 

Mr. CASE. Okay. General, some of the same questions to you just 

in terms of your budget and taking a look at your unfunded priority list. Mr. Womack I think talked about your exercises. You are 

not adding some exercises in PACAF, specifically in the agile combat space, that you would otherwise want to do, right? 

But the one that really kind of—and you have got a MILCON of 

$1.115 billion. And I think we all know that your MILCON is a 

huge gap right now, especially if you take a look at your agile combat plans out in the Pacific. You just saw that again. 

The one that really struck me when I took a look at it was spare 

parts $1.566 billion. And it says here funds single spares, restock 

for aircraft projected to be grounded due to a lack of spare parts. 

I mean, that sounds pretty serious, actually, to me, to be in a UPL 

list, number one. And then, number two, we have had a lot of discussion on the committee about just basic, you know, industrial 

base ability to produce. 

Is this an issue of a supply chain disruption, or is this the parts 

are available, we just don’t have the money to buy them? 

General ALLVIN. Congressman, I think it was more of the latter, 

but the Department of Defense did put an emphasis during the 

budget submission and the contemplation about readiness. So I did 

not want this committee to believe that DOD ignored readiness. 

But what happened is, this year, as we looked at some of the continued erosion and we looked at the strategy that we talked about, 

I went to our Air Force Materiel Command commander A4 and 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
432 

asked him to do a sprint. Let’s deep dive into some data-driven 

analysis that can drive from inputs to outputs, where you can say, 

if I put a dollar in here, in this spare part, what can it deliver out 

there? 

And we have really just developed the data platforms to be able 

to do that with rigor. And so that happened during the summer 

and the fall. And we focused on aircraft and weapon systems that 

we had more control of all of the organic aircraft, the C–130s, the 

B–52s, those where we had a lot more control over that entire supply chain process and the supply parts where we could visualize 

throughout the system, and then looked at which of those which we 

knew had limitations because of spare parts, because we have that 

across our Air Force, which ones would drive the biggest change. 

And, when we saw that, they came up with that analysis and it 

was complete, but it wasn’t complete in time for the budget submission. My sense is, if it had been done earlier, I would have gone 

to Secretary Kendall and said, ‘‘Maybe perhaps we could put this 

in.’’ 

But, when I saw the potential output, it didn’t seem like I could 

wait another year for the next budget submission. So it really was 

a matter of sequencing, because we didn’t want to just put in a 

wedge and say, ‘‘Give us more money for parts.’’ I wanted to be 

able to have some specificity to show the drive, the input to the 

output. 

And I feel like we had confidence enough to where I could submit 

that in my unfunded priority list, because I would rather not wait 

another year to fight in the submission. 

Mr. CASE. Okay. Thank you very much. 

Mr. CALVERT. I thank the gentleman. 

Next, Judge Carter. 

SPACE FUTURES COMMAND

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

General Saltzman, the Space Force recently announced the creation of a Space Futures Command. Can you talk about the goals 

of this command and its timeline, and can you give us examples 

of what types of missions this command will look at? 

General SALTZMAN. Thank you, sir. 

I appreciate the question. The Futures Command came out of our 

analysis associated with optimizing for great power competition. 

And we became aware of the fact that, while there was a lot of 

disaggregated activities across the entire force and the entire Department, quite frankly, associated with trying to build the force 

that we are going to need in the future, it wasn’t coherent enough 

so that we could understand what the second and third order effects of any one decision were. 

So what Futures Command does is it aggregates all those capabilities together. It will look at operational concepts, which technologies will be most likely to be used against us or that we can 

leverage against future threats. What are the missions that are 

going to be expected of us in the future? 

It will evaluate all those operational concepts, war game them, 

do tabletop exercises, do some experimentation to validate those 

concepts, and then finally do the real hard core data analytics that 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
433 

results in a force design so that we can build the requirements and 

buy the kinds of capabilities that we know we are going to need 

in the future. All of that would fall under one field command. 

Mr. CARTER. And when do you expect to stand this up? 

General SALTZMAN. I am hoping that, from a process standpoint, 

later this summer-early fall, we are actually working through the 

processes. It is going to take me a while to put a command structure in place. 

There could be basing decision, and that will take a little more 

time to put in place. But process-wise, because a lot of these are 

already occurring across the Space Force, we will pull them together coherently and work the processes later this fall. 

Mr. CARTER. Is there going to be an issue of location? 

General SALTZMAN. We are going to have to look at that as a 

part of a basing process. 

COLLABORATIVE COMBAT AIRCRAFT PROGRAM

Mr. CARTER. The Air Force recently announced the next phase of 

the Collaborative Combat Aircraft program. And I understand that 

you are exploring international partnerships as part of this program. 

Can you elaborate on what it would look like and the benefit that 

this partnership might bring to further development of the program and the utility of it across our partners and allies? 

Secretary KENDALL. The Collaborative Combat Aircraft program 

is the uncrewed, you know, companions, wing men, if you will, to 

manned aircraft. It started out as a companion for the Next Generation Air Dominance platform, but also could be used by NF–22, 

RNF–35 or RNF–15. 

