S. HRG. 118–520 

Senate Hearings 

Before the Committee on Appropriations 

Department of Defense 

Appropriations 

Fiscal Year 2024 

118th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION 

H.R. 4365/S. 2587 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES 
Department of Defense Appropriations, 2024 (H.R. 4365/S. 2587) 
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

50–509 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024

S. HRG. 118–520 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 

FISCAL YEAR 2024 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON

H.R. 4365/S. 2587 

AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, AND FOR 

OTHER PURPOSES 

Department of Defense 

Nondepartmental Witnesses 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 

( 

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

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chair 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 1

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

JON TESTER, Montana 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut 

JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

GARY PETERS, Michigan 

KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona 2

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Vice Chair 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana 

CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi 

BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee 

KATIE BRITT, Alabama 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

EVAN SCHATZ, Staff Director 

ELIZABETH MCDONNELL, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE

JON TESTER, Montana, Chairman 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 1

PATTY MURRAY, Washington 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 3

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Ranking 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

Professional Staff 

KATE KA ̈ UFER

MIKE CLEMENTI

LAURA FORREST

ABIGAIL GRACE

KATY HAGAN

BRIGID KOLISH

ROB LEONARD

RYAN PETTIT

KIMBERLY SEGURA

RYAN KALDAHL (Minority) 

TODD PHILLIPS (Minority) 

JASON POTTER (Minority) 

JESSE TOLLESON (Minority) 

MIKE WAKEFIELD (Minority) 

Administrative Support 

GABRIELLA ARMONDA

ALEX SHULTZ (Minority) 

1Died September 29, 2023. 

2 Appointed to Committee October 18, 2023. 

3 Appointed to Subcommittee November 2, 2023. 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

HEARINGS 

TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023 Page 

Department of Defense: Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary ......... 1 

TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023 

Department of Defense: Department of the Air Force and Space Force: Office 

of the Secretary .................................................................................................... 91 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 2, 2023 

Department of Defense: Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary ........ 143 

THURSDAY, MAY 11, 2023 

Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense ................................. 185 

THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2023 

Department of Defense: National Guard and Reserve ......................................... 251 

BACK MATTER 

List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements .......................... 341 

Nondepartmental Witnesses ................................................................................... 325 

Subject Index ............................................................................................................ 345 

Department of the Air Force: Office of the Secretary .................................... 345 

United States Space Force ........................................................................ 345 

Department of the Army: Office of the Secretary .......................................... 345 

Department of the Navy: Office of the Secretary .......................................... 345 

United States Marine Coprs ..................................................................... 345 

National Guard and Reserve ........................................................................... 346 

Office of the Secretary of Defense ................................................................... 347 

(1) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 

TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Schatz, Baldwin, Shaheen, 

Murphy, Collins, Murkowski, Graham, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, 

and Capito. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS DEL TORO, SECRETARY 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. I call this committee meeting to order. Good 

morning. I want to welcome our witnesses. 

Secretary Del Toro, Admiral Gilday, General Berger, thank you 

for your service to our Nation, and thank you for leading the Navy 

and the Marine Corps. 

I look forward to discussing your fiscal year 2024 budget priorities today. The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Navy and 

the Marine Corps is $255.8 billion, $11 billion more than in fiscal 

year 2023, and about $32 billion more than fiscal year 2022. This 

increase sounds robust but it is irrelevant unless we enacted Defense Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2024. 

Our key priority this year must be to get the budget done on 

time. Continuing resolutions kill military modernization and cause 

billions in wasteful spending. And it is no secret that the Chinese 

don’t operate under continuing resolutions. 

I am encouraged by the work that Chair Murray and Vice Chair 

Collins, have already put in to restore regular order to the Appropriations Committee. Their commitment to writing Bipartisan Appropriations Bills that addresses the critical challenges facing our 

Nation have my full-throated support. 

This budget request represents continuity from last year’s budget 

by furthering implementing the National Defense Strategy. And it 

reinforces what we already know, despite Russia’s ongoing unjust 

war in Ukraine; China remains our number one pacing threat. 
2 

We must continue to modernize our Military to stay ahead of 

that threat. The Navy and Marine Corps play an important role in 

defending our national and economic security by providing unparalleled maritime capabilities. 

Every week Senator Collins and I hear from commanders in the 

field about the varying threats facing our Nation. So the question 

I have is: Are we spending taxpayer on the right things? 

We look forward to hearing from you on where we have made 

progress, and what challenges remain. And once again, I want to 

thank each one of you for your service to our country. 

Before you make your opening statements, I want to turn it over 

to Senator Collins for her opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It has 

been a great pleasure to work with you as we proceed as the Chair 

and Vice Chair of this very important subcommittee. 

I want to echo the Chairman’s thank you to each of our witnesses, for your service, it is greatly appreciated. And I would ask 

that you also pass on our gratitude to the Sailors and Marines that 

you represent. 

I also want to recognize the Department’s many civilians, and 

their industry partners who build and maintain the ships, aircraft, 

and munitions that sustain the Navy and the Marine Corps. They 

make invaluable contributions, and I am personally proud that so 

many Mainers have chosen to serve their country in these capacities, such as, by working at Bath Iron Works, the Portsmouth 

Naval Shipyard, and the Naval Computer and Telecommunications 

Center in Cutler, Maine. 

The administration’s 2022 National Defense Strategy accurately 

describes the accelerating threat of China, as the Chairman has indicated, and its unprecedented military modernization. 

However, in my judgment, the administration’s budget request 

does not fully reflect the challenges identified in its own National 

Defense Strategy. 

For example, the President’s budget request would result in a 

fleet of 291 ships at the end of the next 5 years. That is smaller 

than today’s fleet of 296 ships, and significantly smaller than the 

Navy’s own requirement of 373 ships. I am also concerned with the 

contrast to more than 440 ships that China is expected to have by 

the year 2030. 

The budget requests also inadequately accounts for the impact of 

Inflation and Investment and Readiness Accounts. The Navy’s proposed budget increase of 4.5 percent, which includes the Marine 

Corps’ 2.6 percent increase, would likely provide less buying power 

than the fiscal year 2023 enacted budget after accounting for inflation. 

For example, the budget request assumes a fuel price of $140 per 

barrel, yet on the very day that the budget was rolled out fuel was 

$169 per barrel, that is 20 percent more than budgeted. 

Why does this matter? It matters because the Department of the 

Navy consumes roughly 24 million barrels of fuel each year, and 

each one dollar per barrel increase carries a $24 million dollar cost. 

At $29 per barrel below current rates, this budget would equate to 
3 

a $700 million dollar unfunded cost just for the Department of the 

Navy. 

It is no surprise that Admiral Gilday and General Berger’s unfunded priorities which highlights some of the shortfalls of this 

budget, totaled $5.7 billion. 

With that backdrop, Navy leadership deserves credit for redoubling its commitment to ship maintenance. This is evidenced by the 

$1.8 billion dollar increase for ship repair, and the continued full 

funding for the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan at the 

Navy’s four public shipyards, including the Portsmouth Navy Shipyard in Kittery, Maine. These investments are critical to keeping 

a greater portion of the Navy’s Fleet available for operations. 

I also want to commend the Navy for pursuing a record number 

of multiyear procurement contracts for munitions this year. 

Ukraine’s War has taught us that we must transition from just-intime stockpiles of weapons and munitions to just-in-case stockpiles. 

If implemented well, these multiyear contracts will provide industry with the certainty necessary to make that transition a reality, 

and deliver cost savings for the taxpayers at the same time, and 

help with workforce challenges. 

I look forward to discussing all of these issues with our distinguished witnesses today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins. 

You will each be given 5 minutes for your presentation. Know 

that your full written testimony will be a part of the record. 

And we will start with you, Secretary Del Toro. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. CARLOS DEL TORO

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman 

Tester, Ranking Member Collins, distinguished Members of the 

Committee. It is an honor to appear before you, alongside General 

Berger and Admiral Gilday, to discuss the Posture of the Department of the Navy. 

Today, our Nation faces challenges in every region and domain 

we operate in, from the seabed to the stars. We recognize the People’s Republic of China as our pacing threat executing a strategy 

aimed at upending international order. 

To preserve our way of life the National Defense Strategy calls 

upon the Joint Force to deter aggression while being prepared to 

prevail in conflict. A strong Navy and Marine Corps are the foundation upon which the success of the Joint Force exists. 

The President’s 2024 budget sends a strong signal to the American people of the value President Biden, and Secretary Austin, 

and myself place in maintaining a robust Navy and Marine Corps 

team to confront the threats that we face. This year’s budget request supports our three enduring priorities: strengthening maritime dominance, building a culture of warfighting excellence, and 

enhancing our strategic partnerships around the globe. 

With your support over the past year we have made major 

strides to modernize our fleet and our force. In 2022 we saw the 

first deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, providing the Navy with lessons learned that will benefit future Fordclass carriers. 
4 

With the support of our partners in Congress we are proud to 

field capable aircraft carriers as part of our fleet with a lower service life cost than their Nimitz-class predecessors. Construction of 

high-end surface combatants continues, including the first Constellation-class frigate, USS Constellation, and the first of our 

Early Bird-class Flight III destroyers, the USS Jack Lucas, which 

we are scheduled to commission in the fall. 

We continue progress on our first Columbia-class Ballistic Missile Submarine, the District of Columbia, our pre-construction activities on the second Columbia-class Ballistic Missile Submarine, 

the USS Wisconsin, have also begun. 

On the innovation front, Task Force 59 in Bahrain continues to 

test a wide range of uncrewed surface vessels. We look forward to 

bringing the capabilities that these platforms provide us to additional regions that we operate in around the globe. 

When we consider the composition of our fleet we seek to strike 

a balance between readiness, modernization and capacity, with an 

immediate emphasis on readiness. 

This year, our divestment request includes three amphibious 

ships, at least two cruisers in poor material condition that offer 

limited warfighting capability. Our decisions to divest or extend the 

ship’s life are based on a hull-by-hull evaluation. For example, we 

recently announced the modernization of the destroyer, USS 

Arleigh Burke, DDG–51, to keep it sailing through 2031, 5 years 

beyond its estimated service life. We hope to be able to continue 

that trend with other ships when possible. 

We owe it to the American people to be responsible stewards of 

our taxpayer dollars, as you have stated Mr. Chairman; investing 

in platforms with limited capability conflicts with that responsibility. The Navy and Marine Corps are not just about platforms 

and systems, however, our Sailors and our Marines are our greatest strength. This year’s budget request contains multiple investments to support them and their families, with services, benefits, 

housing, and education. 

In addition to our commitments to our people, we are reinforcing 

our relationship with our allies and partners around the globe, including our Ukrainian partners as they defend their sovereignty in 

response to Russia’s illegal and unprovoked invasion. 

In the Indo-Pacific we continue to play our leading role in the 

AUKUS Security Partnership. Just this month, President Biden 

announced the optimal pathway for Australia’s acquisition of conventionally armed nuclear-powered, fast-attack submarines. Our 

Navy will be critical to this initiative’s success as we support a very 

important ally. 

In addition to our partnerships abroad, we are also committed to 

strengthening our relationships here at home with industry. We 

value your support and recommit our leadership toward defueling 

and remediating the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility spill as 

well. We are committed to doing what it takes to address the concerns of our service members, their families, the people of Hawaii, 

and all other communities throughout the U.S. 

As I have said before, we build trust one day at a time, one action at a time, and we are committed to doing the right thing. 
5 

Lastly, I am grateful for the trust you have placed in me to lead 

this Department. I look forward to discussing how best to support 

our Sailors, our Marines, and their families in defense of our Nation. 

And I thank you, sir. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CARLOS DEL TORO

Chairman Tester, Vice Chair Collins, distinguished members of the committee, it 

is an honor to appear before you alongside General Berger and Admiral Gilday to 

discuss the posture of the Department of the Navy (DON). We appreciate your trust 

and confidence in us to lead the DON, and appreciate opportunities like this to come 

together with you and address how to best to recruit, train, equip, and prepare our 

Sailors and Marines so they can fulfill their vital role in support of the Joint Force, 

protecting our national security interests. 

The United States requires a strong Navy and Marine Corps. The national and 

economic security of our Nation depends on free and open access to the sea. Ninety 

percent of international trade travels over the seas and one third of that transits 

the South China Sea. Over 400 undersea fiber-optic cables carry more than a trillion 

dollars in transactions every day. And the rules-based international order that benefits us all requires a strong maritime force, campaigning forward alongside allies 

and partners to provide the sea control and integrated deterrence we need to 

counter strategic competitors today and into the future. 

We find ourselves at an inflection point, one that demands we renew our commitment to naval primacy as we chart a course through this century of intense maritime competition. Over the past two decades, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) 

has more than quadrupled its export trade and used its growing wealth and economic power to rapidly expand and modernize its military and its navy. The People’s Liberation Army Navy has added over one hundred combatants to its fleet in 

that time—a naval buildup that is a key component of its increasingly aggressive 

military posture. Today it has approximately 340 ships, and is moving towards a 

fleet of 440 ships by 2030. The PRC is conducting active, aggressive maritime activities in the South China Sea and beyond that have the potential to undermine our 

system of international law, including the freedom of the seas, a foundational U.S. 

interest. 

Our maritime challenges are not confined to the Indo-Pacific. Moscow has not 

abated in its efforts to control large swaths of the Black, Baltic, and Arctic Seas, 

trying to intimidate and deny other countries the opportunity to exercise their 

rights to free passage. That is why six of seven of NATO’s priority operating regions 

are maritime-focused, and NATO is moving to adopt its first maritime strategy. 

Our Navy and Marine Corps team are meeting these threats on the sea, under 

the sea, in the air, and in cyberspace every single day. To defend freedom of the 

sea, we must ensure our Sailors and Marines have the capability and forward presence to stand by our allies and our partners. 

That is why I have directed our Navy and Marine Corps team to prioritize our 

investment in readiness, to make sure our ships and aircraft are always prepared 

to deploy. This approach will deliver the integrated deterrence at sea required by 

our National Defense Strategy. 

THREE ENDURING PRIORITIES GUIDING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

Last year I had the privilege of introducing my strategic vision for the Department of the Navy to this committee, centered on our Department’s three enduring 

priorities, which are complementary to and supportive of both the CNO’s Navigation 

Plan 2022 and the Commandant’s Force Design 2030. 

First, we are strengthening our maritime dominance so that we can deter potential adversaries, and if called upon, fight and win our Nation’s wars. Second, we are 

building a culture of warfighting excellence, founded on strong leadership, and rooted in treating each other with dignity and respect. And third, we are enhancing our 

strategic partnerships, across the Joint Force, with industry, with academia, and 

with our allies and partners around the globe. Over the past year and a half, our 

DON team has made irreversible progress across our three enduring priorities, supporting positive growth and modernization in our naval force. I highlight the 

progress we’ve made and successes we’ve enjoyed over the past year through the 

support of the committee and your other colleagues throughout Congress. 
6 

Strengthening maritime dominance requires us to rapidly field the concepts and 

capabilities that create advantage relative to our pacing threat, with the 

sustainment necessary to generate integrated, all-domain naval power. That is why 

we are making the investments now, guided by the CNO’s Navigation Plan and Marine Corps Force Design 2030, to ensure we remain the most lethal, capable, and 

globally postured force on this planet for decades to come. 

Last June, our shipbuilders laid the keel for USS District of Columbia, the first 

of a new class of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines that will underwrite 

the Nation’s nuclear deterrent out to the year 2080. The second Columbia-class hull, 

USS Wisconsin, has begun pre-construction activities. 

In July, we commissioned USS Fort Lauderdale, an amphibious warship that will 

help modernize our amphibious fleet and extend the reach of our Marines to fight 

from the sea wherever there is a need. 

What’s more, USS Tripoli, the second of our America-class amphibious assault 

ships, completed its maiden deployment in 2022, operating throughout the Indo-Pacific with our larger, traditional aircraft carriers as a test of our F–35B ‘‘Lightning 

Carrier/Assault Carrier’’ concept. Deployments like this one highlight the Navy and 

Marine Corps’ interoperability as well as the strategic and operational advantages 

that amphibious ships continue to provide to the Joint Force. 

With regard to aircraft carriers, we’ve made significant progress on USS Gerald 

R. Ford, the first new carrier to be deployed in almost 50 years. We are taking the 

lessons learned from the Ford as we build the future USS John F. Kennedy, USS 

Enterprise, and USS Doris Miller. Our carriers are not only vital to deterrence, they 

are also the cornerstone of our interoperability with our allies. 

Our most advanced fighter aircraft, the F–35 Lightning II, now brings fifth-generation stealth and multi-role, multi-mission reach and power wherever we need to 

fight. Meanwhile, the F/A–18E/F Super Hornet will be the numerically predominant 

aircraft in the carrier air wing well into the 2030s. Service-life modification initiatives and capability upgrades enhance our inventory by advancing the tactical relevance of the F/A–18 E/F and closing the Navy’s strike-fighter gap. We are working 

with industry to ensure trained mechanics are prepared to support induction schedules, and that they are bringing electrical and avionics experts onboard to support 

Block III transition efforts. 

Marine aviation continues to build capability and capacity in the image of the future force. Recently, we stood up Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 153 

in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, significantly increasing the reach and sustainment capabilities of Marines in the Pacific theater. 

The fifteen KC–130J tanker aircraft that VMGR–153 will have by 2026 will enhance the organic mobility available to Marines during training, in response to crisis, or in conflict. We are approaching 1 year since the CH–53K Sea Stallion program became operational, and we are well underway transitioning Marine Heavy 

Helicopter Squadron 461 into our first fully operational Sea Stallion squadron. 

While it is still in transition, HMH–461 is already conducting heavy-lift assault support missions previously impossible with legacy aircraft. 

Over the past year, DON personnel have also demonstrated the immense potential of unmanned and autonomous vehicles. The Overlord Surface Vessel Ranger 

successfully transited from the Gulf Coast to the West Coast without an embarked 

crew. These unmanned surface vehicles will reduce the risk to our personnel, lower 

operating costs, and protect access to areas like the South China Sea. In addition, 

U.S. Naval Forces Central Command’s Task Force 59, a new, first-of-its- kind task 

force, is rapidly integrating unmanned systems and artificial intelligence into maritime domain awareness in the Fifth Fleet area of operations, and we will soon expand that capability to other regions of the world. 

In addition to procuring the modern platforms, we are also expanding the areas 

available for our personnel to train. With our partners in Congress, through the National Defense Authorization Act of 2023, we are expanding and modernizing our 

training ranges at Naval Air Station Fallon. This initiative will provide our pilots 

with the airspace and ground necessary to hone their skills in the advanced aircraft 

we field. 

Another area of improvement is shipyard performance: our significant investment 

in the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, known as SIOP, is modernizing our four aging public shipyards by optimizing facilities and infrastructure as 

well as increasing dry-dock capacity and capability. We are also looking at establishing a parallel high-end technical track in nuclear welding, robotics, hull technology, software and electronics integration, as well as additive manufacturing for 

high-paying blue collar career. 

We have made significant improvements to surface ship readiness. Working with 

industry partners, we have reduced maintenance delays on major maintenance peri-
7 

ods in private shipyards by 39 percent since 2019. On-time completion of availabilities has also steadily increased from 34 percent in FY19 to 41 percent for all maintenance periods completed in FY22. We have brought data and advanced analytics 

to inform the plan for each maintenance and repair availability period, and improved our processes to better scope work and structure each availability well before 

ship arrival dates. 

Public shipyards are also improving from FY19 in both fewer days of maintenance 

delay and increases to on-time completion percentages. In FY22, despite lingering 

COVID challenges to production, the public shipyards reduced number of days of 

maintenance delay by 29 percent from 2019 with on-time completions now at 33 percent. 

Our second enduring priority, building a culture of warfighting excellence, demands more aggressive recruiting, more ‘‘training like we fight,’’ and a stronger 

commitment to retaining a strong, diverse, and healthy force—a force that is ready 

at all times and focused on warfighting and strong, positive leadership at every 

level. That’s why we have expanded community- and school-based outreach while 

simultaneously increasing media campaigns in underserved and minority markets. 

We must attract the broadest possible talent pool from throughout our all Nation, 

including more women. 

Recognizing that quality of life for our service members and families is inseparable from warfighting excellence, we have directed substantial investments in quality-of-life initiatives, infrastructure improvement, and the largest military pay raise 

in over 20 years. All of these efforts are centered on one goal: combat readiness. Our 

Sailors and Marines are better prepared and more focused when they know their 

families are being cared for and doing well. 

Our third strategic priority, enhancing our strategic partnerships, sustains and 

expands our advantage by seeking to achieve seamless integration, communication, 

and collaboration with each of our partners. With our Government partners, we 

have strived toward greater agility, adaptability, trust, and transparency in support 

of our warfighters. Globally, we have strengthened our relationships with like-minded maritime nations, deepening interoperability and interchangeability in order to 

enable mutual action to address shared challenges. 

Our actions in the face of adversity will long be remembered by our allies and 

partners. Since the start of the conflict in Ukraine, the Navy and Marine Corps 

have supported our Ukrainian partners as they continue to defend their sovereign 

territory in the face of unprovoked Russian aggression. Together, we have risen to 

the occasion, supplying an unprecedented volume of capabilities to assist in their 

time of need. In 2022 alone, the Department of the Navy coordinated the identification, adjudication, and delivery of over $1.3 billion in critical systems, weapons platforms, munitions, and support equipment to address critical Ukrainian needs. 

Beyond tending to our international partnerships, we are working to expand on 

relationships here at home. We have made a concerted effort to support our defense 

industrial base, with special attention paid to supporting entrepreneurs leading 

small and medium-sized businesses. As a direct result of the President of the United 

States’ Executive Order 13985, ‘‘Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,’’ the DON took action to further develop and refine our strategic and tactical approaches to maximize smallbusiness utilization across a diverse industrial base. These deliberate actions have 

increased our outreach to small businesses, improved subcontracting compliance and 

oversight, fostered more opportunities to fully utilize the Department of Defense 

(DoD) Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program, and increased Phase III Small Business Innovation 

Research program funding by 16 percent over the previous year. 

All of these endeavors contribute to our desired expansion of the DoD’s supply 

chain marketplace. 

THE FISCAL YEAR 2024 PRESIDENT’S BUDGET

Despite the successes and progress highlighted above, there is still work to be 

done on all fronts. The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 (PB24) request to 

Congress is a clear signal of 

President Biden’s support for our Navy and Marine Corps team and of the recognition of our critical role in the Joint Force especially in light of the complex strategic environment. Our request this year totals $255.8 billion, a 4.5 percent increase 

over last year. Every dollar of this request will contribute to the warfighting 

strength of our Navy and Marine Corps, from research and development of nextgeneration technologies and systems to procurement of high-end platforms critical 

to defending our Nation, infrastructure improvements, and most importantly, taking 

care of our Sailors, Marines, and their families who sacrifice so much. 
8 

STRENGTHENING MARITIME DOMINANCE

Fleet Investments 

A modern, capable, and lethal Navy requires sustained investment across a variety of platforms to complete missions in all environments. PB24 prioritizes the development, procurement, and sustainment of our Navy’s ships to provide our Nation 

with the most capable platforms. The request includes the full funding for two destroyers, two nuclear-powered attack submarines, two frigates, one T–AO fleet replenishment oiler, and one AS(X) submarine tender, while providing the next increment of funding for construction of CVN 80, CVN 81, and LHA 9, as well as the 

first year of incremental funding for the second Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine. 

The budget request also includes a significant investment in submarine maintenance with the goal of reducing maintenance periods and improving the operational 

availability of these critical assets. These funds are aimed at improving material 

availability and strengthening the private and public industrial bases. 

PB24 prioritizes modernization of the Zumwalt Class (DDG–1000) guided-missile 

destroyer to enable the Navy’s first fielding of the conventional prompt strike seabased hypersonic weapon system. It also includes key enablers for the Integrated 

Combat System such as Infrastructure-as-Service. The Integrated Combat System 

will allow the Navy to deliver future capabilities through software uploads instead 

of hardware installations. 

Fleet Divestments 

Within PB24 is the request for the divestment of eight surface combatants: three 

cruisers (CG); three Landing Ships, Dock (LSD); and two Littoral Combat Ships 

(LCS). The three CGs—USS Cowpens (CG–63), USS Shiloh (CG–67), and USS 

Vicksburg (CG–69) are all within 3 years of their end-of-service-life dates. While 

these cruisers have a large vertical-launch capacity for a variety of weapons, the 

cost associated with repairing, modernizing, and sustaining the hulls requested significantly outweigh any warfighting contribution they provide to the fleet, and occupy limited, valuable private shipyard space that could be better used for maintaining more- lethal ships. 

In addition to the three cruisers, we are requesting divestment of USS Jackson 

(LCS–06) and USS Montgomery (LCS–08), both Independence-Class LCS variants. 

We acknowledge that both hulls are a third of the way through their projected service life of 25 years. However, these platforms are less lethal, less capable, and far 

more expensive to sustain than what is needed for the contested seas our Navy now 

finds itself operating in. 

Finally, we are requesting the divestment of USS Germantown (LSD–42), USS 

Gunston Hall (LSD–44), and USS Tortuga (LSD–46), three amphibious ships that 

are all at or over 34 years of service and in unsatisfactory material condition. The 

planning and repair periods required for these ships to reach a deployable status 

would put all three at or near their 40-year end-of- service-life mark. Undertaking 

the repair of these ships, with potential cost growth, would tie up funding, shipyard 

capacity, and take an enormous personal toll on our Sailors assigned to the projects. 

However, we recognize this request brings us below the 31 amphibious ships we are 

required to maintain per the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2023. The CNO, Commandant, and I are committed to ensuring we meet this requirement and doing so in a timely manner, but with a capable, sustainable mix 

of ship classes that will support our Marines and Sailors for decades to come. 

In PB23, the DON proposed 16 ship divestments, but was only allowed to divest 

four. Ultimately, it is our Sailors and Marines who pay the price when we are restricted from retiring legacy platforms and investing in the capabilities needed for 

the future. 

Research and Development (R&D) of Enhanced Capabilities 

PB24 requests a total of $26.9 billion to increase innovation and modernization 

efforts in R&D. The budget request commits $718 million of R&D funding to the 

recapitalization of all portions of the undersea leg of the triad including Columbiaclass submarines, Take Charge and Move Out (TACAMO) capability, and the Trident D5 life extension 2. The next-generation air defense family of systems includes 

the F/A–XX, the ‘‘Quarterback’’ of the manned/unmanned team concept, directing 

multiple tactical platforms at the leading edge of the battlespace. PB24 also funds 

$861 million in R&D for unmanned platforms, including the MQ–4 Triton, the MQ– 

25 Stingray, the Large Unmanned Surface Vessel, the Extra Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicle, and the MQ–9A Reaper. 
9 

Sustaining Maritime Information Superiority 

Information is combat power, and we will continue modernizing our information 

technology infrastructure, ashore and afloat to ensure this essential backbone of our 

maritime power remains secure and survivable and continues to deliver information 

everywhere to maintain decision advantage over our adversaries. PB24 budgets approximately $13 billion for enterprise IT, cyber activities, business systems, and 

other communications across the DON. 

These investments are a critical warfighting priority for the Department. The 

DON is building information superiority to win the naval fight by modernizing its 

infrastructure, innovating and deploying new capabilities, and defending its information. These initiatives are enabled by data that is managed as a strategic asset. 

Bringing the DON’s enterprise infrastructure to parity with Industry is essential 

for us to maintain our advantage in competition, crisis and conflict. We have 

charted a path to a digital work environment where users can securely access their 

data anywhere on any device with performance that rivals best-in-class experiences 

in Industry. 

The DON is accelerating the modernization and transformation of our IT capabilities by ensuring that decisions made to sunset or rationalize unneeded, obsolete, unproductive, insecure, and un-auditable IT applications are realized. This effort, 

coined Cattle Drive, will accelerate modernization within multiple business and core 

IT portfolios and self-identify funds for potential re-alignment to transformational 

investments. 

The DON is accelerating adoption of game-changing low-earth orbit commercial 

satellite technology to provide resilient, low-latency, high-speed communications for 

warfighting, support, and quality-of-life-and-work solutions. We are adopting a new 

approach to cybersecurity that will move the DON from its current ineffective compliance-based cybersecurity approach to one based on readiness where the right to 

operate is earned and managed every day. 

The DON is a leader within the DoD on the initiative to implement a more effective cybersecurity model called zero trust that is better adapted to today’s threat 

and computing environments. Finally, data management and analytics progress the 

DON is making on multiple fronts is enabling us to improve decisionmaking, sustain information superiority and meet the goals of the DoD data strategy by ensuring quality data are accessible, understood, and shared to the point of need. 

Enabling Cyberspace Superiority 

In addition to building information superiority, the Department will ensure our 

networks and systems are secure, our critical infrastructure and weapon systems 

are survivable, and our cyber forces can impose costs on adversaries in and through 

cyberspace when required. 

Adversaries and competitors worldwide leverage cyber vulnerabilities to hold our 

capacity and capabilities at risk. This malign behavior requires a robust response, 

and we will prioritize building cyber resilience and strengthening our capacity to 

withstand, fight through, and recover quickly from disruption. To do this, the Department must ‘‘bake in’’ cybersecurity to new capabilities and platforms we procure 

while ‘‘bolting on’’ cybersecurity capabilities to legacy platforms. This strategy also 

requires training our Sailors and Marines to operate in cyber contested environments. 

In addition to building cyber resilience, the Department is advancing the technology, tactics, and readiness of our military cyberspace operations forces. One example of this force development is the Navy’s forthcoming establishment of a specific cyber warfare officer designator and enlisted rating. The Department is similarly committed to improving the readiness of the cyber forces we present to U.S. 

Cyber Command, and we will expand the integration of non-kinetic effects afloat. 

Marine Corps Information Command, which operates under the Marine Forces 

Command, achieved initial operational capacity in January 2023. Marine Corps Information Command provides critical linkages at the operational level as well as 

task-organized elements to support campaign objectives by providing decision-makers the ability to leverage authorities and approvals across the cyber, space, influence, and intelligence functions, generating multi-domain advantages. 

Our information space requires new approaches to training, such as the Persistent 

Cyber Training Environment, which integrates capabilities to continuously evolve 

cyber training and exercises. This joint capability has expanded access over the last 

year, enabling force readiness and driving decisions on the tactical, operational, and 

strategic levels. 
10 

Munitions Procurement 

PB24 takes full advantage of new authorities granted by Congress in the Fiscal 

Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act that provided a streamlined 

multiyear procurement process for critical munitions. Not only will this authority 

allow the Department to replenish munitions stockpiles which are reduced in support of the war in Ukraine, it will also support efforts to strengthen the industrial 

base capacity to develop, produce, and field munitions. We are requesting funding 

for the procurement of 34 Block V Tactical Tomahawk missiles for the Marine 

Corps, as well as several hundred Tactical Tomahawk recertification kits, navigation and communications kits, and Maritime Strike Tomahawk kits for the Navy. 

Additionally, PB24 supports the awarding of multi-year procurement contracts for 

critical munitions, including Standard Missile (SM–6), the Naval Strike Missile, and 

Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM). Overall, funding for these and other weapons increased by $2 billion in this budget— a growth of nearly 50 percent compared 

to last year. 

Organic Industrial Base 

The DON’s organic industrial base is vital to our national security, and the DON 

is committed to ongoing depot modernization and optimization efforts. A modernized 

and ready organic industrial base generates Fleet readiness and strengthens our 

Nation’s security. 

PB24 continues the investment in our industrial base to further efforts to train, 

recruit, and retain the workforce, expand capacity and enable the development and 

integration of new technologies. Deliberate investments in the planning and design 

of facilities and optimization within the depots, as well as contract execution in drydock repair and refurbishment are focus areas of the budget cycle. 

PB24 reflects the three named efforts within the Organic Industrial Base where 

these investments highlight the commitment to the Nation’s security with regard to 

maintaining our wartime assets. First, the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization 

Program consists of four public shipyards located in Portsmouth, VA; Kittery, ME; 

Bremerton, WA; and Pearl Harbor, HI. PB24 funding totals $2.7 billion across multiple accounts. Replacing Dry Dock 3 at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard is a critical 

enabler of increased naval capability. This project will construct a graving dock in 

order to support Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard’s ability to continue serving the Navy 

decades into the future by maintaining and modernizing the Pacific Fleet’s nuclearpowered submarines. Second, the Fleet Readiness Center Infrastructure Optimization Program consists of three Fleet Readiness Centers located in NAS North Island 

San Diego, CA; NAS Jacksonville, FL; MCAS Cherry Point, NC. And finally, the 

Marine Corps Organic Industrial Base consists of two Marine Corps production 

plants located in Albany, GA and Barstow, CA. 

The Presidential Budget request funds public shipyard depot maintenance to 100 

percent, and increases the overall workforce from 37,089 to 37,234 full-time employees, adding an additional 145 full- time employees for the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility Guam Detachment. PB24 also aligns 

funding to improve supply-chain capability and materiel availability in order to 

make proper budget and schedule decisions for items such as long-lead- time materiel. 

Aviation Investments 

The F/A–18E/F Super Hornet will be the numerically predominant aircraft in the 

carrier air wing into the 2030s. PB24 funds service-life modification initiatives and 

capability upgrades that enhance our strike-fighter inventory by maintaining the 

tactical relevance of the F/A–18 E/F and minimizing the Navy’s strike-fighter shortfall. The presidential budget request also funds delivery and support of survivable, 

reliable, and resilient airborne command, control, and communications through the 

installation of critical modifications to the existing E–6B fleet, along with platform 

recapitalization to procure a follow-on TACAMO capability. 

We will prioritize the continued development and production of unmanned aircraft 

systems to support current Fleet intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance requirements and to support future unmanned aircraft system integration into the 

carrier air wing. The budget funds two MQ–4 Tritons, three MQ–25 Stingrays, and 

five MQ–9A Reapers for the Marine Corps. PB24 requests funding for 35 F–35s: 19 

F–35C variants for the Navy and Marine Corps and 16 F–35B variants for the Marine Corps. These aircraft will be the backbone of DON air combat superiority for 

decades to come, complementing the carrier strike group with a dominant, multirole, 

fifth-generation aircraft capable of projecting U.S. power and deterring potential adversaries. 
11 

PB24 also requests funding for the procurement of 15 CH–53K King Stallions. 

These production assets will be part of a two-year block buy contract authorized by 

Congress in the FY23 NDAA. The program recently achieved a Full Rate Production 

decision. 

Climate Readiness 

For the Navy and Marine Corps, a changing climate means a contested operational environment. Climate change brings extreme weather events, more humanitarian crises, and heightened friction around essential natural resources. A more 

volatile world increases demands on our Navy and Marine Corps forces while simultaneously impacting the capacity to respond to those demands. Improving the energy performance of our platforms and weapons systems is essential to providing a 

combat-effective force in contested operating environments. To do this, the Department is working to establish rigorous, energy-informed requirements for new capabilities that are then sustained throughout our acquisition decisionmaking. 

Last year, the DON published Climate Action 2030 to maintain the superiority 

of our naval forces through resilience and reducing the national security threat of 

climate change. In support of this initiative, last December, the Naval Postgraduate 

School signed an education partnership agreement with Stanford University’s Doerr 

School of Sustainability. In bringing together these two globally recognized institutions, it is our hope to realize solutions our Navy and our Nation can employ to 

mitigate and reduce effects of a changing climate. 

Jointly with our partners in Congress, we are constantly seeking innovative solutions, leveraging science, partnering with industry and other government entities, 

and investing responsibly to ensure mission readiness. Climate readiness is a tactical, operational, and strategic enabler, and we must ensure our naval forces can 

operate and succeed in any environment. 

BUILDING A CULTURE OF WARFIGHTING EXCELLENCE

Building the Future Force 

The civilian work force is comprised of talented individuals from all walks of life 

whose experiences and skillsets are critical not just to our economic success, but to 

the overall security of our Nation. Today’s Navy and Marine Corps team is a forward-deployed highly sophisticated network that is one of the most technologically 

advanced networks ever conceived and which operates either in concert with other 

combat units or fully self-sustained, and able to dominate in the air, sea and undersea. 

As we become a more technologically advanced force, top civilian talent is increasingly critical to maintaining America’s might upon the sea. Technical talent is needed for the wide array of challenges the DON faces. More than half of the civilian 

workforce are top-tier scientists, logisticians, engineers, mathematicians, technology 

specialists, or cyber experts; almost a quarter of the workforce are artisans performing critical work at the shipyards, depots, civilian mariners, or safeguarding 

our facilities and activities. As one indication of the quality and expertise of our 

workforce, the DON was issued 225 patents (more than the Air Force and Army 

combined) in FY22 and holds more than 58 percent of all active DoD patents 

(4,129). 

Our civilian workforce ensures a 24/7 rapid response to warfighter requirements, 

develops and manufactures critical systems, repairs and maintains our ships and 

aircraft and develops game- changing technology and equipment. The civilian workforce is present in 55 countries, supporting Sailors and Marines around the world. 

We are in a competition for talent with many other employment sectors, which 

is driving us to re-evaluate how we manage the careers of our Sailors, Marines, and 

civilians, from initial recruitment to retirement. To maintain a Fleet that is prepared to defend our Nation from all potential adversaries, we must continue to enhance our ability to attract, develop, and retain a workforce equally as talented and 

diverse as the American people they serve. This includes maintaining an appropriate number of senior executive leadership (general officer, flag officer, and SES) 

billets to ensure optimal operational readiness. 

The Marine Corps continues to make great strides toward retaining more experienced Marines under the Service’s Talent Management program. Leveraging authorities previously enabled by Congress, the Service enacted nine initiatives in 

2022, from which they will expand and accelerate in 2023 including Early Reenlistment Authority, SNCO Promotion Board Realignment, Recruiting Station Commanding Officer Selection Boards, the Special Duty Assignment volunteer program, 

MarineView 360-degree leadership reviews, officer promotion opt-outs, Digital 
12 

Boardroom 2.0, Separate Competitive Promotion Categories, and the Career Intermission Program. 

As a result of many of these programs, the Marine Corps met or exceeded its first 

and subsequent term alignment program goals for the first time in 13 years and 

retained a statistically higher-quality group of Marines. The Service is examining 

numerous other evolutionary initiatives and remains committed to evolving the talent management system with the primary goal of improving warfighting readiness 

in an increasingly complex world. 

As another example of a positive development in force development, in August 

2022, Naval Special Warfare Command (NSW) formally established its Assessment 

Command (NSWAC) to transform how its units compete for talent by building a sustainable architecture for diversified outreach. It conducted more rigorous pre-assessments for character, cognitive, and leadership attributes, and strengthened NSW’s 

culture of continuous assessment. NSWAC is taking a whole-person approach to 

identify, prepare, and mentor qualified candidates from diverse backgrounds to complete training programs and pursue a successful career in NSW. As this new command was being developed, NSW conducted 60 outreach events with more than half 

specifically focused on increasing force diversity and inclusivity with underrepresented demographics. These efforts will enhance the way NSW continuously assesses and selects its incoming officers and enlisted personnel. 

Educational Initiatives 

Last year I talked about the Targeted Re-entry Program, which empowers commanding officers to identify and nominate their Sailors for an accelerated return to 

active duty. This year we want to highlight our increased partnership with the Department of Education, trade schools, and colleges and universities to develop and 

recruit the military and civilian workforce we need. 

As we become a more technologically advanced force, education will be a crucial 

warfighting enabler to maintaining America’s might upon the sea. Our naval education enterprise is working to develop leaders with warfighting knowledge, intellectual dynamism, and creativity to maintain a strategic advantage against competitors and global adversaries. Through our naval university system, we are creating 

a continuum of learning that develops such leaders to serve at every level and 

equips them with skills to maintain and operate increasingly complex systems in 

an ever- changing warfighting environment. 

PB24 requests a $480.2 million investment to continue supporting and growing 

our naval education institutions. We maintain several world-class institutions, including the US Naval Academy, Naval Postgraduate School, Naval War College, and 

Marine Corps University. This requested funding will also sustain our efforts to expand our enlisted personnel’s access to the Naval Community College to support 

their education goals. We are deeply committed to formalizing a culture of lifelong 

learning for both our enlisted and officer communities. 

Resiliency & Readiness 

Mental health concerns and rising suicide rates are national-level issues to which 

the Services have not been immune. We are well aware of the inextricable link between mental health, resiliency, and the readiness of our force. To that end, Admiral 

Gilday, General Berger, and I are committed to supporting and ensuring the mental 

health, safety, and well-being of all Sailors, Marines, and their families, and the Department’s civilian workforce. 

We must do everything we can to foster the well-being of our people and prevent 

suicide. No one solution applies to every Sailor, Marine, family member, or civilian. 

We are constantly evaluating how we do business when it comes to providing services and resources to ensure they are meeting needs. Military service entails sacrifice not just for the service members, but for their families as well, and we want 

to make sure family members feel seen, heard, and taken care of regardless of 

whether their Sailor or Marine is home, stationed overseas, or deployed. The DON 

offers multiple mental-health and counseling resources to all service members at all 

levels. As we continue to encourage positive help-seeking behaviors and combat the 

stigma around mental healthcare among our Marines and Sailors, PB24 requests 

$87 million for mental health support, an increase of $13.1 million from last year. 

This additional funding will provide for increases to our Sailor Assistance and Intercept for Life (SAIL) program, which provides rapid assistance to those in crisis, as 

well as the addition of two Warrior Toughness Teams for each coast. 

Given the complexity of this challenge, our Office of Force Resiliency has taken 

an integrated approach to enhance holistic, data-driven suicide-prevention strategies 

which recognize the benefits of addressing common risk and protective factors to 

promote healthy cultures and climates. As such, our suicide prevention efforts draw 
13 

from and harmonize with the Defense Strategy for Suicide Prevention and the 

White House Strategy to Reduce Military and Veteran Suicide. We are taking action 

on the recently released report from the Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee, and will work within DoD’s coordination framework to 

implement key recommendations that will strengthen our prevention effort. 

The Department of the Navy is laser-focused on countering sexual assault and 

sexual harassment at every level. In addition to the toll on victims, sexual assault 

and sexual harassment directly impact unit cohesion and ultimately undercuts our 

readiness. We must create environments that foster respect, maintain the dignity 

of military service, and increase our warfighting readiness. Sexual assault and sexual harassment are a persistent challenge requiring a multi-pronged approach that 

leverages a wide range of initiatives, not only to address these issues, but also to 

prevent them before they occur. 

I directed the establishment of an Implementation Advisory Panel for the Department of the Navy last spring, bringing leaders to the table to pinpoint strategies 

for the Navy and Marine Corps to implement the recommendations of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, as approved by the 

Secretary of Defense. Through the Implementation Advisory Panel, the DON has already made significant strides to implement the Independent Review Commission’s 

recommendations, focusing on the committee’s highest-priority efforts first. We fully 

recognize that we need to continue to confront and prevent these destructive behaviors. We are investing significant resources to fuel the needed changes and we have 

made substantial progress in standing up a dedicated prevention workforce to prevent harmful behaviors, professionalizing the sexual assault response workforce to 

better provide victim care and support, and establishing Offices of Special Trial 

Counsel. 

Additionally, our Office of Force Resiliency actively synchronizes the DON’s sexual assault awareness and training, prevention, victim response, and accountability 

initiatives with the DoD Office of Force Resiliency. Sexual assault and harassment 

are more than just criminal matters. They undermine the trust and commitment 

that are foundational to our forces and they erode faith in our leaders, institutions, 

shipmates, and Marines. This is a leadership issue, and you have my commitment 

to clearly and actively support these efforts and to demonstrate that sexual assault 

and sexual harassment will not be tolerated in any way, shape, or form. 

Taking Care of Our People 

We continue to make great strides in providing quality-of-life services and improving housing options available to our Sailors, Marines, and their families. In PB24, 

we are asking you to support our DON families with $622 million aimed at sustaining our child and youth services. Additionally, we continue our investments in 

housing for both accompanied and unaccompanied personnel. Notably, our request 

includes $131.8 million for the construction of a Bachelor’s Enlisted Quarters and 

Support Facility at Marine Corps Barracks, here in Washington, DC. We are also 

requesting funding to support housing renovations at multiple bases, to include 

Naval Base San Diego, Naval Air Station Lemoore, Naval Air Station Oceana, and 

Naval Base Ventura County. These investments will yield dividends for years to 

come as we continue to offer safe, affordable, and convenient housing to those who 

defend our Nation. 

STRENGTHENING STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS

Community Partnerships 

The DON is leveraging the Department of Defense Readiness and Environmental 

Protection Integration Program (REPI) to partner with local governments and nongovernmental organizations to advance mission readiness through mutually beneficial, sustainable communities near our installations and ranges. The recently announced 2023 REPI Challenge includes several projects that support DON installations, to include: invasive species management and reef preservation near Pacific 

Missile Range Facility Barking Sands and Marine Corps Base Hawaii; habitat improvement and species management at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Naval 

Base Coronado, Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, and Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach in California; and shoreline stabilization near Marine Corps Base 

Quantico, Virginia. 

Outside our fence lines, the communities that host our Navy and Marine Corps 

installations continue to utilize the Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot (DCIP) 

program to fund community infrastructure projects that benefit local installations, 

enable the DON’s warfighting mission, and provide support to our service members 

and their families. Using 2022 DCIP grant funds, Onslow County in North Carolina 
14 

will upgrade a runway at a local airport to benefit travel in southeastern North 

Carolina, including Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Air Station 

New River, and Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point. In Florida, a new water 

main will improve capacity and pressure for not only for Naval Station Mayport, but 

also the surrounding community where many of our Sailors, Marines, civilians and 

their families live. 

Finally, the city of Newport News in Virginia will undertake a $15 million project 

at the Harwood’s Mill Reservoir Dam to increase flood protection for the entire community and ensure a reliable water supply to Naval Weapons Station Yorktown. 