And we just down-selected, as you mentioned, Congressman, to 

two companies for the first increment. The way the program is 

structured, it has multiple increments. They are about 2 years 

apart. And the first one will go quickly to production. 

We expect to have those aircraft in production within the next 

few years and have deliveries before the end of the 5-year plan. 

They are going to allow us to learn a lot. They will give us an operational capability. I mentioned earlier that we are trying to make 

sure we field meaningful operational capability as quickly as possible. 

So that first increment will give us some degree of capability. 

There will be a second increment coming along a couple years behind that one. And we are particularly looking for international cooperation with that second increment. 

We have had talks, General Allvin and I both have had talks 

with several of our partners, our closest partners, who are very interested. So it is early stages, but we would like to go in that direction. We think this will be something that could have great value 

to all of our partners and enhance our capabilities, you know, particularly in partnership with our closest allies. 

Do you want to add anything to that? 

General ALLVIN. The only thing I would add is the secret sauce 

there that I think will enable us to be more rapidly integrating 

with our allies and partners is part of this entire concept is a government-owned reference architecture, something that we control. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
434 

And so, as we are seeing advancements in the technology, we can 

maybe set the pace for how we can integrate and work with our 

allies and partners, and I think that is one of the big things that 

can let us go faster. 

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Just following up on the Judge’s question, on this 

aircraft, the collaborative aircraft, what do you envision? How 

many aircraft are we talking about here in the next 5 years? 

Secretary KENDALL. We will have over a hundred on order or delivered by the end of the FYDP. That is for increment one. The 

planning figure I have given people to use is a thousand, and that 

is just really to reflect the fact that we are serious about this is 

going to be a significant part of our first structure. 

The ultimate number is going to depend upon cost, affordability, 

and a number of other factors. But this is a fairly transformative 

change to going away from individual fighter pilots all out there at 

risk together to giving our fighter pilots a wing man that can be 

attrited to a degree. It is intended to be survivable, but attritable. 

That will give us a wide range of tactics and techniques that we 

currently can’t utilize. So it is going to become a mainstay part of 

the force. 

Mr. CALVERT. So each, say, F–35, for instance, how many collaborative aircraft do you think would be attached to a single F–35? 

Secretary KENDALL. We won’t do it for every single fighter probably, at least not initially, but nominally two to five, for example, 

under the control of an individual pilot. 

Mr. CALVERT. And the cost I read in the press reports are approximately $30 million apiece. Does that sound about right? 

Secretary KENDALL. We are looking for something that is a fraction of the cost of a fighter. 

Mr. CALVERT. So hopefully less—— 

Secretary KENDALL. So on the order of $25 million or $30 million 

apiece would be kind of what I would consider personally an upper 

bound. 

Mr. CALVERT. Yeah, I would hope so. I would hope that cost 

could come down considerably. Thank you. 

Ms. Kaptur. 

UKRAINE THEATER OPERATIONS

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, Generals, welcome. And, to all your staff, thank 

you for the patriotic job that you all do. 

I wanted to go to General Allvin first, if I might. What is the Air 

Force learning from the Ukraine theater and operations there that 

would inform our posture toward future flight and future fights? 

General ALLVIN. Thank you. And I hesitate early on to talk about 

lessons learned. We certainly want to learn what we can, but understand the context is important. 

I believe that there are a couple things. As an airman, it reminds 

me I don’t think you want to fight without some level of air superiority, because that is where we are right now, and that is painful 

for both sides. 

But I think the advancements in the UAVs and the drones and 

what that means for a change in the ability to retain air superiVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00438 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
435 

ority long enough to be able to have those, the overall combat objectives, is a little different, depending on where you go. 

We want to make sure that, even though we have massive, you 

know, swarms of drones, that works in the European theater. 

When you have a different theater, you have to think of a different 

context, because there is much more range and so you wouldn’t be 

able to use them the same way. 

But I think that the idea that the electromagnetic spectrum may 

be one of the biggest lessons. That still matters more than we did 

before, because the ability for those crewed or uncrewed aircraft to 

be effective in there really depends on how well they can defend 

against—they can jam against—or defend against jamming and 

survive in the electromagnetic spectrum. 

That and the innovation that is happening within the conflict I 

think are things that we need to be prepared for. We need to solve 

for agility to make sure that we can adapt to those maybe lower 

cost but asymmetric capabilities that pop up early in wartime. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you very much. 

CYBER TRAINING

Let me ask any one of you if the Boards of Education that I represent across northern Ohio and our community colleges wanted to 

connect to any of your cyber training or cyber possibilities for 

younger people that holds a potential for recruitment as well as 

workforce development on the private side, if we have interested 

teachers and their students, who do we contact? 

Secretary KENDALL. We will get you someone to talk to about 

that. We are very interested in that. You may not be aware of it. 

We just created a new category of airman warrant officers in the 

cyber and IT field. 

So we are very much interested in expertise in that area and 

having people come in who want to work in that area and stay in 

that area during their career. So I will get you a point of contact, 

and we will have someone work with you on that. 

FUEL CONSERVATION

Ms. KAPTUR. I hear there might be a Cyber Command that was 

established in Cincinnati. I am not sure who that is done through, 

whether it was Wright-Patt or—I don’t know the university there, 

but it is not connected to the places that I represent. 

So I am just curious to be connected to the right place at Air 

Force. Ohio is the State of flight, so we have to protect our own, 

and we want to engage our educational community in that effort 

as well. 

Twenty years ago at the 180th Fighter Wing in western Ohio, a 

biofueled F–16 was flown successfully. 

I am interested in how you, Mr. Secretary, or any of you, think 

about fueling the future and in craft that are airborne, just curious 

how you think about that. 

General ALLVIN. I think in general, Congresswoman, the idea for 

us is fuel conservation is not only just good for the planet; it helps 

us in our mission as well. 

So anything that we can do that can preserve duration, endurance, regardless of the type of fuel, that is what we are looking for. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
436 

But, before we transform sort of the fossil fuel platforms that we 

have into something into the future, we need to ensure that it is 

sustainable, and it is something we can take with us into combat. 

But the idea that we would always be looking at operational energy and being able to better use that, it actually enhances our 

combat effectiveness as well. 

CURRENT AIR RESPONSIBILITIES

Ms. KAPTUR. Should we be apprehensive about the Space Force 

and the current air responsibilities that our region holds with F– 

16s and potentially F–35s, because of the dawn of Space Force, or 

do we have reason to be worried that we are going to lose our fighter wing? 

Secretary KENDALL. I am not aware of any reason why you would 

be. 

Ms. KAPTUR. All right. Well, that is good news. Finally, what 

about the balloon that flew over the country? What did we decide 

that was? 

Secretary KENDALL. There was a Chinese balloon that came by. 

And I am not sure how much I can say without getting into classified. You know, it was very visible. People, you know, were aware 

of it. It was shot down. The Chinese claimed that it was not intentional on their part. I am not sure that we believe that. 

I think we have raised the awareness of that kind of threat quite 

a bit, and we are on the alert for that, because we have seen some 

other cases where balloons have come close if not come over the 

United States. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary KENDALL. We could give much more at a classified 

level. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, I don’t know why they 

don’t just put that debris on display someplace and let the American public look at it and make their own decision. I think we all 

know what that decision would be. 

Mr. Garcia. 

T–7 ACCELERATION

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I thank the three of you for being here today. Thank you for your 

service to our beautiful country. 

Mr. Secretary, congratulations on CCA, two outstanding choices 

there with Anduril and General Atomics and looking forward to 

seeing that program accelerate. And, actually, it is a paradigmbreaking acquisition model as well as a source selection. So really 

appreciate it. 

Survivable but attritable was actually my call sign in the Navy, 

so that is a good thing to see. Hopefully, that is not a black cloud 

for CCA. 

We are in a unique era right now where you are trying to balance capability with capacity. I have been very adamant that I 

don’t know that we have a capability gap relative to China. I think 

that is a fight we always keep fighting, but I think we do have 

unique capabilities, high-end exotics, but the capacity is the chalVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00440 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
437 

lenge with a force projection of, you know, three or four thousand 

miles and not in our backyard, like what they enjoy. 

So now we are in an era where you see, you know, the first flight 

of B–21 happened this year, but also the service life extension of 

B–52 out to be a hundred-year-old platform with new radars, new 

sensors. You see Teddy Roosevelt’s vision of F–35 finally being realized with a tech refresh, and now also F–15EX capacity 

supplementing that capability. I think these are good things. 

JADC2, ABMS maturation and some classified programs. 

So I don’t envy your jobs, but I think overall, at the macro level, 

the Air Force is doing a good job of executing that pivot to the Pacific and maintaining the capability advantage while also addressing the capacity challenges that we have. So I just wanted to give 

you kudos for that. 

My concern is around the T–7 and how we can go faster. I have 

been asking this question for a few years. Mr. Ellzey and I lost a 

good friend in the T–38 accident back in 2019 out of Enid, Oklahoma, a 47-year-old Naval aviator who did an Air Force transition. 

He was in the back seat. 

That T–38 aircraft was not a good trainer in the sixties or seventies. It sure as hell is not a good trainer today, and it is the widow 

maker. I think it has killed about 149, 150 aviators—or pilots since 

it has come online. 

So what are we doing? Is it a Boeing limitation? Is it a materiel 

limitation? What can we in Congress do to help accelerate the T– 

7 to avoid T–38 deaths in the next call it 2- to 4-year period? 

Secretary KENDALL. I am not aware of anything you can do to 

make the program move faster. We had to set production out a 

year because of trying to negotiate and get the cost down and deal 

with some difficulties that have occurred in development. 

You may be aware we have had problems with the ejection seat 

and the ejection system and with some of the controls. I think that 

we are working our way through those. I could get you a more detailed report. General Allvin may have more information than I do. 

General ALLVIN. I think some of it is in general. And I don’t want 

to speak for Boeing specifically, but there are some growing pains 

when you start with sort of a new way of building and designing, 

started with more digital engineering. 