We continue to work with our partners across the Federal Government, the State 

of Hawaii, and Congress to close the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility and remediate the effects of the 2021 spill. We are committed to doing what it takes to address the concerns of service members, their families, and the people of Hawaii. As 

I’ve said before, we rebuild trust one day at a time, one action at a time. Aging infrastructure such as that at Red Hill is a challenge we face at the national level, 

and we appreciate Congress’s support and partnership as we increase our focus on 

revitalizing the shore infrastructure our Navy and Marines Corps rely upon. 

Joint Force and Government 

The Department of the Navy is committed to providing the right mix of capabilities and remaining dominant against threats defined in the National Defense Strategy. Across both Services and throughout the DON, PB24 will invest in capabilities 

for maritime dominance. Successful implementation of the concepts within the Navigation Plan and Force Design 2030 will be pursued through a unified, integrated 

effort at every echelon. But our fully integrated naval force is only part of the formidable Joint Force team that stands united in the protection of the American people. 

Collaboration between military departments and with the interagency is critical to 

the defense of the United States. 

We are constantly seeking opportunities to maximize the combined efficiency and 

effectiveness of our Navy and Marine Corps in cooperation with the Army, Air 

Force, and Space Force. For example, we continue to work with our fellow Services 

on critical advanced research programs including hypersonic weapons. And worldwide, the Joint Strike Fighter program is yielding unprecedented reach and agility 

for the entire Joint Force. 

The Department of the Navy, as a forward-deployed force, is a key contributor to 

Integrated Deterrence as our daily interactions with allies, partners, and potential 

adversaries impact diplomatic, economic, and intelligence equities in addition to the 

obvious military impacts. 

Our most significant contribution as a military department is America’s naval 

forces. The combat-credible forces of the Marine Corps and the Navy are unique as 

America’s most timely, flexible, and forward-deployed force across the full spectrum 

of challenges—from naval diplomacy to strategic deterrence, resource competition, 

crisis, and conflict. Our allies and partners as well as our potential adversaries see 

these forces conducting forward operations and training, alongside partner nations. 

This constant forward presence engenders trust through episodic engagements as 

well as urgent response in the event of a national emergency. 

The iconic presence of Marines in our embassies is just one highly visible way the 

Department of the Navy supports the State Department and whole-of-government 

activities. Behind the scenes, military attache ́s strengthen our bonds with international partners as they facilitate and coordinate activities, from small-scale personnel exchanges to large-scale multi-lateral military exercises. 

Allies and Partners 

Over the past 18 months, the Department of the Navy has been fully committed 

to the multi- phased, commitments-based process, known as the Australia—United 

Kingdom—United States Partnership (AUKUS) to facilitate the development of the 

optimal pathway for Australia’s acquisition of conventionally-armed nuclear-powered submarines, which will contribute to maintaining peace and stability in the 

Indo-Pacific region by enhancing deterrence. As part of this initiative, Australian 

sailors will embed on U.S. SSNs and the U.S. Navy will increase SSN port visits 

to Australia beginning this year. Additionally, as early as 2027, the Navy plans to 

rotate up to four U.S. Virginia-class submarines to HMAS Stirling near Perth, an 

initiative we are calling ‘‘Submarine Rotational Force—West (SRF–W; ‘‘Surf West’’). 

Beginning in the early 2030s, pending statutory authority, we intend to sell Australia at least three Virginia-class SSNs, and potentially an additional two more if 

needed. The AUKUS partners will begin delivering the trilaterally-developed SSN– 

AUKUS in the late 2030s. The cost sharing through the different phases of AUKUS 

will be fair, transparent, and proportional—with the United States and Australia 
15 

making investments to upgrade the U.S. submarine industrial base. We will continue to lead and advance this effort as directed by the President and Secretary of 

Defense. 

As the world has seen over the last year with Russia’s unprovoked and indefensible invasion of Ukraine, and the strengthened resolve and solidarity of NATO and 

like-minded nations around the world, the value of allies and partners cannot be 

overstated; the global landscape offers a stark contrast between those countries with 

strong international partnerships and those who are isolated due to their antithetical stance vis-a`-vis the rules-based international order. Globally, we have strengthened our relationships with like-minded maritime nations, deepening interoperability in order to enable mutual action to address shared challenges. 

As we emerged from the COVID pandemic and returned to our historic operating 

pace, we have looked for ways to expand cooperative deployments and operations 

around the world. Our recent growth in cooperative efforts with our partners has 

been focused on increasing interoperability and moving towards interchangeability 

with allied and partner maritime forces. In every international engagement, I have 

consistently heard the same message from our allies and partners: ‘‘We want to do 

more with the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps’’—a signal that we are the partner of 

choice across the globe. 

In January 2023, the United States and Japan reaffirmed the necessity to optimize our force posture and enhance response capability through a readjustment in 

the laydown of U.S. Forces in Japan. This will provide for stationing of the 12th 

Marine Littoral Regiment in Japan by 2025, and with it, advanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities as well as anti-ship and transportation capabilities. 

In a demonstration of the capabilities and resolve of NATO, the USS George H.W. 

Bush Carrier Strike Group recently completed Exercise Neptune Strike 22.2., operating under the command of Striking Forces NATO (STRIKFORNATO), and flexing 

the capabilities of all-domain warfare at a critical time. 

During the same period, we employed the USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike 

Group for the first time with our NATO allies during Exercise Silent Wolverine. The 

exercise was designed to test the carrier’s capabilities through integrated high-end 

naval warfare scenarios, leading to its inaugural deployment this year. The USS 

Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group and 22 Marine Expeditionary Unit provided 

persistent presence in the Baltic Sea. This demonstration of capability exemplifies 

the unparalleled power of alliance and partnerships. 

Last year, I personally witnessed the power of partnership during RIMPAC 2022, 

when forces from 26 nations from nearly every continent converged at Pearl Harbor. 

We came together as capable, adaptive partners, and declared our commitment to 

work together, to grow our collective capability, and to nurture and enhance relationships that are critical to ensuring the safety of the sea lanes and the security 

of the world’s interconnected oceans. 

Strengthening maritime dominance requires us to rapidly field the concepts and 

capabilities that create advantage relative to our pacing threat with the 

sustainment necessary to generate integrated, all-domain naval power. 

Alongside our Filipino allies, Marines from 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment completed the largest iteration of Exercise Balikatan last April. This was the initial 

operational employment of 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment, and they used it to flex 

their capability to deploy from Hawaii and carry out amphibious landings in northern Luzon, ultimately enabling combined coastal defense training. This exercise not 

only strengthened the bond with our Filipino partners but tested small, distributed, 

and austere encampments, resulting in refinements of the concepts integral to the 

Marine Littoral Regiment. 

This month, Marines and Sailors with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit completed the first Japan-based Iron Fist exercise, which increased interoperability and 

strengthened relationships between the DON and the Japan Self-Defense Forces, 

and demonstrated the commitment of U.S. and Japan forces to maintain a free and 

open Indo-Pacific. 

Last November I had the chance to visit my Indian counterparts in an effort to 

drive forward high-end navy-to-navy cooperation to address challenges in the undersea warfare domain. While we continue to advance thinking on concepts and technology, we are furthering our defense information sharing and exercising in ways 

that are relevant to our shared goals, as exemplified by the USS Ronald Reagan 

Carrier Strike Group’s participation in Exercise Malabar with India, Australia, and 

Japan, and which included high-end tactical anti-submarine warfare. 

While in Brazil, I had the privilege of presiding over the opening ceremony of the 

longest-running maritime exercise, UNITAS, and took the opportunity to spotlight 

the importance of partnerships in our own hemisphere and the Atlantic basin. It 
16 

was a particular honor to meet with the Cameroonian Head of Navy and visit his 

two ships, which had conducted their first-ever trans-Atlantic voyage in order to 

participate in the exercise. Their pride, determination, and dedication to being a 

part of this U.S.-led multinational exercise were evident as they celebrated this exceptional achievement. Strengthening our relationships across Africa and the Western Hemisphere is an important aspect of furthering the National Defense Strategy 

as the PRC endeavors to extend its influence over our neighbors and African partners. One of the most significant detriments to local economies is illegal, unreported, 

and unregulated (IUU) fishing. I have been keenly interested in this complex challenge, and we are working with our partners across the globe to increase maritime 

domain awareness, information sharing, and information operations to counter this 

scourge. Massive fishing fleets from countries such as the PRC prey on countries 

with weak capabilities to protect their exclusive economic zones. Closely linked to 

the IUU fishing problem is a country’s ability to effectively conduct maritime domain awareness. 

As the Navy and Marine Corps team works tirelessly to ensure our forward presence, we are in an intense global competition with the PRC for strategic access and 

influence. That competition is particularly concentrated in the Indo-Pacific. To prevail, we will continue to innovate, leveraging our naval diplomacy to maximum advantage. Improving ports and enabling enhanced maritime patrolling capacity from 

modern airfields serves U.S. security interests as well as island nations’ interests. 

Combined, these critical enablers of U.S. influence, posture, and readiness in the 

Indo-Pacific are also the core components of the DoD’s ability to deliver humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in the region as the catastrophic consequences 

of climate change accelerate. A resilient, distributed posture to meet our operational 

needs and outcompeting the PRC for strategic access and influence in the Indo-Pacific go hand in hand. 

PB24 will strengthen global alliances and partnerships with funding for joint operations and exercises around the world, including CARAT, Malabar, and Balikatan 

in the Indo-Pacific; NATO operations in the Mediterranean; and exercises like 

UNITAS in our own hemisphere. 

We will continue to foster opportunities for Sailors, Marines, and DON civilians 

to train, learn, and operate side-by side with their counterparts in partner and allied forces. We will work on operationally integrating with our allies and partners 

through shared warfighting concepts, continually campaigning forward to deter adversaries and protect the rules-based international order. 

Our Sailors, Marines and civilians are warrior-diplomats for our Nation. Their 

professionalism and dedication promote the connections that strengthen our collective security and cultivate shared ideals that send the message that the United 

States is a friend worth having. 

CLOSING

The United States Navy and Marine Corps Team is on the front lines of defending 

the free and open rules-based international order against those who would cast us 

into a new dark age defined by the principle of ‘‘might makes right.’’ 

I have a sacred obligation to Congress and to the American people to ensure that 

our Navy and Marine Corps are always prepared to defend those liberties, those 

non-negotiable American values wherever the Nation’s interests may be threatened. 

The Navy and Marine Corps remain, after all, this Nation’s single most versatile 

instrument of national power. 

For this, I am grateful for your sustained, bipartisan support of a strong Navy 

and Marine Corps. I look forward to working with old friends and new partners in 

Congress to advance the Nation’s security with a Navy and Marine Corps supremely 

able, first and foremost, to deter all potential adversaries, and if called upon to fight 

and win our Nation’s wars. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Secretary Del Toro. 

Next, we have, Admiral Gilday. 

STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY, CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS 

Admiral GILDAY. Chairman Tester, Vice Chair Collins, distinguished Members of the Committee; Good morning, and thank you 

for the opportunity to appear today with Secretary Del Toro and 

General Berger. 
17 

For the past 77 years the United States Navy has been an anchor of world stability; deterring war, upholding international law, 

and assuring access to the seas. Today, our Navy’s role has never 

been more expansive or consequential. 

This past year, our Navy and Marine Corps team executed more 

than 22,000 steaming hours, and nearly one million flying hours. 

We participated in roughly 100 exercises with allies and partners 

across the globe, and at this moment we have nearly 100 ships at 

sea, reassuring America’s allies and partners that we stand the 

watch alongside them, and reminding potential adversaries that we 

seek to preserve peace, but we are prepared for any fight. 

The United States has always been a maritime Nation, to preserve our security and prosperity America needs a combat-credible 

Naval Force to project our interest in peace and to prevail in war, 

not just today, but for the long run. Our fiscal year 2024 budget 

request remains consistent with the Navy’s enduring priorities. 

And to your point, Mr. Chairman, about whether or not the taxpayers, are being consistent for the taxpayers in these investments, 

we are prioritizing readiness: First, with an emphasis on the sailors who empower everything that we do, ensuring that we are always combat ready. 

Second, we are modernizing our capabilities, ensuring that our 

forces today stay combat-ready, now and into the future in a rapidly changing world. 

Third, we are continuing to build our capacity ensuring that we 

have relevant lethal platforms to achieve warfighting advantage 

with a hybrid fleet of manned and unmanned platforms on, above, 

and below the sea. 

Our budget request reflects the Navy’s commitment to deliver, 

and deploy, and maintain our fleet. It fully funds the Columbiaclass submarine, as the Secretary stated, ensuring the on-time delivery of the most survivable leg of our Nation’s strategic deterrent 

triad. It keeps our fleet ready to fight tonight dedicating the resources necessary to train, and to educate resilient sailors that can 

out-think, that can out-decide, and that can out-fight any potential 

adversary. 

It funds private and public sector ship maintenance to 100 percent, increasing capacity and retaining highly skilled labor to get 

our ships back to sea faster, with full magazines and spare parts 

in their store rooms, to be prepared for any contingency. 

It invests in modernizing our fleet, procuring weapons with 

range and speed, along with integrated systems to improve fleet 

survivability in a resilient, cyber secure network infrastructure. 

And then invest in capable capacity, building towards a larger distributed hybrid fleet, fielding a ready fleet today while modernizing 

for the future. 

Our competitors are investing heavily in warfighting capabilities 

of their own, and the oceans we are operating in are growing more 

lethal and more contested every single day. Failing to modernize to 

meet those threats would erode America’s maritime superiority, at 

a time when the command of the seas will determine the balance 

of power for the rest of this century. 

This means we can no longer afford to maintain ships designed 

for a bygone era, especially at the expense of readiness, moderniza-
18 

tion, and new platforms, and buying new ships most relevant to today’s fight. 

America cannot afford a hollow force. We have been there before 

and we have seen tragic results. It is a mistake we must never repeat. Ships, submarines, and aircrafts are, no doubt, expensive instruments of national power, as are the costs of maintaining them. 

But history shows that without a powerful Navy the price tag could 

be much higher. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify. And I look forward 

to answering your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY

Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the 

Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the posture of the United 

States Navy. On behalf of every American Sailor, Navy civilian, and their families, 

thank you for your continued leadership and support. 

With increased funding in the 2023 Defense Appropriations Act, Congress has 

provided the means for the U.S. Navy to deliver the fleet our Nation needs in support of the 2022 National Defense Strategy. This investment will help us turn the 

corner on readiness to meet strategic competitors in peace and war, ensuring our 

ability to maintain free and open oceans and the international rules-based order. 

Moreover, consistent, steady funding is necessary to provide a clear signal to our 

industry partners, especially our shipbuilders, on the way ahead. This statement 

will detail where we are—and what we must do—to ensure our maritime dominance 

deep into this century. 

Flanked by two oceans, the United States has always been a maritime nation. The 

seas remain the lifeblood of our economy, our national security, and, consequentially, our way of life. Our livelihood depends upon free, open, and secure maritime 

trade. A strong naval force is essential to U.S. national security and long-term economic health. The United States Navy has and will continue to serve as our Nation’s primary instrument of sea control and power projection, ensuring our global 

maritime access during times of peace and war. 

From our humble beginnings with six wooden frigates, the composition of the U.S. 

Navy has steadily evolved to defend U.S. interests around the world and ensure 

American security. For the past 247 years, the U.S. Navy has played a critical part 

in defending and advancing national policy. For the past 77 years, we have been 

an anchor of world stability by deterring war, upholding international law, and assuring access to the global maritime domain for our Nation, our Allies, and our partners. 

Today, our Navy’s role has never been more expansive or consequential. We now 

face challengers who are attempting to rewrite the rules-based international order 

and reshape the world to meet their autocratic desires. The People’s Republic of 

China (PRC) has aggressively modernized its militaries and fielded offensive 

warfighting capabilities at unprecedented speed and scale across all domains. These 

developments are not solely to support regional designs. 

They are for global ambitions. At the same time, Russia’s unprovoked, full-scale 

invasion of Ukraine has triggered the largest conflict in Europe since the Second 

World War—with combat occurring on both land and sea. The future of the global 

order depends on the actions we take in this moment. 

Our Fiscal Year 2024 budget request remains consistent with the Navy’s priorities. To meet the challenges of today while building the fleet of tomorrow, our Navy 

continues to prioritize readiness first—with a special emphasis on the Sailors who 

empower everything we do. Next, we are focused on modernizing our capabilities. 

Then, we will continue to build the capacity of the fleet. Prioritized investments in 

people, technologies, and platforms ensure that we are ready to fight tonight, while 

making progress on the capabilities we need to maintain our combat credibility far 

into the future. To enable Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO), we must generate cost-effective capacity to achieve warfighting advantage with acceptable risk. 

We have already begun building the future fleet—a hybrid force enhanced by unmanned platforms operating on, above, and below the waterline. 
19 

NAVY’S UNIQUE PEACETIME MISSION

With the passage of the fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, the 

United States Navy has a new mission statement. The old mission statement, articulated in Title 10 of U.S. Code, called for the Navy to be ‘‘organized, trained and 

equipped primarily for prompt and sustained combat.’’ Now, Congress has additionally charged the Navy with supporting ‘‘the peacetime promotion of the national security interests and prosperity of the United States.’’ 

Though the mission statement is new, the mission is not. U.S. naval power has 

always played a unique and vital role in promoting our Nation’s security and prosperity during peacetime. The law now accurately reflects our Navy’s contributions 

throughout the history of our Republic. 

Whether providing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, countering seabased illicit activity, safeguarding global shipping lanes, saving lives, or deterring 

conflict, Sailors advance U.S. interests every day. Constantly on call, our Sailors are 

forward deployed in submarines, ships, and aircraft, standing guard with our Allies 

and partners around the world. In part, the change to Title 10 acknowledges our 

historic mission and recognizes that peacetime activities can produce strategic results. However, the change does more than describe what the Navy has always 

done. It also highlights the need to build a healthy, ready naval force that will safeguard our Nation—one that is properly sized, equipped, and trained for the vast 

array of operations needed to preserve peace and prevail in competition, crisis, and 

conflict. 

Of all the peacetime missions that promote security and prosperity, deterring conflict is foremost. Our Sailors are constantly present, operating, and training, often 

in parts of the world that may become hotspots. We are America’s away team, deployed in peace and ready to answer the call if we are needed in war. 

During peacetime, the U.S. Navy must continue strengthening and expanding our 

network of Allies and partners. Whether in day-to-day competition, crisis, or conflict, 

Allies and partners add significant defense capabilities and resources. They provide 

integrated deterrence against adversaries by expanding access to maritime infrastructure through cost-effective, secure, reliable, and geographically distributed 

bases, and provide information in support of distributed operations. 

Thanks to support from Congress, we are starting to rebuild our fleet following 

two decades of ground wars. Still, rebuilding will not happen overnight. It will require years of stable and predictable funding and a long-range plan that incentivizes 

our industry partners to invest in the infrastructure and capacity needed to support 

our growing fleet. 

While most combat forces generally only meet in times of war, navies are in contact with potential adversaries every single day. We are forward deployed around 

the globe, sailing waters in close proximity to other navies, coast guards, and maritime militias, contesting threats to the rules-based international order and ensuring 

the world’s waterways are free and open for all. In this critical decade, the challenges we face are mounting. 

THE MARITIME CHALLENGES TO U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY

The United States continues to face pacing, acute, and persistent challenges to 

our national security. Above all, our pacing challenge is the PRC. As we have witnessed over the past several decades, the PRC seeks to undermine U.S. alliances 

and security partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region, and leverage its growing capabilities, including its economic influence and the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) 

growing strength and military footprint, to coerce its neighbors and threaten their 

interests. In only two decades, the PRC has tripled the size of its Navy—and is on 

pace to quadruple to over 400 ships by 2030. Additionally, it has expanded its strategic nuclear capacity and capability, advanced its cyber and space capabilities, and 

constructed a system of sophisticated sensors and long-range precision weapons to 

intimidate neighbors, challenge free and open access to the seas, and hold U.S. 

forces at risk. 

The PRC seeks to deny U.S. and allied forces access within the First Island Chain 

and beyond. Advances in missile technology by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) 

Rocket Force have provided the PRC with the offensive means of striking U.S. and 

Allied forces. As the PRC has attempted to displace the U.S. Navy from the waters 

in the Western Pacific, the PLA Navy, alongside the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) and China Coast Guard (CCG), has increasingly conducted 

aggressive operations—actions just short of war—to intimidate neighbors and force 

nations to submit to Chinese territorial claims. Through these ‘‘gray zone’’ operations, the PRC has staked illegal maritime claims to offshore resources that threaten the peace, prosperity, and ecological stability of the world’s oceans. Without ques-
20 

tion, the PRC’s investments in offensive warfighting systems—across all domains— 

are aimed at the heart of America’s maritime power. 

Russia remains an acute threat as its unprovoked war of aggression against 

Ukraine continues. Although the Kremlin predicted Ukraine would fall within days 

and NATO would fracture, the citizens of Ukraine have successfully contested Russian forces on land and sea, bolstered by the support of the United States and other 

like-minded nations. This conflict has reminded Russia, and would-be aggressors everywhere, of the power and importance of Allies and partners. Along with our Allies, 

we draw inspiration and strength from the tenacity and courage of the Ukrainian 

people, and we remain resolute in our responsibility to uphold the rules-based international order, and every nation’s inherent right to freedom and self-determination. 

In its most provocative year of missile launches ever, North Korea has been a persistent threat on the Korean Peninsula as it continues to expand its nuclear and 

missile capability to threaten the U.S. homeland, deployed U.S. forces, and the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Japan. With forces on the peninsula and vessels in the 

surrounding seas, the U.S. Navy and the Joint Force stand with our ROK Allies. 

During my visit to the ROK this past November, I confirmed that our alliance and 

friendship remain strong. We left no doubt that our commitment to extended deterrence for the Korean Peninsula is ironclad. 

Iran, beyond its nuclear advancements, has been building and exporting missile 

systems and unmanned aircraft, most notably to support Russia’s brutal campaign 

in Ukraine. All the while, Iran is advancing maritime capabilities that threaten 

maritime chokepoints, putting at risk the free flow of energy resources and international commerce. Further, Iran is undermining regional stability supporting terrorist groups and military proxies, employing its own paramilitary forces, engaging 

in military provocations, and conducting malicious cyber and information operations. Global terrorist groups have had their capabilities degraded, but some may 

be able to reconstitute them in short order, which will require monitoring indications and warning against this threat. 

Whether they are pacing, acute, or persistent challengers, our adversaries are focused on acquiring sophisticated technologies that are changing the battlespace. 

From drone technologies to robust networks of sensors, our adversaries—both stateand non-state-sponsored—have the ability to harm our national interests in myriad 

ways. In the coming years, developments in new technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and additive manufacturing will continue to disrupt the way war is conducted. 

CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE JOINT FORCE, NESTED IN THE NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY

A combat-credible U.S. Navy— forward-deployed and integrated with all elements 

of national power—remains our Nation’s most potent, flexible, and versatile instrument of military influence. Together with the U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Coast 

Guard, our Navy must deploy forward and campaign with a ready, capable, combatcredible fleet. Decisive naval power is a critical component of the Joint Force. 

This past July, I released an updated Navigation Plan, aligning our priorities of 

Readiness, Capabilities, and Capacity to the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS). 

The U.S. Navy remains committed to (1) strengthening our Nation’s deterrence, (2) 

campaigning through forward presence, and (3) building enduring warfighting advantages. In this rapidly changing world, a formidable naval force is crucial in effectively implementing the NDS and the 2022 National Security Strategy (NSS). The 

Navy’s FY24 budget request will deliver on our commitments to the Joint Force by 

aligning our planning, resources, and investments with national policy objectives: 

Strengthening Deterrence. Integrated deterrence—the cornerstone of the 2022 

NDS and a strategic focus of the 2022 NSS—is how the Department of Defense 

(DoD) aligns DoD’s policies, investments, and activities to sustain and strengthen 

deterrence. It is tailored to specific competitors and coordinated to maximum effect 

inside and outside of the DoD. Integrated deterrence leverages the Joint Force’s 

combined capabilities in all domains. It emphasizes a unity of effort throughout the 

U.S. Government as the Department of Defense (DoD) coordinates with and supports the State Department, Intelligence Community, and other government agencies. Additionally, integrated deterrence promotes the importance of working with 

our Allies and partners to uphold the international rules-based order throughout the 

globe. Neither the DoD nor the public sector holds a monopoly on delivering deterrent effects—thus, we must work with America’s vast and innovative private sector 

to ensure peace. 

A secure and reliable strategic nuclear deterrent backstops integrated deterrence. 

Our Navy operates and maintains the most survivable leg of the Nation’s nuclear 

triad, representing approximately 70 percent of America’s treaty-accountable, nu-
21 

clear arsenal. Navy’s FY24 budget requests the resources to replace the 14 Ohioclass submarines with the more capable Columbia- class and continue development 

of the second life extension of the TRIDENT II D5 missile, as well as refresh supporting infrastructure and modernize our nuclear command, control, and communications systems. Our Ohio-class submarines have been patrolling the oceans on 

deterrent missions for 42 years. This once-in-a-generation overhaul of our ballistic 

missile submarine force comes with a massive price tag, but it is a must-pay bill 

for the Nation so that we maintain America’s assured second-strike capability. 

In addition to our nuclear forces, our combat-credible conventional naval forces reinforce deterrence. These forces deploy globally to protect American interests across 

the spectrum of conflict. Operating far from U.S. shores, naval forces provide the 

first physical line of U.S. Homeland Defense, preventing potential adversaries from 

using the seas to threaten the American homeland. Naval Forces are the only element of national power that can fulfill this role. 

To deter war, we must continue to work more seamlessly with our Allies and partners across all domains and by integrating key technologies and other instruments 

of national power. Among other initiatives, we have been working hard to bolster 

the trilateral security partnership of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United 

States, known as AUKUS. AUKUS is a generational opportunity to reinforce the collective defense and prosperity of the United States and two vital Allies who always 

stand beside us. With the overarching objective of promoting peace and stability in 

the Indo-Pacific, through our efforts to enable Australia to acquire a conventionallyarmed, nuclear-powered submarine capability, AUKUS provides a unique opportunity to strengthen the U.S. Submarine Industrial Base while enhancing two of our 

Allies’ military capabilities. This trilateral security partnership also provides an opportunity to set a historic precedent in naval nuclear propulsion, setting the highest 

standards of nuclear nonproliferation. To successfully compete with the PRC and ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific region, we will continue to find ways to integrate 

our efforts with our robust network of Allies and partners. 

The naval service’s ability to control the seas and project power has underpinned 

America’s national defense and economic vitality for generations. Sea control provides freedom of maneuver to the Joint Force and our Allies while denying it to our 

adversaries in conflict. Our ability to project power deters aggression by convincing 

rivals they have no viable means of achieving their objectives through force. Should 

conflict arise, forward deployed Sailors and Marines stand ready to fight alongside 

the rest of the Joint Force, our Allies, and our partners to deny enemy objectives, 

destroy enemy forces, and compel war termination. 

Forward Presence and Campaigning. Naval forces provide the United States strategic advantages in position, influence, and flexibility, independent of access to overseas land bases. Our forward posture guarantees our Nation the ability to respond 

to crisis, blunt gray-zone activities, and preserve a stable and secure global maritime order. The Navy’s global maneuverability supports diplomacy, reassures our 

Allies, and generates favorable influence and access in critical regions. 

Alliances and partnerships remain the United States’ greatest strategic advantage. Our Allies and partners recognize U.S. naval forces as their on-scene partner 

of choice for building combined maritime strength. In turn, the U.S. Navy recognizes 

the value of America’s unmatched network. Having met with over 40 heads of navies around the world over the past year, I have witnessed the power of personal 

connections to bolster our collective strength. Relationships forged on the seas for 

over seven decades have been the bedrock of the free and open, international, rulesbased order. And they will continue to be so. 

Our adversaries do not have the same reinforcing strength and global backing 

that America shares with like-minded nations. In turn, the United States provides 

maritime power that no other country can. The U.S. Navy also brings to NATO an 

ability to assemble and further the interoperable naval combat power of Allies and 

partners and enable continued deterrence in response to Russia’s war on Ukraine. 

We also leverage the strength of our allies and partners as part of our integrated 

deterrence of the PRC as well. We are constantly strengthening interoperability, 

sharing maritime domain awareness, and helping to build capacity for resilient, integrated logistics for our allies and partners. 

Across the spectrum of conflict, the U.S. Navy operates forward, exposing and contesting malign activities of our adversaries. The U.S. Navy remains the partner of 

choice not just because of our strength, but also because of our respect for the rule 

of law. 

Building Enduring Warfighting Advantages. To maintain our warfighting advantage at sea, America needs a larger and more capable Navy. Faced with competitors 

and emerging disruptive technologies, we must become more agile in developing and 

delivering our future force. Above all, our naval forces must be combat credible— 
22 

measured by our ability to deliver lethal effects in contested and persistently 

surveilled battlespaces. 

In collaboration with the other U.S. Armed Services, we have prioritized the future capabilities we need to employ our warfighting concepts and maintain credible 

deterrence. As we build the future fleet, we group these critical capabilities into six 

overarching Force Design Imperatives, as I described in Navigation Plan 2022. 

Expand Distance. Long-range precision fires across all domains and platforms 

with greater reach enable naval forces to strike hostile targets while increasing our 

own survivability. 

Leverage Deception. Deceptive measures—including stealth, concealment and maneuver, emissions control, and electronic warfare—degrade enemy surveillance and 

increase adversary uncertainty, enabling naval forces to operate effectively in contested battlespaces. 

Harden Defense. Integrating directed energy with hard-kill and soft-kill defensive 

systems disrupts attacks and keeps naval forces survivable when targeted by adversaries. 

Increase Distribution. Distributing forces geographically and in all domains enables them to threaten an adversary from multiple attack axes. Smaller, lethal, and 

less costly platforms—including those manned, unmanned, and optionally manned— 

further complicate threat targeting, generate confusion, and impose dilemmas for 

our adversaries. 

Ensure Delivery. Resilient logistics connecting the foundry to the fleet—enabled 

by secure communications and information technology—refuel, rearm, resupply, repair, and revive distributed naval forces down to the last tactical mile. 

Generate Decision Advantage. Naval forces will out-sense, out-decide, and outfight any adversary by accelerating our decision cycles with secure, survivable, and 

resilient networks, accurate data, and the assistance of AI-enabled decision aids. 

Connecting sensors, weapons, and decision-makers across all domains enables naval 

forces to mass firepower and influence without massing forces. 

Together, these six Force Design Imperatives enable DMO and other Joint 

warfighting concepts. These imperatives also define the requirements for the surface, subsurface, aviation, and information platforms that our fleet needs and will 

guide our priority investments going forward. 

U.S. NAVY PRIORITIES

Navy’s FY24 budget request delivers a combat-credible Navy designed to deter 

and, if necessary, prevail in conflict. To deliver that fleet today, tomorrow, and in 

the future, we will continue to focus on three priorities: Readiness, Capabilities, and 

Capacity. 

Our central challenge is balancing our investments in the future fleet while sustaining a forward posture that keeps America safe and prosperous. It is increasingly 

costly to operate and maintain our ships. We appreciate Congress’ support with additional funding in FY23 to mitigate the effects of inflation. We will continue to need 

congressional support of the robust budget in FY24. 

In today’s fiscal environment, we face the enormous challenge of simultaneously 

recapitalizing our strategic nuclear deterrent, century-old dry dock facilities, and 

strategic sealift capacity, while investing in weapons and platforms we will need in 

a future fight. Our focus on Readiness, modernizing Capabilities, and building Capacity is a result of the threats facing our Nation today and the challenges we face 

in the decades to come. To defend our homeland and protect our national interests, 

we cannot field a fleet larger than we can sustain. Hollow fleets cannot fight tonight, and sacrificing current readiness for future capabilities or increased ship 

counts would severely constrain our Navy’s ability to respond in crisis or conflict. 

Our Nation needs a larger, more capable, more lethal fleet—but we must build the 

future fleet at a sustainable rate; not at the expense of warfighters that must be 

ready to stand the watch tonight. 

READINESS

Readiness remains our top priority. Forward-deployed, combat-credible forces 

deter conflict and protect the free and open system underpinning American security 

and prosperity. 

Across the Navy, from our shipyards and aviation depots, to our global network 

of bases and stations, to the steaming and flying hours our Sailors need to hone 

their skills, we are focused on readiness. Our FY24 budget request dedicates the resources necessary to train and educate resilient Sailors that can out-think, out-decide, and out-fight any potential adversary. Today’s security environment demands 
23 

ships, aircraft, and submarines, as well as expeditionary, information, and special 

warfare forces that are ready to fight and win. 

The Navy is committed to accelerating our warfighting advantage by unleashing 

our people, and our ‘‘Get Real, Get Better’’ call to action empowers our warfighters 

to find and fix problems, and to innovate at every level, from the deckplates to our 

senior leaders. While our Navy team remains the most capable maritime force in 

the world, we have identified unacceptable variability in our performance. To address this, we must standardize and incentivize best practices, leadership behaviors, 

and problem-solving techniques throughout the force to reduce this variability and 

unleash our full potential. The essential element is fostering a healthy ecosystem— 

a culture—that assesses, corrects, and innovates better than the opposition, accelerating our warfighting advantage in this critical decade. 

This past year, the Navy-Marine Corps team executed more than 22,000 steaming 

days and nearly one million flying hours. Additionally, the Navy participated in 

roughly 100 exercises with Allies and partners across the globe, strengthening 

America’s integrated deterrence. We are planning for similarly robust level of exercises and engagement efforts over the next year and in years ahead. As our naval 

forces remain in high demand, our budget request emphasizes critical aspects of our 

readiness. Our Sailors stand ready all over the world, from Sasebo to San Diego and 

from Norfolk to Naples, as our Navy keeps the oceans open and free. 

Since the invasion of Ukraine, the Navy has had a continuous Carrier Strike 

Group presence in the Mediterranean, from the extended deployment of the USS 

Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), to the current deployment of the USS George H. W. 

Bush (CVN 77) Carrier Strike Group. Furthermore, the Navy provided early support 

to European Command operations with surge deployments of additional forces, to 

include six destroyers, two P–8 aircraft, two submarines, and a destroyer squadron 

staff. Our Sailors have been present where it matters, when it matters. Additionally, America’s first-in-class aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) returned 

to Naval Station Norfolk in November after successfully completing its inaugural 

deployment in the Atlantic, conducting exercises, strategic engagements, and port 

visits with Allies and partners. 

We have deepened our integration with the U.S. Marine Corps with the establishment of Task Force 61/2 under Naval Forces Europe. This effort streamlined command and control of Navy and Marine Corps forces deployed to act as a deterrent 

and reinforce Alliance cohesion in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. We 

operationalized this cohesion with the deployment of the USS Kearsarge (LHD 3) 

Amphibious Readiness Group (ARG) with the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit 

(MEU) embarked. After the USS Kearsarge ARG–MEU deployment, the same team 

provided the core U.S. military command element that quickly established humanitarian support for Tu ̈ rkiye after the recent earthquake, utilizing the USS Hershel 

‘‘Woody’’ Williams (ESB 4) to deliver disaster relief supplies for those affected by the 

earthquakes. 

To deliver forward presence and capability, our Navy continues to make progress 

improvements. For example, our aircraft depots are reducing the time it takes to 

conduct maintenance and return aircraft and engines back to the Fleet. Our PB24 

request improves funding over FY23 enactment to sustain gains in our aircraft mission capable rates. Of note, in our aviation depot maintenance account, we increase 

funding for engines by $25 million, $9 million for components, and $1 million for 

our Depot Readiness Initiative. The PB24 request provides for the operation, maintenance and training of nine active Navy Carrier Air Wings, with the necessary 

flight hours and maintenance efforts to ensure their carrier and expeditionary strike 

groups are combat ready. The budget request aligns with our broader focus across 

Naval Aviation to increase lethality and readiness through process improvement 

and finding efficiencies at all organizational levels. As aviation costs—across both 

the private and public sectors—continue to increase, the Navy recognizes the need 

to maintain a relentless drive to reap the full benefit of every investment dollar. 

Better maintenance performance has been a point of emphasis across the Navy. 

Repeatedly deploying combat-credible forces starts with performing high-quality 

maintenance on time and in full. Data-driven reforms such as Performance-to-Plan 

(P2P), the Naval Sustainment System (NSS), and other initiatives continue to improve maintenance processes and increase operational availability. Over the last 

several years, the aviation community has enhanced readiness as we maintained 

over the threshold Mission Capable Rate for most Type-Model-Series Aircraft, including the F/A–18E/F, E/A–18G, E–2D, P–8A, MH–60R, and MH–60S. This represents a significant improvement in Navy aircraft readiness, but we are not yet 

satisfied. We are getting real and getting better at applying what we have learned 

in aviation to our maintenance processes across the fleet. 
24 

We continue to take a data-driven approach to improve surface ship and submarine maintenance, and we have seen positive results. However, unprecedented 

hiring challenges in a competitive job market, along with sustained, pandemic-induced delays and supply chain issues, have hampered progress for our public and 

private shipyards. Our budget request funds both private and public sector ship 

maintenance to 100 percent, with a focus on increasing capacity and retaining highly skilled labor at the public shipyards. On top of those resources, we have invested 

considerably in other requirements essential to the material condition of our Fleet. 

Completing maintenance for our Virginia-class submarines and returning them to the Fleet on time is a critical warfighting priority. To that end, we added $541 million for Virginia-class materiel and spares to build depth and breadth in on-hand 

inventory to help ensure that the necessary parts are available when required during maintenance availabilities. 

We remain committed to driving down costs wherever and whenever possible. In 

particular, P2P-driven improvements—such as the goal of awarding contracts 120 

days before the start of a maintenance availability, level loading ports through better prediction of workload, better availability planning, and improved long-lead-time 

material acquisition—have provided effective solutions for readiness. Still, just like 

our industrial partners, our public shipyards face headwinds from workforce constraints, supply chain logjams, and increased costs due to inflation. We recognize 

the challenges, are not satisfied with current conditions, and will continue to invest 

in people, processes, and infrastructure to drive maintenance delays down to the 

only acceptable number—zero. 

Today, the average age of U.S. naval shipyard facilities and related infrastructure 

is 62 years, while the average dry dock age is approaching 100 years. The Shipyard 

Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) provides a strategic roadmap for necessary investments in our public shipyard dry docks, capital equipment, and facilities. We are committed to taking a holistic, analytic approach to our critical shore 

infrastructure, making necessary investments to overhaul and optimize our Nation’s 

shipyards through SIOP, and ensuring our shore establishment can support fleet operations. With $2.7 billion requested for SIOP in our budget request, the Navy can 

continue to upgrade and reconfigure our four public shipyards. This robust investment in the infrastructure and facilities of our four public shipyards is a vital effort 

to maintain and support upgrades of current and future submarines, aircraft carriers, and surface combatants. 

When fully executed, SIOP will deliver required dry dock repairs and system upgrades that will optimize workflow within the shipyards through significant changes 

to their physical layout. Moreover, the SIOP investments allow the public shipyards 

to recapitalize industrial plant equipment with modern technology that will substantially increase productivity and worker safety. As a result of previous SIOP investments, we have already completed construction of the Super Flood Basin at 

Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, construction of the Norfolk Naval Shipyard Production 

Training Facility, and design of Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard Dry Dock 3 Replacement. We remain committed to working with Congress, DoD leadership, the shipyard workforce, impacted communities, regulators, and industry leaders as we continue to drive down maintenance delays. We acknowledge that submarines are still 

experiencing an unacceptable amount of delay days. Still, these investments in our 

four public shipyards are rebuilding the industrial base we need to maintain, upgrade, and return our ships, submarines and aircraft carriers back where they belong—deployed at sea. 

Maintenance delays and other readiness issues are not solely shipyard problems. 

To ensure fleet readiness, we must also reinforce and build resiliency into our supply chain. The Naval Sustainment System-Supply is driving end-to-end naval supply 

chain integration and reform as it streamlines the Navy’s supply chains to increase 

readiness, decrease turn-around times, increase availability of spares, and reduce 

costs. The key to sustained success will come from the better use of data as we improve the resilience and responsiveness of the Naval Supply System. 

Our Sailors—and the civilian workforce that supports the fleet—remain our most 

important weapon system. We must continue to evaluate and improve our capabilities to achieve our mission of attracting, developing, and managing talent to ensure 

our advantage at sea while providing exceptional service to our Sailors and their 

families. Notably, our budget request contains a substantial 5.2 percent pay raise 

for our military and civilians. From education and training to overall health and 

wellness, our budget invests in our Navy’s most important asset—our people. 

To ensure the readiness of every operational unit, we are working hard to resolve 

the manpower problems that exist in the fleet. The solution begins with more robust 

recruiting and retention efforts. We also need to keep honing and optimizing personnel readiness metrics to include the experience and proficiency of Sailors to de-
25 

termine whether operational units are getting personnel with the right skills. The 

solution demands the continuous effort of leadership as we must continue to 

prioritize and care for our Sailors and Civilians. 

The Navy continues the Fleet Training Wholeness initiative to integrate live platforms and simulators across our strike groups. This initiative funds Live, Virtual, 

and Constructive (LVC) training at the unit and strike group levels. In the fleet, 

LVC continues to be a game-changer in training our combat leaders. To date, fleet 

exercises like Large Scale Exercise-21 have connected eight Maritime Operations 

Centers, three Marine Force Operations Centers, eight Carrier and Expeditionary 

Strike Groups, and 30 ships into a single LVC training environment. As we look 

ahead to Large Scale Exercise-23, planned for August of this year, our expanding 

LVC capabilities will only increase the numbers of total participants—training both 

at-sea and pierside—in an advanced, global scenario. From the pilot in the cockpit 

to the technician on the radar scope, LVC initiatives allow warfighters in all domains to train together at unprecedented levels of integration and complexity. 

Investments in training like the Ready Relevant Learning (RRL) initiative allow 

the Navy to continue to modernize Navy training and accelerate new delivery methods, supplementing our traditional brick-and-mortar schoolhouses with modern, 

multi-media, multi-platform solutions. In addition, RRL will develop Career-Long 

Learning Continuums for Navy ratings to map out technical, professional, and leadership training requirements for apprentice, journeyman, and master level milestones in a Sailor’s career. Career-Long Learning Continuum efforts will change the 

paradigms of Navy training by delivering Navy Enlisted Classification refresher 

training, performance support at the point of need coupled with journeyman and 

master core training to close not only existing capability gaps, but also enhance fleet 

readiness. 

To maintain a Fleet prepared to fight and win in long-term strategic competition, 

we continue to evaluate and improve our capability to attract, develop, and manage 

a talented and diverse workforce. Furthermore, at a time of intense talent competition and a rapidly evolving tactical and technical landscape, we are committed to 

modernizing and enhancing our entire talent management approach to recruit and 

retain the best and brightest. We are also reengineering advancement and assignment policies and practices to deliver a positive Sailor experience in terms of transparency, flexibility, and career-driven choice, while attempting to balance Sailor personal and professional desires with Navy priorities. 

As part of this initiative, we released MyNavy Assignment (MNA)—an upgrade 

to our detailing platform providing visibility of all available billets as part of the 

Detailing Marketplace Assignment Policy (DMAP). MNA is a modern user interface 

providing Sailors the ability to bookmark billets of interest and provide amplifying 

information. DMAP continues to expand Sailors’ options beyond the traditional enlisted career paths. It also rewards Sailors in sea-intensive ratings who stay on sea 

duty by offering assignment-based monetary incentives and early advancement opportunities for many Sailors who possess the requisite proficiency and experience. 

We expanded this practice and policy to supervisor positions through the Senior Enlisted Marketplace (SEM), beginning with Master Chief billets during FY 2024 advancement selection boards. We plan to expand to Senior Chief and Chief Petty Officer billets in the following 2 years to expand SEM to become the primary means 

of advancement. 

To accelerate those Sailors with the highest competence and strongest record, we 

expanded the Advancement-to-Position (A2P) program to fill priority supervisor and 

journeyman-level billets in eight additional ratings. A2P assists in filling critical 

gaps and rewards proven performers willing to take a difficult assignment with a 

spot promotion. We have also empowered commanding officers and officers-in-charge 

to reward top performers with both an advancement and geographic stability allowed by a guaranteed follow-on three-year assignment at the same unit through 

the Command Advancement-to-Position program. These talent management initiatives support Sailor development, increase transparency, and generate Fleet-wide, 

warfighting readiness. 

With great sadness, we recognize that suicide rates increased in 2022. Navy leaders and I have been traveling to ships, squadrons, and bases to listen, learn, and 

help. Every loss of life is a tragedy. As we continue to destigmatize mental health 

treatment, we are working to ensure every Member has access to the full continuum 

of mental health support. Our budget request expands mental health programs like 

Sailor Assistance and Intercept for Life, adds support for the 21st Century Sailor 

Office, and increases our Warrior Toughness Teams to help foster the mental, physical, and spiritual resilience of our forces. Along with these programs, we are working to ensure the availability of mental health and wellness support worldwide, including at specialty and primary care clinics, Navy installation counseling centers, 
26 

on the waterfront, embedded within the fleet, and via virtual health platforms. 

Navy Chaplains and deployed resiliency counselors provide confidential counseling 

and are essential in ensuring the spiritual readiness and resiliency of the Naval 

Force. The Navy’s budget request continues to resource quality care for our Sailors 

and support services for them and their families. 