And so there may have been some things associated with that 

that sort of hindered the pace of the development. I am encouraged 

the fact that it is in flight tests now. I think this is where we can 

perhaps accelerate. 

But, as the Secretary said, it really is just about getting it 

through its developmental testing and buying the first ones next 

year. 

Mr. GARCIA. Okay. Well, I would just encourage you if you see 

any opportunity to accelerate, either through parallel risk reduction—I know there are going to be concurrency risks that come 

with that. This isn’t as exotic as the F–35 so those penalties won’t 

be as severe. 

But, you know, Matt Kincade’s widow is out there in Oklahoma 

still, and she is looking at this very closely. And I think it will save 

lives if we can go faster. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
438 

My last request, General Saltzman, if we can get in the SCIF at 

some point. You mentioned a program today that we as a committee have grave concerns over, but we can’t talk about it here, 

that is very relevant right now. And very timely discussion I think 

would be needed in the SCIF if we can at some point. 

General SALTZMAN. Happy to do that. 

Mr. GARCIA. I took a brief at Space Command. I think actually 

the chairman was there as well in El Segundo about a year ago 

now when you were promoting Buzz Aldrin. And I want to follow 

up on that if we can at some point. 

But I think it would behoove, Mr. Chairman, for the whole subcommittee to hear what is going on there. 

But, with that, I yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. I remember that meeting with General 

Aldrin very well, as we can call him now, with the Secretary’s help, 

by the way. I appreciate that very much. 

Mr. Ellzey. 

V–22

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you all for being here today. It is nice to see you. General 

Saltzman, are the lights in here in this windowless room okay for 

a missileer? Okay. All right. 

I would like to thank you and your fellow missileers for what you 

do. There is no way in Hades I could do that. So thank you for taking the strain. You are the perfect guy for this job right now, expanding space capabilities. 

And, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. We never met before, but I just would like to ask what is wrong with the Air Force 

Academy that they can’t find the Secretary of the Air Force for 

themselves that would require a West Pointer? It defies logic, but 

glad you are here. And, of course, from your years in acquisition, 

you are the right guy for these times as well. 

And, General Allvin, your history as a heavy guy hauling logistics, you are the right man for that job right now too. So it is a 

pleasure to be with you guys. Thank you very much. 

General, I would like to start with you. And, by the way, some 

day it is going to be Admiral because, you know, Star Trek, it was 

the fleet, Star Fleet. 

Mr. GARCIA. We are going to make that change. 

Mr. ELLZEY. We are going to do that before I leave Congress. 

Sadly, on November 29, 2023, we lost a V–22 from AFSOC. And 

then, on December 6, 2023, after watching the video, the AFSOC 

commander downed the whole fleet. There were some issues with 

it, which I won’t go into here that led to that mishap and varying 

mishap rates between the different services. 

On March 8th, the Naval Air Systems Command deemed the V– 

22 safe to fly, based on a meticulous and data-driven approach that 

prioritized safety. And then, just days later, the Marine Corps and 

the Japanese started flying them, and the Navy has as well. 

We talked to the SOCOM commander a couple of weeks ago, and 

he said their operations have been severely impacted—in this room 

that is where I will leave it—because of the V–22 grounding. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
439 

So I have spoken to the AFSOC commander, and he can’t give 

me a timeline for return to flight. It has been 6 weeks since the 

Marine Corps and Japanese started flying as well as the Navy. 

That is a long time, considering the operational impacts. And I 

want to know when the V–22 is going to start flying again. 

General ALLVIN. Well, again, I know—and the AFSOC commander, General Bauernfeind, spoke with me as well, and we keep 

in touch very frequently about this. 

So I can tell you right now that three of the platforms have gone 

through FCFs. They have gone through the functional check 

flights. And so we are making a deliberate approach, but it is a 

comprehensive approach because the manner in which, as you 

know, the CV–22 used in the Air Force is really much different. 

And so he is in lockstep with the Joint Program Office and his 

sister services in understanding how and why they are returning 

theirs to fly, but he is taking AFSOC in a deliberate manner to ensure every one of the maintenance records are checked and every 

one of the crews are ready to fly. 

And so he is taking a deliberate approach and a comprehensive 

review on the weapon system, on the crew complement, on the mission set, and how it is unique to the Air Force and AFSOC. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Okay. Well, I got the same answer from him and, 

quite frankly, how he downed it based on a video that was preemptive to a mishap investigation. I was a mishap investigator. I flew 

helos and jets. 

Quite frankly, the decision to do that should not have been approved, and it hurt our national security. That is my take on it. We 

will move on to a different issue. 

ACQUISITION REQUIREMENTS

Let’s talk about acquisitions. And, like I said, Mr. Secretary, you 

are the right guy for this, but it seems like we keep making these 

mistakes over and over and over again. And, you know, the B–21 

is a great program. The F–15EX was a great program. Future longrange assault aircraft is on timeline. But, when we talk about 

Nunn-McCurdy and the 139 Gray Wolf, it is a helicopter. The Sentinel, which I know is a lot more complex. But, in our own service 

the FFG, the DDG–1000, the LCS, the Presidential helo, Air Force 

One. The Ford is 3 years behind. The F–35 got cut, F–22 got cut, 

and T–7 is behind the timeline. 