Though we work in the profession of arms and accept the hazards that come with 

defending our country, all Sailors deserve to be treated with respect and dignity and 

should feel safe among their fellow shipmates. We are focused on creating a culture 

intolerant of sexual assault and are actively executing and evaluating the DoD Prevention Plan of Action. This is a comprehensive approach to promote prevention and 

reduce destructive personnel behaviors that lead to incidents. In addition, we are 

implementing the 82 Independent Review Commission (IRC) recommendations on 

accountability, prevention, climate, culture, and victim care. Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) personnel remain fully available to Sailors worldwide to 

address victims’ physical, mental, and emotional well-being, strengthen resilience, 

encourage reporting, and support victim recovery. 

Moreover, we do not accept any form of sexual harassment in our Navy. To ensure 

Sailors are heard, and to remove actual or perceived bias from the process, Navy 

Sexual Harassment investigations are now conducted by an independent third party 

assigned from outside the command. Likewise, the establishment of the Navy’s Office of Special Trial Counsel ensures that accountability for sexual assault and sexual harassment, among other serious offenses, will be handled by an independent, 

specialized, and expert cadre of professionals. We listen, and we continue to learn. 

Our work to eliminate sexual assaults and remove sexual harassment from our fleet 

is not done. 

When Sailors are valued for their diverse talents and are treated with respect and 

dignity, they feel a sense of belonging to their teams and deliver a higher level of 

performance. With nearly 50 percent of recruitable talent coming from diverse populations, the Navy must be deliberate in advancing a culture where every person, regardless of their background, has the opportunity to succeed as a Sailor and where 

our Navy, in turn, benefits from our Sailors’ talents, experiences, and insights. We 

have built on lessons learned from our findings in Task Force One Navy and have 

launched 53 Task Force One Navy initiatives, which remain on track for full implementation. 

All of our most pressing challenges require strong leadership. However, in the 

past year, as required to support the Space Force and by the FY17 National Defense 

Authorization Act, the Navy reduced more than 8 percent of its Flag Officer billets. 

These leadership reductions 

come at a high cost to maintaining operational readiness, impeding the Navy’s efforts in an already challenging operational environment. At present, nearly onethird of the Navy’s remaining 149 Flag Officer billets are double- or triple-hatted. 

These significant additional demands on leadership have ripple effects on readiness 

that negatively permeate across the fleet. To ensure our Navy can respond in crisis 

and win in conflict, we need Flag Officers with the focus and bandwidth to respond 

thoughtfully to the many challenges the Navy must navigate. 

In the Navy, we serve as families. To improve the lives of our Sailors and their 

families, we continue to focus on improving the consistency of Sailor pay, quality 

of unaccompanied housing, and other quality of life services. This includes installing 

broadband Internet services and wireless connectivity, improving berthing barge living conditions, improving crew parking and transportation, and ensuring an overall 

better experience for Sailors on the waterfront. Access to high-quality childcare is 

critical to supporting our warfighters. Our budget request supports increased staff 

salaries and adds two new Child Development Centers. Funding will also support 

adding full-day pre-Kindergarten opportunities at overseas locations. 

We know that to retain our Force of talented and trained Sailors we must continue to invest in ways that benefit them and their families, while providing environments that make them feel valued and enable them to serve honorably. Continued funding to improve the lives of Sailors will be our greatest return on investment. Our people form the keel of our fleet’s readiness and they will inspire the next 

generation to answer our Nation’s call to serve. 

CAPABILITIES

The Navy’s budget request makes substantial investments that will modernize our 

capabilities. The Navy prioritizes delivering capabilities that can achieve lethal and 

persistent effects inside adversary weapon engagement zones, generate advantages 

to create off-ramps in crisis, and decisively win should crisis escalate into conflict. 

As the challenges in this era require the support and unified effort of Allies and 
27 

partners, it is fundamental to our success that we develop compatible and complementary capabilities. To win now and in the future, we strive not only for interoperability with Allies and partners, but also for interchangeability across the combined force. 

As we build and deploy a Navy capable of deterring and, if necessary, defeating 

a strategic competitor, we must prioritize capabilities for DMO—our Navy’s 

foundational operating concept for maintaining warfighting advantage in contested 

seas. The Navy’s budget request focuses on delivering these critical capabilities. To 

expand our reach, we are investing in hypersonic weapons, space-based capabilities, 

unmanned tanking, and long-range precision fires. For increased deception and defense, we are investing in undersea platforms, weapons, and systems, next-generation aircraft and surface platforms, cyber capabilities, counter-surveillance, and integrated weapons systems. Finally, we are investing in smaller, lethal platforms, autonomous systems in all domains, AI, resilient logistics, and integrated combat systems and networks, all of which enable a more distributed fleet, the delivery to sustain it, and expand our decision advantage. 

Our adversaries are also heavily investing in emerging technologies. In response, 

the Navy will adopt a more agile approach to experimentation and force modernization, leveraging partnerships with industry and academia. Working closely with Allies and partners, we will expand our partnerships across the entire technology ecosystem. Maritime dominance has always depended upon the employment of gamechanging capabilities in combat. 

Rising to meet today’s challenges with unmatched capabilities, the Navy-Marine 

Corps combat team completed its first deployment of F–35C and CMV–22B this past 

year. The warfighting advantages these platforms bring to the battlespace provide 

the Joint Force with an undeniable, lethal edge over our adversaries. Both aircraft, 

though different mission sets, allow our forces to project power deep behind enemy 

lines. In addition, the USS Gerald R. Ford completed its first deployment. This aircraft carrier not only signals the next generation of our fleets’ principal weapon of 

power projection has arrived, but also that our nation remains poised and committed to maintaining our warfighting advantage for decades to come. Deploying 

such capabilities and platforms marks the culmination of many years and many 

people’s hard work, showing the capabilities that our Nation can bring to bear. 

One of the key areas that is shaping and will continue to shape future warfare 

is the incorporation of cyber-warfare tools to detect and defeat adversary attempts 

to infiltrate and disrupt our warfighting systems. The Navy continues to make this 

a priority focus area to ensure our forces are ready to respond to adversary cyberattacks. In addition, the Navy is working closely with the Joint Force to develop 

cyber capabilities that can be used across the entire spectrum of conflict. As such, 

the Navy will continue moving from its current compliance-based cybersecurity approach to one where the right to operate is earned and managed every day. Teams 

organized around the Department’s recently-announced Cyber Ready effort will develop solutions, select tools, and produce methods, policies, guidance, and concepts 

of operation for instituting this new approach. A critical element to implementing 

this approach is the need to ensure the Navy has a skilled cyber-workforce comprised of both military and civilian cyber experts. To ensure the Navy has the cyber 

workforce the nation needs, and in alignment with Congressional intent, we are implementing a dedicated cyber designator. We remain committed to growing this capability alongside the Joint Force, as well as with our Allies and partners, collectively building a more robust security outlook. 

In response to potential adversaries developing and fielding hypersonic missile 

systems, the Navy collaborated with the rest of the defense enterprise to make 

hypersonics one of our highest priority modernization efforts. This past year has 

been marked with certified successes for our Conventional Prompt Strike capability. 

In 2022, we conducted one First Stage and one Second Stage Solid Rocket Motor 

static fires, marking five successful static fire tests of the newly developed missile. 

In another joint effort, the Navy Strategic Systems Programs and the Army 

Hypersonic Project Office successfully conducted the second High Operational 

Tempo for Hypersonics flight campaign in October, 2022. These developments represent significant progress in our hypersonic capabilities, and both programs are on 

track to support the first fielding of a hypersonic capability to the Army later this 

year. Both the Army and the Navy programs are on track to support the first fielding of a hypersonic capability to the Army later this year. Stable funding at the requested level will keep this critical capability on track to field on Zumwalt-class 

DDGs, followed by Virginia-class SSNs equipped with the Virginia Payload Module. 

The rapid development and demonstration of conventional land and sea-based 

hypersonic strike weapon systems support our Nation’s ability to deter and, if nec-
28 

essary, defeat potential strategic competitors. Modernizing capabilities will remain 

a priority to ensure our Navy maintains warfighting advantage. 

Weapons with range and speed are critical capabilities. Our budget request pursues four multi-year procurement contracts for Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air 

Missiles and Standard Missile-6 (SM–6). In addition, our request allows us to continue to work jointly with the Air Force in the procurement and production of Joint 

Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles and Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles. We are also increasing our investments in Maritime Strike Tomahawks, as well as refreshing and 

recertifying existing Tomahawks and MK–48 Heavyweight Torpedoes. 

Above the sea, we remain resolute in our commitment to the Joint Force in establishing air superiority in the maritime domain, and sustaining our unique ability 

to project power from the flight decks of our aircraft carriers. The Navy’s PB24 request supports procurement of thirty-four aircraft, modification, spares and support 

equipment. In this budget, our significant aviation investments include 15 F–35C 

Lightning II’s, 14 Multi-Engine Training Systems, 2 MQ–4 Tritons, and 3 MQ–25 

Stingray II’s. These advanced platforms are helping us drive down risk in our future 

carrier airwings, which will fully integrate unmanned carrier aviation. This past 

year, we completed MQ–25A aircraft in-flight refueling of Navy carrier-based aircraft and its first carrier demonstration. This unmanned aerial platform will complement the capability of our combat strike fighters and extend the range of our aircraft carriers. 

We continue to make progress on the future technologies we need. This past year, 

we completed over 4000 hours and 46,000 nautical miles of unmanned surface vehicle operations. These unmanned systems, and others like them, will play a key role 

in building our capability to conduct DMO. To operationalize the Department’s Unmanned Campaign Plan, we established Task Force 59, which has been a gamechanger for the fleet. As we prioritize the Indo-Pacific and push warships to patrol 

those waters, we have leveraged unmanned surface vessels and achieved outstanding maritime domain awareness in a critical region with three major 

chokepoints—the Suez Canal, the Bab Al-Mandab, and the Strait of Hormuz—spanning a maritime area the size of California. This achievement provides the Navy 

with scalable solutions to monitor the world’s waterways and keep the oceans open 

and free. 

As AI and other disruptive technologies rapidly proliferate, we must proactively 

work to gain every advantage. Many of these rising technological developments play 

to our strengths as a nation. More sensors, providing more information, create more 

battlespace transparency. Our application of AI solutions will provide our forces 

with decision superiority as we map, measure, manage, and govern the battle space. 

We will continuously leverage such technological developments to better the fleet 

and our Sailors. While strengthening our Force, we must remain aware that no nation has a monopoly on innovation—and history has shown us the navy that continues to adapt, learn, and improve the fastest gains a strategic warfighting advantage. 

To enhance our current and future hybrid fleet, we are maturing AI-enabled 

warfighting capabilities and developing an AI-ready workforce. This past year, Task 

Force 59 led and participated in International Maritime Exercise (IMX) 2022, the 

largest maritime AI and autonomous system exercise ever held. Along with this 

IMX, we executed Digital Horizon, an event exercising 15 advanced unmanned systems, 10 of which operated in the Middle East for the first time. Task Force 59 led 

industry partners during phased evolutions, both ashore and at sea, to advance fleet 

efforts to enhance regional maritime awareness with greater effectiveness and reduced cost. 

Along with building testing platforms and driving operational concepts for the future fleet, Task Force 59 advances our understanding of commercial technology that 

has the potential to complement other government-sponsored AI procurement and 

operations. In support of these efforts, the Unmanned Task Force continues to focus 

on rapid experimentation and solving operational problems to quickly inform acquisition strategies. We also continued work with partners and Allies in events such 

as NATO Maritime Unmanned Systems Initiative Exercises. 

CAPACITY

Congress’s support of the Navy’s shipbuilding budget this past year helped us signal our partners in industry—as well as our challengers around the world—that we 

will remain the world’s strongest maritime power. Authorizing and appropriating 

the procurement of 12 battle force ships displays Congress’ continued commitment 

to the Navy’s shipbuilding programs. We appreciate the strong support by Congress 
29 

for naval shipbuilding during FY23 enactment. This year, our budget requests funding for procurement of an additional nine battle force ships. 

With sustained funding, the Navy can turn the corner on beginning to build the 

fleet this Nation needs: a combat-credible, hybrid fleet capable of succeeding across 

the continuum of day-to-day competition, crisis, and conflict. We also need a fleet 

with the capacity to distribute assets and deliver larger volumes of kinetic and nonkinetic effects across all domains to meet the strategic and operational demands of 

the Joint Force. 

The Navy’s most critical role in support of our national defense and robust nuclear posture continues to be maintaining the most lethal ballistic missile submarines in the world. Thus, our number one acquisition priority remains the ontime delivery of the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine. Originally designed 

for a 30-year service life, the first of the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines will 

be retired in 2027 after 42 years of highly effective deterrent patrols. The Columbiaclass will replace it as the Navy’s contribution to the nuclear triad—which remains 

the most survivable leg of the U.S. strategic nuclear deterrent force. This is a oncein-a-generation investment, and sustaining our Nation’s most secure and reliable 

strategic nuclear deterrent will require considerable resources. When the Columbiaclass enters full-rate production in FY26, delivering the Nation’s sea-based nuclear 

deterrent will consume nearly a quarter of the Navy’s entire shipbuilding budget. 

The Navy’s request funds the second Columbia-class submarine and delivery of the 

first vessel in FY28. Specifically, the Columbia-class program request of $5.8 billion, 

includes the first of 2 years of incremental full funding for the second submarine, 

to be awarded in FY24. The budget request also includes continuing Integrated Enterprise Plan funding initiatives, material procurement for future boats, and continued funding for Submarine Industrial Base investments. The strategic significance 

of this platform requires the Navy and the Nation to dedicate the necessary resources to ensure its on-time delivery. 

Shipbuilding remains critical to increasing our fleet’s capacity, and requires significant investments from both the government, as included in the FY24 request, 

and the private sector. A combined commitment ensures healthy competition in the 

shipbuilding industrial base, which is vital to meeting Navy requirements in support of our national interests and defense of the homeland. With the help of Congress, the Navy and private shipbuilders are identifying opportunities to generate 

resiliency and productivity in the shipbuilding workforce. Part of the challenge of 

growing the fleet is having enough shipyards with the capacity and workforce to 

build the ships that we are budgeted. 

The shipbuilding industrial base faces an increase in demand across the enterprise, particularly in nuclear ship construction. As the Navy ramps up production 

of the Columbia-class, we continue to procure two Virginia-class submarines per 

year. The Virginia-class submarine budget requests $10.3 billion, or 32 percent of 

this appropriation, funding two Block V submarines and Advance Procurement for 

two FY 2025 and two FY 2026 submarines. Additionally, we continue production of 

the world’s most capable, most lethal surface vessels. The Ford-class carrier program requests $1.9 billion, and funds the seventh increment of funding for CVN 80, 

and the sixth increment of funding for CVN 81. As part of the surface combatant 

portfolio, our budget requests $4.5 billion for two Arleigh Burke-class Destroyers as 

part of the FY23–FY27 multi-year procurement of modern Flight III Destroyers. We 

plan to award these destroyers this fiscal year. To support the building of our Constellation-class Frigates, our request includes $2.2 billion for the fifth and sixth 

ships of this class. These investments ensure that we field a fleet that sails forward, 

keeps the oceans open, and ensures our maritime advantage on and below the seas. 

To ensure that we can build the future submarines and aircraft carriers, we are 

taking steps to expand and strengthen the nuclear industrial base by investing in 

six key areas: shipbuilder infrastructure, supply chain capability/capacity, scaling 

new technologies, addressing workforce trade skill gaps and constraints, expanding 

productive capacity via strategic outsourcing of large scale fabrication, and government oversight of expanded industrial base efforts. In the Navy, any time we are 

splitting atoms, we know the work will be demanding, but these nuclear-powered 

platforms require our sustained commitment and continued support of the shipbuilders delivering these critical assets to the fleet. 

Beyond these nuclear shipbuilding projects, we are working closely with private 

shipyards to strengthen the Surface Combatant Industrial Base and Frigate Industrial Base. A key focus has been on the Workforce Development investments that 

address risk in schedules, increase capability to meet future force structure, promote 

job creation and economic security, and address risk in single or fragile supply 

chains. Expanding the capabilities of suppliers and shipyard infrastructure in the 

surface ship industrial base results in greater industrial base stability, cost savings, 
30 

and improved efficiency as production increases to build greater quantities of surface combatants. These initiatives are paralleled by ongoing private sector investments to expand the nation’s shipbuilding industrial base. We support any efforts 

to grow our capacity to build more ships annually. This is all part of a long-term 

commitment and clear signal to industry that the unique work done in our private 

shipyards is essential to the nation, and the workforce they provide will be gainfully 

employed for years to come. The Nation’s shipbuilding industrial base remains a 

strategic asset. It requires continued support to expand its capacity, and to recruit 

and retain the workforce the Nation needs to deliver the fleet of tomorrow. 

A robust munitions industrial base, capable of delivering critical munitions in 

large quantities and in strategically relevant timeframes, is also an essential component of our Nation’s warfighting capacity. The rapid expenditure of munitions in 

Ukraine has demonstrated the timeless truth that industrial capacity is a key enabler of victory. Our budget request adds over $2 billion in critical munitions investments, including supporting multi-year procurement contracts. We are working 

closely with our defense partners to make the necessary investments to allow us to 

rapidly ramp up production of critical munitions right now. We are taking a multipronged approach to introduce both stability and competition into the weapons acquisition process in order to accelerate delivery times, increase inventories, and 

lower costs. This includes use of multi-year contracts and large lot procurements, 

recertification of existing munitions, new production, and exploration of alternative 

systems designed to circumvent our adversaries’ advantages and play to our 

strengths. We are also working with our partners and Allies to ensure their requirements are met, as well. Today’s weapons are intricate, specialized, and depend on 

complex supply chains, which challenges our ability to quickly ramp up production. 

We cannot afford to wait until conflict begins to make these critical munitions capacity investments. 

Unmanned systems will play an ever-increasing role in expanding the capacity 

and distribution of our fleet. We will explore opportunities to scale proven capabilities of unmanned Maritime Domain Awareness systems, such as those demonstrated by Task Force 59. In addition, the AI-enabled software that meshes our 

network of systems and platforms will provide an array of decision advantage solutions as we track forces, manage the battlespace, and maintain our dominance at 

sea. Finally, we must focus on accelerating the adoption of technologies and scalable 

platforms that provide increased capability and capacity, while laying the foundation for our future hybrid fleet. 

CONCLUSION

The U.S. Navy’s mission has never been more essential for the preservation of 

American security and prosperity. Facing increasingly aggressive challengers, the 

Navy’s priorities—Readiness, Capabilities, Capacity—will help us maintain our combat credibility in contested seas. 

In line with the NDS, the Navy’s Fiscal Year 2024 budget request keeps us on 

a steady path to modernize U.S. naval power, while maintaining readiness and sustaining a forward posture that keeps America and our Allies safe and prosperous. 

Capable ships, submarines, and aircraft are expensive instruments of national 

power, as are the costs of maintaining and sustaining them. However, without a 

ready, powerful Navy, the costs we incur in potential conflict could be much higher. 

The investments we make now will shape the global maritime balance of power for 

the rest of this century. 

This is my final testimony before this Committee. It has been the honor of a lifetime serving as the Chief of Naval Operations these past three-plus years. 

On behalf of more than 600,000 active and reserve Sailors and Navy Civilians, 

thank you for allowing me to testify today. I am grateful to this Committee and to 

your colleagues in Congress for your steadfast commitment to the Navy. Let us continue our work to deliver the Navy that this Nation deserves—a Navy that will preserve peace, strengthen prosperity, and defend America for many decades to come. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Admiral Gilday. 

Next up, we have got General Berger. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL DAVID H. BERGER, COMMANDANT OF THE 

UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS 

General BERGER. Thank you. Three years ago,—it did a rapid 

change, and was required to meet our statutory missions and the 

mandates of the National Defense Strategy, and with the bipar-
31 

tisan help of this committee and the support of my civilian leadership in the Pentagon. The Marine Corps Force Design is no longer 

a future aim point, it is today. It is a reality. 

And in INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command), for example, Task 

Force 76.3 creating advanced information webs to support Maritime Awareness, they took what they learned in experimentation, 

and turned it into kill webs during exercise in the Philippines and 

in Japan earlier this spring, right in the Chinese backyard. And 

the EUCOM (European Command) Task Force 61.2 found ways to 

create greater Air and Maritime Domain Awareness for the Sixth 

Fleet, focusing on Russian naval and air activities. 

In CENTCOM (Central Command), General Kurilla has Marine 

Corps MQ–9s, providing persistent ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, 

Reconnaissance) that he needs to monitor the key Maritime Terrain. Next month, our new Marine Littoral Regiment, Third MLR, 

will demonstrate some of its newest sensing and lethal capabilities 

in the Philippines during an exercise called Balikatan, right alongside our allies and partners. 

And in January of this year, a couple months ago, Japan agreed 

to host our Second Marine Littoral Regiment, which is Twelfth 

MLR that will be forward into the first island chain, where persistent Marine Corps presence matters most. So in short, your Marines are aware it matters most today, just as they always have 

been. 

Three years ago, I described how the Marine Corps would not 

just modernize quickly, but we would self-fund those changes we 

had to make. We would get leaner, lighter, and more naval. And 

in 3 short years your Marines have done just that. Marines are in 

the field, and those changes are in the field today, we are not waiting for 2025, or 2027, or 2030, your Marines are ready to handle 

any crisis, anywhere now. 

Our major divestments are done. We are at our fighting weight. 

Now we have to sustain our modernization efforts while focusing, 

as the Secretary mentioned, on the quality of life issues most important to the Marines, Sailors, and the families. People are the 

real source of our competitive advantage. And I ask for your help 

now to invest in their quality of life. 

We must focus now on where Marines and families live, where 

they eat, where they work, Marines and Sailors expect that from 

us, and they deserve it. Restoring and modernizing our infrastructure is directly tied to retention, supporting our families and generating readiness. 

So on behalf of all Marines I ask for your support now as we 

bring our facilities up to par with the quality of Marines and Sailors operating from those warfighting platforms. 

And I would also ask for your support to our Naval Expeditionary capability, the CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) and I 

agree on three key principles when it comes to amphibious ships. 

First, the absolute minimum of L-class amphibious ships the Nation needs is 31. That is the warfighting requirement. Second, 

block buys save money, and they give industry predictability. And 

third, divesting without replacing creates unacceptable risk. 

Amphibious ships are critical to crisis response for this country. 

That is how we evacuated citizens, U.S. citizens out of Lebanon. 
32 

That is how the U.S. made initial entry into Afghanistan after 9/ 

11, from the sea. And when DOD (Department of Defense) sends 

its life-saving support after hurricanes, and typhoons, and earthquakes around the world, and here in the U.S., amphibious ships 

with embarked Marines were the only practical option. 

Today, we need to do all that plus directly contribute to campaigning in integrated deterrence. Here is the bottom line from 

where I see it, the first time we can’t respond to an ally or partner 

in time of crisis it will probably be the last time they depend on 

us for help, and we cannot let those partnerships erode. 

In my final year as commandant, I will finish by just saying 

thank you. Your Marine Corps wouldn’t be where it is today without your oversight, your guidance, your unwavering support. 

And with that, I welcome your questions. I look forward to working closely with this committee in the months to come. Thank you, 

sir. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENERAL DAVID H. BERGER

Chair, Ranking Member, and distinguished members of the Committee, I am 

thankful for the opportunity to report the progress of your Marine Corps over the 

last year and seek your support in continuing to prepare the Service to face an increasingly uncertain and challenging future. I would be remiss, in my final year as 

Commandant, if I did not first acknowledge the unwavering support of this Committee over the last 3 years. Simply put, the Marine Corps of today is a better fighting force because of your guidance, commitment, and resourcing decisions. But there 

is still much work to be done. A brief review of world events over the past few years 

tells us we are moving in the right direction, but we cannot slow down. In fact, we 

need to accelerate our efforts so your Marine Corps can effectively deter while remaining ready to immediately respond to any crisis, anywhere on the globe, at any 

time. The work of this Committee is crucial to the modernization of the Marine 

Corps into a force that will continue to do just that. 

POSTURE

Today, more than 32,000 Marines are forward-deployed or stationed across 50 

countries. There are also, on average, 102 Marine Corps fixed-wing aircraft (F–35, 

F/A–18, and KC–130J) forward-deployed or stationed overseas, a 22 percent increase 

since 2018. This forward posture is a critical requirement for integrated deterrence 

and reinforces a national source of strategic advantage—our global network of allies 

and partners. 

Most Marine forces west of the International Date Line are based in Japan. In 

January, the Government of Japan announced its intention to host the future 12th 

Marine Littoral Regiment (MLR). This unit will possess advanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities as well as long range precision fires 

capabilities, improving both maritime domain awareness and our ability to deter potential adversaries. When combined with the other stand-in force capabilities of III 

Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF), 12th MLR will provide a major lethality upgrade for the fleet and joint force in the Indo-Pacific. 

While our posture has become more robust in the Indo-Pacific, fewer of our forward-deployed Marines are serving afloat with the fleet. In 2018, 16,000 Marines 

served aboard ships, but in 2022, just 12,660 did so—a 20 percent decrease. The 

principal reason for this decline was the lack of amphibious warfare ship availability. As directed by the Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) National Defense Authorization 

Act (NDAA), 10 LHA/LHD and 21 LPDs are the bare minimum necessary for our 

amphibious fleet. Additionally, in my best military judgment, the Marine Corps 

needs a minimum of seven Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Units 

(ARG/MEU), three MLRs, and 35 Medium Landing Ships (LSM) to provide a strong 

forward posture for building partnerships in the littorals and to contribute to integrated deterrence. 
33 

RESOURCES

The FY24 budget request for the Marine Corps is $53.2 billion (B). To date, the 

Marine Corps has taken every possible opportunity to self-fund our modernization. 

This required hard choices and difficult, unpopular decisions. With the support of 

our civilian leadership in the Department of the Navy (DoN), Department of Defense (DoD), and Congress, from Presidential Budget 2020 (PB20) to PB23 this approach succeeded. Over the last five program objective memorandum (POM) cycles, 

the Marine Corps divested $18.2B across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) 

in structure and legacy platforms and systems and has reinvested $15.8B directly 

into modernization. The success of these divest-to-invest actions would not have 

been possible without the support of our civilian and Congressional leadership. 

To be clear, the Marine Corps is now complete with our major divestments. Reducing the approved acquisition objectives (AAO) of major programs like the CH– 

53K or F–35 at this point would not produce resources for investment elsewhere and 

would be premature decisions. We approached FY24 as a program review year. Limiting the introduction of new programs in FY24 allows the Marine Corps to maintain or even accelerate progress on investments from preceding budget cycles that 

are directly tied to our pacing threat. 

The suggestion that we may have to choose between preparing to fight tonight— 

which your Marines are fully prepared to do—and preparing for some distant point 

in the future presents a false dichotomy. Readiness, lethality, and modernization to 

meet future challenges are all required today. Our collective challenge is to balance 

the resource tension between the force we employ today and the development of the 

force to compete and win in the years to come. 

WARFIGHTING READINESS

In many ways, Marine Corps readiness has improved since 2018. Our units have 

higher levels of persistent manning/staffing, more equipment and supplies, enhanced individualized training, and more collective training—much of it force-onforce. Our combat arms units are equipped with modern capabilities far superior to 

those of past formations. Yet, while many things have changed, the foundational elements have not. We remain the most elite infantry in the world, with the most proficient combined arms teams on the globe. 

While there have been substantive readiness improvements across the force, nowhere have these improvements been more visible than in Marine aviation. Across 

all type/model/series of aircraft, our mission capable rate has increased from 57 percent in 2018 to 66 percent in 2023—an achievement that would not have been possible without Congressional support and the herculean efforts of Marine aviation 

mechanics and maintenance crews. We anticipate further improvements to aviation 

readiness as we retire older airframes (e.g., F/A–18 and CH–53E) and accelerate acquisition of newer platforms like the F–35B/C and CH–53K. 

In 2018, we employed a lethal, though primarily fourth generation, tactical air 

(TACAIR) force of 173 F/A–18C/D and 126 AV–8B, with 72 fifth generation F–35B/ 

Cs. Today, our TACAIR force is comprised of 174 F–35B/C and 178 fourth generation aircraft—a major step forward. Despite the challenges associated with 

transitioning the force from fourth to fifth generation aircraft, the overall readiness 

of our TACAIR fleet increased from 56 percent in 2018 to 68 percent in 2023. 

We have also achieved significant gains in the readiness of our MV–22 fleet, rising from 52 percent in 2018 to 64 percent in 2023. The current challenges surrounding a series of hard clutch engagements caused each of the Services to take 

immediate action to replace certain transmission components in our V–22 fleets. 

That action is ongoing, and we expect to see a rebound in readiness this spring and 

summer. 

Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV): The introduction of the ACV has the potential 

to greatly enhance our littoral mobility and expeditionary reach. However, as with 

all new systems and technologies, there have been a few notable challenges. At 

present, we are working with BAE Systems to address two major component 

issues—one with the struts/shock absorbers, and the other with the central tire inflation system. Both issues have caused part failures, resulting in a decrease in reliability and a corresponding decrease in readiness. We have also identified issues related to possible water incursion into the power train and are working with our industry partner to resolve those as well. In addition to these mechanical issues, we 

have experienced three incidents in the surf zone that resulted in vehicles rolling 

over. According to BAE Systems and confirmed by our safety investigations, these 

rollovers were caused by a lever effect generated when the vehicle becomes parallel 

to the surf-line and is struck by a large wave. These events were, in large part, the 

product of training shortfalls. We are actively working with BAE Systems to rectify 
34 

all mechanical concerns and are enhancing the training regimen for our vehicle operators on this new and more sophisticated amphibious vehicle. 

F135 Engine: In both PB22 and PB23, Congress enacted funding to support F135 

engine modernization. In addition to this funding, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) added significant resources for an engine core upgrade and for power 

and thermal management system (PTMS) modernization. We will continue to monitor the current F135 engine and F–35 PTMS’s ability to support Block IV mission 

systems and will work with the Joint Program Office to ensure our requirements 

are being met. 

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Pilot Training: As an integral part of Force Design, we embarked along a path in late 2019 to double our uncrewed aircraft capacity across the force from three unmanned aerial vehicle squadrons (VMU) to six 

squadrons, while transitioning from the RQ–21 to the much more capable MQ–9. 

While our commitment to uncrewed systems is unshakeable, we have concluded the 

Air Force’s capacity to generate trained MQ–9 UAS officers is insufficient to satisfy 

Marine Corps requirements. At present, half of our total inventory of UAS officers 

(72 of 148) are not yet trained and qualified to operate the MQ–9. We are working 

with the Air Force to remedy this throughput issue. However, there is a need to 

direct the necessary resources in future budgets to establish a Naval UAS School 

to resolve this larger joint force issue. 

Pilot Readiness Concerns: Service Chiefs are routinely asked about how the joint 

force can effectively compete against the Department’s pacing challenge—the People’s Republic of China (PRC)—or our acute threat—Russia. But there is a different 

competition that is more directly and more adversely impacting the joint force than 

that emanating from either Russia or China, and that is the unhealthy competition 

between the Services and the airline industry. As the head of personnel for the Air 

Force stated during testimony in 2017, we cannot compete with the airlines. We 

could not then and we cannot now. This is an issue that requires your oversight. 

We are at a competitive disadvantage and risk our reservoir of pilots drying up. As 

an example, in 2018, the Marine Corps had 88 of the 203 required F–35 pilots (43 

percent of the requirement). At the end of 2022, we had 218 of 498 F–35 pilots (44 

percent of the requirement). At the end of 2022, we had 200 F–35 pilots in flight 

school and another 62 at our fleet replacement squadrons with FY23 and FY24 completion dates. We are making some progress, but not enough—and certainly not 

quickly enough. We are exploring various options for structuring aviation bonuses 

and aviation incentive pay under the new authorities granted in the FY23 NDAA. 

But ever-larger monetary incentives are neither sustainable nor the appropriate 

remedy. This is not just a Marine Corps problem. It is a joint force problem, and 

we will continue to work with the other services and Congress as our understanding 

of this issue develops. 

FORCE DESIGN AND CURRENT OPERATIONS

There is a misperception by some that Force Design might create a gap in Marine 

Corps capabilities between divestment and fielding new capabilities. The reality is 

that fielding new capabilities associated with Force Design is already well underway. Many of these ‘‘future’’ capabilities tied to Force Design 2030 are already being 

employed by Marine forces today. Six examples from 2022 are illustrative: 

TF 61.2 and Reconnaissance and Counter-reconnaissance: In March 2022, U.S. 

Sixth Fleet partnered with II MEF to create Task Force (TF) 61.2. TF 61.2 was designed as a joint task force crisis response capability to command and control naval 

forces supporting contingencies in Europe and Africa. This force was delegated tactical control of amphibious forces (ARG/MEU) in theater, allocated Marine forces 

(Marine Rotational Force—Europe), and a task organized reconnaissance/counter-reconnaissance force. Near simultaneously, II MEF and 2d Marine Division were 

tasked with ‘‘accelerating experimentation with maritime, multi-domain reconnaissance constructs and activities to enhance the ability of the stand-in force to dominate the information environment, sense and make sense of the situation, and win 

the reconnaissance vs. counter-reconnaissance competition.’’ Commander, Sixth 

Fleet, immediately volunteered TF 61.2 to support these broader Service experimentation efforts. During the next several weeks, TF 61.2 conducted training aboard 

both the USS Woody Williams (ESB–4) and USS Georgia (SSGN–729), and engaged 

in combined-arms training in both Greece and Turkey. Those initial exercises demonstrated that maritime expeditionary forces could increase surface, subsurface, and 

aerial domain awareness for the fleet commander—regardless of theater—and allowed us to focus on the information web required to create domain awareness in 

a contested space. TF 61.2 then transitioned these experimental capabilities to the 

Baltics, where it participated in bilateral training on maritime domain awareness 
35 

with the Estonian Navy in the Gulf of Finland. During this period, TF 61.2 participated in an amphibious landing in Estonia and Exercise BALTOPS with 16 North 

Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) nations, utilizing 47 ships and 7,000 personnel. This new organization has been so successful the previous Commander, U.S. 

European Command (EUCOM) chose to highlight the value of the task force during 

his spring 2022 annual testimony. The bottom line is that your Marines’ ability to 

conduct reconnaissance and counter-reconnaissance is a current force capability that 

directly contributes to competition and deterrence today. 

TF 76.3: Building upon the success of TF 61.2, in October 2022, the 3d Marine 

Expeditionary Brigade and Naval Task Force 76 staffs merged into a completely integrated naval task force in the Indo-Pacific. Over the next several months, TF 76.3 

experimented with naval concepts at sea and ashore via a broad campaign of learning labeled NOBLE FUSION 22.2. TF 76.3 also participated in exercises 

KAMANDANG in the Philippines and RESOLUTE DRAGON in Japan. Once again, 

Marines and Sailors demonstrated the ability to create advanced information webs 

to support maritime domain awareness across the theater. Just as importantly, they 

demonstrated this capability to potential adversaries. 

USS Tripoli: The most recent deployment of the USS Tripoli (LHA–7) demonstrated the strategic and operational advantage that amphibious warfare ships 

create today. In early 2022, Tripoli set sail as an independent deployment, in part 

to test our F–35B ‘‘Lightning Carrier/Assault Carrier’’ concept by which 16–24 F– 

35Bs were embarked and operated in concert with a traditional carrier strike group. 

During Tripoli’s time in the Indo-Pacific, embarked Marines and Sailors trained 

with and supported the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN–72) and USS Ronald Reagan 

(CVN–76), among other traditional surface combatants. Not only did the deployment 

illustrate the potency of the Lightning Carrier concept in support of carrier strike 

group operations, it also demonstrated the versatility and value of the platform for 

the integrated Navy-Marine Corps team. During Exercise VALIANT SHIELD 2022, 

the Commander of U.S. Seventh Fleet, Vice Admiral (VADM) Karl Thomas, embarked his staff aboard the Tripoli and used it as his command platform for 15 

days—a strong endorsement of the platform’s importance within the larger fleet. 

VADM Thomas noted, ‘‘One day you can have F–35Bs on the flight deck, the next 

day you could have MV–22s and you can be putting Marines ashore. . . .it just is 

a very versatile instrument . . . [with] 14 5th-gen fighters on board—it’s an incredibly capable sensor.’’ 

The LHA’s size, which closely mirrors the amphibious warfare ships of our allies, 

makes it an attractive partnership and learning platform. During their deployment, 

Marines and Sailors from Tripoli and the 31st MEU trained with forces from Japan, 

Australia, the Philippines, and Singapore. 

Multifunction Air Operations Center (MAOC): In March 2022, 2d Marine Aircraft 

Wing (MAW) conducted the Service’s first operational deployment of a multi-function air operations center (MAOC). In Lithuania, under the command of U.S. Air 

Forces Europe, the MAOC conducted air surveillance and multi-domain awareness 

in support of NATO operations. This is not simply an evolutionary step in fixed 

aviation command and control (C2) nodes, but rather, a transformational, expeditionary capability that can serve as a hub for Marine Corps, naval, and joint kill 

chains and webs. The MAOC provides the Marine Corps with the capability to control aircraft and missiles, and enables decision superiority. It also offers the ability 

to gain and maintain custody of adversary targets and hold those targets at risk 

via fires with its organic TPS–80 Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar (G/ATOR), Common Aviation Command and Control System (CAC2S), and highly proficient aviation C2 Marines. The MAOC is scalable by task-organized units, small enough to 

support distributed teams or large enough to support a multi-MEF or Corps-level 

fight. This agency construct is also the model we are using for the development of 

all-domain C2. 3d MAW is now leading the Service’s MAOC experimentation efforts 

and employed this capability as part of Marine Rotational Force—Darwin (MRF–D), 

integrating C2 and sensor services for 16 allied and partner nations during Exercise 

PITCH BLACK. From these initial efforts, 3d MAW has matured the MAOC, creating a persistent hub to enhance the common tactical picture for I and III MEF. 

Recent experiments in February 2023, which included U.S. Indo-Pacific Command 

(USINDOPACOM), have further demonstrated the MAOC’s ability to integrate additional capabilities from the MEF Information Group and improve the common tactical picture for a carrier strike group, and is visible evidence of Joint All-Domain 

Command and Control (JADC2) in practice. 

Marine Corps Information Command (MCIC): In October 2022, we streamlined 

and simplified much of the coordination required for space and cyberspace operations at the headquarters level, by realigning current relationships and structure 

at Headquarters, Marine Corps (HQMC) from a staff officer to an operational com-
36 

mander, to create the MCIC. The MCIC is a service-retained command designed to 

integrate global Marine Corps capabilities in information, intelligence, cyberspace, 

and space to support Fleet Marine Forces (FMF) resulting in decision advantage. 

This two-star command operates under Marine Forces Command (MARFORCOM) 

and provides critical linkages across operational level planning. It also provides task 

organized detachments to support the FMF commander’s campaigning objectives. 

This allows the commander to leverage the authorities needed to synchronize global 

cyber, space, influence, and intelligence effects and generate multi-domain advantages in support of the commander’s objectives. The MCIC achieved initial operational capability (IOC) in January 2023. 

VMGR–153 and HMH–461: In January 2023, we activated Marine Aerial Refueler 

Transport Squadron 153 (VMGR–153) in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii. By 2026, VMGR– 

153 will bring 15 KC–130J aircraft to the region, building on the organic mobility 

available to Marines responding to crisis or conflict in the region. We are also approaching 1 year since the CH–53K program achieved IOC and are well underway 

transitioning Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 461 (HMH–461) into our first fully 

operational CH–53K squadron. Despite their ongoing transition, HMH–461 is already demonstrating the significant impact of this new capability, conducting heavy 

lift assault support missions previously impossible with legacy aircraft. In parallel, 

the operational test and evaluation squadron (VMX–1) continues to push the boundaries of heavy lift operations. Last December, they successfully lifted an F–35C, 

demonstrating the platform’s utility in conducting next generation tactical recovery 

missions. 

FORCE DESIGN AND THE GROUND COMBAT ELEMENT (GCE)

Infantry Battalion Experiment (IBX): IBX is an ongoing Service-level initiative designed to evaluate the future infantry battalion’s ability to conduct expeditionary, 

offensive, and defensive operations as an element of a MEU, MLR, or infantry regiment in support of fleet and joint operations. The results of IBX live-force experimentation represent a critical component of our campaign of learning and are one 

of several inputs informing our ongoing assessment of the future infantry battalion. 

After 24 months of experimentations and force-on-force exercises with three infantry battalions, our combat developers, division commanders, and MEF commanders 

recommended an 811-person infantry battalion. This new battalion demonstrated 

improved C2, sensing, and lethality. Importantly, this recommendation reflects the 

value of our campaign of learning. In 2019, we experimented with a 735-person battalion. But force-on-force experimentation made clear our initial assumptions were 

off. It also demonstrated a need for additional ground ISR and indirect fires capacity. In line with these findings, we right-sized personnel, added back indirect fires 

capacity, and added organic UAS platforms and personnel to improve surveillance 

and target acquisition. Future infantry battalions will possess Block IV Javelins at 

the company-level to increase anti-armor capability and will have loitering munitions (organic precision fires (OPF)) at the squad and platoon levels to increase 

lethality, enhance maneuver, and facilitate distributed operations. They will have 

additional communications, logistics, and intelligence capabilities at the companylevel, and new signals intelligence and electromagnetic warfare capabilities at both 

the battalion and company levels. They will possess vehicle-mounted and canisterlaunched OPF at the company and battalion level to enhance the lethality, multidomain awareness, and reach of those units, and will have improved C2 systems 

at the company-level. But our learning never stops. We will build from past efforts 

and conduct another round of experiments with two additional battalions this year. 

These experiments will evaluate the new infantry battalion design against a peer 

adversary, with the aim of further refining its structure and capabilities to the demands of the modern battlefield. We will also begin incorporating our lessons 

learned into FMF battalions not directly involved in IBX later this year. 

Close Combat Lethality: In 2018, former Secretary of Defense James Mattis convened the Close Combat Lethality Task Force (CCLTF). As we approach 5 years 

since that effort was launched, we should take stock of its significant impact. The 

CCLTF’s insights have been instrumental in informing the ongoing transformation 

within our infantry formations, the most visible of which being the success of the 

Multi-purpose Anti-armor Anti-personnel Weapon System (MAAWS). It provides a 

multiple-effects rocket system to infantry and combat engineer squads to increase 

firepower and enhance their ability to close with and destroy the enemy. The 

MAAWS is a medium-range, multi-purpose, man-portable, line-of-sight, reloadable, 

recoilless, day/night, anti-armor, and anti-personnel weapon system with an available suite of 84mm rockets. MAAWS munitions will be capable of obscuration, illumination, personnel denial, armored vehicle denial and penetration, bunker and 
37 

hardened facility penetration, and soft target destruction capabilities. Every rifle 

squad, combat engineer squad, and Marine Special Operations Command 

(MARSOC) team will be equipped with one MAAWS. Fielding began in the 3d quarter (3Q) of FY21 and will be complete in 3QFY25. 

The Marine Corps has also fielded lightweight body armor including a new plate 

carrier (PC Gen 3), and an enhanced combat helmet—all of which address the significant weight of the individual Marine’s combat load so well documented from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, new night vision devices (AN/PVS– 

31A) have enhanced night movement and weapons lethality for our infantry, improving their situational awareness and ability to acquire targets. The MAAWS, 

Squad Common Optic, M27 squad automatic rifle, M17 pistol, and Mk13 and Mk22 

precision rifles have all increased organic lethality within our small units. Multidomain sensing and targeting is being addressed with a new signals intelligence/ 

electromagnetic warfare (SI/EW) program called Marine Electromagnetic Ground 

Family of Systems (MEGFoS). This SI/EW suite of equipment, crewed by dedicated 

SI/EW and cyberspace personnel, will be employed in the future infantry battalion, 

greatly enhancing tactical level target identification and engagement. All these capability enhancements make our squads and platoons more lethal. 

3d MLR and 12th MLR: On 3 March 2022, we activated 3d MLR and it is on 

track to achieve IOC this year. 3d MLR has an established littoral combat team 

(LCT), combat logistics battalion (CLB), and littoral anti-air battalion (LAAB), all 

of which have been exercising in operations, activities, and investment events in the 

Indo-Pacific region. 3d MLR continues to operate in coordination with the Naval 

Surface Group Middle Pacific (NAVSURFGRU MIDPAC) to further develop its maritime fires capabilities, and most recently, deployed to Marine Air-Ground Task 

Force—Training Command (MAGTF—TC) to execute the first Service-level MLR 

training exercise. This exercise focused on the MLR’s ability to sense and make 

sense of the operating environment and rapidly close kill chains. 3d MLR is designed to be a stand-in force, but it is not the Service’s sole stand-in force. Rather, 

it is one part of the larger III MEF system of stand-in forces that includes our forward deployed naval force, as well as other expeditionary capabilities including the 

F–35B/C. 

We are on track to activate 12th MLR by 2025. The Government of Japan and 

Secretary Austin recently announced that 12th MLR will be forward stationed on 

Okinawa to create greater maritime domain awareness and enhance our collective 

ability to deter in the region. As Secretary Austin stated during the announcement, 

‘‘We will equip this new formation with advanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, as well as anti-ship and transportation capabilities that are relevant 

to the current and future threat environments.’’ 12th MLR’s presence and capability 

suite will augment our existing stand-in force capacity in the first island chain. 

These littoral regiments provide the joint force two essential capabilities. First, 

they serve as eyes and ears of the joint force—meaning their persistent, forward, 

and distributed posture enables the joint force to reach well inside of weapons engagement zones. Second, they provide decision space and time for the other joint 

forces to deploy, while maintaining continuous maritime domain awareness. 

FORCE DESIGN EMERGING CAPABILITIES

In addition to current operations that demonstrate Force Design in action today, 

a number of emerging capabilities on the horizon will increase the Marine Corps’ 

ability to enable full-spectrum operations for the Joint Force in contested environments. 