So my question—and I am asking this in a way that is completely innocent. I have no agenda here, but I really want to know 

that, after decades of doing the wrong thing do we have a requirements issue? Because I think in my service, we do. Are we underestimating supply chain issues, and we are just catching up to 

them? Or is it a lack of business sense in acquisitions? And I am 

not trying to lead you down the right answer. I really just kind of 

want to know. 

Secretary KENDALL. How long do you have, Congressman? 

Mr. ELLZEY. Forty seconds. 

Mr. CALVERT. I will give you an extra minute. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Oh, good, we get a minute extension. 

Secretary KENDALL. I have got 50 years of experience with new 

product development, basically, and I have seen us get in trouble 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
440 

the same way over and over. And you have the list. It is not always 

the same. But unrealistic requirements, unrealistic schedules, lack 

of appreciation of technical risk. I mean, all these things. 

And there has been an effort to chase I think what I call acquisition magic a few times, which is somebody comes up with a new 

idea they think about how to do it. Usually, it involves taking extraordinary risk, and then we pay the price for that. Putting amateurs in charge doesn’t work very well. 

The things we ask people to do to develop new weapon systems 

for the United States are hard things. We are asking them to build 

weapon systems that are a generation ahead of anything ever built 

before. There is inherent risk in that, and you have to plan and 

manage that risk. 

You have to take risk mitigation steps. You have to understand 

deeply what those technical risks really are and then what is appropriate to try to reduce that risk or to manage it, so you have 

alternatives if you encounter it. 

There is no substitute for professionalism. There is this idea that 

we are—we can go much faster if we just, you know, somehow 

waved our arms and create a different set of structures. That tends 

to just get you in trouble. 

You can be overly conservative, but I think that is the exception. 

Most of our programs overrun in development by about 25 percent. 

That is the average. In early production, they overrun by about 10 

percent. 

And, when I was running the acquisition for DOD, we were able 

to drive that down. But, you know, you mentioned a couple of programs. B–21 is one that Dr. LaPlante, who is now the A&S Under 

Secretary, and I put together. But when we take wild chances, we 

get the result you should expect. So that is very in a nutshell. 

So we don’t want to be—I would tend to structure programs to 

be somewhat aggressive but not so much so that you are guaranteeing failure. That is really the key to success. But you got to really understand what you are doing. There is no magic answer. 

Mr. ELLZEY. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Just to put my two cents into this, and I have been 

here for a while, 30-some years. And I was here when we started 

the F–35 program. I remember the people bringing in the 

PowerPoints and saying, ‘‘This is going to be the Swiss Army knife 

of all fighter planes. We are going to have a single frame, three 

variants. They’re going to use a single engine. It is going to bring 

down our maintenance cost, our hourly cost, our per-unit cost and 

all that. And we are going to get rid of the F–16. We are going to 

get rid of the F–18. We are going to get rid of the F–15. We are 

going to get rid of the A–10. You know, this is going to be it.’’ 

And we are building more F–18s. We are building F–15X. They 

got an upgraded F–16. So it didn’t quite work out the way we 

thought. 

And my thought on this is, and this is a serious question: How 

many program managers have we had on the F–35 since the inception? Does anybody know the answer to that question? 

Secretary KENDALL. Several, only one of which I can think of 

that was fired. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
441 

Mr. CALVERT. But, you know, years ago, and it may be not an 

ample comparison. But Admiral Rickover started the submarine 

program with a Nautilus program and stayed with it until God 

knows he was how old and took responsibility for every single submarine and every single submarine program, and everyone knew 

who to call if there was a problem. 

And, right now, you know, some of these programs, if we put a 

young officer and say, ‘‘Look, you are going to be with this program 

until you leave, and you are going to get all your ups; you are going 

to get all that.’’ 

But I think there has got to be a better way to do this, because 

what we have been doing hasn’t been working. So I just want to 

throw my two cents in on that. And I know you put a lot of thought 

in that, and everybody else has, but it is a problem. 

Okay. Mr. Aguilar. 

HYPERSONIC GLIDE VEHICLE TESTING

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Kendall, I understand there have been some critiques 

of the Air Force’s testing on hypersonic weapons due, in part, to 

the low number of glide vehicle test events, along with limited 

availability of hypersonic flight corridors, target areas, and test 

support assets. 

Is this true? And, if so, what resources are necessary to increase 

the capacity for hypersonic glide vehicle testing? 

Secretary KENDALL. We do have issues with test capacity and 

availability of ranges essentially to do some of our hypersonic testing. 

I don’t have any details for you, but I know there has been a substantial investment in improved infrastructure to support 

hypersonic testing. I would have to get you an answer for the 

record on the content of that. I haven’t followed that that closely 

myself. 

Mr. AGUILAR. I appreciate it. 

General Saltzman, we are investing significant resources into 

space-based tracking of hypersonic threats, and this is critical for 

our defense capabilities. 