Unmanned Logistics System-Aerial (ULS–A): As the ongoing conflict in Ukraine 

has illustrated, even traditional ground resupply, executed over interior lines and 

relatively short distances, can be disrupted with operational level effects. Consistent 

with these lessons, the Marine Corps is developing the ULS–A Small or Tactical Resupply Unmanned Aircraft System (TRUAS). The TRUAS has a 9-mile range and 

maximum payload of 150 pounds, which is sufficient to fly in ammunition, food, 

medical supplies, and batteries, among other supplies. This small system only requires two Marines to operate and will be a game-changing capability for our distributed forces. The TRUAS is anticipated to achieve IOC in 2023 with fielding completed in 2027. Fielding this capability is critical toward setting conditions for the 

development of the ULS–A Medium system, which is the required capability for 

large-scale tactical distribution in a contested space. The emerging ULS–A Medium 

will be fielded in 2025 and will provide payloads between 300 and 600lbs with a 

range of up to 100 miles. 

Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS): MADIS is an expeditionary, 

upgradable, and state-of-the-art capability to protect maneuver forces, installations, 
38 

and other designated critical assets from fixed/rotary wing (FW/RW) aircraft and 

Group 1–3 UAS. It uses sensor-integrated C2 to provide beyond line-of-sight cueing, 

targeting, and engagement. Current air defense capabilities only defend against FW/ 

RW targets and Group 3 UAS within line of sight. The MADIS is composed of a 

complementary pair of Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV). The Mk1 JLTV is designed to kill FW/RW variants with a turret-mounted 30mm cannon, Stinger missiles, and an electromagnetic warfare (EW) jammer. The Mk 2 JLTV provides redundant, non-kinetic and kinetic fires while primarily employing C2 software and 

sensors to collect, interpret, and pass radar tracks to the Mk 1 via a wireless local 

network for target engagements. The AAO is 131 systems comprised of 262 vehicles; 

the FY24 budget request provides for 13 MADIS (26 vehicles). We will achieve IOC 

in 4QFY24 with the delivery of 17 systems, and we anticipate reaching full operational capability (FOC) in FY31. The FY24 budget request for the MADIS family 

of systems is $265 million (M). 

Medium Range Intercept Capability (MRIC): The MRIC defends forward-deployed 

forces against the threat of cruise missiles and other aerial threats with similar 

flight profiles. This is accomplished through the integration of already-fielded Marine Corps and Israeli systems that include CAC2S, the TPS–80 G/ATOR, the Iron 

Dome Battle Management Controller, and the Tamir missile and guidance uplink. 

Each MEF will be fielded with one MRIC battery. A battery is comprised of a headquarters element and four independently deployable firing platoons. To date, there 

have been four successful live fire events: August 2019, November—December 2021, 

April—June 2022, and September 2022. Each live fire successfully demonstrated the 

destruction of multiple operationally challenging missile threats. The Service’s FY24 

budget request is for $44 million. 

Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS): The Marine 

Corps is transitioning the majority of its existing lightweight 155mm towed artillery 

batteries into medium-range missile (MMSL) batteries equipped with NMESIS to 

conduct anti-surface warfare operations as a component of an integrated naval force. 

By 2030, the Marine Corps will have 14 MMSL batteries: three batteries forward 

deployed in support of MLRs and 11 continental U.S. (CONUS)-based batteries supporting the rotational and MEU deployments. The program will enter low-rate initial production (LRIP) in 3QFY23. The first six operational launchers will be fielded 

to MMSL Battery, 3d MLR in 4QFY23 to give the Service its first capability to contribute to sea denial and sea control operations with ground based anti-ship missile 

(GBASM) fires. We anticipate reaching IOC in FY25 after fielding five MMSL batteries and a MMSL battalion headquarters. We anticipate reaching FOC in FY30 

when all 14 MMSL batteries have been fielded. The Service’s FY24 budget request 

for $402 million supports procurement of 24 NMESIS launchers and associated 

equipment, and 90 Naval Strike Missiles (NSM) keeping the program on track to 

reach 774 NSM. The 774 NSMs provide one combat load plus one combat load resupply per deployed MMSL unit. 

Long-Range Fires (LRF): OSD directed the Marine Corps to develop and field a 

ground-launched Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) capability to support joint 

force long range, precision fires requirements. The LRF weapons system is composed 

of a Remotely Operated Ground Unit for Expeditionary (ROGUE) Fires leader kit, 

LRF launcher, LRF C2 System (LC2S), and LRF Reload and Resupply System 

(LRRS). All four components are required to complete a full mission of loading, 

transporting, and firing a Tomahawk missile. This capability leverages existing 

Navy and Marine Corps hardware and software such as the Mk41 Vertical Launch 

System, Tactical Tomahawk Weapon Control System, Tomahawk cruise missile, and 

JLTV to reduce risk by accelerating capability delivery to the FMF and combatant 

commanders. The current plan is to establish three 16-launcher, long range missile 

(LMSL) batteries to form one LMSL battalion capable of deploying one battery at 

a time by 2030. The first four operational launchers are scheduled to be fielded during 4QFY24. Remaining batteries are planned for activation between FY26 and 

FY28. OSD provided $1.2B in research, development, testing, and evaluation 

(RDT&E) and Procurement Marine Corps (PMC) funding through FY26 to support 

the development and procurement of 56 LRF launchers, C2 and support equipment, 

and 152 Tomahawk (TLAM and MST) missiles. The FY24 budget request for LRF 

is $142 million. 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & EVALUATION (RDT&E)

This year, we will invest heavily in the next generation of RDT&E efforts. We are 

placing an emphasis on the future of Marine aviation, JADC2, persistent sensing, 

and contested logistics, while expanding our experimentation efforts. With the support of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering’s 
39 

Joint Capability Technology Demonstration office, we will begin the Long-Range Attack Munition (LRAM) project, to rapidly develop and field a low-cost, air launched, 

family of loitering and swarming munitions. The LRAM can be employed by not just 

H–1s and F–35s, but also palletized and employed from MV–22s, CH–53Ks, and C– 

130s, thereby significantly expanding our magazine depth. Likewise, we have moved 

out in earnest on experimentation with our capstone research and development effort, the family of integrated targeting cells (FITC). FITC accelerates the evolution 

of combined arms to a new level. It fuses operations, intelligence, and fires functions 

together in one center and creates the means by which the Marine Corps will be 

able to participate in and control joint fires, while also gaining and maintaining persistent custody of adversary targets. We will also expand our ground launched loitering munitions capabilities by demonstrating a common launcher for the family 

of munitions, and we continue testing a low-cost, hypersonic booster that will be in 

a form factor the Marine Corps can logistically support in a contested environment. 

For maritime mobility, we are also investing in our first Stern Landing Vessel (SLV) 

prototypes, which are helping buy down risk and advance the Medium Landing Ship 

(LSM) program. We will continue efforts to develop a medium-sized, uncrewed logistics aircraft and will begin small boat experimentation to determine the future of 

our surface reconnaissance capabilities. 

FORCE DESIGN EXPERIMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF CONTESTED LOGISTICS

The Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, in close collaboration with both the 

Navy and III MEF, is currently experimenting with more than a dozen new technologies and potential future capabilities focused on enabling logistics in a contested 

environment. These operational experiments include well-known capabilities such as 

the SLV and wing-in-ground-effect (WIG) craft, as well as lesser-known, emerging 

capabilities such as the autonomous low-profile vessel (ALPV). Based on our existing 

experimentation plans, operational experimentation with these and other capabilities will continue over the next 3 years and inform future capability investment decisions. 

FORCE DESIGN EXPERIMENTATION WITH LITTORAL MOBILITY

Mobility is a key characteristic to the dispersion and persistence of stand-in 

forces. In the case of the Indo-Pacific, littoral mobility will be essential to our ability 

to maneuver through the complex geography of the region. We recognized this capability gap early in the design process and identified the LSM as a mechanism to 

transport Marines in this unique maritime environment. 

Medium Landing Ship (LSM): Distinct, yet complementary to traditional L-Class 

amphibious warfare ships, the LSM is purpose-built to provide tactical maneuver for 

regimental sized units, forward-deployed naval forces, and other expeditionary advanced base-enabling forces operating within contested environments. The LSM is 

a maneuver asset, and as a shore-to-shore connector, is unique and critical to expeditionary littoral mobility. It will facilitate campaigning and support diverse missions such as security cooperation, humanitarian assistance/disaster relief (HA/DR), 

and logistics support. While not optimized for any one threat or region, we envision 

the LSM being of particular utility in the maritime gray zone contests omnipresent 

in the Indo-Pacific. Given its size and characteristics, this vessel could be employed 

with a lower risk of escalation than larger platforms. 

After extensive research and wargaming, we calculated a need for nine LSMs to 

support a single regimental sized unit. The DoN’s Amphibious Force Requirements 

Study over the last 2 years validated this number, articulating a requirement of no 

fewer than 18 LSMs to support littoral maneuver. Given that current force structure 

plans call for three MLRs, we require 35 LSMs to account for operational availability and mobility for those units. We anticipate an initial request for 18 of the 

35 LSMs we seek will be a step toward enabling us to more effectively counter adversaries’ strategies, support and reinforce alliances and partnerships, and do so at 

a relatively low cost. 

Despite focusing our efforts over the past 3 years on deterring, competing, and 

if necessary, contesting the pacing challenge, the Marine Corps will not fully realize 

the capabilities of the MLR until we have the littoral mobility assets that enable 

these forces. The decision to delay LSM procurement from FY22 to FY25 was a setback in our ability to bring this capability online within an operationally relevant 

timeframe. As Marines do best, we have adapted to this challenge and are developing bridging solutions to experiment with LCU–1700s and leased Expeditionary 

Fast Transports (T–EPF) and SLVs. While these platforms will inform the eventual 

employment of the LSM, they will fall short of desired capabilities if called upon 

in an operational setting. Our modernized expeditionary forces need a comparably 
40 

modern mobility platform to bring the full weight of their capability to bear on competitors or adversaries, particularly in littoral regions. 

FORCE DESIGN CAMPAIGN OF LEARNING

Marine Corps Wargaming and Analysis Center (MCWAC): Wargames play an essential role in concept development and operational planning, and provide the basis 

for informed decisionmaking. The Marine Corps is undergoing a shift from humandriven to technology-enabled processes that will provide disproportionate benefits— 

not only to the Service, but the joint force writ large. 

Upon completion in 2024, the MCWAC in Quantico will provide a state-of-the-art 

facility designed to help decision-makers better visualize the threat environment, 

gain competitive advantages over adversaries, and simulate future operating environments. It will also provide data that informs force development, force management, and system functionality. Simulations will support existing and developing 

weapons platforms and capabilities in all regions of the globe. 

MCWAC will incorporate elements of artificial intelligence and machine learning 

to amplify decision accuracy on issues that determine the way we organize, train, 

and equip for the future fight. This facility will also provide a critical asset to the 

joint force and senior leadership currently unavailable in the National Capital Region. Its location facilitates participation by joint, interagency, and multinational organizations, in addition to Service-specific analysis. 

Lessons Learned: Between July 2019 and December 2022, we executed 25 

wargames. This calendar year, we will conduct another 9 wargames and welcome 

the participation of any Member, or their staff, interested in observing. These 

wargames will primarily focus on two subjects: (1) reconnaissance and counter-reconnaissance, and (2) III MEF deployment and sustainment during major combat 

operations. 

One of the persistent lessons from our wargames is that our current logistics concepts and capabilities are not optimized for maritime campaigns in a contested environment. Improving joint and combined logistics integration, and streamlining logistics C2, are critical areas for further planning and development. The number and 

capabilities of current logistics distribution platforms are insufficient to adequately 

deploy, maneuver, and sustain stand-in forces. Due to geographical distribution of 

forces, all Services will be challenged to meet their sustainment requirements. This 

suggests the Marine Corps will have reduced access to connecters under the operational control of the other Services. 

Our learning is continuous, and we have already refined some of our initial Force 

Design decisions based on that learning. For example, when we initially reduced the 

number of cannon batteries, we assumed that the existing 6-gun per battery model 

would be sufficient to meet requirements. After additional study, we decided to expand those batteries back to their original, pre-2015, 8-gun structure and added 

back two batteries. Next, we initially assessed 10-plane fighter-attack squadrons 

(VMFA) as the operationally suitable and sustainable approach for the future force. 

After multiple studies, a series of experiments and wargames, and emergent capabilities development, we know the 10-plane model requires redress and are undertaking that effort now. Likewise, initial assessments of our heavy-lift helicopter capacity demonstrated we could cut several squadrons; yet real-world considerations 

have resulted in a modification to our original plans and restoration of some of that 

structure and capacity. 

AMPHIBIOUS WARFARE SHIPS

Achieving the priorities of the National Defense Strategy requires a Navy that 

creates advantage for the joint force across the competition continuum. Sustaining 

and recapitalizing our nuclear deterrent and nuclear command, control, and communications systems; enhancing and expanding our undersea advantage; and creating 

advanced naval expeditionary forces that consist of all classes of ships and are capable of persisting and prevailing against any threat, are all things we must do now. 

We cannot create and sustain this force on the time horizons necessary to achieve 

competition and deterrence objectives without a significant expansion of our defense 

industrial base, which is currently organized for peacetime efficiency. We are a maritime nation that requires naval forces capable of answering the Nation’s call, whenever or wherever that might be. Amphibious warfare ships are, and will continue 

to be, a critical component of the Nation’s fleet. They provide an essential capability 

to the joint force that cannot be overstated. As the amphibious fleet requirement 

authority, as designated in the FY23 NDAA, it is my obligation to ensure this Committee is aware of the current status of your amphibious fleet. 
41 

Secretary of the Navy Amphibious Ship Studies: Since 2019, three DoN studies 

have examined amphibious warfare ship force structure requirements. Combining 

the findings of those studies with amphibious warfare ship readiness trends over 

the past 10 years and projected ship availability rates, I conclude that the Nation 

requires no fewer than 31 traditional amphibious warfare ships (10 LHA/LHD and 

21 LPDs/LSDs) to ensure the warfighting readiness and responsiveness of amphibious naval forces. 

The Importance of Amphibious Warfare Ships and the ARG/MEU: Our Nation’s 

amphibious warfare ships enable Marines to execute three essential missions in 

support of the National Defense Strategy. First, unlike traditional surface combatants whose role is to sink enemy surface combatants and submarines or destroy 

enemy aircraft and missiles, amphibious warfare ships are meant to project the national power of the United States globally as both a warning to our adversaries and 

as a visible sign of our commitment to allies and partners. Our defense strategy 

clearly identifies those allies and partners as a source of our strategic advantage. 

As Secretary Austin has previously stated, we ‘‘need resources matched to strategy, 

strategy matched to policy, and policy matched to the will of the American people.’’ 

Our strategic aims are clear: we must deter any act or activity intended to disrupt 

the rules-based international order. Our strategy is to not fight unless necessary; 

we seek only to deter conflict. Effective integrated deterrence requires amphibious 

warfare ships. More so than any other Marine Corps operation, activity, or investment, amphibious warfare ships with embarked Marines provide a flexible, scalable, 

and visible capability for our combatant commanders to employ at the time and 

place of their choosing in support of integrated deterrence campaigning. 

Second, amphibious warfare ships enable Marines to immediately respond to crisis or contingency. When the Japanese nuclear reactor in Fukushima was damaged 

by an earthquake in 2011, an amphibious Task Force responded immediately. Noncombatant evacuations in Lebanon, the response to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, the rescue of downed U.S. aircrew in contested areas, and numerous other situations around the world have all required an amphibious response, either due to 

lack of inland access or a determination that a large U.S. military footprint ashore 

would exacerbate an already dire situation. 

Third, amphibious warfare ships and their embarked Marines ensure the President and his ambassadors, as well as all U.S. citizens living outside the United 

States, have the on-call crisis response protection required to ensure their safety. 

Whether in Haiti, Venezuela, South Sudan, Yemen, Eswatini, or anywhere else on 

the globe, MEUs are ready to respond and protect. We must maintain forward-deployed ARG/MEUs with the operational reach to rapidly respond to our highest 

threat consulates and embassies globally. Marines forward-deployed aboard ships 

are the operationally desirable solution. 

Lastly, the 31 combined amphibious warfare ships are vital components of our 

Nation’s seven ARG/MEUs. This number of ships allows the Nation to maintain at 

least two ARG/MEUs at sea, with the option to surge to five. Assuming our present 

trajectory, we will fall below the congressionally mandated floor of 31 amphibious 

warfare ships. From my perspective, this is a result of divesting these platforms 

faster than we are procuring their replacements. The result of not meeting this requirement became most acutely visible when we were unable to provide traditional 

disaster-relief response following the earthquake in Turkey earlier this year. Our 

ARG/MEU deployments are a visible sign of commitment to our allies and partners 

and provide evidence to the PRC of our readiness to contest any malign activities. 

They also provide a visible sign to Russia about our commitment to NATO. In fact, 

when the Prime Minister and Minister of Defense for Sweden wanted to send a 

clear signal to Russia regarding Sweden’s intention to join NATO, they did so by 

making a statement on the flight deck of the USS Kearsarge—a Wasp-class amphibious assault ship. 

LPD Flight II Program: The PRC is accelerating their production of amphibious 

warfare ships. We cannot overlook the fact that since 2019, the People’s Liberation 

Army Navy (PLAN) has launched three Type 075 ‘‘LHA-like’’ and three Type 071 

‘‘LPD-like’’ amphibious warfare ships. The PLAN intends to launch an additional 

five Type 075 ’’LHA-like’’ amphibious warfare ships in the next 5 years. It appears 

that the PLAN sees amphibious warfare ships as highly relevant and a critical instrument in power projection as evidenced by their recent deployments extending 

beyond the South China Sea. In my opinion, there is also a soft power component 

to our amphibious warfare ships that cannot be replaced by other platforms. It is 

obvious the PRC is learning this lesson and is pursuing their own amphibious warfare ship program as a competitive act. 

Next, an LPD’s or any other amphibious warfare ship’s vulnerability to an antiship missile is no more relevant to its value than an aircraft’s vulnerability to being 
42 

shot down is relevant to its value. Over 5,000 helicopters were destroyed during the 

Vietnam War, yet we do not hear persistent arguments related to their survivability. In a recent series of wargames held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2 carriers and 10—20 destroyers and cruisers were sunk in the 

Pacific during each of the 24 iterations. Just as these wargames do not signal the 

irrelevance of these surface warships, conjecture about the survivability of amphibious warfare ships does not either. Instead of focusing exclusively on the survivability of platforms in a high-end fight, we should instead seek an appropriate balance of capabilities needed to effectively campaign and maintain deterrence with 

those capabilities optimized for major war. As evidenced by constant year cost, the 

LPD Flight II is the most effective and affordable answer until a follow-on amphibious warfare ship is developed. 

FORCE DESIGN AND MARINE FORCES RESERVE

The Marine Innovation Unit (MIU), manned by Marine Reservists, was recently 

established aboard Stewart Air National Guard Base in New York. This cuttingedge unit will make considerable contributions by focusing Marine talent toward accelerated identification and adoption of advanced capabilities, transforming naval 

service capacity for technology employment, and retaining and investing in human 

capital. MIU is expanding Marine Corps reach into the wider innovation ecosystem 

and developing key partnerships with the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), NavalX, 

Army Futures Command, and others to increase tempo and progress toward Force 

Design objectives. 

The MIU is just the beginning. We continue to explore the efficacy of establishing 

a maritime reconnaissance capability within our Reserve Component (RC) as part 

of our larger multi-domain reconnaissance initiatives across the force. We are currently evaluating the potential to establish a reserve MQ–9 squadron, as well as reserve augmentation detachments with active duty squadrons. 

In addition to its role supporting Force Design, Marine Forces Reserve 

(MARFORRES) continues to function as both an operational and strategic reserve 

to augment and reinforce the Active Component (AC). In 2022, more than 1,100 Marines and Sailors activated to support Operation ALLIES WELCOME (OAW), 

honing their security and humanitarian relief skills. From that activation, 103 Marines volunteered to deploy to OAW-Kosovo aboard Camp Bondsteel. Finally, as the 

Service brought new capabilities online during FY22, MARFORRES provided High 

Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and Amphibious Assault Vehicle 

(AAV) rotations in support of USINDOPACOM requirements. This augmentation 

enabled the AC to execute Force Design experimentation and unit transitions without an impact on combatant commands. The Marine Corps’ continued employment 

of the RC demonstrates our total force approach and has proven to be a critical component of force modernization efforts. 

FORCE DESIGN AND MARINE SPECIAL OPERATIONS FORCES

As part of the larger Force Design effort, our Marine special operations forces are 

modernizing through their Next Generation Raider Force (NGRF) initiative. The 

NGRF is intended to implement the strategic shaping and reconnaissance (SSR) operating concept, and its two major sub-components—irregular warfare and special 

reconnaissance, both focused in the littoral regions of the globe. In a manner consistent with other Marine forces, MARSOC seeks to provide the joint force with the 

capability to shape the operating environment; illuminate adversary actions, activities, and intentions; and provide options to impose cost, both kinetically and nonkinetically, from competition to conflict. 

TALENT MANAGEMENT

Talent Management 2030 (TM2030) directed accelerated personnel reforms and 

oriented the Service toward retaining more experienced Marines. In February 2022, 

I directed the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps to form a Talent Management Strategy Group to align and harmonize Service-wide talent management efforts. This group focuses on future demographics, economic, and human capital 

trends, while working with academia, research organizations, pertinent departments 

in HQMC, and commanders in the FMF to identify initiatives that will better align 

individual abilities, skills, and desires with the warfighting needs of the Service. 

Since the release of TM2030, we have better aligned departments and organizations 

involved in talent management, assessed, and mapped out interdependencies of 

total force personnel policies, and begun to generate momentum with a sense of urgency. Leveraging authorities previously enabled by Congress, we enacted nine initiatives in 2022, which we will expand and accelerate in 2023: 
43 

Commandant’s Retention Program (CRP): During FY23, the CRP offered pre-approved reenlistments to top-performing Marines by streamlining the process and 

giving priority access to primary military occupational specialty (MOS) monitors for 

duty station and assignment options. The CRP resulted in a 72 percent increase of 

first-term reenlistment submissions by top-performing Marines with the average reenlistment approval accomplished in 24 to 48 hours, much quicker than the previous 

norm. Going forward we will expand the program to more first-term Marines as well 

as our career force. 

Staff Non-Commissioned Officer (SNCO) Promotion Board Realignment: Beginning in FY24, we are realigning SNCO promotion boards to sequence more effectively with the assignments and reenlistment processes. This initiative will reduce 

SNCO billet gaps in the FMF and decrease the processing time of reenlistment 

packages. The realignment will provide greater predictability for SNCOs and their 

families while dramatically reducing the number of permanent change of station 

(PCS) moves across the force. 

Recruiting Station Commanding Officer Selection Board: We implemented two initiatives for the fiscal year 23 Recruiting Station Commanding Officer (RSCO) selection board. First, officers now have the opportunity to volunteer for command, including officers otherwise not scheduled for consideration. Second, officers may also 

request removal from RSCO consideration for 1 year, without penalty, should they 

prefer to complete a deployment or other professional obligation, or due to a personal life circumstance. 

Special Duty Assignment (SDA) Volunteer Program: Prior to 2022, we screened 

and selected Marines for Special Duty Assignments en masse. But last year, we 

launched a pilot SDA volunteer program, expanding incentives to provide duty station preference for volunteer recruiters, drill instructors, and combat instructors. As 

a result, volunteers increased by 62 percent, reducing the number of involuntarily 

screened Marines by 38 percent. This minimized disruption to our Marines, their 

families, and FMF units while also reducing SDA school attrition. We will improve 

and expand this program in 2023. 

MarineView 360–Degree Leadership Review: MarineView360 is a development tool 

for leaders that helps Marines identify their strengths, personal blind spots, and 

areas for focused improvement through the polling of their supervisors, peers, and 

subordinates. Leaders receive feedback and advice through a dedicated mentor and 

coach. The MarineView360 pilot began with a group of 150 sitting commanders and 

is now leveraging the experience of 200 additional selected commanders and senior 

enlisted advisors. The final phase of the pilot will expand to 1,000 Marines of varying rank from gunnery sergeant to colonel. 

Officer Promotion Opt-Out: Starting in 2022, both the AC and RC offered certain 

officer populations the ability to opt-out of consideration for promotion once without 

penalty. This allowed officers increased flexibility in their career paths to pursue 

unconventional career experiences or formal education that would otherwise take 

them off track for key developmental assignments. We are currently exploring the 

expansion of this initiative to enlisted Marines to afford them the same flexibility 

in their careers. 

Digital Boardroom 2.0 (DBR 2.0): DBR 2.0 increases the functionality and accuracy of information presented to board members, enhances the conduct of virtual 

boards, safeguards data, and improves this critical talent management process. The 

Enlisted Career Retention and Reserve Aviation boards successfully used DBR 2.0 

in 2022. With the availability of cloud-based data, we will expand use of DBR 2.0 

while simultaneously assessing the outcomes, cost and time savings, and professional depth and breadth of board members to benchmark with our legacy process. 

Separate Competitive Promotion Categories: To meet the demands of the future, 

the Marine Corps must retain the highest quality officers with the necessary skill 

sets at all ranks. To that end, we are exploring options to reorganize the unrestricted officer population into separate competitive categories to better meet the 

Marine Corps’ needs for diverse expertise and experience at all ranks by competing 

for promotion with peers having similar skill sets, training, and education. We will 

conduct a pilot program to evaluate the merits of this reorganization during the 

2025 field grade officer promotion boards. 

Career Intermission Program (CIP): Many Marines desire to pursue specialized 

education, or to focus on family for a significant life event. The CIP is an initial 

step toward allowing Marines an option to temporarily pause their active-duty service and later resume their careers without penalty. This program enables career 

flexibility, and in doing so, also encourages retention of experienced, talented Marines. 
44 

TALENT MANAGEMENT WAY-AHEAD

Manpower Information Technology System Modernization (MITSM): In February 

2022, Deputy Commandant, Manpower and Reserve Affairs (DC, M&RA), created a 

business capability requirements document that outlines the capabilities required to 

begin the MITSM acquisition process. MITSM will aggregate legacy systems and capabilities into a device-agnostic, data-driven, and dynamic human resources information technology solution that meets the evolving needs of the Marine Corps’ talent-based work force. One aspect of the MITSM will be a web-based ‘‘talent marketplace,’’ which will enable a collaborative and transparent assignment process and 

increase the role of both commanders and individual Marines. This capability will 

help us better align the talent of individuals with the needs of the Service to maximize the performance of both. Despite its criticality to modernizing our talent management systems and processes, MITSM is currently challenged by the acquisition 

process. 

Potential Implementation of ‘‘Indefinite End of Active Service’’ Policy for Enlisted 

Personnel: As we seek to mature the force, we also seek to eliminate antiquated 

processes and policies that induce both friction within the personnel system as well 

as personal and familial stress. There is little reason why those who have served 

honorably for 16∂ years need to worry about re-enlistment before completing twenty-years of service. This year, we will explore the feasibility of senior SNCO career 

designation to establish an indefinite expiration of active service. This shift will 

align senior SNCO retention practices with those of officers, increase flexibility in 

assignments, reduce administrative burden and needless paperwork, and minimize 

uncertainty for SNCOs and their families. 

Small Unit Leader Initiative: Under the current policy, first-term Marines are ineligible for promotion to sergeant. While the spirit of that policy is reasonable, it 

creates a disincentive to the highest performing Marines across the force by establishing an administrative obstacle they cannot overcome regardless of individual talent. Going forward, if one of our talented Marines with at least 36-months of service 

wishes to re-enlist, then that Marine will become eligible for promotion to sergeant 

upon their re-enlistment. This program will incentivize the most talented who desire 

to stay for another enlistment and should help mitigate the persistent need for sergeants across the FMF. 

Active and Reserve Permeability: During the next year, we will explore options to 

increase the permeability between the AC and RC. The aim is to better match the 

diverse—and often immediate—operational needs of AC commanders with the specialized skills of individual Marines in the RC. Due to statutory limitations on reserve employment, we will work with the Administration to identify potential opportunities for improvement to AC–RC permeability. 

Orders Issuance: In an attempt to give individuals and their families as much 

time as possible when executing a PCS move, we will increasingly attempt to issue 

orders up to twelve months before the execution date. We will also assess the feasibility of issuing follow-on assignment orders to those individuals selected for resident professional military education. This should do two things. First, it should provide greater clarity to service members and their families to facilitate proper planning for any school transitions, childcare needs, and special healthcare needs, and 

will provide spouses more time to secure desirable employment. Second, earlier 

issuance of orders would allow the Service to clarify a unit’s incoming personnel picture to increase long-term planning, effectiveness, and risk management. 

Five-Year Orders: The importance of unit cohesion cannot be overstated. To 

achieve that cohesion, we need to shift from a three-year tour model toward a fiveyear tour model—with notable exceptions for some of locations such as Okinawa, 

Japan and Twentynine Palms, California. In addition to creating greater unit cohesion and, as a result, greater readiness, a five-year model would facilitate improvements to family stability and family readiness. Using the standard twenty-year career timeline, the new assignment length would only require a family to relocate 

three times after the initial assignment. This suggested tour length should enable 

children to finish elementary or secondary school in one location, and would enable 

extended periods of spouse employment—minimizing the impacts on dual-income 

households. 

Assignment Incentive Pay/Hardship Duty Pay: Congress and the Department 

have provided us with the authorities necessary to incentivize service at some of the 

more challenging duty stations and we have a plan to use them. We will increasingly utilize Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP)—consistent with the other services— 

to increase the attractiveness of hard-to-fill duty stations. Notably, Army soldiers 

stationed at Fort Irwin, California or in Korea, have many of the same concerns as 

our Marines at Twentynine Palms and Okinawa. In addition to AIP, we are explor-
45 

ing other authorities provided by Congress, to incentivize duty by our most talented 

Marines in our hardest-to-place locations. 

Weapons Systems Officers (WSO) & Electronic Countermeasures Officers (ECMO): 

As we transition from the F/A–18D and EA–6B to the F–35, we will have the opportunity to transition some of our most talented Naval Flight Officers (NFOs) currently serving as WSOs and ECMOs into our expanded uncrewed aircraft squadrons 

(VMUs). At present, we have 95 WSOs and 32 ECMOs. While the legacy aircraft 

these officers were previously associated with are being retired, their individual 

skills remain critical to the future force. 

Attracting, developing, incentivizing, and retaining dedicated professionals that 

increase our readiness and lethality is a priority and necessary to improve our efficacy as a force. The initiatives undertaken since the publication of TM2030 demonstrate our commitment to our expeditionary warfighting legacy and our drive to 

fight and win in 2030 and beyond. Our performance in future battles will be defined 

by the investments we make in our Marine Corps today. All actions to evolve our 

talent management system are aimed squarely at supporting our warfighting requirements. They will incentivize and optimize our talent and sustain our ability 

to serve as the Nation’s premier expeditionary force in readiness within the rapidly 

evolving world we face. 

RECRUITING AND RETENTION

The Marine Corps is not insulated from the challenging recruiting and retention 

environment impacting the entire DoD. The FY24 budget supports an active-duty 

end strength of 172,300 Marines, an achievable target. The Marine Corps will monitor and reevaluate end strength, even as we continue to increase retention as part 

of our Talent Management strategy. We appreciate the support and flexibility that 

Congress provides us on retirement, retention, and end strength. 

In 2022, we achieved our annual recruiting mission and exceeded both our firstterm re-enlistment goal (101 percent) and our subsequent-term re-enlistment goal 

(107 percent). To put this in perspective, 5,063 first-term Marines re-enlisted in 

2018, while 5,820 re-enlisted in 2022. Further, we are re-enlisting those Marines 

earlier. In FY22, the Service met its First Term Alignment Program (FTAP) mission 

on 8 July 2022, which at the time was considered a major accomplishment. In fiscal 

year 23, we met our FTAP mission of 6,225 Marines on 6 February 2023—a full 6 

months earlier—and retained higher quality Marines than we have in the last few 

years. 

The Marine Corps met or exceeded both our FTAP and Subsequent Term Alignment Program (STAP) goals across the force for the first time in 13 years. In FY23, 

we expanded early re-enlistment authorizations for Marines with at least 24 

months’ time in service from 200 to 600. We reached 150 in the first weekend, and 

then reached 200 (last year’s total) within three weeks. We then expanded this program to accommodate the 700∂ submissions we had received by 1 February this 

year. Completing these early re-enlistments will help mitigate any recruiting challenges across a two-year period (FY25–27). In FY23, we satisfied our retention goal 

of infantry Marines before December for the first time in over a decade. As a result 

of these retention efforts, we are gradually maturing the force. This will result in 

more mature non-commissioned officers leading our youngest Marines and will generate better operational outcomes on the modern battlefield. 

As noted by RAND economist Dr. Beth Asch, we should never forget that we do 

not have an all-volunteer-force; but rather, a predominantly all-recruited force. To 

overcome current challenges in recruiting, we have challenged all assumptions. We 

have also resurrected and reviewed ideas and options previously generated over the 

years, but never actioned or implemented. The results have been very promising. 

While some assumed five year ‘‘infantry-only’’ contracts would not be well received, that assumption has been invalidated. During the past year, we conducted 

a limited experiment in which we offered recruits a 60-month infantry-only contract. 

This 400-spot program ‘‘sold out’’ immediately and was subsequently expanded to 

accommodate the demand. Infantry-only contracts ensure unit cohesion and almost 

guarantee Marines two deployments in a single contract, mitigating unit turnover 

between deployments. Since the completion of that pilot program, we continue to 

find that our young Marines prefer the stability afforded by these 60-month contracts and are choosing this option over 48-month contract options. 

Some assumptions related to the utility of monetary incentives have also been invalidated. Big sums of money are not required to incentivize potential Marine recruits. This past year, we implemented a $5,000 shipping bonus program for new 

enlistees with great success. In exchange for this one-time payment, we direct shipping at a date of our choosing, which gives us greater predictability and flexibility. 
46 

This experiment was very successful. We also implemented a $9,000 shipping bonus 

program with similar success. In exchange for this one-time payment, the individual’s contract time does not officially begin until they arrive at their first unit. As 

a result, those in this program that become infantry Marines will average 2 deployments during their first contract, because their initial 7 months of entry-level training will not count towards their obligated service. 

Finally, we want to make the statement, ‘‘there is always boat-space for talent,’’ 

a truism across the Marine Corps. In the past, talented individuals were denied reenlistment due to ‘‘closed’’ MOSs or other administrative obstacles beyond their control, such as an inability to transition from an MOS they didn’t choose or perhaps 

never wanted. These talented Marines want to re-enlist, but they also want a new 

(primary MOS) PMOS. The ability to ‘‘laterally move’’ talent into a new PMOS is 

an obstacle at present, but we are working on this issue. This is a training issue, 

not a personnel issue. Regardless, we are not going to let 8–12 weeks of retraining 

costs prevent us from benefiting from the talents and leadership of these proven 

Marines for another 4 years or more of service. If we must choose between proven 

leadership and MOS credibility, we will prioritize proven leadership for a greater 

return-on-investment. Retraining costs less than the $42,000 cost to recruit a Marine. While recruiting will remain challenging for the foreseeable future, the Marine 

Corps is up to the challenge. But there is one option that we will not exercise: we 

will not lower our standards. This is non-negotiable. Despite the well-known recruiting challenges in recent years, from 2018 and 2022, the average Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) and average General Technical (GT) scores of our infantry Marines (0311s) have actually increased across the force. 

CHILDCARE

Addressing the availability of childcare remains a top priority for the Service. Unfortunately, persistent supply and demand imbalances have resulted in unacceptable wait times for our Marine families. At present, there are notable waitlists for 

full-time childcare at Marine Corps Base (MCB) Quantico, MCB Camp Lejeune, 

MCB Camp Pendleton, and MCB Hawaii. These locations still maintain approximately 77%of the Service’s unmet waitlist for ages six weeks to 5 years. This is primarily due to a shortage of qualified workers, high turnover due to less competitive 

pay, lengthy hiring and background check processes, seasonal PCS fluctuations, and 

facility renovations. While we have capacity to serve 6,523 children at present, we 

only have sufficient staff to serve 5,880 children. To provide a variety of options that 

fit families’ needs and to mitigate lengthy Child Development Center (CDC) 

waitlists, we also offer fee assistance for eligible Marines who are geographically remote, reside more than 15 miles from an installation, or are assigned to an installation with a lengthy CDC waitlist. 

In 2022, with the support of OSD Office of Military Family Readiness Policy, we 

established the Child Care in Your Home (CCYH) Pilot Program. CCYH is a DoD 

fee assistance pilot program that helps military families cover the cost of full-time 

childcare (30–60 hours per week) provided in their homes. 

Designed to support families with non-traditional work schedules, care can be provided every day of the week and during non-traditional hours, such as evenings and 

weekends, or on rotating schedules. At present, we maintain 58 childcare facilities 

(32 CDCs and 26 school-aged care facilities). Renovations are currently in-progress 

aboard MCB Quantico and Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Beaufort. We recently 

completed a $37.7M construction project aboard MCAS Miramar, which will provide 

412 new childcare spaces to our families. In addition, we have construction planned 

aboard MCB Butler in Okinawa for a new school-aged care facility, aboard Camp 

Pendleton for a new CDC that will add 250 additional spaces, and aboard MCB 

Camp Blaz in Guam to satisfy the needs of 276 children in the future. 

SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION

The Marine Corps’ Substance Abuse Program focuses on three distinct areas: drug 

demand reduction, alcohol misuse prevention, and substance misuse non-medical 

counseling services. As part of our continued vigilance, we have expanded our urinalysis testing to include both illicit and prescription drugs, including the most misused and abused opiates. One hundred percent of urine samples are now tested for 

fentanyl. Additionally, due to a regrettable resurgence in lysergic acid diethylamide 

(LSD) in some of the communities surrounding our major bases and stations, we 

added LSD testing back to the standard drug testing panel. Delta-8 

tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) was also added to the standard drug testing panel in 

July 2021, expanding testing for THC products. THC remains the most prevalent 

drug detected during our testing. While expansion in testing did result in an in-
47 

crease in positive test results, the Marine Corps remains below the DoD benchmark 

for positive test results and current data indicates that prescription drug misuse is 

low. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

As a Service, we have focused on countering sexual assault within our ranks by 

professionalizing the prevention workforce, improving training for Marines at all 

levels, professionalizing the sexual assault response workforce, and strengthening 

an environment of accountability by establishing an Office Special Trial Counsel. As 

of January, our newly established Office of Special Trial Counsel reached IOC and 

is on track to reach FOC by December 2023, putting prosecutorial discretion for 

these offenses in the hands of trained attorneys. In addition to these efforts, the Marine Corps continues to implement the recommendations of the Independent Review 

Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, as approved by the Secretary of Defense. These efforts include developing organizational structure, hiring qualified professionals, and ensuring our prevention workforce is trained and postured to provide 

this crucial support to commanders. We are also investing in education to enable 

prevention, focusing on leadership responsibilities to both prevent and respond to 

sexual assault and sexual harassment, and providing training for trauma-informed 

leadership. While this larger societal problem persists, we are actively pursuing solutions to improve prevention and ensure offender accountability when prevention 

efforts fail. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION

As part of our larger human performance management efforts, we continue to examine our mental health programs and suicide prevention efforts. Every life lost to 

suicide is one too many. As an organization known for our camaraderie, we take 

every loss of life seriously and continue to pursue all opportunities to reduce the 

incidence of suicide amongst our Marines, Sailors, and their family members. 

The Secretary of Defense recently released a report from the Suicide Prevention 

and Response Independent Review Committee. The committee concluded that the 

most important preventative measure is engaged quality leadership, and we agree. 

This has long been a focus of ours, as have many of the recommended personnel 

reforms, which mirror our on-going talent management initiatives. We also embrace 

the Committee’s conclusions about the criticality of access to mental healthcare professionals and services, and their recommendations related to TRICARE reform to 

enable such access. 

HEALTHCARE

Developmental Pediatricians: Generating ready forces requires building and sustaining readiness at-home among our military families. Military service is demanding. Extended training, frequent military moves, and routine deployments—scheduled and unscheduled—strain marriages and stress families, regardless of a Marine’s rank or time-in-service. That stress is magnified in cases where children have 

special medical needs, such as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Regrettably, we 

are currently unable to provide sufficient developmental pediatric care across the 

force, even in areas where we enjoy highly developed military healthcare infrastructure, such as San Diego or the National Capital Region. Parents are often forced 

to wait 6 months or longer for an appointment. This is not acceptable. The scholarship is clear and undisputed: early intervention is the key to better outcomes for 

children with ASD. Today, we have four active duty and three civilian developmental-behavioral pediatricians to support the force, which is insufficient to meet 

the needs of our families. The force requires at least two developmental- behavioral 

pediatricians per medical treatment facility to meet the needs of our families. If providing these additional developmental pediatricians is considered unsupportable, 

then we would ask for Congress’ support in creating legislation to make it easier 

for families requiring this care to obtain it from the civilian market. Parents should 

not be forced to choose between their profession and calling to serve, and their need 

to provide for their families. 

Defense Health Agency (DHA): The DHA has undertaken the largest transformation in the history of the military health system. From the lens of providing 

support to service members and families, this undertaking has failed to satisfy expectations, and has resulted in both unsustainable costs and degraded services. 

While the DHA is maturing in its role as a combat support agency (CSA), the lack 

of agreement between the DHA and military departments regarding DHA’s roles 

and responsibilities as a CSA, as well as business rules governing employment of 

uniformed personnel inside the medical treatment facilities (MTFs), has created sig-
48 

nificant challenges. This problem is compounded by a recent exodus of military and 

civilian healthcare professionals due to ‘‘burn out’’ from the COVID–19 pandemic 

and operational tempo, the ability to double or even triple salaries in the civilian 

sector, and uncertainty and frustration over the DHA transition.Due to the nationwide shortage, the DoD is competing for the same finite resources when attempting 

to hire contract healthcare professionals. Unfortunately, the DoD contract pay rate 

is near the lowest, if not the lowest, in the industry, making recruitment particularly challenging. 

In terms of improving the affordability of healthcare as promised, these cost savings have not been realized. In fact, the transition has come with higher costs. An 

additional undesired outcome of the movement away from Service authority, direction, and control of healthcare delivery is the lack of consideration for Service-specific requirements and the impact to healthcare operations. Specifically, in remote 

locations such as Okinawa and Iwakuni, decisions to reduce access to care inside 

MTFs has negatively impacted dependents and civilian personnel, which impacts 

operational readiness. 

I ask for your continued oversight of the DHA and help in addressing the overwhelming gap between DoD contract healthcare labor rates and the civilian market. 

The success of the military health system (MHS) requires the ability to hire qualified, civilian healthcare labor. The MHS must have contract rates that can compete 

in a highly competitive market for a finite and highly valuable resource. Failure to 

remedy this issue will have catastrophic consequences on the readiness of the force. 

TRAINING AND EDUCATION

The Marine Corps enjoys a hard-earned reputation as a learning organization. 

The previous 3 years of Service-level training exercises, along with other large and 

small exercises, wargames, and live force experiments, established a sound foundation for organizational learning. Collectively, they provided clear evidence that 

change is required. We have learned that today’s training and education system 

must rapidly evolve to prepare individual Marines and units to succeed on an alldomain battlefield. Those changes are articulated in the recently published Training 

and Education 2030 report. 

Training and Education and the Russo-Ukraine Conflict: While the future remains uncertain, clear trends are emerging from the conflict in Ukraine that are 

consistent with much of what we have seen in other recent conflicts, evidencing the 

need for accelerated modernization across the joint force. However, we should not 

lose sight of the fact that the Ukrainians succeeded in the early phases of the conflict not because of superior equipment, but because they were adaptable—especially 

at the tactical level—and rapidly innovated new concepts of employment to address 

specific areas where the Russians had achieved advantage. In fact, their bias for action, unit cohesion, and emphasis on decentralized C2 had a significant impact on 

the readiness of Ukraine’s infantry and maneuver forces. These factors allowed 

Ukrainian battalions to effectively operate in and control battlespace we would normally associate with an Army Brigade or Marine Regimental Combat Team—units 

3 or more times larger than a traditional battalion. The operational requirements 

associated with these expanded areas of responsibility are placing more and more 

demands upon junior leaders that can only be addressed through greater investment 

in the training and education of our Marines. The conflict is demonstrating that advanced capabilities will be available and employed at much lower tactical levels 

than we have witnessed in our own recent past. In future conflicts, we are going 

to ask junior leaders at the company level and below to do things battalion commanders may not have had the authority to do in recent years. It is clear this will 

require an increasing investment in the training and education of our leaders at all 

levels and across the entire joint force. 

DOCTRINE

Doctrine establishes the basis for developing operational concepts and requirements. It also describes our understanding of how those capabilities are to be employed and ultimately, details training and associated resource requirements. Marine Corps Doctrinal Publication (MCDP) 1, Warfighting, tells us that doctrine ‘‘establishes a particular way of thinking about war and a way of fighting. It also 

provides . . . a mandate for professionalism, and a common language.’’ Our doctrine, including its bedrock in Warfighting, has given us a solid grounding in the 

essential elements of maneuver warfare, upon which we expect our philosophy of 

warfare to remain anchored for the foreseeable future. This is not enough. The character of warfare has always been subject to the constant and uneven pressures of 

technological advance and social and geopolitical change. Warfare’s changing char-
49 

acter means we must constantly review and revise our assumptions; they will 

change and we must change with them. Doctrine, in turn, must evolve, adapt, and 

keep pace. For example, in June 2022 we published MCDP 8, Information, describing how the Marine Corps gains and exploits information advantages in all 

warfighting domains across the competition continuum. We also recently revised 

MCDP 4, Logistics, updating our doctrinal foundation of this critical warfighting 

function to meet the challenges of the future. 