It would be logical that such a system would be trained against 

real world scenarios. Given what the Secretary has indicated, how 

do we test these tracking capabilities under your programs, and 

where do these priorities kind of reconcile and where do they meet? 

General SALTZMAN. That is a great question. I would say we have 

a three-pronged approach to that. Anywhere we can use digital 

simulations, we are leveraging that to the max extent possible. 

There will be some range testing to try to calibrate the systems as 

they go into orbit. And real world live events, we never miss an opportunity to take advantage of those. And, unfortunately, these 

days there are those events to look at. 

So we don’t have all the complement on orbit yet to be able to 

fully test that as an operational capability, but we are going to rapidly get there in the next year or so. 

Mr. AGUILAR. When do you expect a more robust kind of launch 

ability to—— 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
442 

General SALTZMAN. The Proliferative Warfighter Space Architecture that our Space Development Agency is putting together is the 

sensors that will be able to track the hypersonics. 

We are going to start tranche one delivery later this year, and 

by fiscal year 2026, we should have enough on orbit to be able to 

demonstrate the capability. 

Mr. AGUILAR. And we will have enough data to make that decision? 

General SALTZMAN. We will be testing. Every time there is a 

launch, in checkout we test that information. We test the data. 

Mr. AGUILAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Since Mr. Aguilar brought up the hypersonic program, just a real quick comment on that. You know, we have the 

Navy program, obviously. We have the Army program. We have the 

Air Force program. Lockheed has the interest in all three of the 

programs. 

And, obviously, from our perspective, it has been somewhat frustrating. I think, so far, in all three programs, we have been spending about $3.5 billion a year to get to a hypersonic missile, and we 

have yet to get there on any of the programs. 

And, as far as I know, it is a classified number, but the Chinese, 

let’s just say at least a thousand hypersonic missiles that are maneuverable. And, you know, I was around when Mike Griffin did 

the first test. I think you were around too at that time on the 

hypersonic program back in 1996, when we did the first hypersonic 

missile test and got to speed. It was a successful test. We offered 

it to the Air Force. They turned it down. The Chinese stole the 

technology, perfected it, and deployed it. 

You know, I had to get my frustration out, but here we are, spent 

I think well over 10-, $12 billion, and we are yet to get there. So 

it is not good. 

Mr. Fleischmann. 

LEGACY SYSTEM REPLACEMENTS

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Kendall, General Allvin, and General Saltzman, let me 

join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for well-deserved accolades to all of you all. Thank you for your tremendous service to 

our Nation. It is a privilege to be with you today. 

Gentlemen, as you may be aware, I chair the Energy and Water 

Subcommittee of Appropriations. And I am well aware that the 

highest priority of DOD and NNSA is completing the Nuclear Recapitalization Program of Record. 

We recognize the Air Force has a tremendous role, with responsibility for both the ICBM and strategic bomber legs of the triad as 

well as the NC3 infrastructure, along with the Space Force and the 

Navy. 

I want to thank all the airmen, missileers, submariners and 

guardians that protect our Nation and our allies every day. 

Unfortunately, we are experiencing schedule delays and cost 

overruns that have become all too common with major programs. 

I recognize the greatest challenge we face is probably workforce, as 

with military recruitment we have a shortage in the necessary 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
443 

skilled personnel, from program managers to engineers to technicians and tradesmen. 

After decades of underinvestment, we are now paying to relearn 

costly lessons. All the while, the Russians have suspended New 

START. Even though they seem to be keeping to the treaty limits 

for now, it expires in less than 2 years. China is meanwhile rapidly 

expanding its nuclear forces and could catch us within a decade. 

We are entering uncharted territory, dealing with two peer nuclear adversaries, as we are in the middle of recapitalizing our entire deterrent with just a time of schedule. 

Question: What is the Air Force doing to keep Sentinel and B– 

21 schedules from slipping further, and how can Congress better 

help ensure that there is not an unacceptable dip in force structure 

once we begin replacing legacy systems? 

Secretary KENDALL. B–21 is roughly on schedule. It is still in development. It is in test flight. I wouldn’t make any commitments 

or promises about what will happen going forward, but to date it 

has executed fairly well. 

Sentinel is the opposite story, basically. I am recused on Sentinel. I will let General Allvin talk about that. It is going through 

the Nunn-McCurdy. And General Dr. LaPlante is running that 

process, and we will come out of that with a recommendation about 

how to proceed on Sentinel. But I think I am pretty comfortable, 

as much as one can be at this point in time, with where B–21 is. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you, sir. 

General ALLVIN. The only thing I would add is on Sentinel, 

again, it is one of those—Secretary Kendall talked earlier about 

some of the challenges in the acquisition process. And some of 

those is maybe underestimating what some of the complexity is. 

And I think perhaps we will discover that the two parts of the Sentinel program, one is actually the technology and the missile and 

all that, and the other was actually the scope and scale of what is 

really the largest civil works program that we have had in the Department of Defense for a long time. 

Maybe there was an underappreciation of that. So the drivers of 

the cost is something that Dr. LaPlante is going through in the 

Nunn-McCurdy review. 