Changes to our warfighting ideas, theories, and concepts must be expressed clearly and quickly. This leads to greater emphasis on the rapid creation and dissemination of doctrine at a level of specificity below that of our capstone publications and 

tied tightly to our campaign of learning, including feedback from the FMF. Most importantly, we must hold ourselves accountable for training and operating in accordance with our refined doctrine. 

ENHANCED INFANTRY AND LEADER TRAINING

14-week Infantry Marine Course (IMC): Before our IMC pilot effort began, the Marine Corps underwent a deliberate process to identify the infantry skills necessary 

to win in a fight against a peer adversary. During this process, Training and Education Command developed 39 behaviors required for all infantry Marines. These required behaviors range from traditional skills like employing the service rifle, patrolling, and land navigation to skills such as ‘‘embodying the Marine Corps’ 

warfighting philosophy’’ or ‘‘manag[ing] signature.’’ Based on feedback from our division commanders, a subset of 20 of the original 39 infantry behaviors were 

prioritized as a requirement for entry-level training. Those 20 infantry behaviors became the foundation for a new program of instruction (POI) and the first pilot of 

the 14-week IMC. 

IMC Marines are held to a much higher physical standard to both enter training 

and to graduate than previously required. Marines earning the infantry MOS are 

now challenged to achieve first class scores on the Physical Fitness Test (PFT) and 

Combat Fitness Test (CFT), achieve a minimum swim qualification of Water Survival Intermediate (WSI), and pass an evaluation on the Shallow Water Egress 

Trainer (SWET), which simulates procedures for evacuating a sinking aircraft. Student physical graduation requirements also include a 10-kilometer (km) Combat Endurance Assessment (CEA) and completion of a 20km hike with a 75-pound fighting 

load. 

In addition to better physical fitness, IMC Marines develop better decisionmaking 

skills. By the end of the course, students make thousands of decisions, receiving constant feedback from both combat instructors and peers, significantly increasing the 

experiential foundation for sound decisionmaking. As IMC builds a better decisionmaker, it also produces a significantly more lethal Marine. IMC graduates are 

trained to a markedly higher standard in rifle marksmanship and are combat capable in all environments with the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). They are further trained in the employment of medium machine guns, grenade launchers, antiarmor systems, and light mortars—all of which are new weapons skills for basic riflemen. 

Better-trained Marines generate operational tempo—a key to success in maneuver 

warfare. The outcomes thus far are remarkable. IMC graduates are trained to be 

quicker-thinking and better decision-makers, more physically fit, and much more lethal at earlier points in their careers than their predecessors. All these things 

should increase the readiness of their units and the overall force. To date, 3,524 Marines have graduated from this program. While it is too early to make any definitive 

conclusions, initial findings suggest IMC graduates may have lower non-EAS attrition rates. 

THE MODERNIZED MARINE CORPS TRAINING ENVIRONMENT (PROJECT TRIPOLI)

We train how we fight. But we are limited by the number of ranges and training 

areas available, environmental limitations, airspace restrictions, and several other 

factors that ensure Marines can employ the full range of capabilities they will have 

at their disposal. One solution to this challenge is to expand and modernize the Marine Corps training environment (MCTE) through an effort called Project Tripoli, 

which seeks the integration of the live, virtual, and constructive training domains. 

The MCTE is our combined arms training concept for the future that will enable 

us to realistically train and exercise with our advanced capabilities both internally 

and as part of the joint force. Importantly, it permits training with capabilities in 

a manner concealed from our adversaries and in ways that would otherwise be resource prohibitive in terms of materiel, ordnance expenditure, and personnel. The 

MCTE will enable combined arms training in the broadest sense and will allow new 
50 

and expanded dimensions in force-on- force (FoF) exercise capabilities. Conceptually, 

a modernized MCTE integrates all training enablers—from high-fidelity flight simulators, to ranges and training areas, to FoF training systems—into C2 architectures and networks supporting training events. MCTE is not a single acquisition 

program, but a system comprised of multiple training programs. To further improve 

the MCTE network, we will continue to build interoperability among existing training systems as we bring new systems online, pre-designed with enabling technologies to support increasingly dynamic training environments. 

Our next big step will be to field our Force-on-Force Training System (FoF–TS) 

Next Program across the force to equip units with the training tools necessary to 

conduct realistic and challenging FoF training. This system is designed specifically 

to accommodate rapid changes and refinements in the training continuum. Additionally, it will process the tremendous amounts of sensor data needed for our FoF–TS, 

UAS, cyber, electronic warfare, and loitering munition capabilities to facilitate readiness. The FY24 budget request for training and education modernization is $581 

million. 

TRAINING AREAS AND RANGES

At present, ensuring sufficient range access and training in the Western Pacific 

region is challenged a by a lengthy supply chain, environmental constraints, infrastructure challenges, and access restraints. To ensure the persistent readiness of 

Marines in the region, the Marine Corps has a number of planned investments 

across the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Investments planned 

for Guam include: a live-fire training range complex, a multi-purpose machine gun 

range, and urban combat training facility, and a training support center. On Tinian, 

the Marine Corps is pursuing a platoon level live-fire and maneuver range and an 

explosive ordnance disposal range. These efforts are pending a positive determination of ongoing environmental impact studies. The Marine Corps is also involved in 

the Pacific Multi-Domain Training and Experimentation Capability (PMTEC) initiative. PMTEC will better integrate existing capabilities and expand the ranges and 

training areas available to Marines, to include the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex and the Pacific Missile Range Facility. 

Training areas and ranges in Alaska continue to grow in importance to overall 

Marine Corps readiness. The sophistication, instrumentation, infrastructure support, and sheer size of Alaska ranges make them indispensable for the development 

of 5th generation fighter aircraft tactics. During 2022, Marines participated in four 

joint exercises in Alaska, to include the high-end rehearsal exercise RED FLAG. The 

Marine Corps provided 38 F–35Bs across different phases of the exercise as well as 

leading edge air C2 capabilities. In 2023, we will expand our participation in exercises in Alaska to include Exercises NORTHERN EDGE and ARCTIC EDGE. 

While our efforts to prevent encroachment have focused on protecting the ranges 

and training areas we have, modernized training requirements are going to push 

us to expand training areas in multiple domains to ensure we have trained and 

ready forces to meet our Nation’s needs into the future. MCAS Yuma makes an outsized contribution to the training readiness of Marine aviation due, in part, to the 

presence of Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One (MAWTS–1) and 

the conduct of the biannual Weapons and Tactics Instructor (WTI) courses. In addition to the decades long challenges associated with the location of the Yuma Fairgrounds, the continued use of Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Yuma’s Barry M. 

Goldwater Range (BMGR) in support of modernized aviation training is at risk due 

to the loss of Flat Tailed Horned Lizard (FTHL) habitat associated with border wall 

construction. By risk we mean, the loss of habitat increases the likelihood that the 

FTHL would be listed under the Endangered Species Act. Listing the FTHL could 

result significant restrictions to our ability to train and experiment to meet force 

design objectives. To prevent this from occurring, we need to act now to secure necessary FTHL habitat and are leveraging the Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program as one tool to support habitat protection efforts. 

In addition to physical ranges, we will also leverage a variety of virtual ranges 

like the Persistent Cyber Training Environment (PCTE) for joint qualification requirements and rehearsals. The PCTE integrates capabilities that support continuous evolution of cyber training and exercises, enabling force readiness and driving 

decisions on tactical, operational, and strategic levels. Over the past year, the PCTE 

has expanded access to cyber operating forces in the FMF. We are confident that 

access to these modern training environments will significantly enable the all-domain nature of our Marine forces. 
51 

INSTALLATIONS AND LOGISTICS

In recent years, we have identified logistics as the ‘‘pacing function’’ for 

warfighting. Among the seven warfighting functions, logistics most dictates the 

tempo of operations and the operational reach of a unit. No other warfighting function more profoundly affects our ability to persist in contested spaces. Moreover, logistics and sustainment capability and capacity have a deterrent effect. Persuading 

an adversary that a quick win is not possible by demonstrating an ability to generate, re-generate, and sustain combat power is, in itself, a deterrent. 

An uncertain future, the threat of peer and near-peer competitors, and developing 

challenges in all warfighting domains create wide-ranging implications for sustaining the current and future force. To support emerging and future operational 

requirements against peer and near-peer adversaries, we will have to transform our 

approach to logistics. Simply put, we must transition from a force optimized for supporting sustained operations ashore to a maritime force capable of supporting operations in austere, expeditionary, and littoral environments that are contested across 

all domains. This process of change and adaption began with the release of our Installations and Logistics 2030 report and our revised foundational doctrinal publication on logistics, MCDP 4. 

While our current approach worked well in the past, it is insufficient to meet the 

demands of the future operating environment, particularly when contested across all 

domains. The magnitude of change required to prepare the Marine Corps installations and logistics enterprise to support the future force mandates a fundamental 

reevaluation of our approach to logistics. 

INSTALLATIONS ASSESSMENT AND RESOURCES

Ready and resilient bases and stations are a critical requirement today and into 

the future. Years of under-funding the installations portfolio has resulted in a funding shortfall across the FYDP in the tens of billions of dollars. Earlier decisions to 

take near-term risk in these accounts and shift resources to support readiness-related accounts resulted in longer-term systemic risks to the Service that we must 

address. 

Beginning in 2023, we will engage in a comprehensive and informed infrastructure recapitalization that directly contributes to the requirements of the future 

force. This will require additional funding, and while it will take more than one 

FYDP to accomplish, the foundation must be laid today. 

FACILITIES SUSTAINMENT, RESTORATION AND MODERNIZATION (FSRM)

Fiscal Year 2024 will be the second year using our pilot Readiness Maximization 

Tool. This pilot program prioritizes restoration, modernization, and demolition in 

order to achieve a better facility readiness outcome as opposed to the traditional emphasis of focusing on sustainment metrics. The Marine Corps’ FY24 FSRM budget 

request for the active and reserve forces totals $1.3B. 

INSTALLATIONS PLAN 2023 (IPLAN)

In the near future, we will publish our first ever Installations Plan (IPLAN), modeled after the Aviation Plan (AVPLAN), to create a shared understanding of the Marine Corps Installations Command (MCICOM) enterprise. We intend to produce this 

reference document annually to show military construction (MILCON) and FSRM 

funding framed across time by region, base, and station. The report will further 

identify the five priority MILCON projects (funded or unfunded) by base and station 

for the next 1—10 years. Finally, future versions of the IPLAN will include a threatbased resiliency assessment by base and station regarding resiliency of force protection; airfield operations; range support; and command, control, and communications. 

It will also describe the scope, cost, and schedule to achieve resilience. 

MILCON PRIORITIES IN SUPPORT OF FORCE DESIGN

The FY24 budget includes $1.3B to support a total of 16 projects, which includes 

both planning and design. This funding includes seven projects totaling $457 million 

to continue our efforts to relocate Marines from Japan to Guam. 

INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Infrastructure: Aging drinking water and wastewater systems were not designed to meet increasingly stringent environmental requirements. These old systems also require significant maintenance to continue operation. Since FY16, the 

Marine Corps has invested approximately $400 million to upgrade or replace drink-
52 

ing water and wastewater infrastructure, improving environmental compliance and 

reducing risk to personnel and the environment. We are currently evaluating the 

need for future support. 

Energy Infrastructure: The vast majority of our installations are dependent on a 

commercial electrical grid vulnerable to disruption due to a variety of threats such 

as aging infrastructure, severe weather, and both physical and cyber-attacks. While 

procedures and infrastructure are in place to respond to short-term power outages, 

there is a growing need to ensure we can maintain essential functions and critical 

services during a prolonged outage. As part of our renewed focus on installations, 

we will produce energy resilience plans by base and station in 2023. 

Fuel Storage Tanks: In April of 2022, in response to an inquiry by the Assistant 

Secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations, and Environment, MCICOM conducted a risk assessment of significant (>10,000 gallon) fuel storage tanks located 

on Marine Corps installations, and the risk to drinking water sources and systems. 

This assessment included tank condition, tank location relative to systems and 

sources, and condition and adequacy of containment systems. The assessment concluded no immediate threat for this population of storage tanks. However, the assessment did identify two >10,000-gallon tanks with a high-risk for release due to 

condition, but due to their locations, concluded any release from either tank would 

not impact water sources or systems. Since the completion of this assessment, the 

high-risk tank located aboard Camp Fuji has been replaced, and the other tank, located aboard MCB Quantico, is scheduled to be replaced this fiscal year. As an additional risk mitigation, the tank aboard MCB Quantico has been drained pending replacement. 

Barracks: The Marine Corps possesses 672 barracks with 155,329 bed spaces. On 

average, those barracks are 32 years old and in need of renovation. In FY22, we 

renovated 14 barracks for a total cost of $118 million, and in FY23, we plan to renovate another 16 at a cost of $262 million. The barracks renovations completed in 

FY22 to FY23 will positively impact 8,116 Marines living in them. The per barracks 

renovation costs over the past 2 years have risen from $8.4M to $16.4M. At present, 

16 percent or 108 Marine Corps barracks are in poor (Q3 on the facilities conditions 

index ratings) or failing (Q4) condition. Current estimates to recapitalize, sustain, 

or demolish require an additional $3 billion to return all assets to Q2 (>80 facility 

condition index) by 2031. Clearly Q2 is not our goal; Q1 is and will be. In FY24, 

we plan to use approximately $270 million to renovate 25 barracks including some 

renovations previously deferred. 

GUAM AND H2B VISAS

Earlier this year the Marine Corps reactivated Camp Blaz—a facility that secures 

a geographically distributed and operationally resilient posture for the Marine 

Corps in the Indo-Pacific. It also strengthens DoD’s ability to deter, defend, and support allies and partners in the region. The continued build-out of Guam projects will 

require a reassessment of the H–2B visa issue, based on available qualified workforce. 

CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCE

Currently, the Marine Corps is undergoing a review of installation master plans 

to build resilience against all hazards such as wildfires, water scarcity, rising sea 

levels, and hurricanes. Marine Corps Recruit Depot (MCRD) Parris Island (PI) has 

already completed a master plan (2021) and a Climate Change Resiliency and Adaptation Plan (2020), which are being used to develop MILCON and FSRM investment 

projects to reduce existing and projected localized flooding. The Military Installation 

Resilience Review of the low country community surrounding MCAS Beaufort and 

MCRD PI developed a toolkit for structural interventions and nonstructural planning approaches to enable the low country communities to adapt to climate change. 

The toolkit has been applied to three pilot projects: St. Helena Island wastewater 

treatment plant, Lady’s Island neighborhood, and the Shell Point Interchange. 

MCRD PI’s efforts to address sea-level rise and climate change with regional conservation groups and the local community is growing stronger. MCRD PI currently 

has five initiatives in process with our regional partners: Lowcountry Sentinel Landscape Application, National Fish and Wildlife National Coastal Resiliency Fund 

(carbon sequestration $550,000), South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, 

Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program, and US Army Corps 

of Engineers. 
53 

CONCLUSION

On-going conflicts across the continent in Africa, along the line-of-actual-control 

between India and China, along the Turkish-Syrian border, and in Ukraine remind 

us that despite our best efforts, we can never know with certainty when, where, or 

how an adversary might precipitate conflict—especially against an ally or partner. 

We must be ready—not simply available—to respond tonight, tomorrow, and every 

night into the future. We are. As a Service, we must ensure that your crisis response force is globally deployable. We are. But we don’t have the luxury of building 

a force for only one threat, one region, or one form of warfare. The Marine Corps 

must be organized, trained, equipped, and postured for the full range of operations 

in places we might not expect, and on timelines we did not anticipate. We are. In 

these times of increasing complexity and uncertainty, the Nation needs one force, 

maintained at the highest levels of readiness, that can respond to the crises that 

few saw coming. We are that force. 

This Committee’s support to our modernization efforts—anchored on Force Design 

2030, Talent Management 2030, Training & Education 2030, and Installations and 

Logistics 2030—has been crucial to our success thus far. Today is an opportunity 

to re-recommit to our modernization program and help facilitate its acceleration, 

while at the same time addressing issues often mistakenly deemed secondary to 

readiness such as barracks, housing, childcare, and healthcare. Which are equally 

essential to the readiness of the force. 

Based on your continued support, 2022 and 2023 will be known as the years Force 

Design transitioned from ideas to operational capabilities. Force Design is now; it 

is here today. But with updates to organization and equipment well underway, we 

must turn both our attention and our resources to manning, training, and retaining. 

We must never lose sight that our most critical warfighting advantage is our people, 

and that they deserve the best quality-of-life that we can provide them given the 

anticipated stress associated with military service. I look forward to working with 

the Committee members and staff over my final months as Commandant, and thank 

each of you and your staff for the tireless efforts in support of the Marine Corps. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Berger. It is also fair to 

say, the Marine Corps wouldn’t be where it is today without your 

leadership. So we thank you for that. 

I am going to yield my time to Senator Murray, who is the—— 

Senator MURRAY. Go ahead. 

Senator TESTER. No, no, no. I know where the bread’s buttered. 

I am going to yield to Senator Murray, the Chair of the Full 

Committee. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR PATTY MURRAY

Senator MURRAY. Thank you, very much Chairman Tester, Vice 

Chair Collins, really appreciate it. And we really are fortunate to 

have two really tremendous leaders steering this subcommittee. So 

I am grateful to both of you. And I am very glad to join today’s 

hearing with you, as we continue to work towards regular order 

here in the Senate for the first time in years. 

And as Senator Collins and I have made very clear, we know we 

have a responsibility to work in a timely fashion to write the bipartisan bills that will fund our country, build us as a stronger country, and make our communities safer, and ensure that we stay 

ahead of our global competitors. 

And the conversations that we are having today, including this 

hearing, really help us show how we are going to make those investments decisions, here in DC, that will help strengthen our 

country and protect our families, which as we all know, is especially important when China and others are making significant investments in their own Navy and military right now. And if we are 

going to keep pace with those countries we have to work together 

to get a bipartisan funding bill done. 
54 

So I am really glad to have this opportunity to hear from the witnesses today about the President’s budget request for the Navy and 

Marines, particularly how we can make sure we are supporting our 

service members and their families. And we need to remember that 

includes making sure that our military families, as you just alluded 

to, get things like child care, and mental healthcare, and good 

housing, and schools, and a lot more, because at the end of the day 

our best naval ships can’t go very far without the brave men and 

women who are willing to put themselves on the frontlines to keep 

our country safe. 

So with that, I do have some questions for you today. And Admiral Gilday, I would like to start with you, because in February seismic deficiencies were found at three of the dry docks as you know, 

at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, and the Delta Pier 

at the Trident Refit Facility in Bangor. Two very critical facilities 

in my home State of Washington. And as a result submarines were 

prohibited from using three of those six dry docks at Puget Sound, 

and the only dry dock at Bangor. Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is 

the primary location for attack submarine and aircraft carriers 

maintenance as we know, on the west coast, so I wanted to ask you 

today: How exactly is the Navy working with Puget Sound Naval 

Shipyard, and Trident Refit Facility to plan and implement the 

near-term mitigation? And what resources do you need to have to 

accomplish that? 

Admiral GILDAY. Thank you, ma’am. We are making good 

progress right now on the repairs in three of those, facilities. So the 

first one at TRF (Trident Refit Facility) Bangor will be completed 

in June that is the most substantial work that we are doing, essentially, repairing both sides of the entire dry dock; the two other 

docks will be finished in April and May. 

As they are progressing well. We are focused there on those portions of the dock that are closest to the nuclear power plant and 

the submarines, where we actually put them up in the dry dock. There is a $300 million request in my unfunded list as you know, 

that was a late-add that didn’t make it into the budget, so I request your help there. 

Longer term, we will be looking at other upgrades that we need 

to make in order to ensure the Seismic Resiliency of that facility. 

As you stated we really count on it, in terms of providing submarine maintenance for the fleet. 

Senator MURRAY. So the $300 million is for the short term; that 

is your request? 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes, it is. 

Senator MURRAY. And then longer term? 

Admiral GILDAY. So longer term, too early for me to state what 

that requirement is. We are right now scoping the long-term repairs in conjunction with the SIOP (Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program’s) work that we are planning up there as well. 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. 

Admiral GILDAY. So we want to make sure that it is Seismically 

Resilient. 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. And you will stay in touch with us on 

that? 

Admiral GILDAY. Absolutely, ma’am. 
55 

Senator MURRAY. Secretary Del Toro, back in 2021, it was announced that Naval Station Everett had been designated as the future Home Port for Twelfth Constellation-class Frigates scheduled 

to be delivered in 2026. That is great news. The Navy’s long-term 

commitment to Everett and Snohomish County, my State, is really 

clear. But as we get closer to that date, we need to make sure that 

not only the Navy has the resources they need, but the Everett 

community also has the support it needs to accommodate the influx 

of sailors and their families. Are those still on track to arrive in 

2026? 

Secretary DEL TORO. We are currently looking at the lay down 

plans, ma’am, for all of our ships given the increasing Indo-Pacific 

threat that we face. I myself have visited the Puget Sound area 

and looked at all the different infrastructure issues that are at play 

there, and we are looking and discussing with the CNO exactly 

what investments need to be made over the next several years, so 

that we can move in the right direction, including greater support 

for the hospital in the Puget Sound area as well, too. 

And if I could just briefly comment, and thank you for your leadership, as well as the collaboration that we have had with the community of Puget Sound, as we actually moved very aggressively to 

effect the repairs to the dry docks very expeditiously. It has been 

nothing but a great relationship. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much. 

And just really quickly, Mr. Chairman; if I could just ask the 

Secretary again about the Navy suicide rate; nearly 17 deaths per 

100,000 sailors, that is just devastating. Does the President’s budget request support any additional mental health? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Very much so, ma’am. In the Department 

of the Navy’s budget we actually have additional funds, upwards 

of $200 million that are dedicated to this. In addition to the actual 

human element of actually trying to bring everyone together to try 

to solve this grave problem that we face as a Nation; and the Navy 

too. 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Admiral Gilday, the fiscal year 2022 NDAA (National Defense 

Authorization Act) sought to empower the CNO by requiring the 

CNO to submit his or her fleet size requirements directly to Congress. In July of 2022, the first such requirement was submitted 

and called for 373 ships, compared to 296 in the fleet today. Your 

navigation plan, which was released that same month, called for 96 

large surface combatants like those built at Bath Iron Works in my 

home State. 

Two questions: First, when do you anticipate that your analysis 

will be released so that we have the benefit of your guidance in 

drafting the bill? It likely that your updated fleet requirement will 

be greater than the 373 ships in light of China’s modernization? 

Admiral GILDAY. Ma’am, on the first question, I have committed 

to Congress to deliver the report by the 10th of June, this year. 

And I will make the deadline. We are on track with our analysis 

team to do that. 
56 

Secondly, with respect to not only the size but the composition 

of the fleet, I would expect that to change from the last report, particularly in terms of composition. It is too early to tell with respect 

to size, but quite honestly, ma’am, I can’t see it getting any smaller 

than 373 manned ships. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. And that is quite a ways from 

where we are today? 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes, it is. 

Senator COLLINS. General Berger, as we were sitting here, a 

headline came across my phone, and it says, ‘‘Pentagon comes out 

against law requiring military wish lists’’, and it came across just 

as you were explaining why you need more amphibious ships. And 

that that was your number one unfunded priority. Isn’t it important for Congress to know what your chief unfunded priorities are? 

General BERGER. From my perspective it has been useful I think 

to submit it from each of the services, and you to have visibility 

on what is not in the budget, for whatever reason. So from my perspective, it seems useful if it is useful to members. And it has been 

in the past. 

Senator COLLINS. It is definitely useful to us. And I don’t think 

that Congress is going to take the Pentagon’s advice on doing away 

with the unfunded priorities list. 

Admiral, let me return to you. Could you explain to the Committee why our surface Navy is so, important as a deterrent from 

a deterrence perspective? 

Admiral GILDAY. So the destroyers, the cruisers that we have at 

sea today are really the backbone of the fleet, along with our aircraft carriers and our amphibious ships. You just can’t replace forward presence. It is there to not only ensure that U.S. interests are 

looked after, but also poised in case any crisis comes up, we reassure allies and partners that we are there 24/7, 365. 

A full-third of the Navy is forward on any given day. A secondthird is in maintenance, and the remaining third has either just returned from deployment, or is ramping up to go. That is where we 

belong out forward. 

The Secretary of Defense has directed readiness levels to us, and 

those, our ships that are ready to respond within 10 days, those 

ships are all at sea now. So what we are trying to do in order to 

take advantage of the firepower that we have today is to improve 

our maintenance cadence as an example to send more ships to sea, 

the more the better; the bigger fleet, the better. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. So I will start with you, Secretary Del Toro. 

Last year Congress accelerated investment in weapons so that our 

weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies. In this 

year’s budget the Department is proposing to lock in procurement 

quantities for nine different weapons programs over 5 years. This 

would provide significant predictability and stability to the industrial base. However, I note in some cases, such as the Naval 

Strength Missile, quantities requested this year are lower than appropriated last year. Further, it is not clear what the private sector 

investment will be in return for this procurement predictability 

from the Government. 
57 

So Secretary, could you explain how multiyear procurements can 

help stabilize the industrial base? And furthermore, what investments are you expecting in return from this predictability? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Mr. Chairman, I believe that multiyear procurements are critical to growing the size of the fleet in terms of 

buying individual platforms, and ships, as critical as it is, to invest 

in munitions. We appreciate the support of the Congress and being 

allowed to use these multiyear procurements for the purchase of 

Missile Systems as well, too. 

Our budget, in this year’s fiscal, President’s budget submission, 

increases the investment in munitions by 50 percent, investing in 

Tomahawks, SM–6, Mark 48 torpedoes, LRASM (Long Range AntiShip Missile), across the entire threshold of the missiles that are 

needed, actually, for the Navy to be able to accomplish its mission. 

I am also a big supporter of the Naval Strike Missile, just on the 

LCS (Littoral Combat Ship) class of platforms, we are looking to 

put them on all our LCS platforms moving forward. 

So I wasn’t aware of the slight decrease in the numbers of NSMs 

(Naval Strike Missile), I thought the numbers had actually gone 

up, but I will go back and validate that and get back to you if there 

has been a small decrease in the numbers of NSMs. I believe we 

are purchasing over 99 across the entire fleet. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. And what do you expect in return from 

the industrial base with long-term predictability? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I expect their commitment to recapitalize in 

order to be able to provide these Missiles at the pace that we are 

requiring them, for both the challenge that we face these—versus 

Ukraine, as well as the potential need to be able to deter China in 

the Taiwan scenario as well. These missiles will be required in the 

numbers necessary to be able to get there, so industry has to do 

its parts with a consistent signal being sent by the Department of 

Defense, that we will be purchasing these Missiles for a long period 

of time, they should feel comfortable in their confidence that they 

can invest in their own capitalization and their workforce to be 

able to produce these missiles and systems that are needed. 

Senator TESTER. Despite repeated investments in the defense industrial base and the shipbuilding industrial base in particular, we 

don’t really see improvements towards ships being delivered on cost 

and on time. In fact, your annual report to pay for cost overruns 

on new ships is about two billion bucks, or close to. 

It seems like I ask this every year, but what else can we do to 

support the shipbuilding industry to be able to get ships out on 

time in particular, and under cost? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Mr. Chairman, I think that our investments in the P2P (Performance-to-Plan) Plan that the CNO has 

been committed to for the past several years, actually is starting 

now to make some advancements in being able to get ships out of 

shipyards, are far faster than before, whether they are ships being 

repaired, or new construction ships for that matter as well. With 

regards to the increased cost of the ships, much of it has been due 

to inflation, and certainly the negative impacts of the CR (Continuing Resolution), and the workforce shortage that we are all existing. 
58 

I am hopeful that as we actually come out of COVID, and start 

fixing some of these work shortages that we have, we will be in a 

better place. 

I want to thank the Congress, and you particularly, for your in- vestment in over $2.3 billion in workforce, and industrial-based investments last year, and the number this year is equally significant, $1.7 billion. 

We will continue to make sure that those dollars get used wisely 

with a return on investment on behalf of the American taxpayer, 

with the right oversight that is necessary to create these programs 

that hopefully will provide far greater numbers of workers to the 

shipyards themselves. 

Senator TESTER. The two Senators to my right and to my left 

have made it clear that they intend to follow regular order and get 

a budget up by the end of September. I think that is good news. 

The other side of that coin is, is that we do need to do our job, but 

also the industrial base needs to deliver on time. Is there anything 

that we can do to help you make sure that they are delivering our 

assets that we are having them built on time? 

Secretary DEL TORO. As Secretary of the Navy, I have held them 

accountable, actually, for delivering ships on time. I have had numerous meetings with all of the CEOs (Chief Executive Officers), 

I have walked all the shipyards myself to take a look at exactly 

how engaged they are in the construction of ships, and providing 

the quality of materials that are necessary. 

I think from the Congressional perspective, your continued commitment to invest in the industrial base, not just in the submarine 

community, but as the Vice Chairwomen mentioned, in the surface 

warfare industrial base as well, is critically important. Those are 

measures I think Congress should continue to take in order for us 

to get to a better place. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Moran. 

Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Welcome to our panel. I appreciate your service and your presence here. 

General Berger, let me begin with you. Both the Marine Corps 

budget submission, and unfunded priority list invest heavily in 

CH–53 King Stallions; explain why this particular aircraft is critical to the Force Design 2030, and the Marine Corps Mission, if you 

would? 

General BERGER. Late last fall, I went down to North Carolina, 

and the Senator, to fly on that aircraft, having grown up in CH– 

53Ds and Es. This is a state-of-the-art aircraft. It has a glass cockpit, it is a fly-by-wire digital airframe, it doesn’t fly itself, literally, 

but it is just exponentially years ahead of where anything else that 

we have. 

Around the world, it is one of a kind, it has range, altitude capability, refueling, lift, and it is marinized to go aboard ship like we 

do. To your question on how does it fit into Force Design? Both the 

CNO and I believe strongly that we will need to operate in a distributed manner. That means you are going to have to move troops 

and supplies around, the 53K is critical for that, especially in regions where you have long distances where you got to do that over 

water, this is the machine built for that. 
59 

And the price, which I am glad to see happen, gone down from 

117 to 113 in the most recent lot, that is the direction you want 

to see costs go as they learn how to build better airframe. The cost 

is headed in the right direction. 

Lastly, I will just say, it is scheduled to deploy later this fall. I 

will be pretty excited to see what it does aboard ship when it is 

actually deployed. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you. Admiral Gilday; P–8s, advancing 

technology, submarine capability of our adversaries, the P–8 Poseidon, I assume, continues to be critical to deal with those threats. 

I visited SOUTHCOM (Southern Command) last month, or a few 

weeks before that, and the Commanding General in our conversation, but also in a conversation with Senator Shaheen, indicated 

that the drug flow coming across our southern border is at an alltime high, SOUTHCOM’s allocated resources to see this situation, 

Her ISR assets quote, ‘‘Are at an all-time low.’’ 

The Navy’s procurement has stopped short of meeting the original risk-informed requirements for the 138 aircraft, what risk assessments went into this decision to halt the procurement of this 

critical capability? 

Admiral GILDAY. Sir, right now the estimate is 127, and we are 

sticking to that, so this is based on evolving, wargaming analysis 

that we are doing on an annual basis. The same thing goes into 

our ship numbers, and our ship mix. As you said, P–8s are vitally 

important. So I have never had to ask a combatant commander 

twice if they need another P–8, they are in very, high demand. 

They are not the only asset out there that we rely on for ISR, 

but particularly with respect to an ASW (Anti-Submarine Warfare) 

mission, which is what they were really designed for, they are less 

optimum for SOUTHCOM, as an example, let us say, a Russian 

submarine threat coming from the high north. As they tend to 

come out with more frequency these days, as well as a growing 

Chinese threat. 

Our focus has really been on both of those primary global 

threats, as outlined in the National Defense Strategy. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you. And let me turn to you, Mr. Secretary. Last year’s PACT Act was signed into law. It provides benefits to veterans exposed to toxic substances. The law included a 

provision allowing for individuals impacted by contaminated waters 

at Camp Lejeune to file for damages in court, Federal court. 

The PACT Act required claimants to present their claims to the 

Navy before going to court, and this is certainly additional burdens 

on claimants, the Department of Justice, the Federal court system, 

if the Navy can’t find a way to provide an administrative remedy 

in these cases. Would you explain where the Navy is in its effort 

to set up an administrative claims process? How many claims have 

been filed with the Navy since the law became—took effect on August the 10th? How many claims has the Navy acted on? And can 

you provide a reasonable timeline for the Navy to process and respond to those claims? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Senator. And we are very grateful for the support that was given by the Congress in order to pass 

the PACT Act to take care of our Troops, our Sailors, our Marines, 

and their families as well too. 
60 

Senator MORAN. Thank you. 

Secretary DEL TORO. We have stood up an outward-facing 

website at the Processing Unit. It is my understanding that we 

have received over 20,000 claims. We are obviously going to have 

to increase the personnel assigned to the Processing Unit, to be 

able to address those claims. I will get back to you on an exact 

number of claims that have already been addressed. I believe this 

is just the beginning, and there is much more work to be done, but 

we are committed to actually being able to process those claims in 

a responsible manner in order to move down that path. 

Senator MORAN. Does the President’s budget request reflect that 

additional personnel? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I will have to get back to you, Senator, I 

don’t believe it does right now. 

Senator MORAN. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Schatz. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for 

being here. 

Secretary Del Toro, just very quickly; are we on track for 

defueling Red Hill? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, we are very much on track for 

defueling Red Hill. As you know, we have also submitted our closure plan for Red Hill, we have submitted addendum number one, 

and we are working on addendum number two as well, so it will 

be submitted later this year. 

Senator SCHATZ. Do you have any reason to believe that 

defueling will adversely impact the DOD’s ability to support military operations in the AOR? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I do not, Senator. In all my conversations 

with senior leadership at the Pentagon, and looking at the strategic 

lay down plan for defueling afterwards, I don’t see any challenges 

whatsoever to executing that plan, over the course of time, absolutely not. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. And do I have your commitment to 

make sure that the Navy works with State and local partners on 

the healthcare aspect of this as well, as environmental remediation? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, you have always had my commitment on that subject, and you will continue to have my commitment on that subject, working with the Office of Secretary of Defense, and DHA (Defense Health Agency) in particular, to ensure 

that the service members, and also the people of Hawaii, have the 

services they need from a health care perspective moving forward. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you very much. 

Admiral Gilday, given that the INDOPACOM unfunded priorities 

list includes Military construction, Joint training with regional 

partners, and Logistics, can we be confident that—this is a delicate 

question,—so I wish you luck with the answer. Can we be confident 

that member-driven priorities aren’t crowding out our more 

foundational budget priorities? 

I am talking about divestment here, and we have had some good 

conversations, and even on the committee we have been talking 

about divestment, but everybody talks about divestment every 

year. And as I look at these priorities, it seems to me that these 
61 

are things that should not be on the unfunded priorities list, but 

on the list, that we are planning to fund. Can you reassure me that 

we are not accommodating all of the members, and all of their 

hometown business interests, in contradiction, of what the Department of Defense needs? 

Admiral GILDAY. Sir, the friction point with divestments, specifically ship divestments, directly against those members that are interested in ensuring that repair yards have a sufficient throughput 

going through them, right? And so if I look out to 2026, with a high 

degree of confidence, I can tell you that as an example, in Norfolk, 

through those shipyards will increase by 10 percent. 

In San Diego, it will increase by 9 percent. There is a bit of a 

dip there in 2024, but it does stabilize. If I could draw a parallel, 

and to our ship-building plan, so our submarines you can look out 

for 20 years and you know that we are in a cadence to build one 

SSBN, and two SSNs. Likewise, that gives stability to the Force in 

terms of what you are going to look at, in terms of the battle force 

you are going to field under the sea, and what those repair requirements are, with a high degree of fidelity. 

We are just now getting to that point in the surface build production lines, destroyers, LPDs, we want to keep, that line going. 

Senator SCHATZ. I get all that, and that—— 

Admiral GILDAY. It gives a higher degree of fidelity in terms of 

what the future looks like for those repair yards. 

Senator SCHATZ. Sure. And I am obviously supportive of keeping 

the industrial base up and running. 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes, sir. 

Senator SCHATZ. And also the predictability, and probably the 

price predictability of long-term contracts, and long-term Investments. But I just worry that we are giving short shrift to the kind 

of boring stuff, making facilities more resilient, funding our partnerships in the region, sewer, water,—— 

Admiral GILDAY. I get your point. 

Senator SCHATZ [continuing]. Housing, all of it. 

Admiral GILDAY. I get your point. So if I were to take our investment strategy with respect to infrastructure in the Indo-Pacific, 

and I have another billion, and then another $0.5 billion on my unfunded list for infrastructure, most of that is in the Pacific, and it 

is completely aligned with INDOPACOM’s plan for bases in places 

that we need to expand in the Indo-Pacific, or to shore up because 

we have not done any work there in a while. 

We work our budget with respect to that, sir, hand in glove with 

the combating commander. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. And just one final question for Secretary Del Toro: Red Hill is not the only aging infrastructure in 

Hawaii, that is for sure, and I would like you to speak to the sort 

of more basic, more mundane needs regarding infrastructure in the 

State of Hawaii? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Very much, Senator. And we have actually 

dedicated in this year’s budget, over a billion above last year or 

two, investments in the infrastructure, and they are going to have 

to continue. Historically, we have invested less than 1 percent of 

the budgets over the last 10, 20 years actually, in infrastructure. 
62 

And it is as critical to combat readiness as the readiness of our 

ships, and our aircraft, et. 

With regards to the infrastructure on the Island of O’ahu, and 

throughout Hawaii as well, it is challenged, it is very old, and it 

needs to be replaced. I believe the CNO has actually executed three 

recent assessments to take a look at the water, the sewage, and 

electricity, actually on the island, in order to support the infrastructure, and the ships that are there, and the families that are 

there as well. 

We have to continue that investment moving forward. We cannot 

ignore it. I myself, have called for a 30-year infrastructure plan for 

the Department of Navy, it will take us, a year to get it in the right 

direction, but both of the Marine Corps and the Navy, are actually 

paying a lot more attention to infrastructure because it is the right 

thing to do. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This morning, in Alaska, there is—500 speakers that are lined 

up to participate at the Arctic Encounter Symposium, the largest 

Arctic gathering here in the country. We are talking a lot about the 

Arctic nowadays. One of the principal issues of discussion will be 

the China-Russia intersect and the interest in the Arctic. I am all 

eyes on the Arctic all the time. 

And I was a little concerned, Mr. Secretary, as well as Admiral 

Gilday, in going through, at least your written testimony this 

morning, some 50 pages of text between the two of you, there is 

zero mention to resourcing your Department’s Arctic Strategy, or 

defending America’s Arctic. 

That worries me. We have seen Arctic strategies released by each 

one of the services, that is greatly important, but we all know that 

just having a strategy is nothing if we do not resource it, and resources are reflected in the budget. 

So Mr. Secretary, can you explain to me why you haven’t been 

conducting more overt operations in the Arctic? And just, more generally, if you would like: whether or not you think that this budget 

properly resources the Navy’s Arctic strategy? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, let me say that I deeply am concerned about what is happening in the Arctic, obviously, the United 

States is an Arctic nation, just like Russia. Unfortunately, they 

have been investing far greater resources than we have, historically, in the Arctic, whether it has been icebreakers, or troops, et. 

We need to do a better job of our investment in the Arctic. I 

think we have been challenged, obviously, with the current situation in Ukraine, as well as challenged by the current increasing 

threat of China, as the pacing threat, and the scenario with regards to Taiwan, which has demanded additional resources to be 

able to address those significant challenges. 

But nevertheless, the CNO, myself, and the Marine Corps, and 

General Berger, are looking at trying to increase the number of operations that we have actually in the north, and also taking a look 

at future deep-water ports, that perhaps we could reinforce, in 

terms of the piers, and et. I am planning to go to Alaska in 

June—— 
63 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Good. 

Secretary DEL TORO [continuing]. To address some of these 

issues myself, so I look forward to that continued conversation with 

you and the rest of Congress as we need to address these significant threats that are evolving. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Good. We will certainly welcome you in 

June. Any time you want. 

General Berger, let me ask you the same, whether or not you feel 

this budget appropriately resources the issues as they relate to our 

Marine Corps and the footprint in Alaska? 

General BERGER. Thanks for the question, ma’am. It gives us the 

resources we need to train there, yes. Both in exercises that are 

regularly scheduled, like you mentioned, the Arctic Edge being one 

of them. Where we go up and, frankly, can train to a level we can’t 

inside the rest of the United States, both because of the airspace 

and the sea space; and the force-on-force opportunities that you 

have in Alaska that it is really difficult to generate down here. 

There is also the unit deployments that we do to Alaska, and I 

took my Battalion to Alaska because you can build readiness there 

and get a regular deployment. You can do things, again, that you 

can’t do at home station. It does provide us the resource like the 

Marine Corps, the resources to do that right now. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. Well, it is something that, again, we 

recognize that this is a matter—this is an issue when it comes to 

Arctic and Arctic readiness, that we are not there yet. I think we 

would all recognize across all the Services, we are not there yet. 

You mentioned icebreakers, and I am sure you know this, Mr. Secretary, that we are sitting here still at one-and-a-half icebreakers 

on a good day, compare that to Russia’s 56. China is moving forward, even India is talking about building an icebreaker. 

So we are well behind in the construction of how are we going 

to facilitate our icebreaking fleet. I have two questions. And I am 

probably not going to be able to get to them, so I would ask that 

you both take these for the record. 

And this is to you, Admiral Gilday, and to you, Mr. Secretary. 

And they relate to World War II munitions and explosives of concern, unexploded ordinances that were left near Unalaska, at the 

end of the Aleutians, there have been several areas identified, 

where these hazards can be. It has been concluded that risks to 

public safety are present in many of these areas. It is a concern 

amongst the people in the region, most notably. 

Now, we are told that Navy says it does not plan to conduct another survey until 2027, until more advanced underwater search 

technology is developed. I want you to be aware of this, because I 

am going to include language in the Defense Appropriations Bill to 

conduct a more thorough survey in 2024. I think the people there 

deserve it. And it is in addition to the unexploded ordinances. 

I am also going to inquire about the chemical weapons, the Mustard agent, the Lewisite that was deposited off of AT2, and again 

the survey of that chemical weapons dumpsite. So just put that on 

your horizon. If you can get back to me earlier than that, it might 

obviate the need for it for language. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Baldwin. 
64 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Del Toro, building on this committee’s prior shipbuilding investments, I am advocating for additional funding for 

the frigate industrial base and workforce in fiscal year 2024. The 

ship will be a central part of the future fleet. 

And as a new class will undoubtedly face workforce, supplier, 

and shipyard infrastructure challenges, last year Congress provided $50 million for the Frigate Industrial Base and Workforce 

Development Program. I want to thank you for noting your support 

of this funding during last year’s hearing. First, can you share your 

thoughts on how the fiscal year 2023 funding will be executed to 

benefit this program? And then secondly, please follow up with, because I believe a sustained and robust investment is required to 

continue supporting the ship’s production ramp up. How do you see 

sustained industrial-based funding helping the program? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Thank you, Senator. First let me thank you 

for your commitment to ensuring the Constellation gets built on 

time, and on track. I am pleased to report that she is on time an 

for delivery. And we want to make sure that we continue that 

record. 

And the industrial-based investments are necessary. Most of the 

monies, I believe, will be dedicated towards—Constellation will go 

in the force of Workforce Development programs to try to help the 

shipyard recruit additional, and train additional individuals in 

Wisconsin to train them to be able to support, an increasing need 

for the workforce in the shipyard itself. 

I think that will be the best use of the monies. The shipyard 

itself has invested a lot in CapEx, and has reinvested a lot of its 

own profits, and its own capitalization as well too, to try to keep 

the frigate on track. 

So I am hopeful that the monies in 2023 are going to be better 

used in workforce development than in actual CapEx like investments in the shipyard. 

Senator BALDWIN. Okay. Thank you. 

General Berger, the Marine Corps listed LPDs, that is the amphibious transport dock ships, as their number one priority on 

their unfunded priority list. However, the Navy has halted its pursuit of the transport dock line, citing the program’s growing costs. 

Can you explain why supporting the LPD Project is important to 

the Marine Corps? And what the Second and Third order effects 

would be, if the LPD Project is not funded? 

General BERGER. Senator, in my opening comments I tried to 

highlight the operational, and the statutory minimums, both mandated by Congress, and what I see, as the warfighting requirement. 

And that is a floor, not a ceiling. And it consists of 10 big decks, 

LHAs, LHDs, and 21 medium or small LPDs, and is the bare minimum. 

This budget proposes early decommissioning of three of those 

LSDs, with no construction, no acquisition of an LPD, so from my 

role as defining what the requirements are, and the statutory minimums of 31, there is no plan to get there. 

From my perspective, I didn’t see any other way than to put it 

on the unfunded list in order to reflect that there is no plan to get 

to the minimum requirements. 
65 

If we don’t have it, to your question, what is the risk? The risk 

is our inventory atrophies to a point where we cannot deter, can’t 

campaign, can’t respond. And as I tried to highlight, when we can’t 

respond when we have to, then our allies’ and partners’ trust goes 

down, and in all likelihood the way the Chinese Navy is growing, 

they are expanding, but they are liable to try to step in. And we 

can’t afford that to happen. 

I would say the last part of this, of course, is maintenance which 

is the number one priority for the CNO, for four straight years, and 

recovering that maintenance making sure we have the fleet that 

we need that is ready, as he points out, is key also. 