And, again, the point you made, your opening point is the right 

one, Congressman. We have to be committed to a safe, effective, 

and reliable triad. So, whatever the Nunn-McCurdy review delivers 

for us, we are going to be supportive and we are going to deal with 

that, because, as you mentioned, the threats are not sitting idly by 

while we sort out what we do with our triad. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. Thank you, sir. 

NEW START COMPLIANCE

A followup question: With the expiration of New START in less 

than 2 years, can you commit to this committee that the Air Force 

is preparing contingency plans now, in cooperation with NNSA, to 

upload Minuteman III and recertify more B–52s for nuclear missions? 

Secretary KENDALL. There are some discussions happening in the 

policy framework, what will happen if Russia does not stay in comVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:06 Dec 13, 2024 Jkt 057432 PO 00000 Frm 00447 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A432.XXX A432

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
444 

pliance and also to react, as you mentioned, to China’s growing arsenal. 

At this point in time, we don’t have any specific plans in place 

or any specific intentions. But I think we would have to get into 

a classified forum to talk about those options in any more detail. 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN. I understand. Thank you for your answer. 

Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

Ms. McCollum. 

SERVICE AUDITS

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you. 

As I mentioned in my opening statement, climate change is a 

costly impact to our national security. It shows up in cracks in cement, large temperature swings, from cold weather to warm weather, soil erosion, leading to sinkholes, damage from significant 

weather events. It is an environmental stressor on our infrastructure, and the Department has long recognized this. 

In addition to the operational stress of more frequent rocket 

launches at launch sites, General Saltzman, you are now working 

through a plan to collect fees from industry to recoup some of the 

indirect cost for operations at the launch pads, and implementation 

could start as early as this summer. 

Now, from an appropriations standpoint, we will want to have 

visibility on how and where such funds are spent. The chairman 

and I served on the Interior Committee, where there are fees collected. I know that when they decided to collect fees on passports, 

we have seen, except for during COVID and some of the challenges 

we had with that, we have seen great success in passport things. 

So these can be a really good thing to happen. But I think we 

need to clarify the language, and we need to work on that together. 

I think it is important that those fees be clearly reinvested in the 

facilities, both to improve their resiliency and to handle the workload. And that is what the industry is going to expect. 

So that means transparency, proper accounting on these collections and expenditures. So I would like to learn more, and I am 

sure the committee would too on that. And along with that comes 

when you and I met earlier talking about a clean audit, this might 

be a great place to start to get a clean audit. 

So we have got the Marine Corps. We have got one of our other 

intelligence agencies doing it. And I think Space Force can be next. 

So any comments you want to make, sir? 

General SALTZMAN. Yes, ma’am. We definitely owe you a plan for 

how we plan to utilize those indirect costs, the authorities that we 

have been given. It is up to $5 million I think is the cap per provider. But we owe you that mechanism, and we will come back to 

you and show you exactly how we plan to exercise those authorities. 

And I left the Hill the other day after you talked to us about the 

audit. I went straight to the Vice Chief of Space Operations, and 

I said, ‘‘Tell me what it would take to give us a clean audit.’’ And 

so they are going through now in detail to try to figure out what 

the LIMFAX (ph) might be. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
445 

Mr. CALVERT. I almost forgot you, Mr. Joyce. I would never want 

to do that. But you are recognized. 

REOPTIMIZATION EFFORTS

Mr. JOYCE. You are very kind, Mr. Chairman. After Mr. Aguilar 

came in and took over, I figured that I was back to the bottom of 

the list. 

But thank you all for being here. And thank you, especially the 

men and women in the back row as well, for your service to our 

country. And I apologize. When I saw my wife texting me, that is 

when—and then somehow I hit—I don’t know what the hell I hit, 

but it started playing that funky music. So I apologize for that. 

Secretary Kendall, Youngstown Air Force Reserve station is in 

my district, and we also have four active Air National Guard wings 

in the State of Ohio. In February, you unveiled your planned reoptimization efforts for the Air Force and Space Force. 

Can you share your insight on how the Air Force plans on incorporating the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard bases into 

the new proposed reorganization of the service? 

Secretary KENDALL. The overarching answer is that no major 

changes should be expected, that what we are doing is to try to ensure that we are focused on the pacing challenge, the threat that 

is most dominant right now, and ensuring that we have in place 

organizational structures, mostly in the active Air Force and the 

Space Force, that are focused on keeping us competitive over time 

and keeping us as ready with the current force as we can be at all 

times. 

The Guard and the Reserves are both very much a part of that 

readiness equation. And what will probably happen is there will be 

a look at how readiness is assessed for those units to ensure that 

the right standards and so on are in place and the right assessment mechanisms are in place. 

We want to make sure that our units that are intended to be 

deployable to support an operations plan have everything they 

need so that they can go do that and that they are really ready to 

go deploy. And that would apply to some of those units as well. 

So there are some things on the margin that might change because of this, but I don’t think anything fundamental is expected 

to change. 

General Allvin, do you want to add anything to that? 

General ALLVIN. No, I think the Secretary has it just right. I 

think when we look at the manner in which we are to look at 

changing how we are going to present forces to the combatant commands, it has been different. For the last 20 years, we have been 

sort of crowdsourcing our Air Force, and we have sort of been privileging the preservation of the installation at the expense of perhaps 

the combat unit they sort of need over there in theater. We can’t 

do that in the Indo-Pacific. 

And so, as we change that, we need to understand what exactly 

is it going to take for a unit that sits together behind the fence line 

in a given installation or a wing, what do they need, as the Secretary said, to be able to pick up, deploy on short notice, go someplace, generate combat power, sustain that combat in a way we 

haven’t done that before. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
446 

So General Loh and General Healy were there at the inception 

of this. And I asked them. I said, ‘‘How do you see the Guard and 

the Reserves playing into this?’’ And they said, ‘‘We see ourselves 

perfectly, because we were designed to be that.’’ 

We all sort of were designed to be that way. We just sort of started presenting forces differently. And so we are looking as we start 

doing our exercises how we can include whole Guard units with 

whole Reserve units in a manner that is consistent with their volunteerism but will still enable them to do the training just like the 

Active Duty force to be these deployable combat wings and go and 

exercise against what we think the pacing challenge is in the IndoPacific. 

Secretary KENDALL. One of the things we discovered we were 

doing is we were crowdsourcing in order to deploy units. We would 

send, say, a fighter squadron to the Middle East somewhere. And 

all the supporting functions that had to go with it to make it, you 

know, fully functional we would crowdsource across the Air Force, 

including elements out of the Guard and Reserves. 

So we were picking a few people here, a few people there, a few 

people there. That is not the way you want to go into a combat 

zone, into a war. You want to have a unit that is cohesive, that has 

trained together, that is ready to go deploy together and fight together. 

And we got away from that for efficiency reasons, because the environment we were deploying into wasn’t a combat zone. It was essentially a relatively benign area. So that will be a change that 

people may see, that those opportunities to do individual or just a 

few people kind of deployments may not be there anymore, because 

we are trying to have units that can deploy as opposed to pickup 

games, if you will, that we put together at the last minute. 

Mr. JOYCE. Fair enough. 

FLEET FUNDING CUTS

Secretary, the Air Force is expecting its fleet to drop below 5,000 

aircraft in fiscal year 2025. Your budget proposes cutting hundreds 

of aircraft and repurposing those funds for research and development. Are you concerned that the Air Force is prioritizing quality 

over quantity with aircraft and that we can still deter our adversaries with a fleet of less than 5,000 aircraft? 

Secretary KENDALL. We are making some difficult tradeoffs, and 

both capacity and capability matter. Congressman Garcia talked 

about that earlier. 

The aircraft that we are retiring or divesting are aircraft that are 

generally reaching the end of their service life and/or they are no 

longer effective against the pacing threat. And so retaining those 

aircraft and carrying the cost of sustaining them really would keep 

us from moving forward as fast as we need to. 

So I think we have got the balance about right. I will let General 

Allvin add to that. 

You know, if we had more resources, I think I would be 

prioritizing modernization still over retention of older force structure that is not going to be effective against the pacing challenge. 

General ALLVIN. I would just add numbers for numbers. This 

year specifically, about 250 we are divesting. Of those, 56 are A– 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
447 

10s, 65 are the F–15Cs and Ds, because those are sort of running 

out of service life as well. Twenty-two are in the T–1s. We talked 

about how we are shifting to simulator from the aircraft to be able 

to increase velocity through the pipeline. The C–130s are 

transitioning one for one. The KC–135s are one for one with KC– 

46. And the EC–130, we are losing one EC–130. We are gaining an 

85 E–837 (ph). 

So, as we look at the overall quantity for quality, I think I would 

rather have a smaller number of aircraft that maybe can win than 

a larger number of these F–56, A–10s that probably aren’t going 

to help against a China fight. 

Mr. CALVERT. I know who will take those A–10s. 

Mr. JOYCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CALVERT. Thank you. 

One quick comment and then I think I will wrap the hearing up 

unless Ms. McCollum has any additional comments. 

As you know, as we all know, back in the old days, the R&D 

budgets were in the U.S. Government. I mean, that was where everything happened. So all the bells and whistles were over there. 

But nowadays the commercial side, quite frankly, are the ones that 

are coming up with the primary innovations, and we adopt those 

innovations in the Department of Defense. 

So certainly in the communications, satellites, on down the 

road—especially, I think this applies to the space side—I am certainly encouraged by your emphasizing leveraging these commercial capabilities, because we need to take advantage. 

This Nation, we are still ahead on many things. And so we need 

to do that. And I will be concerned about how much funding we 

have in fiscal year 2025 in that commercial arena. 

But, before we conclude, I want to thank the witnesses for their 

testimony today. 

The subcommittee members are welcome to submit questions for 

the record. I ask that the witnesses respond in a reasonable time. 

And, with that, the subcommittee stands adjourned. 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS

DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGS
(i) 


DMWilson on DSKJM0X7X2PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 02 here 57432.258