Senator BALDWIN. You have previously cited that the buy now or 

block buy acquisition strategy will mitigate costs by footing the bill 

up front. Can you explain why you think this will be an effective 

way to mitigate costs, such as inflation; or if there are other methods to help mitigate those costs? 

General BERGER. The CNO is better qualified to explain the variables here. But from my perspective, a predictable pattern of construction on what they call centers, is key. Key for parts, key for 

labor, and for LPDs it is 2 years, so we have to have a battle 

rhythm, a cadence that allows them the predictability that they 

need. If we don’t have that, then they can’t hold the workforce, 

they can’t keep the supply chain working, and it starts to tumble 

downhill. 

Senator BALDWIN. Yes. I note that I have run out of time, but 

maybe for the record, Admiral Gilday, I would like to give you the 

opportunity to respond on the topic of LPDs, and feel free to submit 

that to the committee in writing. 

Admiral GILDAY. Thank you, ma’am. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Graham. 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

What is the inflation rate today, Mr. Secretary, do you know, for 

the Nation? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, I believe it is approximately 4.6 

percent, or so. 

Senator GRAHAM. For the country? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Overall. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Is the Navy budget equal to inflation? 

Secretary DEL TORO. No, sir, it is not. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. What is the Navy budget—how far 

below inflation is it? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I believe it is about 2 percent below inflation, sir. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. How many ships do we have in the 

Navy? 

Secretary DEL TORO. And when I mentioned the 4.6, that is the 

predictors that were used. 

Senator GRAHAM. All right. What’s the actual inflation rate? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Somewhere in the 6 percent range, sir. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. So the predictor was wrong? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Predictors are often wrong. 

Senator GRAHAM. Yes. Okay. Have you accounted for that? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Have we accounted for? 

Senator GRAHAM. Yes. 
66 

Secretary DEL TORO. Well, we are very thankful for the addi- tional $9 billion that the Congress provided to Department of Defense. 

Senator GRAHAM. Well, the point is that you are a couple of 

points below inflation. I think that is my point. So, how many ships 

in the Navy? 

Secretary DEL TORO. 296, sir, as of today. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. How many ships in the Chinese Navy? 

Secretary DEL TORO. It is upward of 300. 

Senator GRAHAM. Like 340? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. By 2028 how many ships will we have? 

Secretary DEL TORO. By 2028 we will have approximately 291 

ships, or so. 

Senator GRAHAM. That is less than 296, right? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, sir. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. How many will the Chinese have? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I can’t predict exactly what the Chinese 

will have, but estimates are upward of 440, or so. 

Senator GRAHAM. Yes. Okay. 

Secretary DEL TORO. I will add that our ships are extremely 

more modern than they ever have been, as well. 

Senator GRAHAM. Let us hope so. I believe, let us hope so. 

Secretary DEL TORO. And lethal. 

Senator GRAHAM. If not, we are in a world of hurt. 

Let me ask you this, CNO, how many ships do we actually need? 

Admiral GILDAY. 373 manned, and probably 150 unmanned. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. So under this budget the one—do you 

support this budget? 

Admiral GILDAY. I do. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. If we have 296 today, and under this 

budget we are going to be at 291 in fiscal year 2028, how do we 

get to 373? 

Admiral GILDAY. Sir, right now we have 56 ships under construction, and another 76 that are under contract. We can’t buy back 

time. For 20 years we are focused on ground wars, and understandably so, the Navy wasn’t the priority. Sir, keeping old ships, that 

are not usable or workable is not going to make us a stronger 

Navy. 

Senator GRAHAM. I am not arguing with you, I am just asking: 

Does the budget get you to 373 ships? 

Admiral GILDAY. If we follow the shipbuilding plan, that there is 

three alternatives in the shipbuilding plan, the third alternative, 

assuming about a 5 percent increase above inflation, above our top 

line. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. You are assuming 5 percent above inflation. The actual budget is 2 percent below inflation. How can you 

support a plan that requires 5 percent to get you where you want 

to go, and the actual plan is 2 percent below inflation? I mean that 

doesn’t make sense to me. Does that make sense to you? 

Admiral GILDAY. Well, sir, part of it gets at, what can the shipbuilding industry actually produce? 

Senator GRAHAM. Do we have a shipbuilding industry problem, 

or do we have a budget problem? 
67 

Secretary DEL TORO. We have a shipbuilding industry problem 

currently, Senator. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Well, let me just go back to the budget. 

He just said you need 5 percent above inflation, am I quoting you 

right? 

Admiral GILDAY. They is a—— 

Senator GRAHAM. To get to that 373 number. You just said that 

the Navy’s budget is 2 percent below inflation, and when you look 

out, over time, in year ten, do you know what percentage of GDP 

(Gross Domestic Product) we will be spending on defense? 

Secretary DEL TORO. I cannot predict that in 10 years, sir. 

Senator GRAHAM. Well, I can. And tell you right now; it is 2.5 

percent. How many times has this Nation spent less than 3 percent 

on GDP for defense in the in the modern era? I know, I will just 

tell you, four times? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Four time. 

Senator GRAHAM. 1940, 1999, 2000, and 2001. This budget is 

going to get us to 2.5, in fiscal year 2028 it goes to 2.9, so your 

budget is taking GDP spent on the Navy and the Military to historic lows, the budget you are supporting is below inflation, and 

you are telling us, to get to where we want to go we have got to 

be above inflation by 5 percent. If this is a good budget, I would 

hate to see a bad budget. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to 

each of you for being here today, and for your service to the country. 

I don’t know, Mr. Secretary, or Admiral Gilday, which of you 

would like to answer this question. But the Portsmouth Naval 

Shipyard has done the first Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization 

Program Dry Dock Modernization—it is a mouthful. Are there lessons learned there that you think should be applied to similar future projects in Hawaii and Washington, and what are they? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Very much so, Senator. And actually I am 

pleased that the progress in Portsmouth actually has remained on 

track, but it has been at the expense of many years of trying to understand exactly what we needed to do there from an engineering 

perspective. And those lessons learned are being applied actually 

in Hawaii. I just signed the first contract out in Hawaii for $2.8 

billion, my staff did. 

And we have applied those lessons to what we are experiencing 

in Hawaii, although both shipyards actually aren’t exactly the 

same nor are the projects themselves are exactly the same. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Right. 

Secretary DEL TORO. But I will ask the CNO to comment further 

on. 

Admiral GILDAY. I think one of the things—ma’am, that we 

learned, because these projects are so complex and we haven’t done 

them in a hundred years, is to bring the best in industry together 

in a group to inform how we move together. We didn’t do that as 

well in Portsmouth. We relied on a single contractor. We have 

brought together many more experts when we did the estimate for 

Hawaii, and the contract was just signed 2 weeks ago. I think we 
68 

are in a better position with a design that will keep us on track, 

in a bit more challenging area in Hawaii than Portsmouth. 

But that said, we have learned a lot from Portsmouth in terms 

of how we both design and then move forward in execution. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Well, thank you both for your support for that project and for coming to see it. I think it has been 

very impressive. 

General Berger, the Marine Corps is in its fourth year now, 

Force Design 2030. What have you seen in the Nagorno-Karabakh 

War, or the Ukrainian War, that has validated your approach to 

Force Design 2030? Are there lessons there? Or are there changes 

that we need to make in response to what you have seen? 

General BERGER. Well, that could be a long explanation I am patient. 

Senator SHAHEEN. You have 2 minutes and 33 seconds. 

General BERGER. I am patient in drawing long-term lessons 

learned while there is a fight going on, because you can make a 

mistake too early on thinking you have seen something and we 

should change everything. We need to be a little bit patient. 

That said though, I think we have seen enough to draw some 

conclusions, as you point out, because this is 10, 12 years observing 

this. 

First, the ability of a force to operate more spread out and empower authorized junior leaders to make decisions at speed, matters. There is almost ubiquitous sensing nowadays everywhere you 

need counter for that. And some of the counter to that is basics of 

camouflage, and some of it is much more technical and logistics. 

And lastly, I would say the ability of a force to adapt is huge. 

It is hard to quantify, ma’am. But the fight that you are in is never 

the fight that they taught you in school. We should be very impressed by the ability of Ukraine to adapt over the past year, all 

along the way, and the failure of Russian units to do the same. You 

and the force has to adapt to the environment they have got. And 

they have done a marvelous job of that. 

Outmanned, outnumbered, they have all the odds against them, 

except for NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and the 

U.S., but they have adapted. We need to be able to do the same. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, one of the things as I understand, you 

are working to do, and how does this complement that? But it has 

been described to me, hoping to change from the Marine Corps’ historically young Force to a more experienced Force. So how does 

that help us in those kinds of environments? 

General BERGER. It is directly tied to it. If you are going to empower, you are going to authorize junior tactical leaders to make 

really critical, key, tactical, and operational decisions, they need 

the maturity to do that. By maturity I don’t mean in age. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Right. 

General BERGER. I mean enough repetition, seen enough, done 

enough, to see a close semblance of what they have trained for before, and make a very quick decision. We have to mature the Marine Corps’ Force to reach a better balance of a very, young Force, 

versus a Force that has enough experience in there to make those 

tactical decisions, which is at the root of what Force Design for us 

is doing. Reach that right balance, retain more talent, and balance 
69 

the experience that we are going to need, with the youth that we 

have always had. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. And Secretary Del Toro, I am out 

of time, but one of—we had a hearing last week in the Armed Services Committee on Recruitment and Retention and the challenges 

that we are facing in our military. One of the issues that I think 

is very important to helping with recruitment—with retention, in 

particular, is ensuring that there is child care for families who are 

serving. 

I am going to submit this for the record, but I would like to know 

what we are doing to better expand our ability to provide child care 

for DOD families? We have done a really interesting Congressional 

Defense award in New Hampshire between the shipyard, and 

Pease National Guard, who are doing a child care facility jointly. 

Are there creative ideas like that that we are working on? But I 

will submit for the record. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Very quickly, we had two in the budget last 

year. We have three in the budget this year. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Great. Thank you. 

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary, in your testimony you highlight the significance that— 

of the challenge that China poses to our Navy and our Marine 

Corps. But last fall the administration released a draft regulation 

that would require contractors to report on any greenhouse gas 

emissions linked to the work that they perform on DOD contracts, 

and then prioritize emissions’ reductions regardless of the cost or 

impact on the warfighter. 

This regulations ‘‘finaled’’: it will increase costs, it will discourage 

contractors from working with DOD, and put green mandates 

ahead of operational requirements. And I would guess China would 

be pleased to learn that U.S. is willing to spend more to make 

weapons greener instead of getting more weapons or more lethal 

weapons to combat our adversaries. 

Can the Navy afford to have contractors increase their prices, 

and so forth, and focus on how green their weapons are in the face 

of the China challenge? And will somehow reducing the emissions 

of our weapon systems help either the Navy or the Marine Corps 

to more effectively meet the challenge that China poses, as you outline? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Senator I am not exactly sure that the relationship between green gas; gas emissions were tied directly to the 

weapon systems themselves. There is a lot of other utilities that 

the United States Navy depends upon, in which case green technology does make a lot of sense, and we are investing in a lot of 

green technology. 

The Marine Corps alone, we have actually taken Marine Corps 

Base Albany to zero essential emissions, essentially, and that pays 

off tremendous dividends in being able to provide us more resources to actually put into combat readiness, and to be able to buy 

more weapon systems themselves. 

Senator HOEVEN. Have you seen the proposed regulation I am referring to? 
70 

Secretary DEL TORO. I will have to look—no, I haven’t—— 

Senator HOEVEN. I would encourage you to take a look at it, because that is not what it does. It requires additional focus on making the systems, weapon systems, and so forth, the contractors provide more green. And it is hard for me to understand, we were 

talking about lethal weapons, that that would be the focus, or how 

that could not be costly and counterproductive to our warfighters. 

So I would encourage you to take a look at it. 

Secretary DEL TORO. I promise to look at it and get back to you, 

Senator. 

Senator HOEVEN. Yes. Thank you, Secretary. 

And then, Commandant, let me ask, General Berger, the UAS 

pilot training, in your testimony you mentioned the Air Force probably does not have the capacity to train the number of MQ–9 officers that you need. So what are you doing to get that training? And 

you know, are there enough trainers? Have you looked at contract 

training? Have you looked at alternatives then to address it? 

General BERGER. The way I captured it in the written testimony, 

is as accurate, as picture is, me and General Brown, and the CNO 

have. That we don’t see any shrinking of reduction of that demand. 

So the CNO, we have got a couple options here. As you have pointed out, one is contract. Two, is a naval school for unmanned pilots 

ourselves. 

In other words, opening up a UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems) 

school ourselves, which we are talking about. We don’t know yet 

what that would cost, and where we would put it. The instructor 

base, all that sort of thing, but it is pretty clear that relying on the 

Air Force, as we have the last couple years, we wouldn’t be where 

we were without them. This is not going to meet the requirement 

going forward. So it is probably going to be in either a Naval UAS 

school, or a contract solution. 

Senator HOEVEN. I would like to talk to you about that. We have 

put a lot of time and effort into working with Air Force at the 

Grand Forks Air Force Base, both to have a Technology Park, 

Grand Sky Technology Park, on that base, as well as a test site, 

Great Plains Test Site. General Atomics is located there, the manufacturer, they are training their Foreign Military Sales Pilots. They 

have the Brits there right now on the MQ–9. 

And so I would sure like to talk to you about that, existing facilities, the ability to fly in the NAS (National Airspace System) without—beyond visual line of sight aircraft. You know, manned aircraft having to chase all these things that might give you a tremendous head start. I would like to explore that with you. 

General BERGER. Absolutely, sir. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, General. 

General BERGER. You are welcome. 

Senator HOEVEN. Admiral, number one, two, and three things 

you need to really advance your ability to address the challenge of 

China in the Pacific? 

Admiral GILDAY. One is to keep shipbuilding on track clear, stable, and demand signals. 

Senator HOEVEN. I think Lindsey might agree with you on that 

one. 
71 

Admiral GILDAY. A clear stable demand signal to the industry. 

We haven’t always done so well in the past. We have been sinusoidal; we can’t afford to be like that anymore. A continued investment in readiness, so the investment in capacity cannot be at the 

expense of current day readiness, we have to be ready for today, 

and tomorrow. 

And then I think a continued focus on modernization, 70 percent 

of the fleet today we are going to have 10 years from now. So continuing to upgrade those capabilities, as well as taking care of the 

material condition of those ships is really important. 

Senator HOEVEN. I think you made a really important point earlier, it is not just the numbers of ships, it is having the ships you 

need to do the job. 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes. Yes, sir. 

Senator HOEVEN. And I think that was an important point that 

you did make. 

I would like to thank all three of you for your service, very much 

appreciate it, and for being here today. 

Admiral GILDAY. Thank you, sir. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Capito. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank 

Senator Collins as well. Thank you all for being here, and thank 

you for your service. 

Thank you, Secretary Del Toro, for the visit to my office several 

weeks ago. 

Over the past year, you and other defense leaders have spoken 

about the urgent need to increase production, particularly in munitions, to replenish our stockpiles, and be ready for the future contingencies. In particular solid rocket motors, are a critical component in our precision-guided munitions, and we need to increase 

our capacity. I am proud that some of these solid rocket motors, for 

many of our critical munitions, are made from a Navy-owned facility in the State of West Virginia. 

So I would first like to ask you to visit there. Or I don’t know 

if you have already been there, but I would love for you to have 

an opportunity to tour that facility in the future. So I extend that 

to you. 

But Mr. Secretary, how important is the production of these solid 

rocket motors to our national security objectives and readiness? 

Secretary DEL TORO. It is—— 

Senator CAPITO. And where are we on the pendulum here? I 

know we have expended a lot. 

Secretary DEL TORO. Well first, Senator, thanks for your invitation. I will most certainly take you up on that. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Secretary DEL TORO. And not just to visit West Virginia because 

it is a wonderful State, but because of the criticality of these solid 

rocket motors, we are a bit of an extremist in terms of being able 

to produce these at the rates that we actually need in the future. 

And so we have to look for additional suppliers that can produce 

them, we have to make sure that we don’t have continued mergers 

of companies, for example, so that we have more competition in the 

industry as well, they are critical to most of our missile systems, 

whether it be SM–6s, or some of our larger missiles as well. 
72 

Senator CAPITO. Yes. Well, they are maximizing their space out 

there, so they are putting a little bit more space, or a lot more 

space in. Let me ask you this? Is the impact of this has anything 

to do with the munitions that we have sent to Ukraine? Is that 

why—are stockpiling enough there? Or is it just hard to keep up 

with the production, which one of those would be true, do you 

know? 

Secretary DEL TORO. We have a commitment to provide Ukraine 

the munitions that it needs. 

Senator CAPITO. Correct. 

Secretary DEL TORO. And we will continue to in the future. And 

so that obviously has expended a lot of the munitions that we do 

have, therefore we have to make a commitment to increasing munitions across the board. The Office of Secretary of Defense, the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment has 

been completely devoted to this effort, and working with manufacturers across the country, around the world indeed. 

The Secretary of Defense, himself, has invested a tremendous 

amount of time to working with other nations to ensure that we 

bring as many munitions as possible to the support of Ukraine. 

And that of course has allowed, or it requires us to continue to refurbish those stockpiles that we have here in the United States, in 

order to get to a better place. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. General Berger, could you speak to this, 

the importance of a stockpile, and where you see that right now, 

where we are? 

General BERGER. A couple of thoughts, ma’am. First, based on 

what we have seen in Ukraine in the last year the rate of expenditure of munitions, is probably a lot higher in some scenarios, some 

situations, than we recognize. 

Senator CAPITO. Mm-hmm. 

General BERGER. It is a good—in other words, a good reminder 

to the rest of us, war isn’t a 48-, 72-hour kind of event all the time. 

And every day, every week the expenditure amounts are very high. 

We have a great process in place. I am very comfortable with it in 

the Department of Defense, for each request from Ukraine, getting 

analyzed and examined, and who can provide what. 

But it is very clear that our stockpiles for training and for 

warfighting, we need to reassess the assumptions in those to make 

sure that we have the depth, because to highlight your point, our 

industrial base, using a phrase from the Vice Chair earlier, can’t 

be just-in-time if we have to go to a conflict. 

Senator CAPITO. No. 

General BERGER. We have got to have it just-in-case, we have the 

depth in that industrial base to account for a big surge. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. Yes. I mean, I think that is a source of 

concern. 

Admiral, do you have a comment on this? 

Admiral GILDAY. I agree with everything the General said. I 

think the biggest thing we learned was the expenditure rates it has 

caused us to go back to take a look at our own wargaming and 

analysis, what our predicted and expenditure rates would be, and 

the questions and assumptions we made. So that is why, for the 
73 

Navy and Marine Corps, you see four multiyear procurements of 

weapons in this budget proposal. 

Senator CAPITO. So maybe your initial wargaming estimates 

might have been low? 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes. 

Senator CAPITO. Or just used differently? 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes. Yes, I think that we all assumed that our 

expenditure rates would be lower, weapons are more technologically advanced, and that is not playing out so well, in Ukraine. 

Senator CAPITO. Yes. 

Admiral GILDAY. So it has informed our thinking. 

Senator CAPITO. Okay. Thank you. 

Admiral GILDAY. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CAPITO. General, let me ask you a question on fentanyl 

use in the Navy and Marine Corps. It is a national problem. It is 

reflected in your Force. I understand between the years 2017 to 

2021, 332 of our men and women in uniform succumb to an overdose. Are you all focusing on this in the Marine Corps? 

General BERGER. Absolutely, yes. I would say anywhere that you 

travel in a Navy and Marine Corps, on any base, any station, you 

are going to find fentanyl as a top-of-the-list discussion when it 

comes to the drug issues that are difficult to detect, and readily 

available and affordable, absolutely. And it is, to your point, it is 

a killer. Every commander, every leader, enlisted officer, is focused 

on it, to answer your question. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CAPITO. Well, thank you. Yes. And Mr. Secretary, I am 

sure that would be the same. I am out of time, but I would say it 

is such a different substance, and so lethal. You know, I think on 

the prevention and education side, you can’t over-educate, and 

over-emphasize, just because you are taking a little pill doesn’t 

mean that this little pill is actually what they say it is. 

Mr. Secretary, I am out of time but—— 

Secretary DEL TORO. Senator, it is a major crisis in our Nation, 

and we, in the Department of Defense and the Department of the 

Navy are paying tremendous attention to it, to ensure that our 

troops understand that, and they should never be using drugs to 

start with, but for them to understand the real danger and threat 

that this immediately presents to one’s life, and that there is no 

second chance, or it could be very little second chance—— 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Secretary DEL TORO [continuing]. When it comes to the use of 

fentanyl. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you. Thank you all. 

Admiral GILDAY. If I could just? 

Senator CAPITO. Yes. 

Admiral GILDAY. We characterize it as a poison, yes. 

Senator CAPITO. Good. 

Admiral GILDAY. To your point. 

Senator CAPITO. Good. It is. 

Admiral GILDAY. You don’t know what you are putting in your 

body, and it is killing people, 107,000. 

Senator CAPITO. Yes, yes. Well, thank you all very much. It is a 

tough fight. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Collins. 
74 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Admiral Gilday, I was pleased that my colleague from New 

Hampshire brought up the Shipyard and Infrastructure Optimization Program, as she says, that is a mouthful, the SIOP Program. 

And that is well resourced in the budget, which I am pleased to 

see, not only because the work that we both are interested in, at 

the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, is underway, 

one phase has been completed, but there is more to come, but also, 

because I am concerned about the number of submarines that 

aren’t operational because they need maintenance, or refueling. 

And that is a trend that we need to reverse. I am told that nearly twice as many submarines as planned were not deployable in recent months because of maintenance or other issues. Are the investments in this budget sufficient for us to try to reverse that 

trend? 

Admiral GILDAY. I think so, ma’am. A lot of this is on us in terms 

of process. There are three areas that we are really focused on. 

One, is eliminating surprises for whether it is a private or a public 

yard, in terms of what they need to do. It is just like doing a house 

renovation. It surprises, drive your budget up, and they drive you 

off schedule, so we have focused on that. And I will talk about 

numbers in just a minute. 

The second thing is material. So you have given us a pilot using 

OPM (Office of Personnel Management) money, so multiyear 

money, to not only put private yard availabilities on contract across 

fiscal years, but to also use that money to frontload the material 

so that the workers aren’t waiting for that to arrive, and it is mitigating the risks that we are seeing with supply chain 

vulnerabilities. 

The third piece is the workforce. And I know you are well-informed about, you know, developing an experienced workforce. As 

we continue to work with industry on that, based on those three 

areas, and the work that we have been doing, we have seen delay 

days out of shipyards come from more than 7,000 down 3,000. That 

is not good enough. 

I predict, that based on the track that we are on, will be less 

than a thousand a-year-and-a-half from now. So by the end of fiscal 

year 2024, our goal is actually below 900. I think we are on track 

for that, but again the investments really in the material side, in 

terms of money, there is a $0.5 billion in Virginia-class submarine 

repair parts in this budget alone, to address some of that. 

So I think we are on the right track we are not satisfied yet, but 

the more operational availability that we return to fleet commanders, to your point about the submarines, the better off that 

we will be in terms of having a Navy operating forward. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. With regard to the workforce, let 

me just mention that the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard has one of 

the best apprenticeship programs that I have ever seen. Each year 

they bring in about a hundred new people into this apprenticeship 

program, they train in very realistic conditions, and very confined 

spaces, for example, and it really is a great program. And that is 

what I think we need to do more of, in industry as well, so that 

we have a pipeline of experienced workers. 
75 

Mr. Secretary, I just have—well, I have many final questions I 

could ask, but I didn’t want you to think I was ignoring you by not 

asking you a question today. And I do want to go back to the point 

that I made about the budget’s assumptions on fuel costs, in my 

opening statement, because the budget request assumes some fuel 

price of only a $140 per barrel. And it was ironic that on the day 

of the presentation of the budget the fuel costs, as measured per 

barrel, was 20 percent higher than budgeted. 

So my final question for this hearing is: Will you work with us 

to make sure that we do have sufficient funding for fuel? And explain to the Committee, what would be the implications if we have 

under-budgeted for fuel, in terms of flying hours, steaming days, 

training exercises, and other readiness activities? 

Secretary DEL TORO. Yes, ma’am. And it is a serious impact, because as the CNO said earlier, at any given day one-third of our 

Fleet and Aircraft are operational, and therefore we use fuel quite 

a bit. And so we are significantly impacted by the cost of that fuel. 

It is important to estimate those costs appropriately. 

And certainly, again, you know, we thank the Congress for the support they gave us in 2023 by putting $9 billion towards inflation, but it certainly makes it more difficult to be able to budget 

properly, if we don’t have the budget perfectly aligned to inflation. 

But that is a real difficult problem to do for OMB (Office of Management and Budget), and others, to be able to predict well ahead 

exactly what inflation might be next year. However, I think the 

greatest threat to our budget and the things that we are trying to 

accomplish today, actually is if the Congress were not able to pass 

an Appropriations Bill on time this year, and that will unquestionably, threaten all the things that we have talked about at this 

hearing today. 

Senator COLLINS. Well, I certainly agree with you on that. And 

I know that the Chairman does too. And that is why the sooner we 

can get information back from you, including, June 10, seems awfully far off for the plan, but the sooner we can get responses the 

better off that we can be in getting our work done as well. 

I want to sincerely thank all three of you for the time you have 

spent with me, and also for your testimony today. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins. I will echo those remarks. We appreciate your service, we appreciate the folks that 

you represent, and the commitment they have to keeping this country the country it is today. 

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

I appreciate your testimony. And Senators may submit additional 

written questions, and we would ask that you respond to them, if 

you get them, in a reasonable amount of time. 

[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were 

submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hearing:] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CARLOS DEL TORO

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. As part of its Fiscal Year 2024 budget request, the Navy plans to decommission 8 ships before the end of their service life, including 2 Littoral Combat 
76 

Ships. Mr. Secretary, you told us that you have enough LCS to cover your mission, 

but these ships are newer than my tractor back home and still have plenty of life 

left in them. There is no shortage of demand within the Department for additional 

maritime assets-particular among the Combatant Commands. Further, you last year 

mentioned the possibility of transferring LCS the Navy no longer wants to foreign 

nations. 

Have you made any progress in that regard? 

Answer. We have made good progress. In February 2023, Navy International Programs Office issued correspondence soliciting interest from foreign governments on 

potential transfer of decommissioned LCS. In response, we received formal Letters 

of Request for the transfer of the LCS from five (5) countries. As part of the next 

step, we are beginning the process of determining which interested countries can 

effectively operate and sustain these platforms, with the ultimate goal of allocating 

specific hulls for transfer. 

Question. I want to ask about a pressing healthcare issue in Japan that is affecting our military readiness. When we talk to Marines stationed, there, the top concern we hear about is the lack of healthcare for their dependents and DoD civilians. 

Constituents from Montana stationed in Japan and working for DoD have also contacted my office voicing the same-concerns. I raised this issue during our recent 

Subcommittee briefing with the Defense Health Agency, and while I understand 

some policy changes have been made, concerns about Japanese hospitals denying 

care remain 

What are you doing to fix this problem? 

Answer. Healthcare access issues impacting Sailors, Marines, families, and civilian employees stationed in Japan is an important topic for the Navy. The Japanese 

healthcare system operates fundamentally differently than in the United States, but 

we are actively working with the Defense Health Agency and other DoD components 

to address these issues and ensure our Sailors, Marines, families, and civilian employees get the support they need both in the continental United States and overseas, in locations like Japan. 

Question. In February, the, Government Accountability Office reported that the 

Navy is facing persistent and worsening sustainment challenges across its ten classes of surface ships. From data collected over a ten-year period, operating and support costs grew by about $2.5 billion, while the number of operating hours of the 

ships actually decreased. We already have a smaller fleet than China, we can’t afford ships to be stuck in port when they should be steaming. Unfortunately these 

findings are not surprising. Your Fiscal Year 2024 budget request adds $1.9 billion 

to the Ship Maintenance account, fully funding our-maintenance to capacity at the 

public and private shipyards. This is a good thing, but I’m not sure money alone 

will fix the issue. 

What are some specific action items you have directed to improve fleet readiness? 

Answer. I have directed Navy leadership to continue to evolve a myriad of endeavors to improve fleet readiness. Two examples include: Naval Sustainment SystemShipyards and Surface Warfare Enterprise Performance-to-Plan. 

The Naval Sustainment System-Shipyards (NSS–SY) is the Navy’s approach to 

identify and execute initiatives that reduce nuclear ship and submarine maintenance durations. NSS–SY is focused on three critical levers: reducing unplanned 

work, increasing throughput, and increasing material readiness. Each of these efforts is analytically supported by Center for Naval Analysis. NSS–SY waterfront efforts are focused on people-centric initiatives. NSS–SY will continue through the 

end of 2023 targeting on-time delivery of all availabilities. Upon completion of the 

NSS–SY contract, the government will assume control of all initiatives and continue 

improvements to work towards meeting class maintenance plans by FY 26. 

Surface Warfare Enterprise Performance-to-Plan (P2P) remains the key driver to 

Get Rea1 on the Navy’s baseline readiness performance, identifying the most consequential levers that move the needle on outcomes and communicating performance barriers to accountable supported commanders. Through P2P-Surface (focused 

initially on DDG 51 Class availability performance), Navy is seeing positive results 

in execution leading measures including planning, reduced growth work, early contract awards, reduced contract change cycle time, and improved long lead time material (LLTM) processes reducing DDG 51 Class Days of Maintenance Delay (DoMD) 

by 27%, from 424 (QI FY 21) to 308 (Q4 FY 22). 

Question. Nearly 1 year ago, three Sailors assigned to the USS George Washington committed suicide in the same week. The Navy’s initial investigation found 

no correlation between these deaths, but found manning shortages, mental health 

provider shortages, and quality of life issues to be contributing factors. The Suicide 

Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee referred to these as ‘‘dayto-day stressors.’’ 
77 

We have heard alarming statistics about the Navy’s vacant mental health positions, and senior leaders receiving a dozen sailor suicide risk reports daily. 

What reforms has the Navy implemented to respond to these suicides? 

Answer. The Navy is focusing resources and action on areas with higher risk of 

suicide, such as units that are in a maintenance phase. 

The Navy is increasing the number of mental health providers and chaplains on 

the waterfront. For Newport News Shipyard in particular, additional mental health 

professionals are now assigned to Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) aircraft 

carriers and have offices in close proximity to the ship. This increases accessibility 

and reduces commute times. 

In March, the Navy published the Mental Health Playbook to help normalize conversations around mental health and provide Sailors a roadmap to navigate care options. 

The Navy is also overhauling the totality of its prevention programs through the 

Advance Navy Culture initiative. This initiative will streamline and integrate related efforts and programs to enable on outcomes critical to readiness including increased connection, cohesion, and inclusion within commands, more effective stress 

management tools for Sailors in challenging environments, and an overall reduction 

in harmful behaviors across the force. 

At the Newport News Shipyard, the Navy has taken numerous actions to improve 

the quality of life of Sailors. These include: 

—Improving access to food options consistent with 24/7 work hours by bringing 

in food trucks in the evenings, reopening the self-use kitchen in the unaccompanied housing, and opening a Navy Exchange-mini-mart within the confines 

of the shipyard; 

—Increasing Wi-Fi access, which is now available for Sailors’ personal use, to increase connections to family’ and friends; 

—Centralizing parking, increasing the number of shuttles from parking lots to the 

shipyard and adding shuttle service inside the controlled industrial area; 

—Implementing unit-level morale efforts on the USS George Washington by reopening retail sales, resuming monthly birthday celebrations of Sailors, hosting 

therapy dogs onboard and increasing engagement with the command resilience 

team. 

More broadly, all aircraft carriers in RCOH have reviewed their sponsorship and 

mentorship programs, incorporating changes that benefit first-term Sailors. Welcome handbooks have been rewritten to cover mental health and other critical resources and information relevant for a first-term Sailor audience. First-term Sailors 

also receive command handbooks that provide a broad overview of the ship and the 

ship services tailored to a carrier in the shipyard. 

The Department of the Navy (DON), in coordination with the Department of Defense (DoD) and the other Military Departments, is reviewing the 127 recommendations made in the Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Commission (SPRIRC) report from February 2023. Recommendations include policy reforms, 

increased services, and overall improvements to quality of life for Service Members. 

The DON submitted prioritization and implementation plans to the Secretary of Defense in June 2023, and anticipates further guidance upon his review. 

Question. When will the final investigation report be released? 

Answer. The Phase I investigation specifically looked into the contributing factors 

and any causal links between the three tragic suicides in April 2022. Phase I is complete and was briefed to the families in December 2022. 

The Phase II investigation focused on the command climate and quality of life onboard the USS George Washington including the availability of support services, the 

challenging environment in the shipyard, lessons learned from past shipyard refueling overhauls, any possible effects of the COVID–19 pandemic and systemic challenges that impact aircraft carrier overhauls or construction in Newport News. 

Given the breadth and complexity of the investigation, a review is underway to inform the prioritization and resourcing of the recommendations. The report was released on 18 May 2023. 

Question. Does the Navy have the funding it needs in this budget request to make 

the necessary quality of life improvements? 

Answer. The DON is continuing to execute the President’s Budget 2023 and has 

sufficient funding based on current requirements. The Navy is committed to improving quality of life for Sailors and has significantly increased mental health and suicide prevention and response investments in out years. Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 investments totaled $62M. This increased to $74M in FY 2023, and the projected FY 

2024 investment is $102M. These additional investments will expand clinical and 

non-clinical mental health resources to support Service Members in: 

—Offering programs aimed at strengthening resilience and well-being 
78 

—Increasing access to embedded mental health providers 

—Providing reintegration support to Service Members after a suicide attempt, 

and, 

—Deploying rapid behavioral health support to units following a suicide. 

The DON is currently assessing any need for additional funding and resources for 

FY 2024 and beyond to support the implementation of the 127 recommendations 

from the February 2023 Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee (SPRIRC) report on Preventing Suicide in the Military and the recommendations from Phase II of the USS George Washington investigation. 

Question. The Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Report on Sexual 

Assault in the Military found that the Department of the Navy had the highest 

prevalence rate for sexual assault and unwanted sexual contact across all Services. 

Female Marines and male Sailors had the highest rates overall. The Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee visited with Sailors assigned to 

a ship in drydock. Sailors were sleeping in cars to prevent being sexually assaulted 

on the ship. 

The recently released Annual Report for Sexual Harassment and Violence at the 

Military Service Academies also found an alarming prevalence increase at the U.S. 

Naval Academy, your pipeline for officers. 

What is the Department of the Navy doing about these disturbing and unacceptable trends? 

Answer. The Department of the Navy (DON) is continuing to implement the recommendations from the 2021 Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault 

in the Military (IRC). In Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22), I released ALNAV 024122 Interim 

Policy Governing Investigations of Formal Sexual Harassment Complaints under IO 

US. C 1561. This interim policy requires that Investigating Officers charged with 

investigating formal complaints of sexual harassment come from outside the command of the victim and the subject; creating an environment that encourages victims to come forward. Additionally, I released the No Wrong Door Policy and Safe 

to Report Policy in June of 2022 that ensures victims receive care and support or 

have a ‘‘warm hand,-off’ appropriate service providers, as well as assurance that 

they will not be disciplined for minor collateral misconduct for filing an unrestricted 

report of sexual assault. 

The DON is continuing to make strides in removing collateral duty Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs) and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 

Victim Advocates (VAs) by hiring personnel at the 0–6 command level. The additional personnel will increase a workforce specifically trained to assist victims of 

sexual assault and sexual harassment. Hiring actions from both Navy and Marine 

Corps SARCs and VAs are underway and expect to replace all collateral duty personnel by FY26. 

After a review of the IRC recommendations, I directed the DON to prioritize five 

recommendations that focused on developing, educating, and promoting our leaders, 

to include those in the pipeline at the United States Naval Academy. These recommendations will equip leaders with the training and education necessary to deter 

violence and set conditions for healthy personal and professional relationships, 

thereby promoting protective command climates. These five recommendations are: 

DEVELOPING, EDUCATING, AND PROMOTING LEADERS 

3.3b Educate leaders on cyber harassment and technology-facilitated sexual harassment and sexual assault. 

3.4d Review and revise Professional Military Education (PME) and Department of Defense (DoD) schoolhouse curricula to mainstream Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) priorities. 

3.5a Use qualitative data to select and develop the right leaders. 

3.6 Building a climate for the reduction of sexual harassment and sexual assault as a fundamental leader development requirement. 

4.4c Revise and update training modules on appropriate response to sexual assault and sexual harassment in PME 

for Officers and NCOs. 

In August 2022, the DON defined ‘‘cyberharassment’’ allowing the DON to develop 

targeted training for Service Members and leadership on the prevention and appropriate response to harassing behaviors, including those of a sexual nature, that 

occur online. The DON anticipates launching cyberharassment training modules and 

webinars no later than (NLT) 30 September 2023 (Recommendation 3.3b). 

The DON is reviewing all PME and DoD schoolhouses for WPS principles. The 

Marine Corps has developed two MarineNet WPS courses: one for executives and 

one for junior/general population to help establish a WPS baseline understanding 

(Recommendation 3.4d). 
79 

To select and develop the right leaders, the Navy is implementing the Naval 

Leadership Assessment Program (NLAP) to add more relevant and timely data to 

the process of selecting leaders to include reliable, and valid cognitive and non-cognitive data assessments, 360° evaluations, structured job-related psychological interviews, and formal board interviews with Navy leadership (Recommendation 3.5a). 

The Navy and Marine Corps have conducted a comprehensive assessment to include a gap analysis of their leadership training curricula to ensure that the IRC 

recommended elements are fully integrated into future training modules. Currently, 

the Marine Corps Curriculum Review Board is in the process of approval for curriculum design, course descriptions, assessment overview and special areas of emphasis. The Navy is addressing curriculum gaps by piloting specific training to 

equip leaders to foster healthy climates (Recommendation 3.6). 

The Navy and Marine Corps have evaluated their existing PME training. Both 

Services are on track to design curricula that would eliminate reprisal, ostracism, 

and retaliation for survivors that report their experiences of sexual violence. Additionally, newly formed curricula has specifically designed modules to support leaders 

in helping survivors that are particularly vulnerable to sexual violence. All five of 

these recommendations will be implemented NLT 30 September 2023 to aide in developing healthy climates and driving down the trends of sexual assault and sexual 

harassment as highlighted in the 2021 report. 

Question. Where is the Department in hiring its prevention workforce and implementing the recommendations of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual 

Assault in the Military? 

Answer. The DON is continuing to implement the recommendations from the IRC. 

In November 2022, I signed a memorandum formally establishing the DON’s Integrated Primary Prevention Policy. The DON, Navy, and Marine Corps intend to hire 

1,055 full-time prevention workforce personnel between Fiscal Year (FY) 2022–2028. 

The Navy has hired and onboarded 43 personnel. The Marine Corps has hired and 

onboarded 18 positions. Both Services have many hiring actions in progress and offers waiting to be accepted as it begins to ramp up the workforce. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN

Question. The Navy has recently modernized its graving dock in San Diego and 

is also planning for an additional auxiliary floating dock in FY 25. While we welcome the Navy’s investments in surge capacity, we also need to make sure that the 

Navy isn’t discouraging the private sector from making and sustaining their own 

investments. 

What is the Navy doing to ensure that the ship repair industrial base remains 

healthy in San Diego and that these public investments are not negatively impacting critical, existing private sector capacity? 

Answer. The Navy is committed to enabling a healthy industrial base in San 

Diego and ensuring its actions do not have unintended negative consequences on our 

industry partners. The Navy’s goal of utilizing the Naval Base San Diego (NBSD) 

graving dock remains to foster a competitive private industrial base that enables the 

Navy the opportunity to conduct all ship docking availabilities in ships’ homeports. 

The NBSD graving dock was returned to service and certified to dock DDG 51 Class 

ships in August 2022, and within a month, the additional capacity provided by the 

NBSD graving dock was leveraged for an emergent docking. Had the government 

facility not been available, the docking would have been either delayed by approximately 8 months or the ship would have been forced out of port for the docking 

work, negatively impacting the crew and their families with next to no advance notice. 

In its efforts to mitigate any negative impacts to our industry partners, the Navy 

has refined its solicitation considerations for use of the NBSD graving dock and has 

implemented mechanisms that can allow for the place of performance to be changed 

to a private dock post-award if the contractor’s dock would otherwise remain empty. 

The Navy continues to engage private repair yards and solicit feedback and refine 

its approach to maximize private dock usage and to use public docks to maintain 

competition. The Navy remains committed to working with industry and Congress 

to meet maintenance requirements while also promoting health of the industrial 

base. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. I understand the Navy is collaborating with the Coast Guard in designing the Polar Security Cutters. 
80 

Can you discuss how far along you are in the design process and elaborate on this 

project? 

What is the Navy doing to assist with the stopgap while we wait for the icebreaker? 

Answer. The Navy is collaborating with the Coast Guard on the Detail Design and 

Construction of the Polar Security Cutter (PSC), having formalized the relationship 

with a Memorandum of Agreement signed in 2017 to define specific roles and resource contributions. The PSC program is managed by an Integrated Program Office 

(IPO) comprised of Coast Guard and Navy personnel. 

The PSC remains in the Detail Design phase. An Initial Critical Design Review 

(CDR) was held in March 2022 and planning for the Final CDR is ongoing. The IPO 

expects the Final CDR to be held within the next 8 months. Design efforts related 

to the Final CDR directly support Production Readiness Review (PRR) milestones 

and ultimately the start of construction. 

Additionally, the IPO created a Prototype Fabrication Assessment (PFA) period, 

which is projected to start this summer and will provide a ramp up period to facilitate a seamless transition to construction. This risk reduction effort will allow for 

the construction of as many as eight PSC modules prior to PRR to accelerate industrial learning, allow the shipbuilder to test its production processes, and train its 

skilled workforce on the unique characteristics of the steel being used to construct 

this polar icebreaker. 

Question. There has been significant activity from our adversaries in the Arctic, 

however I have noticed a significant lack of presence from our own Navy by comparison. 

Do you have the shore side infrastructure to support a naval presence in the Arctic? 

Answer. Naval forces are unique in their ability to operate at sea away from fixed 

land bases. The ability to sustain and replenish surface ships, at sea and the persistent presence of our submarines gives the Navy a tremendous advantage in the 

austere and remote regions of the Arctic. Following National Defense Strategy guidance, the Navy accomplishes defense and protection of the homeland by using our 

bases in the Atlantic and Pacific, along with the bases offered by our Allies and 

Partners. The bases the Navy operates from are considered the fixed posture that 

allows the Navy to have presence anywhere in the world. This is the same whether 

the Navy operates in the lndo-Pacific, Atlantic, Caribbean, or the Arctic. Additionally, Naval air presence is supported by Joint Force and Interagency partner shoreside infrastructure. Of note, Naval Air Facility Adak was closed during the base realignment and closure (BRAC) in 1997. 

Question. Does this budget address the shore side needs of the Navy to have an 

Arctic presence? 

Answer. Navy does not currently have any specific military construction requirements in the Arctic; therefore, the budget does not address any shore side needs of 

the Navy to have an Arctic presence. 

Question. After WWII, the DoD dumped hundreds of tons of chemical weapons 

(mustard agent and Lewisite) at 2,000 fathoms depth off Attu. DoD was required 

by the 2007 Defense Authorization Act to conduct a survey of such sites in Hawaii 

and Alaska, yet it only conducted such surveys in shallow, tropical waters of Hawaii 

(two sites), and then argued that such a survey in Alaska was not needed, as the 

Hawaii and Alaska sites were ’substantially similar.’ This is categorically not so. 

Why the DoD decline? 

Answer. The Navy respectfully defers to OSD to explain DoD policy for representative site selection in response to Sec. 314 of the FY 2007 NDAA. 

Question. Will the Navy conduct a survey in Alaska? 

Answer. The Navy reviewed the language in accordance with Sec. 314 of the FY 

2007 NDAA, the Navy has and will comply with direction from the Secretary of Defense on locations to be surveyed. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN

Question. It is my understanding that the CDC-Agency for Toxic Substances and 

Disease Registry (ATSDR) is on-site in Hawaii reviewing records of families who 

were affected by the Red Hill water contamination, at the request of the Navy. I 

think the ATSDR’s presence is a step in the right direction to find answers for the 

93,000 affected individuals. I understand that Service Members do not need to grant 

authorization for this type of review, but families of Service Members have reported 

no communication or transparency relating to CDC–ARSDR’s presence in Hawaii. 
81 

What is the purpose of the review and when will you be communicating with families about this review and its purpose? 

Answer. Defense Health Agency Public Health requested CDC/ATSDR epidemiologic assistance to better understand the illnesses reported by families impacted by 

the Red Hill fuel release. CDC/ATSDR officers reviewed the medical records of 653 

individuals potentially exposed to the fuel release. Defense Health Agency Public 

Health will communicate the findings to the Red Hill community through multiple 

platforms including a Red Hill Health e-update, website, and webinar. 

Question. What guidance have you put out to commanders on the ground about 

what to communicate to these families? 

Answer. First and foremost, Navy leaders—at all levels—encourage individuals to 

seek medical attention if they are experiencing symptoms. In January 2023, the Defense Health Agency established the Red Hi11 Clinic, which provides same-day consultations for those experiencing symptoms potentially related to the Red Hill fuel 

release. Regarding the CDC-Agency for Toxic. Substances and Disease Registry 

(CDC/ATSDR), local Navy leadership and public affairs offices publicized the CDC/ 

ATSDR survey and strongly encouraged participation. The Navy has also hosted 

town halls that included representatives from EPA, DOH and the CDC/ATSDR to 

provide information and answer questions from military personnel, families and the 

local community. The Navy will continue to coordinate closely with the Defense 

Health Agency, the Hawaii Department of Health, and the CDC/ATSDR to share 

information with the public as soon as it is available. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN

Question. Congress strongly supports increased funding to build, maintain, and 

expand our naval fleet, While supporting the domestic American manufacturing 

base. However, our defense manufacturing base is facing challenges from foreign 

competition. For example, it is my understanding that the Navy’s Constellation 

Class power systems upgrade was completed by a European manufacturer over a 

domestic manufacturer because the Navy focused on cost instead of enforcing domestic content requirements for power generation equipment. 

Can you please share what the Navy is doing to ensure strong enforcement of domestic content and Buy America standards, which will in turn support our domestic 

manufacturers? Do you support stronger domestic content requirements for power 

generation equipment? 

Answer. The health of the shipbuilding industrial base and sub-tier suppliers is 

vital to meeting our National Defense Strategy. Balancing imperatives such as strategic industrial base capabilities, supply chain resiliency, and affordability is a complex task. Through collaboration and smart investments, the industrial base can 

adapt and grow to build and maintain the fleet we need. The Navy is in compliance 

with domestic sourcing requirements and continually monitors and works with industry partners, including sub-tier suppliers, to assess the general health of the industrial base and identify opportunities for strengthening areas in need of reinforcement. This is almost always accomplished by encouraging competition while ensuring key domestic suppliers have sufficient work to sustain themselves. The Constellation Class power and propulsion systems are being manufactured to baseline 

requirements and have not undergone an upgrade. Although Section 8113(b) of Public Law 116–9:), the FY 2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act, directs all propulsion 

engines and main reduction gears be manufactured domestically by the 11th ship, 

the Constellation Class will deliver ship 2 with 100% domestically built power and 

propulsion systems. Additionally, the power and propulsion equipment manufacturing transition has begun on the first ship with training United States workers 

on foreign production lines. The Navy supports all current domestic content requirements and will continue to assess opportunities to strengthen the domestic shipbuilding industrial base. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO ADMIRAL MICHAEL M. GILDAY

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. All military Services are facing historic recruiting challenges. There are 

many factors at play here, but notable causes remain a shrinking pool of eligible 

candidates, and a competitive job market. Last year, the Navy took a significant 

number of recruits from its Delayed Entry Program (DEP) Pool to try to meet its 

recruiting goals, thereby significantly depleting the Navy’s accessions pipeline for 
82 

this year. The Marine Corps reduced the size of its force below its Force Design 

2030 goal. 

How is recruiting going for the Department of the Navy this year? 

Answer. Navy Recruiting Command (NRC) continues to aggressively work towards 

the Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23) accession mission, but is experiencing challenges. The 

previous FY was one of the toughest in recruiting history and NRC was unable to 

refill the DEP pool back to a healthy level of 50 percent. The inability to rebuild 

a healthy DEP created conditions for a contract-and- ship environment, which 

places additional stress on achieving the required mission. Throughout this FY, 

NRC has experienced great difficulty attracting Sailors in specific high-demand 

fields (Nuclear Field, Information Warfare, Special Warfare/Operations, Submarine, 

and certain aviation specialties), due to strong competition from the other Services 

and industry, a decline in labor force participation rate, a decline/loss of relationships and recruiter contacts, and a low market propensity among the target demographic. Propensity to serve declined from 13 percent to nine percent, which equates 

to approximately 1.2 million fewer prospects. In order to be successful this year, 

Navy will have to match or exceed the highest average contracting rate (927 Net 

Contract Attained (NCA)/week) in more than a decade to make the accessions mission. 

Question. Are you on track to meet your authorized strength levels? 

Answer. The Navy is employing numerous recruiting, attrition, and retention mitigations to help mitigate the end strength shortfalls in FY23. However, due to the 

challenging recruiting environment and the growing strength profile from FY22 to 

FY23, Navy does not anticipate achieving authorized strength levels in FY23. 

Question. In February, the Government Accountability Office reported that the 

Navy is facing persistent and worsening sustainment challenges across its ten classes of surface ships. From data collected over a ten-year period, operating and support costs grew by about $2.5 billion, while the number of operating hours of the 

ships actually decreased. We already have a smaller fleet than China, we can’t afford ships to be stuck in port when they should be steaming. 

The GAO report was specific to surface ship maintenance, but submarines are 

also plagued with longer than expected repair periods. 

What are we doing to increase readiness of the submarine force? 

Answer. Navy leadership remains dedicated to reducing our submarine’s days of 

maintenance delay and returning our fighting force back to the fleet as expeditiously as possible. The Navy is executing multiple initiatives for improvement to 

eliminate the root causes of the delays. These initiatives are part of the Naval 

Sustainment System-Shipyard (NSS–SY) and referred to as Pillars of effort. Each 

Pillar is led by a flag officer to ensure enterprise accountability. The Pillars include 

Engineering, Inside Shops, Waterfront, People, Fleet Ops, Infrastructure, Information Technology, Cost, and Planning. The Navy is engaged across the spectrum of 

submarine maintenance and modernization and is targeting improvements that will 

increase overall submarine readiness. 

In conjunction with these Pillars, the Navy established several critical efforts to 

drive change and improvements to the maintenance and sustainment periods 

through the implementation of a VIRGINIA Class (VACL) Material Strategy as well 

as additional focused efforts in the areas of Supplier Development, Shipyard Infrastructure, Strategic Outsourcing, and Workforce Development. 

VACL Material Strategy comprises four critical actions: 

1. Ensure proper phasing of material funding to support having a majority of the 

material at start of maintenance availabilities. 

2. Ensure proper levels of material funding per availability. 

3. Ensure the material funding is clearly separated/identified. 

4. Develop and implement a Bill of Material strategy to increase material availability. 

Key PB–24 investments in SSN maintenance are: 

—Fully funds Submarine Maintenance (1B4B) which will improve confidence in 

schedule execution and material availability for planned submarine overhauls. 

($972M (FYDP)) 

—Invests in the long lead-time (LLTM) materials that are causing significant 

delays in VCS availabilities. ($896M (FYDP)) 

—Addresses obsolete systems or components and invests in outsourced work to 

enable shipyard worker focus on critical path work. ($761M (FYDP)) 

—Restores Navy Working Capital Fund investment in VCS material made in 

FY23. ($350M (FYDP)) 

—Funds planning of a private shipyard VCS availability in heel-to-toe fashion following BOISE EOH, continuing Navy’s partnership with private industry. 

($170M (FYDP)) 
83 

The Navy is aggressively pursuing this VACL Material Strategy with all stakeholders to address material issues impacting VACL maintenance performance. A 

key focus is to bolster the industrial base in the following areas: 

Supplier Development 

Develop existing suppliers and expand the number of Submarine Industrial Base 

suppliers to better support material needs. The Navy is working with stakeholders, 

including the two prime submarine shipbuilders—General Dynamics Electric Boat 

(GDEB) and Huntington Ingalls Industries—Newport News Shipbuilding (HII– 

NNS), to improve oversight and assessment of the supply chain, including conducting annual health and readiness assessments of the supplier base that supports 

the submarine shipbuilding enterprise. Using a comprehensive risk management approach, critical suppliers are evaluated on their ability to meet current demand and 

grow to meet future demand. This oversight and accountability model enables greater visibility of supply chain health and data informed decisionmaking that transition information to action. 

Investments in the Submarine Industrial Base ultimately provide additional benefits to sustainment, as beneficiary companies and suppliers supporting new construction also manufacture spares used for submarine maintenance availabilities. 

Shipyard Infrastructure 

The Navy, GDEB, and HII–NNS, have each invested to expand and modernize facilities and shipyard infrastructure to support submarine construction capacity. The 

Navy has primarily used capital expenditure (CAPEX) and Construction Readiness 

Incentives (CRI) to support both shipbuilders’ capital investments. The Navy and 

both shipbuilders have reached a common understanding of the current facilities, 

fixtures, footprint, and resources needed to achieve the construction capacity to 

reach the COLUMBIA SSBN and two VACL SSN (1∂2) serial submarine construction rate, as well as the risks and constraints as part of that baseline. Additionally, 

the Navy is investing in the modernization and expansion of facilities and infrastructure at the public shipyards through the Navy’s Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan (SIOP). Specifically, SIOP is designed to update the physical layout 

of the four public shipyards, upgrade and modernize their dry docks, and replace 

antiquated capital equipment. FY23 enacted appropriations included $1.8B for SIOP 

efforts. PB24 continues SIOP investments requesting $2.7B in FY24 and $9.9B 

across the FYDP. 

Strategic Outsourcing 

Strategic outsourcing provides the dual benefit of supporting increased production 

at the public shipyards while leveraging existing capacity and stabilizing the workload for other industry partners. These efforts are focused on increasing depot-level 

capacity and reducing CNO availability duration. This work includes a combination 

of preservation, onboard ship system work, structural, electrical shop work, support 

services, and component repairs. 

At the private shipyards, GDEB is continuing to execute a combination of traditional ‘‘buy’’ purchase orders and the Focus Factory (FF) outsourcing concept, which 

is a dedicated approach to allow the transfer of work and technical rigor to the industrial base using shipbuilder instructions, processes, and supervision. Newport 

News Shipbuilding (NNS) is outsourcing approximately 1 million labor hours per 

year to address footprint and work center capacity constraints. This work includes 

a combination of large structural assemblies, steel fabrication, machining, and blast 

and coat operations. NNS intends to maintain this level of outsourcing over the next 

5 years based on current demand signals. An extensive amount of work has been 

performed to assess and develop suppliers to support this workload. Suppliers are 

beginning to demonstrate the ability to overcome the learning curve but workforce 

development and employee retention remain challenging. 

Workforce Development 

To keep pace with the existential threat of shrinking manufacturing base expertise and experience, the nation must view the generational increase in requirements 

for submarine shipbuilding and maintenance as an opportunity to reimagine traditional approaches. These approaches must address skilled labor resource shortages, 

bridge disconnects between school-based education and domestic defense manufacturing skillsets and reinvigorate community connection with the Navy mission. The 

Navy is implementing a strategy in partnership with the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Program, industry, regional 

trade associations, and state/local governments to address critical Submarine Industrial Base workforce challenges in the attraction, recruitment, training and development, and retention of the vital defense industrial base workforce. 
84 

Workforce Pay and Retention 

NAVSEA is leveraging a three-pronged approach to address hiring challenges and 

improve retention. 

—Special Pay Rates: One of the leading indicators related to under performance 

of hiring plans is the disparity of pay in comparison to private industry. Each 

shipyard developed data-driven positions to be considered for Special Pay Rates 

—Through the Naval Sustainment System-Shipyard (NSS–SY) People Pillar, the 

Expert Tradesperson initiative creates a career path that incentivizes our best 

and brightest mechanics to stay in the Wage Grade field. The Expert 

Tradesperson position was established with a clear vision and intent to enhance 

a career in trades and increase responsibilities and authorities within the production department, thereby dramatically improving throughput and productive 

capacity. 

—Pursuing Exceptions to Pay Increase Limitations: Annual appropriations law 

found in the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act 

places limits on wage schedule increases for Federal Wage System positions. 

This limitation does not provide parity with private industry and places undue 

burden on the naval shipyards to recruit or retain qualified employees. 

Strategic Submarines Sustainment Efforts 

OHIO Class SSBNs remain the cornerstone of our national security. The Navy established Program Management Office (PMS) 396 in October 2021 to focus on the 

sustainment of OHIO Class SSBNs for fleet tasking and is taking a multi-pronged 

approach to SSBN sustainment and readiness. This includes technical rigor and adherence to requirements, proactive solutions to maintenance and material issues, incremental modernization to meet future needs/threats, continuous data feedback 

and analyses to routinely refine and improve maintenance requirements, work execution, and develop/execute depot maintenance schedule. 

Similar to the VACL, the Navy remains dedicated to reducing our strategic submarines’ days of maintenance delay and returning our fighting force back to the 

fleet. We are ensuring VACL lessons are implemented and applied and have focused 

efforts in the areas of Supplier Development and Sea-Based Strategic Deterrence Infrastructure. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN

Question. Admiral Gilday, during the hearing, General Berger explained his justification for listing the LPD as his number one item on the Marine Corps Unfunded 

Priorities List, can you please respond to his points? 

If the Navy does not plan to purchase an LPD for the next 5 years, how will the 

Navy fill that capability gap and/or mitigate associated risks with ceasing acquisition of the LPD? 

Answer. General Berger and I agree on the requirement for 31 amphibious ships, 

and we are committed to ensuring we meet this requirement and do so in a timely 

manner, but with a capable, sustainable mix of ship classes that will support our 

Marines and Sailors for decades to come. The FY24 budget reflects a pause in procuring LPDs in order to conduct an LPD 17 Flt II amphibious ship cost/capability 

study and complete the Battle Force Ship Assessment & Requirement (BFSAR) report to Congress which will inform the FY25 budget’s way ahead for LPD acquisition. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. The Navy has conducted three surveys of WWII munitions and explosives of concern (including Unexploded Ordnance, UXO) on the seabed at Unalaska, 

and has identified several areas where these hazards may be. It has concluded that 

risks to public safety are present in many of these areas. I, and I believe the Navy 

view these seabed MEC/UXOs as a serious risk to public safety in the Unalaska/ 

Dutch Harbor area. Yet, the Navy does not plan to conduct another survey until 

2027. To date the Navy has apparently only used Side Scan Sonar in its surveys, 

but no underwater metal detectors, ROVs, Synthetic Aperture Sonar, to locate these 

explosive hazards. 

Why? 

Answer. The Navy is committed to protecting human health and the environment 

by investigating, remediating and implementing response actions at munition sites 

on land and at sea. To protect public safety in the Unalaska/Dutch Harbor area, the 
85 

Navy is implementing response actions to include land use controls, notifying the 

public, and conducting outreach to communities that might access the area. 

While there have been great strides in the past several years to develop and obtain technologies that can find munitions on the seafloor, there are currently no 

technologies or equipment that can operate in the challenging sea conditions in 

Alaska and provide high-fidelity information to identify and classify Munitions and 

Explosives of Concern (MEC). The Navy has assessed the ability of other equipment, 

such as Remotely Operated Vehicles and currently available metal detectors, to operate in the Unalaska/Dutch Harbor area as well. Unfortunately, these technologies 

do not generate data results that are superior to side scan sonar. 

The planned MEC survey dates in Fiscal Year 2027 (FY 27) are based on the expected timelines to develop new technology through the Department of Defense’s 

Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). The Navy plans to 

use synthetic aperture sonar along with other equipment FY27. The Navy remains 

committed to moving forward on underwater investigation and remediation as soon 

as possible, and will adjust timelines as suitable equipment is available. 

Question. Will the Navy use all technologies at its disposal, to locate these MEC/ 

UXOs, and to the extent that is safe, remove or contain these munition hazards 

such that they no longer pose a threat to the local public? 

Answer. Yes, the Navy is committed to taking all actions necessary to protect 

human health and the environment. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN

Question. The Skillbridge program is a valuable and effective program for 

servicemembers to gain practical civilian work experience prior to separation. The 

Navy recently released guidance restricting access to Skillbridge for its senior enlisted and officers. While, the Navy’s recruiting challenges are not as drastic as others, I believe the Navy should be prioritizing programs to stay ahead of this issue. 

Can you share what specific information and factors influenced this guidance? 

Answer. The Navy’s rationale for these program changes is to balance between 

mission readiness and Sailors’ ability to improve post-service employment opportunities, consistent with the MyNavy HR Strategic Goal to Build a Navy that can 

Fight and Win. 

The Navy understands the value of SkillBridge for transitioning Sailors. Our policy changes focus SkillBridge opportunities on junior Sailors who are less likely to 

have extensive formal education, or highly developed skillsets, placing them at the 

highest risk for post-service unemployment. These changes focus the program on 

those whom it was intended to help, while also taking into account critical manning 

needs and mission readiness. 

The Navy is also mindful of the significant investment we make in officer education. These policy changes ensure maximum return on that investment by requiring officers to fulfill their commitments to the Navy before embarking on 

SkillBridge. 

Question. Did you consult with DoD before issuing these new guidelines? 

Answer. Yes. We socialized our proposed policy changes with SkillBridge leadership at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. 

Question. Private sector firms are providing incredible fellowships and internships 

at no cost to the Services beyond sustaining the service members’ pay and benefits. 

Does the Navy have an alternative program that costs less and delivers similar 

outcomes while also improving the transition experience? 

Answer. The Navy is fully committed to assisting our Sailors’ successful transition 

to civilian life. It is our goal to enable former Sailors to become productive citizens 

and ambassadors for the Navy in which they served. We fully support and encourage their participation in the Transition Assistance Program as required by law, 

along with participation in other transition or internship programs, such as 

SkillBridge, as the individual unit’s mission requirements allow. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN

Question. In a potential conflict in the Indo-Pacific region, the strength of our 

Navy will be one of the key factors for control of the region. Given the current pace 

of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) naval expansion, now more than ever we 

must focus on improving and maintaining the readiness of our current fleet. 

Admiral Gilday, I know that you understand this problem better than anyone. 

Can you please talk to the initiatives that the Navy is implementing to modernize 
86 

and optimize our shipyards to ensure our fleet is prepared for the possibility of future conflict? 

Answer. The Navy’s primary initiative to modernize and optimize the four public 

shipyards is the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP). Shipyards 

with resilient facilities, efficient layouts, modernized equipment, and digital interconnections generate Fleet readiness and strengthen our Nation’s security. With the support received from Congress—to include the $1.7 billion appropriated 

in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023—SIOP is advancing three lines of effort (LOE): (1) deliver 

required dry dock repairs and upgrades to support current and planned classes of 

nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines, (2) optimize workflow within the 

shipyards through significant changes to their physical layout and modernizing facilities, and (3) recapitalize obsolete industrial plant equipment with modern technology, substantially increasing productivity and safety. In addition, SIOP provides 

a unique opportunity to address environmental stewardship, climate change, and 

energy resiliency, while updating the shipyards to Navy criteria and industry standards. 

SIOP has already achieved a number of accomplishments: 

—Completion of the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (PNSY) Super Flood Basin construction project and the modernized Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY) Dry Dock 

4. 

—Construction contract awards for the NNSY Dry Dock 8 Saltwater Upgrades 

and the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard (PHNS) Dry Dock 3 Replacement. 

—Preliminary design of a Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier capable dry dock 

at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS). 

—Awarding multiple Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 

projects across all four shipyards. 

—Making a of range of capital equipment investments to include delivery of a 

175-ton portal crane to PNSY. 

The foundation of SIOP’s optimization effort is made up of the industrial modeling 

and simulation, engineering studies, and area development plans underway for each 

shipyard. SIOP completed the first increment of industrial modeling in 2022, which 

provided facility-level data describing optimized workflow among buildings and validated reductions in ship maintenance availability durations achievable by optimizing facility layouts and infrastructure. The second increment of industrial modeling started in 2022 and focuses on processes within each building to optimize shop 

floor layout and equipment to further increase efficiencies. Using the modeled data 

from the first increment of industrial modeling and data gathered from engineering 

studies, area development plans are underway at all four shipyards. Leveraging a 

SIOP-tailored major defense acquisition process, the Navy will make investment decisions that will lead to design and construction of the preferred alternative at each 

shipyard. 

As the deliberate, long-term planning progresses that will create the efficiencies 

and throughput needed in our public shipyards, the Navy is making significant 

near-term investments in facilities and equipment to support the platforms in the 

fleet and entering service. The Navy’s FY 2024 President’s Budget Submission confirms the Administration’s commitment to SIOP with $9.9B of funding across the 

FYs 2024–2028 Future Years Defense Program. 

Navy readiness demands that all SIOP investments are coordinated with fleet 

operational commitments to ensure alignment of requirements, construction, and 

ship maintenance, while remaining mindful of the impact SIOP will have on our 

shipyard workers and our need for sustainable infrastructure. This includes ensuring the program is integrated with the Naval Sea Systems Command Performance 

to Plan, the Naval Sustainment System—Shipyards efforts, local communities and 

regulators, and the Administration’s climate initiatives. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL DAVID H. BERGER

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. You recently quoted a 32 percent readiness rate for our amphibious 

fleet. You’re not proposing to buy any new amphibious ships in the 2024 budget, 

but at the same time are proposing to retire 3 amphibious ships, further shrinking 

the fleet. 

What size amphibious fleet do we need to support Force Design 2030? 

Answer. We need no less than 31 Amphibious Warfare Ships to enable Marine 

Corps Title 10 missions in support of the joint force while providing minimal ARG/ 

MEU presence globally in support of Combatant Commanders. This number is 
87 

threat informed and risk assessed. It is scenario based, and model driven through 

a multiple phase event executed by the analytic arms of the Navy and the Marine 

Corps. It is imperative for delivering our Marines and their equipment on time, at 

decisive locations, to contest strategic areas in support of our Nation’s most demanding war planning efforts. However, there is still significant risk with only 31 amphibious warfare ships due to readiness. Even with an inventory of 31, four of our 

last five ARG/MEUs have been delayed, and one patrol executed with two ships instead of three. This requirement is consistent with 11 amphibious warfare ship inventory studies completed over the last 14 years. 

Question. Is it accurate that last year, the Marine Corps was unable to support 

certain recent deployment requirements from the Combatant Commanders? 

Answer. The Marine Corps remains postured and prepared to serve as the Nation’s crisis response force, providing credible forces where the Nation is least ready. 

Last year, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022, Marines 

stood ready to sortie to the U.S. European Command. However, due to readiness 

issues of certain Amphibious Warfare Ships, we were unable to provide this option 

to the EUCOM Commander and Secretary of Defense. 

Then, in February of this year, when Turkey experienced one of the most devastating earthquakes in the region’s history, Marines who are trained and prepared 

to support humanitarian aid operations were once again ready to deploy. Due to the 

availability of amphibious shipping, this deployment option was not available to the 

Secretary of Defense. An amphibious ship with embarked Marines could have provided the Combatant Commander with capabilities such as a hospital, large berthing spaces, water purification, heavy lift helicopters, debris removal, and transportation via MV–22 tiltrotor aircraft, and a landing force of 2,400 Marines trained in 

Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief (HA/DR). Instead, Marines forward based 

in Naples, Italy established a forward crisis response operations center at Incirlik 

Air Base in Turkey. Without the organic and sovereign capabilities of an embarked 

MEU aboard amphibious ships, this HA/DR response option was severely reduced, 

and the nation was unable to support a NATO partner as we traditionally have in 

a crisis. 

Question. All military services are facing historic recruiting challenges. There are 

many factors at play here, but notable causes remain a shrinking pool of eligible 

candidates, and a competitive job market. 

Last year, the Navy took a significant number of recruits from its Delayed Entry 

Pool to try to meet its recruiting goals, thereby significantly depleting the Navy’s 

accessions pipeline for this year. The Marine Corps reduced the size of its force 

below its Force Design 2030 goal. 

Is readiness now a concern for the Marine Corps? 

Answer. The Marine Corps remains the Nation’s force-in-readiness—a postured 

naval expeditionary force ready to deter adversaries, respond to crisis and conflict, 

and contribute to Naval and Joint Force operations. Our identity as Marines centers 

on being ready to deter, fight, and win. As individuals, as units, and as a Corps, 

everything we do is in support of warfighting advantage and being most ready when 

the Nation is least ready. This is our obligation to the American people. 

Our FY23 end strength target is 172,300. While enlisted recruiting continues to 

face unprecedented challenges, retention is responding positively across almost all 

metrics. For both first term reenlistments and career-oriented Marines we have retained over 104% of our goal. This retention rate of this magnitude is record setting. 

Current plans achieve the Force Design 2030 floor of 174,600 by FY30; the intent 

is to achieve the floor sooner if possible. The Marine Corps adjusted its Active Component enlisted recruiting mission in FY22 by 1,500 to mitigate the effects of 

COVID and new medical screening system implementation. Despite FY22 challenges, the Marine Corps achieved its enlisted recruiting goal. However, doing so reduced the Service’s delayed entry recruit pool from a historical average of over 50% 

to approximately 30%. The FY23 Active Component enlisted recruiting mission was 

modified in December 2022 from 31,900 to 28,900 to mitigate risk due to the current 

recruiting environment and limit further delayed entry pool degradation. 

Our Nation is facing a recruiting strain that is unparalleled in the All-Volunteer 

Force era. All Services are affected by the current confluence of a stagnant youth 

population, declining youth propensity to serve, declining percentage of qualified 

youth, and fragmented advertising markets. This is a national problem requiring a 

whole-of-nation dialogue. In keeping with the tenets of Force Design 2030, the Marine Corps is increasing retention of our highest performing Marines, especially 

within leadership and highly technical billets. This will prepare our forces to succeed on dispersed, complex, distributed, and high-technology future battlefields. We 

will continue to refine our policies consistent with Talent Management 2030 to best 

align the innate aptitudes, unique skill sets, and personal and professional aspira-
88 

tions of individual Marines to the warfighting requirements of the Marine Corps— 

over the entirety of a Marine’s career. Young Americans who earn the title of ‘‘Marine’’ can expect to be challenged through higher quality, more intense, and more 

sophisticated training and education than ever before. 

Question. I want to ask about a pressing healthcare issue in Japan that is affecting our military readiness. When we talk to Marines stationed there, the top concern we hear about is the lack of healthcare for their dependents and DoD civilians. 

Constituents from Montana stationed in Japan and working for DoD have also 

contacted my office voicing the same concerns. 

I raised this issue during our recent Subcommittee briefing with the Defense 

Health Agency, and while I understand some policy changes have been made, concerns about Japanese hospitals denying care remain. 

Are you hearing the same from Marines and civilians stationed in Japan? 

Answer. Yes, healthcare access issues impacting Marines, families, and civilian 

employees stationed in Japan is an important topic for the Marine Corps. At the 

recent Executive meeting of USMC 3 and 4 star Generals, this topic was prioritized. 

The Japanese healthcare system operates fundamentally differently than in the 

United States. There is a different mechanism for accessing care both in a 

prehospital setting and specialty care. We are actively working with the Defense 

Health Agency and other DoD components to address these issues and ensure our 

Marines, families, and civilian employees get the support they need both in the continental United States and overseas, in locations like Japan. 

Question. Last fiscal year, the Marine Corps did not spend all of its initial funding 

to begin hiring its prevention workforce. 

What is the status of the Marine Corps hiring for these positions? 

Answer. To date, 85 positions are posted or have selected candidates with Tentative Job Offers and 24 personnel have been hired. The Marine Corps noted in the 

OSD Implementation Roadmap development that execution of IRC recommendations 

require time for implementation planning and assessments, clarification of tasks, 

and Service-specific input to support a phased, iterative approach. The accelerated 

funding the Marine Corps received at the beginning of the 3rd quarter FY22 in support of the IRC was not obligated. Originally, the Marine Corps was planning for 

FY23 implementation of the IRC recommendations. Since notification of FY22 funding, the Marine Corps has completed the necessary administrative actions and all 

hiring/payroll processes to commence IRC hiring actions in support of IRC requirements. The full implementation of Marine Corps hiring, based on SAPR IRC recommendations, is in progress. 

Question. Are you on track to fill these positions this fiscal year? 

Answer. No. We are behind. That said, we are working to get on track with filling 

these positions this fiscal year and are currently at 14 percent of our FY23 goal to 

hire 369 positions worldwide, with new vacancy announcements being posted regularly. These positions include 121 SARCs, 194 Victim Advocates, 23 Primary Prevention Integrators, and 31 Equal Opportunity Advisors. Marine Corps implementation of all IRC requirements will require significant enduring resourcing, programmatic changes for manpower training, and military justice policy and authorities. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN

Question. General Berger, I read in your written statement that you have invested 

significantly in quality-of-life improvements for Marines living in the barracks. 

However, I also saw that 16% of the facilities are in poor or failing conditions. 

What investments can we make to ensure that Marines and their families have 

the high-quality housing they deserve, and do you see a correlation between the 

quality of your barracks and housing and the recruiting and retention issue? 

Answer. The Marine Corps sees a direct correlation between the condition of our 

quality of life (QOL) facilities with recruitment and retention. As stated in the Marine Corps’ Talent Management 2030 plan, ‘‘Quality of life is one of the leading reasons Marines choose to depart our Corps. We must renew our focus on meeting Marines’ needs like high-quality barracks, family housing, and chow halls; adequate 

childcare center capacity; and sufficient options for pediatric care.’’ 

To achieve these goals, the Marine Corps will invest $116M to renovate 13 barracks in FY24, as well as over $201M in family housing construction and operations. 

The Marine Corps strives to improve the QOL for its service members and their 

families, and with these investments, hopes to increase retention and recruiting 

measures. 
89 

Question. General Berger, I understand a large part of Force Design and the 

stand- in forces concept is forward deployed Marines who are already in place when 

the worst- case scenario unfolds. This plan requires resiliency, self-sufficiency, and 

the ability to punch back, after taking a punch. It seems the MRIC, or MediumRange Intercept Capability system is important for this capacity. 

Can you tell me about this systems progress and your planned investments for 

FY24? 

Answer. MRIC is an expeditionary, land-based, medium-range, surface-to-air fires 

system that will enable Joint, Marine Corps, and partner forces to operate and persist within contested areas by providing these forces with the capability to defend 

against cruise missiles and other aerial threats. The Marine Corps is utilizing a 

Middle Tier Acquisition (MTA) approach to procure an MRIC prototype system. The 

MRIC rapid prototype effort began in FY21, demonstrated success against relevant 

target profiles through a series of multiple live fire tests during FY22 and FY23, 

and remains on track to deliver a prototype system to conduct operationally relevant 

demonstrations by the end of FY25. This will inform the Marine Corps’ follow-on 

materiel development decision in order to meet the Force Design requirement to 

field an MRIC Battery to each of the three Low Altitude Air Defense (LAAD) Battalions in FY26, FY27, and FY28. 

The FY24 President’s Budget request $44M to support munition and component 

level procurement of the prototype system, as well as the operation and maintenance, and research and development requirements for the planned operational 

demonstration and necessary preparatory events and activities. These include training Marines to operate the prototype system, performance of an operational demonstration in Arizona, and conducting a quick reaction assessment in New Mexico. 

The last event will be overseen by the Marine Corps’ Operational Test and Evaluation Activity. 

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. Look, I think predictability in the industrial 

base is really, really important. And I think, making sure we are 

getting the biggest bang for the buck, by getting folks to have competitive contracts, and getting these out on time is also very important. 

And I look forward to working with all three of you, as do Senator Collins, to make sure that when this budget hits the ground, 

we all know what is in it, and we all know what to expect the results of it are, because I think it is a critically important moment 

in time. So thank you all for what you do. 

This defense subcommittee will reconvene on Tuesday, April 18, 

at 10 a.m., to hear from the Air Force. 

We stand in recess. 

[Whereupon, at 11:33 a.m., Tuesday, March 28, the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, April 

18.] 

(91) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 

TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met at 10 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Baldwin, Shaheen, Collins, 

Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK KENDALL, SECRETARY 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. Good morning, everybody. And I want to call 

this committee meeting to order. 

I want to welcome our witnesses; Secretary Kendall, General 

Brown, General Saltzman, thank you for your leadership and commitment to our Air Force and Space Force; I look forward to discussing your fiscal year 2024 budget, priorities today. 

General Saltzman, this is your first hearing before this committee, and we look forward to continuing to work with you. 

Secretary Kendall, I want to thank you for joining me to visit the 

341st Missile Wing at Malmstrom Air Force Base, and the 120th 

Airlift Wing of the Montana Air National Guard a couple weeks 

ago tomorrow, I think it was. And I appreciate your visit. I look 

forward to continuing our discussions to ensure that our service 

members have the tools they need to protect this country’s freedoms. 

The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Department of the Air Force is $215.1 billion, $9.3 billion more than fiscal year 2023, 

and about $41 billion more than fiscal year 2022. With China’s pacing threat, and Russia’s destabilizing actions, necessitated robust 

National Defense budget. However, modernization efforts in the 

fielding of crucial systems and aircraft are frozen unless we enact 

the Defense Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2024. 

We cannot allow CRs (Continuing Resolutions) to block our 

progress towards a modernization, and robust, and capable Air 

Force and Space Force, it is imperative that the fiscal year 2024 
92 

budget is enacted on time. And I look forward to working with Senator Murray and Senator Collins, to position us for success. 

Our national security is equally undermined by leaks of classified 

information, while the damage assessment of recent leaks by a 

member of the Air National Guard is ongoing; I would like to hear 

from you today why this individual had access to such highly classified information in the first place. 

Until we can confidently guarantee that our folks receiving security clearances will keep our Nation safe, I will continue to push 

for commonsense reforms to the background check and security 

classification process. 

Further, while it was important to explore and invest in modernization improvements of our assets and systems, these efforts 

fall flat unless they can be translated into capabilities delivered to 

the warfighter. 

As in previous years, your requests for modernization programs 

grow significantly, while your procurement request remains relatively flat. This is concerning because it implies that experiments, 

prototypes, and modernization efforts are not transferring to a 

large-scale production. We cannot let record high investments, and 

innovation, and modernization go unrealized. 

Once again, I want to thank you, each of you, for your service 

to this country. 

Before you make your opening statements, I want to turn it over 

to my Ranking Member, Senator Collins, for any comments she 

would like to make. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your holding this hearing on the Air Force’s fiscal year 2024 

budget request. 

To our witnesses, thank you so much for your service and leadership, and that of the Airmen and Guardians who serve our Nation. 

Secretary Kendall, the seven operational imperatives that you 

and the Chiefs have established for the Air Force and Space Force 

provide a useful framework for our analysis this morning. 

In many respects, the budget request reflects your continued 

focus to implement them, such as proposals to double funding for 

missiles, to increase funding for the Space Force by 15 percent, and 

to accelerate the development of the Next-Generation Air Refueling 

Systems optimized for the Indo-Pacific Theater. 

Until that new system is in place, I welcome the Department’s 

continued commitment to recapitalizing all of the legacy KC–135 

aircraft across the Air Force, including the 60-year-old airframes 

flown by the MAINEiacs of the Air National Guard in Bangor, 

Maine. However, there is a lot in this request, or perhaps more accurately not in it, that raises questions about whether the budget 

will achieve the seven imperatives before our country faces the 

challenges that you seek to address. 

Let me highlight just three of them: First, the Department is 

proposing to retire three times as many aircraft as it plans to buy 

this year. If this request were to be enacted with no changes, by 

my calculation, the Air Force would have 800 fewer aircraft in 2028 

than it does today. Meanwhile, China continues to increase both 
93 

the number and the capability of its most advanced fighter aircraft, 

the J–20 and the J–16. 

Second, the mission-capable rate for the F–35 in February was 

just 53 percent. It is not clear to me how this budget request will 

tackle this problem. And the Air Force, obviously, is far less effective if many of its planes are grounded. I would like to know how 

this budget request will improve the operational availability of the 

F–35. 

Finally, the Air Force is the largest consumer of fuel in the Federal Government, therefore, the Air Force has the greatest exposure of budget shortfalls and readiness risks if the cost assumptions in this request understate the actual price of fuel. For 2 years 

in a row that is exactly what has happened, the budget request has 

underestimated fuel costs, and Congress has come to the rescue to 

protect training and readiness. We were able to do that because of 

a substantial increase in the Defense top line for the past 2 years. 

So the question I will have for our witnesses is: What is the Air 

Force doing to maintain its flying hours, programs, and operations? 

What will it do if fuel costs, once again, exceed the estimate in the 

budget request? 

There are many issues for us to cover today, not the least of 

which is, as the Chairman mentioned, the disturbing revelation 

last week that a young Cape Cod-based Air National Guardsman 

was, allegedly, able to remove, photograph, and disseminate many 

classified National Security documents for months without notice 

from the Office of Special Investigations, the Pentagon, or the Intelligence Community. 

I look forward to discussing these issues with our witnesses. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins. 

Next up, we have the Honorable Frank Kendall, Secretary of the 

Air Force. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK KENDALL

Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Department of the Air Force’s fiscal year 2024 budget submission. 

Approximately 1 year ago, I began my testimony before this committee with a quote from General Douglas MacArthur reminding 

us that ‘‘The history of failure in war can almost always be 

summed up in two words: too late.’’ That warning is even more 

valid today. 

Over the past year, under the rubric of the seven DAF (Department of the Air Force) operational imperatives, that Senator Collins mentioned, the Department of the Air Force has worked to define the capabilities and technologies that we need, along with the 

programs and resources required, to deter, and if necessary prevail 

over our pacing challenge, China, China, China. 

In fiscal year 2024, we are requesting approximately $5 billion 

as a direct result of this work, and over $25 billion for operational 

imperative-related investments. War is not inevitable, but successfully deterring conflict is heavily dependent on our Military capabilities. 
94 

In our fiscal year 2024 budget request, there are approximately 

20 completely new, or significantly rescoped program elements, 

some of which are classified, that we must develop, produce and 

field, if we desire to maintain the air and space superiority that 

America and our allies have counted upon for decades. In order to 

proceed with any of these programs the Department of the Air 

Force needs timely authorizations and appropriations. 

The Department of the Air Force is ready to move forward with 

the next generation of capabilities we need. And there is no time 

to lose. 

In addition, to these new starts or enhanced efforts, the fiscal 

year 2024 budget includes requests for additional resources to increase production and accelerate development of programs essential to the Department’s missions, as defined in the National Defense Strategy. 

For the Strategic Triad, we have fully funded the Sentinel ICBM 

(intercontinental ballistic missile), the B–21 Raider Bomber, the 

Long-Range Standoff Weapon, and our Nuclear Commander Control Programs. 

For the Conventional Force, we are increasing production of both 

the F–35 and the F–15EX. The Next Generation Air Dominance 

Program is funded to move forward, and as indicated last year, an 

Uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft Program of record, is fully 

funded in our fiscal year 2024 request. 

We are also continuing the acquisition of sensor programs, like 

the E–7 Wedgetail, and the new resilient missile warning and 

tracking space system. As we indicated last year, hard choices have 

been required to move the Department into the future. 

We deeply appreciate the support of the Congress and this Committee for the divestitures we requested last year. This year, we 

must continue the divestment of the over-40-year-old A–10 Warthog. This program has served us well, but it is absorbing resources 

needed for higher priorities; we ask for Congress’ continued support 

for this and other identified changes we must make to field the 

forces we need to be successful against our pacing challenge and 

other threats. 

But of course it isn’t all about the equipment we need to perform 

our missions; it is also about the men and women who serve in the 

Total Force, Active, Guard, Reserve, and those who support them. 

I recently returned from the Indo-Pacific where I met with a 

number of armed teammates—excuse me—I think I may have 

skipped a page. 

We appreciate Congress’ support for 4.6 percent pay raise last 

year. This year we are asking for our 5.2 percent pay increase. The 

largest 1 year increase we have ever requested. 

In line with Secretary Austin’s Taking Care of People Initiative, 

we are continuing to invest in child development centers and housing to meet the highest priority needs of the Airmen, Guardians, 

and their families. 

Like the other Services, with the exception of the Space Force, 

the Air Force faces challenges in recruiting in a generation where 

the propensity to serve is the lowest that we have seen in decades. 

We are removing barriers to ensure that anyone with a capability 

and desire can serve to their full potential. 
95 

Under our National Defense Strategy, we are strengthening 

teams, both in the Joint Force and with our allies and partners, 

building these relationships, investing in our ability to work together is the essence of integrated deterrence. The effectiveness 

and importance of these relationships are on display in Europe 

today, where NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is stronger than ever. 

I recently returned from the Indo-Pacific where I met with a 

number of our teammates where I participated in a ground-breaking event for one of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement 

bases in the Philippines. Our budget request also supports 

strengthening our partnerships around the world, especially where 

we confront our pacing challenge and most acute threats. 

I started by talking about the value of time, and I will finish by 

highlighting a legislative proposal that can save up to 2 years of 

that valuable time. Our proposal would expand Rapid Acquisition 

Authority so that Military Departments can more quickly respond 

to emerging threats and take advantage of evolving technology. 

Within reasonable constraints, this legislative proposal would 

allow progress on compelling national security needs that would, 

otherwise, be delayed, until the next submission and approval of 

the President’s budget. I have been pushing this reform for many 

years, and we look forward to working with the Congress on this 

proposal. 

In closing, I believe the Department of the Air Force is well postured to move into the future. Our work to define that future is not 

complete, but it has produced compelling results that are reflected 

in our fiscal year 2024 budget submission. 

We look forward to your questions today; and would like to offer 

a more complete briefing on the classified details of our submission, 

at your convenience. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you Secretary Kendall. 

General Brown, you have the floor. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR., AIR FORCE CHIEF 

OF STAFF 

General BROWN. Good morning, Chairman Tester, and Ranking 

Member Collins, and distinguished Members of this Subcommittee. 

I am proud to represent the 689,000 Total Force Airmen serving 

our Nation. I want to thank you for your steadfast support to our 

Airmen and their families. 

It is an honor to join Secretary Kendall and General Saltzman 

to testify in the fiscal year 2024 budget submission. This budget 

builds on the progress made in fiscal year 2023, and marks the 

next milestone towards the transformation of the Air Force to address the evolving security challenges outlined in the National Defense Strategy. 

As I emphasized last year: we must continue to accelerate change 

or risk losing our strategic advantage. The Department of the Air 

Force’s operational imperatives describe key capabilities that must 

be attained to enable the Air Force’s modernization in the face of 

a rapidly changing threat environment, remain dedicated to ensuring our investments and resources outlining this budget submission 
96 

are aligned with the National Defense Strategy so the Air Force 

can continue to deter our adversaries, prevail in conflict, and to 

execute our mission to: Fly, Fight, and Win, Air Power Anytime, 

Anywhere. Not sometime in some places, but Anytime, Anywhere. 

This budget ensures the Air Forces continue to provide the Nation the assurance of air superiority, the advantage of global strike, 

the agility rapid global mobility, and you combine that with the 

adaptability of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and 

the authority in our command and control capabilities, providing 

the ability to sense, make sense, and act. This is what we must do 

today, and we must be prepared to do tomorrow. 

In order to provide these core functions to the Nation, we must 

accelerate development of programs essential to our mission with 

this budget submission. The right of the assurance of air superiority, we are increasing production of the F–35 and F–15EX, as 

highlighted by the Secretary, while the Next Generation Air Dominance Program continues development. 

To provide the advantage of global strike, we fully funded the 

Sentinel ICBM and the B–21 Raider Bomber. To provide the agility 

of Rapid Global Mobility we must continue the recapitalization of 

the KC–135 Fleet, while moving towards the Next-Generation Air 

Refueling System. To provide the adaptability of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, we are transitioning to the E–7A, 

complemented by other persistent, connected, and survivable and 

systems, and to provide the authority of our command and control 

we continue to mature Advanced Battle Management System by investing in digital infrastructure and modernizing cloud-based communications. 

Last year’s budget has started our necessary transformation, as 

we indicated, that hard choices would have to be made. Often, 

these choices are between current capacity, readiness, and future 

capabilities. 

Our message this year has not changed. The Air Force must 

modernize to counter strategic competitors, by balancing risk by investing in platforms and capabilities that have decreasing relevance against our pacing challenge, investments in speed, agility, 

and the lethality of the Air Force capabilities underwrites the entirety of the Joint Force. 

Our Airmen remain the backbone of our Air Force, and we are 

committed to ensuring their well-being and development while providing them the resources and opportunities to reach their full potential whenever and wherever the Nation calls. 

The Air Force is dedicated to reducing barriers, improving quality of service, and quality of life for Airmen and their families. Addition to excess of air power doesn’t happen alone, the excess is 

only possible through the collaboration with many of our stakeholders and teammates. 

I want to thank the Congress and this Subcommittee for their 

past and continued support. 

We look forward to working with you on our fiscal year 2024 legislative priorities, like Expanding Rapid Acquisition Authority, furthering modernization efforts at the Nevada Test and Training 

Range, preventing encroachment on our nuclear launch and control 
97 

facilities, and supporting pilot production, through civilian contractor position conversion. 

While we remain the strongest Air Force in the world, we must 

continue the change required to address both today and tomorrow’s 

national security threats. We must have teamwork and collaboration with all of our key stakeholders, to accelerate, providing our 

Airmen the capabilities they need to deter, and project credible 

combat power. 

We must have on-time appropriations and avoid continuing resolutions to stay ahead of the pacing, acute, and unforeseen challenges now, into the future. There is not a moment to lose. 

Thank you for the opportunity to be here with you today. And 

I look forward to your questions. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Brown. 

General Saltzman. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN, CHIEF OF SPACE 

OPERATIONS, UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE 

General SALTZMAN. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, 

distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for your continued support and for the opportunity to testify on the Space 

Force fiscal year 2024 budget submission. 

As the Space Force enters its fourth year, we continue to mature 

as an independent service, and are fully delivering on assigned 

missions. Since assuming my responsibilities in November I have 

traveled globally to engage with guardians, combatant commanders, and military service chiefs from partner nations to better 

understand where the Space Force should focus our efforts. 

Across the board, each of these groups emphasized the vital role 

space plays in strategic competition and integrated deterrence. 

As this committee well understands, competition and deterrence 

require investment in and modernization of technology, training, 

and partnerships. That is what the fiscal year 2024 budget submission for the Space Force does. 

This budget submission is directly in line with the National Defense Strategy, and the Department of the Air Force operational 

imperatives. As the fiscal year 2024 budget will allow us to further 

efforts to develop a resilient Space Order of Battle, and preparing 

for Rapid transition to a wartime posture against any potential adversary to fight and win in a high intensity conflict. 

In conjunction with ongoing modernization projects, the Space 

Force has several new starts for fiscal year 2024 to support these 

efforts. Investing in these modernization projects will allow us to 

execute our assigned missions as we move forward to better posture for the emerging complexities of the space domain, and the 

threat systems being fielded by strategic competitors. 

Space is now undeniably a contested warfighting domain; China 

and Russia define space as such, and are investing in technology 

meant to undermine U.S. advantage in the domain. 

China, our pacing challenge, is our most substantial threat into 

and from space, but Russia also remains an acute threat. Both 

present serious challenges with space capabilities that can track 

and target U.S. Military Forces on land, at sea, and in the air. 

Both can hold U.S. space assets at risk with cyber and electronic 
98 

warfare, lasers, ground-to-space missiles, and space-to-space orbital 

engagement systems. 

These systems threaten the space architecture the Nation relies 

on for prosperity and security. To meet this challenge the Space 

Force will prioritize three lines of effort: First, fielding ready, resilient, and combat-credible Forces. Second, amplifying what I call the 

‘‘Guardian Spirit’’; and three, partnering to win. 

These are directly in line with Secretary Austin’s Mission, People, and Team priorities. In sum, this budget request is designed 

to deliver the forces, personnel, and partnerships the Space Force 

requires to preserve U.S. advantages in space. 

To build resilient-ready, combat-credible Forces, we are accelerating the pivot towards modern, more defendable satellite constellations, and support infrastructure. We are conducting transformational Force design analysis based on threats, operational 

needs, and costs, so that we can maximize our budget while investing in effective missile warning, space domain awareness, communication, and navigation systems. 

Additionally, we are investing to ensure our networks are hardened to defeat cyber threats and that we have the operational test 

and training infrastructure necessary to prepare Guardians for 

high intensity conflict. 

With our second line of effort, we are amplifying the Guardian 

Spirit by recruiting, developing, and retaining the best talent, and 

empowering Guardians to succeed. Investment in space-centric curriculum for entry-level schools will build Guardians laser-focused 

on space operations in competition and conflict. 

Guardians will be empowered through mission command to innovate and execute in those scenarios. Notably, and with Congressional support, we plan to integrate the space mission elements of 

the Air Force Reserve into the Space Force to offer Guardians flexible career paths, including both full-time and part-time duty to retain talent and bring private-sector experience to the Force. 

The third line of effort acknowledges that the Space Force relies 

on Partnerships to accomplish our mission. We are investing in 

training, education, data sharing, and integrated capabilities with 

our allies and partners. The Space Force will strengthen our presence in all combatant commands where Guardians are already 

making solid connections with allies and partners. 

Because of its critical importance, the Space Force is collaborating with commercial partners to build resilient capacity and leverage emerging technologies. To enhance this partnership, the 

Space Force is working to eliminate barriers to such collaboration 

so that we can build enduring advantages, and field them more 

rapidly. 

In conclusion, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Space 

Force’s fiscal year 2024 budget request. The Space Force continues 

to be the preeminent military space organization in the world. Our 

adversaries seek to challenge our advantage in space, but with the 

support of this committee our Guardians will be able to outwork, 

out-innovate, and out-compete our potential adversaries to ensure 

that we maintain that advantage. 

The fiscal year 2024 budget request will make this possible, but 

only if the Congress passes timely appropriations. 
99 

I look forward to your questions. Thank you. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANK KENDALL, GENERAL CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR., AND

GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN

OVERVIEW

The Department of the Air Force (DAF) remains focused on implementing the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the priorities of the Secretary of Defense: mission, people, and teams. Our ability to perform our missions comes first, and everything we are doing to support and develop our people and build strong teams supports that goal. One year ago, we submitted a posture statement in which the need 

to modernize the Air and Space Forces, especially to meet our pacing challenge— 

the People’s Republic of China (PRC)—was highlighted. Over the past year, we have 

provided threat briefings to Congress on the severity of that challenge. A year ago, 

we also outlined seven operational imperatives the DAF must meet to be successful, 

but we were only beginning our work to analyze and define the solutions to those 

imperatives. We are pleased to report we have made significant progress in identifying the capabilities the DAF will need to prevail against the PRC and in defining 

new programs and resources to develop and field these capabilities. That progress 

is reflected in over a dozen new efforts, including a mix of completely new or significantly re-scoped program elements, in our Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) budget submission. With our budget submission, the DAF’s ability to execute these plans and to 

keep pace with the threat is now in your hands, and we urge you to act promptly 

on our FY24 request. 

Within the NDS, there are four priorities: defending the homeland, deterring strategic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient joint force. The Nation’s 

Air and Space Forces have key roles to play in each of these, and this is reflected 

in our FY24 budget request. 

The need to defend the homeland is paced with the growing threat from the PRC. 

We have just seen a manifestation of this threat in the high-altitude surveillance 

balloon destroyed by an Air Force F–22 fighter aircraft. While the recent high-altitude balloon incursion into our airspace may have garnered significant attention, 

there are other, more concerning threats to the homeland. PRC and Russian satellites observe the United States continuously. Cyber-attacks focused on intellectual 

property theft, penetration of critical infrastructure, espionage against national security networks, and disinformation, from both the PRC and Russia, are a constant 

reality. As the PRC increases the range of its conventional strike capabilities, the 

potential for missile strikes of various types against the homeland is increasing. In 

our FY24 budget, we are once again requesting F–15EX and F–35 fighter production. We are also accelerating our acquisition of a new space-based missile warning 

architecture to improve our warning and enable defenses against missile threats. 

To deter strategic attacks against the United States, our allies, and partners, the 

DAF continues programs to recapitalize the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) 

and bomber legs of the nuclear triad. The Sentinel program, our ICBM replacement, 

is continuing in development. The Minuteman III, first deployed in 1970, is the oldest land-based strategic missile system in the world. FY24 budgets more than $4.4 

billion for its replacement, Sentinel, which is critical for our nuclear modernization. 

For the bomber leg, we recently rolled out the B–21 Raider, which is scheduled to 

achieve its first flight this calendar year. Complementing our new bomber is the 

modernization of the B–52 and development of the Long-Range Standoff Weapon. 

Stable and consistent Congressional support remains vital to ensuring a safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent. These programs and others that contribute to 

this priority are all fully funded in the FY24 budget request. 

Our biggest challenge is maintaining and strengthening our capacity to deter aggression, and to prevail, if necessary, with priority to the PRC and the Indo-Pacific 

followed by the Russian challenge in Europe. While there is overlap with other priorities, the focus of our seven operational imperatives described in last year’s posture statement has been on this challenge. The Nation’s ability to project power, in 

the western Pacific in particular, is being challenged aggressively. The FY24 budget 

request includes approximately $5 billion in funding focused directly on achieving 

the seven operational imperatives and includes several new initiatives. The DAF’s 

Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) request includes nearly $35 billion in funding to continue our investments designed to address the operational imperatives. 

The criticality of these efforts highlights the importance of an on-time appropriation. 

Space has been recognized as a military domain of crucial importance to the joint 

force, allies, and partners, and to our ability to project power. The first operational 
100 

imperative is to define the Space Force that we will need and to put the programs 

in place to field that force. The Space Force has two fundamental missions: to provide essential services to the joint force and to protect the joint force from adversary 

hostile uses of space systems. The ability to perform these missions is at risk today 

and that risk is increasing over time. Our space systems are threatened by a variety 

of growing anti-satellite capabilities, and the joint force is threatened by increasingly sophisticated adversary space-based systems intended to target the joint force. 

Our FY24 budget request continues the work on a resilient missile warning constellation initiated last year. Our budget also builds out a more resilient space communications capability for the joint force, based on diversity and dispersion of communication satellites. This development work includes programs being managed by 

the Space Development Agency (SDA), now a part of the DAF and the Space Force, 

continuing to field distributed communications architectures. The total Space Force 

budget in the FY24 request is $30 billion, 15 percent above the enacted Fiscal Year 

2023 (FY23) Space Force appropriation. It includes over $2 billion and seven new 

efforts for this imperative. Other initiatives in this portfolio can be discussed at a 

higher level of classification. 

The Air and Space Forces play crucial roles in Joint All Domain Command and 

Control (JADC2). The second operational imperative is intended to ensure the totality of DAF Command, Control, Communications, and Battle Management (C3BM) 

programs provide an integrated capability with the resilience and performance needed to provide the Air Force and Space Force, the joint force, allies, and partners, 

with timely information and the systems to communicate, manage, and employ that 

information. Providing this capability resiliently is critical to enable our warfighters 

to make effective decisions in a high-speed, complex fight against our pacing challenge. The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) is one part of this overall 

effort, which has now been brought under the technical management of a recently 

created Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Integrated C3BM. Additionally, our 

Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications (NC3) capability investments will 

be synchronized with the PEO for Integrated C3BM efforts. The FY24 budget submission includes a net of roughly $500 million for DAF C3BM, including an additional $65 million for one new effort in this area. 

If the United States is to deter aggression and prevail should conflict occur, we 

must have the ability to track and engage advancing enemy forces in the air, on 

the sea, and on land. The third operational imperative addresses this need with a 

combination of space- and air-based systems. For space-based systems, the Space 

Force is working in close collaboration with the intelligence community to ensure 

that the joint force has the support it needs from integrated intelligence and operational support systems located in space. This will include operational space sensing, coupled with tasking and data management, designed with joint tactical 

warfighting as a primary mission. For airborne systems, the DAF is continuing the 

acquisition of the E–7A replacement for the E–3 airborne warning and control system. Other initiatives can be discussed at a higher level of classification. Overall, 

the FY24 budget requests $431 million for moving target related systems (exclusive 

of the Intelligence Community and classified funding) and includes six new efforts. 

For over 75 years, the Air Force has dominated opponents in the air. The PRC 

is challenging that dominance, and we cannot afford complacency, nor can we afford 

Air Force capability and capacity composed largely of fighters that cost as much as 

or more than the F–35. The fourth operational imperative addresses the family-ofsystems needed to sustain our dominance in the air. The centerpiece of this effort 

is the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) platform, but this platform will be 

too expensive to be purchased in large numbers. The FY24 budget enhances funding 

to field uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) to complement the NGAD, 

F–35, and possibly other current and new crewed platforms. Concurrent with CCA 

development, the DAF will acquire assets for experimentation and testing to explore 

organizational structures, maintenance concepts, and operational tactics. CCA inventory goals have not been established, but for planning purposes, we are assuming an initial inventory of 1,000 CCAs, with nominally two CCAs paired with each 

NGAD aircraft, and a portion of the F–35 inventory. In addition to the CCAs, this 

operational imperative has addressed other aspects of the NGAD family-of-systems. 

In total, the FY24 budget submission requests approximately $490 million for air 

dominance, with the entire CCA program and supporting elements encompassing 

three new efforts. 

The PRC and Russian investments in long-range precision strikes have put our 

forward airbases at risk. The Air Force’s Agile Combat Employment (ACE) concept 

partially addresses this threat. The fifth operational imperative team analyzed additional steps to enhance forward air base availability and resiliency. In the FY24 

budget request, the DAF prioritized actions that could be taken quickly to increase 
101 

the overall resiliency of our forward-deployed air assets, including building hardened shelters and pre- positioning equipment and supplies needed to implement 

ACE. The FY24 budget includes $1.2 billion to strengthen the resiliency and expand 

the availability of our forward airbases in the Indo-Pacific region. While not a new 

start, it represents a significant increase over FY23 funding levels. 

The Air Force’s global strike capabilities provide a powerful conventional and strategic deterrent. The sixth operational imperative examined ways to improve the 

cost-effectiveness of the family-of-systems surrounding the B–21 bomber. As noted 

above, the B–21 Raider is fully funded in the FY24 request, and it continues to 

make progress toward production and fielding. The Raider is more than a new platform, and this imperative identified new weapons, sensors, and communications 

that can make the B–21 more effective in the joint tactical fight. The fiscal year 24 

request includes $80 million to modernize our global strike capabilities and includes 

two new efforts. 

Both the Space Force and the Air Force have a number of systems and facilities 

on which they depend to mobilize and transition to wartime operations. The final 

operational imperative addressed the need to ensure these systems and facilities 

would function as needed in wartime. Much of the work to date under this imperative focused on the cyber-security of our critical information systems and infrastructure, especially modernizing and hardening our network infrastructure and giving 

our cyber operators new tools for cyber defense. Air and Space forces must also be 

capable of operating in a contested cyberspace environment. Our current budget reflects initial investments to achieve these objectives by cyber hardening networks, 

weapon systems, and priority defense critical infrastructure, and we recognize that 

there is much work to do in this area. The FY24 budget request includes $613 million in this area to strengthen the DAF’s cybersecurity posture. This represents a 

significant increase in enterprise information technology and cyber defense funding 

over FY23 levels. 

The work on the operational imperatives over the past year has informed the 

FY24 request, but it has also indicated some areas in which more effort is required. 

In just the last year, the threat has become more severe. As a result, the DAF is 

continuing and expanding our efforts to define solutions to the challenges we face. 

We are continuing the work of the seven operational imperatives to refine resource 

needs and plans across the lifecycle of these capabilities. In addition, we have started work on three cross-cutting operational enablers. These are mobility, electronic 

warfare, and munitions. These combined efforts will inform our Fiscal Year 2025 

(FY25) request, but they have already influenced our FY24 plans. 

In the DAF mobility portfolio, the tanker recapitalization effort has been our highest priority. The KC–46 is still working to meet all its requirements, but we believe 

they will be achieved. As the threat continues to increase the range at which it can 

engage our aircraft, we are being forced to reexamine how we will operate these 

platforms. The mobility study we have initiated will identify new ways to achieve 

more mission resilience and effectiveness with existing platforms and will define the 

requirements for the next generation of tanker and transport aircraft. While it is 

too early to provide any results, one outcome seems probable: the next tanker must 

be much more survivable than current designs and is unlikely to be a derivative 

of a commercial aircraft design. The DAF will conduct an Analysis of Alternatives 

to determine the requirements and concept for the Next Generation Air-Refueling 

System and we will evaluate our future mobility platform needs. 

Russia’s war against Ukraine, Korea Readiness Review, and the experience combating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have taught us that munitions 

planning, production capitalization, and stockpiling must account for the possibility 

of a longer and more intense conflict than previously assumed. The munitions crosscutting operational enabler analysis will inform our FY25 budget, but we are not 

waiting to address our highest-priority munitions requirements. The target set for 

which we must be prepared is evolving. We must build a munitions inventory that 

is more diverse with greater capacity while accelerating design and production capability, which includes advanced weapons. In the FY24 budget, we are increasing our 

procurement of munitions and partnering aggressively with the other services, allies, partners, and industry. 

The combat support area of electronic warfare (EW) must be reevaluated in light 

of emerging threats. Historically, EW development has been stove-piped for the sole 

purpose of providing enhanced survivability of individual platforms. As our adversaries have advanced their long-range sensing and targeting capabilities, we need 

to examine new ways to use EW as an offensive capability designed to defeat adversary kill webs. While most of this analytical work is classified, we expect new programs as well as some program restructuring in our FY25 budget. 
102 

Last year we indicated that hard choices would have to be made. Often those 

choices are between current and future capabilities. The DAF FY24 budget provides 

an acceptable level of operational risk for the current force in order to fund the future force. Affording the investments necessary to implement the operational imperative-derived recommendations requires both divestitures from the current force and 

an acceptance of risk in the level of readiness of the current force. Make no mistake: 

your Air Force and Space Force are ready and able to confront and defeat any adversary, but they are not being maintained at as high a level of readiness as might 

be possible. The fact is that the threat is racing to make those existing forces obsolete. The DAF must move as rapidly as possible to the future set of capabilities we 

need to sustain our deterrent and our ability to project power. There is not a moment to lose. 

We deeply appreciate the support of Congress in FY23. Congress largely supported our divestiture requests in FY23 with one exception—the divestiture of 32 

of our oldest and least capable F–22s. A year later, the threat is more severe, and 

the need to modernize is more pressing. This year we hope to continue the 

divestitures that were requested last year as we transition the force to one that is 

relevant to the threat. In particular, we are requesting the retirement of an additional 42 A–10s. This 40-plus-year-old fighter has served the Air Force and the Nation well, but it does not deter or survive against our pacing challenge, and we need 

to move forward. 

The Air and Space Forces are working to fulfill the NDS priority of building a 

resilient joint force and defense ecosystem. All our mission capabilities rest on one 

single foundation—our people. The hard work and dedication of over 700,000 military and civilian Airmen and Guardians across the Active, Guard, and Reserve components power our department. In fiscal year 24, we vow to continue supporting 

them by ensuring they can serve to their fullest potential. We demand a culture of 

respect, will promote accountability, and aim to end harmful behaviors, such as sexual harassment, sexual assault, racial, ethnic, and gender disparities, domestic violence, domestic abuse, and suicide as well as hazing, bullying, and other forms of 

discriminatory harassment. We will also promote initiatives that improve diversity 

and inclusion, ensure quality healthcare access, advance recruitment and retention, 

and improve our talent management processes to strengthen readiness. Every current and potential Airman and Guardian should understand their value and the importance of service to our Nation. 

As we move forward to meet our challenges, we do so as members of a much larger team. First, the Air and Space Forces are critical members of the joint team. We 

are also members of an international team with our allies and partners who collectively ensure our success at achieving integrated deterrence against any threat, but 

first and foremost against our pacing challenge. 

Our people and our missions are successful because of teamwork. The fiscal year 

24 budget continues numerous investments, such as $194 million for Pacific Deterrence initiatives, to strengthen our relationships and interoperability with our joint 

force, allies, partners, and interagencies. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization 

(NATO) is stronger than ever, and the ever-increasing F–35 community provides 

strong interoperability. In the Pacific, we are expanding our relationship with traditional partners like Japan, South Korea, and Australia, while strengthening our cooperation with nations like the Philippines and other Pacific Island nations. Our 

united resolve against Russian aggression and our combined focus on the pacing 

challenge in the Indo-Pacific highlight the incredible partnerships we have with democracies around the globe that share our values. As we research, test, acquire, and 

build the military capabilities of tomorrow, we strengthen and expand the Defense 

Industrial Base, and we do so in concert with our allied and partner nations. 

UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE 

The United States Space Force was created in recognition of the space domain’s 

critical importance to national prosperity and the need to contest the domain for national security purposes. Recently, the US has seen dramatic changes in the domain 

with an exponential increase of launches, on-orbit active payloads, space debris, and 

proliferation of counter-space threats. This reality presents new risks and opportunities to national objectives across diplomatic, information, military, and economic instruments of power. Consequently, ensuring our Nation’s ability to operate in, from, 

and through a stable space domain is a vital national interest for the Space Force 

to address. 

Spacepower is not simply ‘‘important’’ in modern competition and conflict—it is 

foundational. Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to validate this assertion in 

several ways. First, Russian counterspace attacks since the outset of the war rein-
103 

force the reality that space is a warfighting domain. Second, proliferating constellations and disaggregating space missions are proving to be far more resilient and effective, especially with commercial augmentation. Third, equipment alone cannot 

win in the modern fight. Winning takes space-enabled, multi-domain operations and 

a joint force trained on the most current operational concepts. In this environment, 

we must shift to a resilient and effective Space Order of Battle and ensure we have 

the tools, talent, and experience to be ready to face the challenges to our missions 

of providing space superiority so that we can enable and protect the joint force, our 

allies, and partners. 

SPACE FORCE’S ROLE IN DEFENDING THE NATION

A primary responsibility of the Space Force is to field ready, resilient, and combat-credible forces. To be ready, Guardians must be trained, exercised, and postured. To be resilient, our architectures must be designed to render threats operationally impractical or self-defeating. And to be combat-credible, space forces need 

systems for full spectrum operations utilized by competent warfighters practiced in 

their tradecraft. 

Through the operational imperatives, we are defining the space systems and capabilities we need to prevail against the pacing challenges—the PRC and, secondarily, 

Russia. Through the work in the first operational imperative, we are focused on increasing resilience for space architecture by addressing the risks facing people, platforms, and processes through systems proliferated across multiple orbits. Resilient 

systems will allow us to prevent, respond, and campaign through competition and 

aggression. When operated by a ready, combat-credible force, resilient systems will 

disincentivize would-be aggressors. 

The FY24 budget includes critical investments for meeting all four priorities demanded in the NDS and the DAF’s first operational imperative by evolving toward 

more resilient space architectures. Building resilience must first consider the continuous operation of over 50 legacy platforms, which necessitates investing $172 million in FY24 for additional cyber protection, evaluating select legacy systems for upgrades, and integrating space capabilities from several allies and partners. These 

upgrades will broaden the resilience of several mission areas, including military Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT), Command, Control, Communications, and 

Battle Management (C3BM) systems, and NC3 by migrating the Evolved Strategic 

SATCOM (ESS) system to a proliferated architecture that will be more resilient during a strategic attack. 

Still, the surest way to lessen long-term risk is through the generational replacement of legacy platforms. This year’s budget requests $102 million to continue our 

analysis of the force design for how space-based systems support several critical 

warfighter needs, including delivering communications to the tactical edge, providing secure PNT information, and enabling data links that connect sensors, 

warfighters, and weapons. The insights gained from comprehensive force design 

analyses ensure we make effective and cost-effective transitions from legacy to nextgeneration space systems. 

The first mission area to undergo this transformation will be Missile Warning/ 

Missile Tracking (MW/MT), with the last legacy Space-Based Infrared System 

launch having occurred in 2022. In the FY24 budget, we turn the page into a new 

era of MW/MT with over $2.3 billion to ramp up research, development, test, and 

evaluation of the first tranche of proliferated satellites, ground segment development, and interoperability testing which sets the way for a complete constellation 

in the years to follow. Additionally, we are on track to deliver the first Next-Gen 

Overhead Persistent Infrared geosynchronous space vehicle by 2025 to reduce risk 

and improve the transitional resiliency and effectiveness of MW/MT, missile defense, battlespace awareness, and technical intelligence. 

Recognizing that joint warfighters need to sustain and expand SATCOM capabilities, this budget pursues new solutions. MeshONE, for example, is a $151 million 

effort that will deliver a novel approach to a modern, scalable, resilient, cyber-secure 

Wide Area Network available to the joint force at the tactical edge. We are also 

leading the transformation of communications via the emerging space data transport layer. Beginning in FY24, our investment of $1.8 billion will deliver an initial 

warfighter capability that will provide low-latency data transport and beyond-lineof-sight targeting, with persistent regional access to the joint force. Once fully operational, this capability will serve as the backbone of data transport in support of 

C3BM and JADC2. 

We must also provide protection to the joint force and our allies from adversary 

space systems that threaten our forward-deployed forces and those of our partners. 

The FY24 budget includes funding for critical counter-space capabilities intended to 
104 

fulfill this mission need. Specific budgetary information is available at a higher level 

of classification. 

Our ability to use space effectively requires assured access, being first to field the 

necessary capabilities, and the ability to reconstitute them, if necessary. This budget 

ensures the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) program is equipped to place 

essential capabilities in orbit when needed. The NSSL program is preparing for a 

new phase in which we are pursuing a dual-lane, hybrid approach that maximizes 

the use of the Nation’s robust commercial launch market. Recognizing the exponential growth of the commercial space industry, we are investing $99 million in 

FY24 and over $1 billion over the FYDP into the Range of the Future vision, which 

aligns us with the accelerating domestic space launch market, and maintains safe 

and assured launch for commercial, civil, and Department of Defense users. 

SPACE FORCE’S ROLE IN TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE

The Space Force is implementing a more modern talent management approach 

based on a competency framework that optimizes individual contribution. Over the 

past year, we have made progress toward achieving our end state described in the 

Guardian Ideal. The result has been tangible impacts on retention and the development of Guardians of all ranks. Our future hinges on recruiting and retaining a diverse and innovative force of highly talented Guardians, and we are proud to have 

met our recruiting targets. Guardians will soon be leading an innovative approach 

to holistic health by emphasizing a continuously healthy lifestyle rather than episodic fitness testing. We are retooling how we measure healthy living and providing 

Guardians and leaders with the resources they need to uphold the highest standards expected of military professionals. 

We are also advancing opportunities and education for all ranks and phases of 

a Guardian’s career. Starting with Basic Military Training, FY24 will see graduation standards fully established, with Guardians being held to service-specific requirements, while Air Force Officer Training School and Reserve Officers’ Training 

Corps Space Force cadets will see increased space-related academic content. This 

budget will mature the University Partnership Program to inspire and recruit the 

right talent and provide additional opportunities for Guardians to obtain advanced 

academic degrees in essential Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math subjects. 

Reflecting our continued commitment to professional military education, this budget 

funds the program with our first graduates in 2024. With Congressional support, 

we intend to innovate by pursuing a personnel system with full- to part-time fluidity 

that will improve career flexibility and enhance retention tools. 

Recruiting initiatives are only the beginning for Guardians as space professionals. 

To develop professional warfighters, this budget commits to enhancing readiness by 

increasing the quality and quantity of realistic testing of new systems and training 

of Guardians on them. By incrementally instituting Operational Test and Training 

Infrastructure and the National Space Test and Training Complex, FY24’s investment of $21 million will continue progress in delivering more realistic testing and 

training against a thinking adversary, much like the high-end fight our Nation may 

face in a future contingency. To do this, the Space Force will build agile operational 

capabilities and execute orbital experimentation to rapidly expand our technological 

prowess. 

SPACE FORCE’S ROLE IN SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Teamwork for the Space Force starts internally within the DAF, where the Space 

Force relies upon support from the Air Force. For example, the Air Force supports 

the six Space Force Bases with over 8,000 Total Force Airmen providing numerous 

activities to the Space Force. This includes, but is not limited to, finance, contracting, education and training, child and youth services, dining, fitness, lodging, 

manpower, logistics, communications, medical, emergency services, and base security. Externally, the Space Force is building teams in four key areas: joint force, 

commercial industry, the intelligence community, and internationally. 

With Congressional support, the Chief of Space Operations is formally designated 

as the Force Design Architect for Space Systems of the Armed Forces. This is important because our closest partnering efforts are inside the joint team. We are exercising our role as the integrator of all space requirements from and for the joint 

force as we merge and integrate requirements through more-responsive processes 

from sister services and Combatant Commands. Moreover, this budget requests to 

restructure the Space Force’s organizations responsible for this important analytic 

work, namely by redesignating the Space Warfighting Analysis Center as a directreporting unit, which will increase responsiveness to warfighter needs. 
105 

In coordination with the Intelligence Community (IC), Guardians are also taking 

the initiative and exploring joint service intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, 

and targeting needs and opportunities. Inherent coordination in integration with the 

IC ensures that operational and intelligence requirements are being met efficiently, 

especially when they overlap and use shared assets. For example, the IC and DAF 

are similarly seeking new means for moving target engagement, the fourth operational imperative. 

To best partner with our industrial base and commercial space, we must improve 

space acquisition to be more dynamic, cost-sensible, and effective. In the past 3 

years, several significant improvements have been made to the structure and relationships comprising space system acquisitions. For example, all major stakeholders 

in space acquisitions are collaborating to define resilient architectures, assess risks 

to identify needs, and drive rapid change that aims to deliver results faster than 

the threats can react. The nine acquisition principles developed by the Assistant 

Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration will revamp acquisition strategy to epitomize responsive acquisitions that apply state-of-the- art commercial best practices. 

Expanding the use and future of the commercial space industry and academia 

across all mission areas organic to the Space Force and the joint force remains critical. These include satellite communications (SATCOM), space domain awareness 

(SDA), launch, PNT, and more. A strategic advantage for the United States is our 

robust, innovative, and responsive industrial base, which includes the highly specialized traditional defense industrial base and the highly innovative new commercial space industry segment. We are embracing a hybrid architecture of commercial 

solutions across many mission areas. Our approach to hybrid architectures affords 

several benefits including resiliency, cost competition, responsive surge capacity, 

rapid technology refreshment, increased innovation, improved diversification to industry, and more expedient integration with international partners. 

We continue to expand the team of allies we cooperate with across all mission 

areas. Space Systems Command recently delivered two SDA sensors on Japanese 

satellites to build SDA capacity and relations with a key ally in the Indo-Pacific region. In the European theater, our partnership with the Norwegian Ministry of Defense led to Enhanced Polar SATCOM payloads on two Norwegian satellites that 

will provide communications from highly elliptical orbits. The Space Force continues 

to address partnering challenges by implementing new classification guidance and 

sharing agreements, investing in more accessible hardware and software such as the 

Unified Data Library, and supporting DAF- and Department of Defense-wide solutions, particularly the Mission Partner Environment. The Space Force recognizes 

that the best solutions are preventative, such as the implementation of the Combined Space Operations Vision 2031 and the successful maturation of the NATO 

Space Centre. These structural improvements will help us to develop and operate 

resilient, interoperable architectures by and for coalitions. 

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE 

The United States Air Force is critical to our national defense, is committed to 

Airmen and families, and succeeds by teaming with our joint teammates, allies, and 

partners as we execute our mission to ‘‘Fly, Fight, and Win . . . Airpower Anytime, 

Anywhere.’’ Our speed, agility, and lethality are exponential force multipliers to any 

global military operation. Our capabilities underwrite the entirety of the joint force, 

and we are uniquely suited to provide this cornerstone of the Nation’s defense. 

To meet the threats facing the force of today and in the future, we must implement the programs that have been defined by the analysis of the seven DAF operational imperatives and continue the momentum of Accelerate Change or Lose. We 

are orienting our decisionmaking processes and shaping investments around resilience and lethality against the pacing challenge, long-range kill chains, and the elements supporting them. We remain dedicated to ensuring our investments and resources are properly aligned with the NDS to deter our adversaries and prevail in 

conflict. As the combat environment and the character of war continue to evolve, 

our determination to be the leader in speed, agility, and lethality remains an irreplaceable role for the joint team and our allies and partners. 

AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN DEFENDING THE NATION

As stated above, we must continue to make hard choices in Airpower modernization to keep pace with our strategic competitors while balancing risk. The difficult 

decisions are far from over, and the measured near-term risk decisions which 

prioritize essential modernization and acceptable current readiness continue. Airpower modernization is critical to address the four NDS priorities: defending the 
106 

homeland, deterring strategic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient 

joint force. 

The NDS priorities depend upon platforms and capabilities that support effective 

command and control and are survivable in the threat environment of both today 

and tomorrow. In FY24, we continue our modernization efforts while divesting platforms and capabilities that have decreasing relevance against our pacing challenge. 

Current airborne platforms, such as the E–3 and E–8, are not adequately survivable 

against emerging threats, are not optimal for joint or coalition operations, and need 

to continue divestiture as we look to the future. These airborne capabilities play a 

critical role in meeting the operational imperative to track and engage enemy forces 

at scale. A combination of space- and air-based systems will be needed to maximize 

lethality and close kill chains. We remain committed to balancing current, mid-term, 

and longer-term capability and capacity by divesting the E–3 while rapidly acquiring and fielding the E–7A to modernize efficiently. 

A focused redesign of the C3BM network, being pursued under the second operational imperative, is overdue and a top-priority modernization effort that will define and field ABMS capabilities. The establishment of the C3BM Integrating PEO 

will align command and control modernization efforts across the DAF and with the 

joint force. ABMS will fulfill the Air Force’s integral contribution to JADC2 and the 

FY24 budget focuses on building and maturing ongoing programs. 

Air superiority for the joint force demands affordable Airpower modernization, 

which includes NGAD. The FY24 budget continues NGAD development. The NGAD 

family-of-systems operational imperative will provide an innovative suite of capabilities that allow us to establish and maintain air superiority, a precondition for the 

joint force’s freedom of maneuver. The uncrewed CCA program included in this 

budget is a significantly enhanced activity for air superiority and is targeted to support both NGAD and the F–35. The CCA program will have three simultaneous 

lines of development—the platform, autonomy, and unit construct. 

In addition to the longer-term operational imperative programs described above, 

the modernization decisions we are making consider the entirety of the Air Force’s 

capability and capacity mix. As we work to develop a new generation of capabilities, 

we are also working to improve current and mid-term capability and capacity. This 

process includes replacing some legacy platforms, namely the MH–139A replacing 

the UH–1N, and the Survivable Airborne Operations Center replacing the E–4B. It 

also includes modernizing existing platforms that will remain in operation for many 

years, including the B–1, B–2, B–52, C–17, C–5, F–16, F–15E, F–22, and F–35 

fleets. Within the FY24 budget, we have committed over $12 billion to modernize 

these existing platforms. These modernization efforts are designed to improve midterm capability and reduce risk while providing needed capacity to complement the 

improved capabilities provided by the programs defined by the operational imperatives and the new families-of-systems such as the B–21 and NGAD. 

As noted earlier, capable, improved, and complementary munitions are needed for 

both our new and existing platforms. We are prioritizing investments in munitions 

and technology to counter pacing threats in highly-contested environments. This includes investments in both air-to-air and air-to-surface capabilities to engage mobile 

targets from standoff ranges in adverse weather. Investments into hypersonic munitions will enable us to hold high-value, time-sensitive targets at risk in contested 

environments from standoff distances. The FY24 budget invests over $5 billion to 

support Small Diameter Bomb II, Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile, Hypersonic 

Attack Cruise Missile, Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon, and more munitions’ 

facilitation across the defense industrial base. These investments will shorten the 

kill chain while supporting the moving target operational imperative. 

For the current force, we are pursuing improved readiness through multiple channels, including the Air Force Force Generation model (AFFORGEN). AFFORGEN 

enables the presentation of sustainable, predictable capacity and capabilities while 

ensuring operational preparedness and required readiness. AFFORGEN balances 

risk between Combatant Command requirements, Air Force readiness, and modernization by deploying pre-identified units and/or teams who have trained together 

to improve performance. AFFORGEN will meet initial operational capability in 

FY24. 

Agile Combat Employment (ACE) increases readiness by dispersing operations 

from large bases to networks of smaller locations and provides the basis for the 

operational imperative of resilient forward basing. We are standardizing the concepts and terms of ACE in Air Force Doctrine as well as incorporating them into 

ongoing exercises and worldwide training. There is $1.2 billion to fund the resilient 

forward basing operational imperative this fiscal year in addition to funding for 

ACE. Additional work is being done to identify and create capabilities and formal-
107 

ized training programs to field an agile force that sets the theater and establishes 

distributed command and control. 

The Flying Hour Program (FHP) and Weapon System Sustainment (WSS) budget 

requests ensure our Airmen have the training and equipment necessary to ‘‘Fly, 

Fight, and Win.’’ The $9 billion in FY24 funds our FHP to levels that can be reasonably executed and meet our readiness requirements. Our WSS FY24 funding of over 

$19 billion is aligned with our FHP but is challenged by requirements growth due 

to an aging fleet, the fielding of more complex weapons systems, increasing operational requirements, and increasing organic and contract costs. 

Execution of our mission requires appropriate infrastructure support and resilient 

basing. The Facilities, Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM) efforts 

focus on prioritizing existing quality-of-life requirements and maintaining our operational and training infrastructure. In addition to new mission builds for Military 

Construction (MILCON) projects, we are pursuing improvements for our Airmen, 

supported Guardians, and their families to our Child Development Centers (CDC) 

and dorms with targeted investments totaling $107 million in FY24 MILCON and 

$294 million in FSRM. Since 1990, we have 60 percent fewer fighter squadrons, 40 

percent fewer Airmen, but only 15 percent fewer installations in the continental 

United States. Our FY24 budget reflects our commitment to right-sizing our facilities and infrastructure footprint through consolidations, demolitions, and optimizing 

our space utilization. 

AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE

Taking care of our people begins with recruiting the best military and civilian Airmen of tomorrow. In FY23, the active-duty component of the Air Force is projected 

to miss military enlistment requirements by about 10 percent, over three thousand 

individuals. The Air Guard and Reserve components are projected to miss their 

goals by even higher margins. To maximize our pool of eligible individuals and to 

recruit the best our Nation has to offer, we are working to reduce barriers and connect with young people and communities. While maintaining our established standards, we are reviewing and removing barriers to service and offering enhanced financial opportunities to those who wish to serve. Additionally, we are taking a targeted approach to open our bases to local communities to strengthen connections 

and help influencers and potential recruits see the many possible opportunities we 

have to offer for a rewarding career and personal development. We are also highlighting, particularly online, the positive experiences of Air Force veterans who have 

moved on to successful careers outside the military. 

Once Airmen join our team, the focus shifts from recruitment to retention. Congress provided critical retention tools to the Services last year with increases in 

basic pay, housing, and subsistence rates—providing a viable compensation package. 

Our focus on improving the quality of life for our Airmen includes improving the 

childcare availability for our members. The FY24 budget includes new CDC construction, existing CDC facility improvements, staffing initiatives, and additional 

childcare providers. 

Military housing is another important way we have focused on retention. Our 

FY24 budget includes funding for continued investment in DAF’s government-owned 

and government-leased housing based on the need to support mission requirements, 

address health and safety concerns, and modernize housing for unaccompanied personnel. Our FY24 budget also includes Family Housing Construction funds for 

prioritized investments in DAF’s Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI) 

portfolio to improve the safety, quality, and habitability of select privatized housing 

projects and ensure their long-term financial viability. We remain committed to providing continued oversight of the private sector MHPI companies that own and operate privatized housing projects on DAF installations to hold MHPI companies accountable for project performance, problems with property management, and inappropriate business practices. In addition, we will continue to engage with local civic 

leaders to increase the availability of affordable, quality off-base housing options for 

our servicemembers and their families. 

Retention efforts must also ensure military members and families have access to 

the care and support they need—including mental health. As the Nation struggles 

with a shortage of mental health providers, we are employing various innovative 

means to provide this care to Airmen and Guardians. The Targeted Care program 

improves access to care by connecting people to the most appropriate resource given 

their needs. Additionally, we are implementing the recommendations of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military, as approved by the 

Secretary of Defense, and leaning forward on exploring the co-location of victim support services. Furthermore, we are implementing groundbreaking military justice 
108 

reforms to establish the Office of Special Trial Counsel, which will provide expert, 

independent, and specialized support for the investigation and prosecution of serious 

crimes such as sexual assault. We are also ready to begin implementation of the 

Department of Defense’s Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review 

Committee recommendations and have leaned forward on restructuring prevention 

training, increasing emphasis on lethal means safety and behavioral health workforce development. 

Retention also requires that our talent management decisions are optimized for 

both the member and the Air Force. The Airmen Leadership Qualities we value 

must be reflected in our systems and transparent to our members. We are in the 

process of categorizing 161 specialties and approximately 19,000 functional skills to 

map flexible designs which align with the talent of our Airmen and are adaptive 

to emerging technologies and threats. 

To develop the Airmen of tomorrow, our evaluation systems and supporting data 

systems must be modernized. FY23 saw the beginning of new officer and enlisted 

evaluation systems which will generate over 17 million data points to drive enhanced talent management decisions and reduce administrative burdens in the future. The new processes, enabled in part by the FY24 investments into digital infrastructure and tech refresh, will increase agility and flexibility to build the talent 

management structure we need. Concurrently, we are also implementing a dualtrack ‘‘Civilians We Need’’ career model identifying functional expert and enterprise 

leader tracks on a model designed to allow flexible career paths based on the members’ evolving needs. 

AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Teamwork for the Air Force begins within the DAF, where the Air Force relies 

upon and supports the Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force are inextricably 

linked through shared history, current activities, and future operations. The Air 

Force relies heavily on Space Force for the technical development and execution of 

each of the operational imperatives and other necessary capabilities. Neither the Air 

Force nor the Space Force alone has the situational awareness and decision support 

tools to close hundreds of kill chains on relevant timelines in all domains in a highly 

contested environment. We can only be successful through teamwork to provide survivable, long-range, persistent families-of-systems across multiple modalities and as 

a part of a full joint and combined force. The Air Force depends upon a ready, resilient, and effective Space Force. 

Our teamwork extends to the entirety of the joint force and Combatant Commands. Each of the operational imperatives and our broader capability investments 

supports the joint force by providing the capabilities necessary to deter and, if necessary, defeat any challenger. We play a vital role in homeland defense through air 

domain awareness and the provision of Airpower. We are also leveraging the capabilities of the mission and system level cyber risk assessment components of the 

Strategic Cybersecurity Program, led by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisitions and Sustainment, to help inform investments in cyber risk mitigation. The 

joint force’s ability to effectively mobilize, deploy, and sustain forces cannot be accomplished without the mobility assets we provide. This FY24 budget includes $252 

million of investment in support of the integrated priority lists of the Combatant 

Commands. All our platforms and airborne capabilities contribute to joint force combat power, and we remain committed to providing capabilities to the Combatant 

Commands in the execution of their missions. 

Beyond the joint force, we are seeking to expand how we team with our international allies and partners. Investments in readiness, human capital, infrastructure, and relationships with allies and partners remain foundational to balance 

present-day demands and set conditions for the future. This budget request, coupled 

with support from our allies and partners, enables responses to imminent threats 

while also seeking to improve the teamwork and interoperability of the allied and 

partner forces to win the fight of the future. 

To ensure maximum teamwork with our allies and partners, we are seeking to 

expand interoperability through an Integrated by Design process. Integrated by Design is not a replacement for our current security efforts, but it ensures that we collaborate and make decisions together on interoperability, resource investment, information sharing, force development, and strategy from the very beginning of our programs with the end state constantly in mind. Conversations with allies and partners 

about developing capabilities that are complementary instead of competitive will 

also better align us to face future challenges in unity. That unity will be a comparative advantage against threats that seek military, technological, or economic means 

to challenge our collective national security. 
109 

CONCLUSION

The Department of the Air Force FY24 budget prioritizes defending the Nation, 

taking care of our people, and succeeding through teamwork by balancing the risk 

between maintaining current readiness, mid- term improvements, and longer-term 

modernization. Current readiness is being maintained at acceptable levels to support combatant commanders while investments are made in mid- and longer-term 

modernization that is critical to developing, building, and fielding the force needed 

for the future. The modernization efforts defined by the operational imperatives are 

not optional; they are called imperatives for a reason. No one can predict when a 

war with any potential threat may happen, and war is not inevitable. Nevertheless, 

the PRC, our pacing challenge, is actively and effectively developing the capabilities 

it believes are needed to defeat the American ability to project power. The PRC is 

also expanding and improving its strategic forces and experimenting with destabilizing novel concepts. The DAF must move forward as quickly as possible, or we 

will fall behind. No one should doubt our current capabilities, which remain the 

strongest the world has ever seen. Nevertheless, we are in a race for technological 

and operational superiority more challenging than anything we have ever experienced. In this environment, timely and soundly balanced investments in current, 

mid-term, and longer-term Air and Space Forces are essential to our continued security. Our most sacred duty to our Airmen and Guardians is to provide them with 

the tools they need to be successful. We believe the budget we have submitted for 

FY24 meets that need, but time is our most precious asset, and we urge Congress 

to move quickly to fund and authorize our proposed budget to enable the new starts, 

significantly rescoped program investments, and required capabilities that will allow 

us to keep pace with the threat. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you General Saltzman. I want to thank 

all three of you for your testimony. 

As I said in my opening statement last week, the FBI (Federal 

Bureau of Investigation) arrested a 21-year-old Air National 

Guardsman. He had access to highly sensitive information that we 

can’t even talk about in this forum. 

So General Brown, I have got three questions: Number one, why 

did this individual have access to this classified information? Number two, how could this Guardsman take this information and distribute it electronically for weeks if not months, and nobody knew 

about it? And number three, do we have protections in place, because we spend a lot of money trying to protect classified information, do we have protections in place to stop this from ever happening again? 

General BROWN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the question, and 

let me go with your third question first. We do have protections in 

place to protect classified information, and all of our members are, 

as they get their security clearance, and then sign documents to 

have the process to protect the information. 

Obviously, in this case this process fell apart. And so the aspect 

of this particular Airman for his particular job he had the access 

for information but he didn’t actually have a need to know for some 

of the information. 

We are going through an ongoing investigation associated with 

that, and then also determining how he was able to distribute. So 

ongoing, we have an ongoing investigation, and we have a process 

of looking at accountability, not only from the criminal standpoint 

for the individual, but also as we look at the organization itself, we 

are going to take a look at the overall processes across the Department of the Air Force. 

And that Secretary Austin also sent out a memo to the Department of Defense, for us all to take a look at our processes, and then 
110 

we will look at how we review all of our processes across the Department of the Air Force, to include a standout on security. 

Senator TESTER. So I am going to flesh this out a little bit more. 

You in your opening statement said that your oversight of 689,000 

of some of the best people in the world that are under your command. How did this person even get access? Did he do it legally? 

Did he do it illegally? How did he have access to this information? 

General BROWN. Chairman he actually has, because of his duties 

he has access to some aspects as he—based on his job as a cyber 

administrator. He took advantage of that access, and I don’t want 

to go into more detail—— 

Senator TESTER. Okay. 

General BROWN [continuing]. In too much detail, but I can talk 

to you in a closed session about that. 

Senator TESTER. We will have a closed session with the Air 

Force, and I am talking a little off script here, but we will, because 

I think there are some things we need to talk about in the SCIF 

(Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility), not only this, but 

other things. 

But this is very disturbing, and the fact that it happened is bad 

enough, and we have just got to make sure it doesn’t happen again. 

I think you are on the same page with that. 

General BROWN. I am. 

Senator TESTER. A few months ago we saw an incursion of a Chinese spy balloon. I think Senator Murkowski would agree with me, 

that I think it should have been shot over the Aleutians, but it 

wasn’t. And it had the ability to gather intelligence from bases 

across this country. The administration put in $90 million in this 

budget to improve detection and assessment. 

I assume this question is for you, Mr. Brown. Is there a point— 

General Brown, I am sorry. Is there a point person within the Air 

Force to improve our detection and assessment of the balloon issue, 

because I don’t think it was the first one? 

General BROWN. Chairman, we actually have an individual who 

is, Kristen Baldwin, who is actually not only for detection, but we 

are also looking at all the other aspects of detection, and tracking, 

and how you negate that—future threats like that. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. And can you tell me who that person is, 

or? 

General BROWN. Yes, sir. It is Kristen Baldwin. She works in our 

acquisition peripheral. What we have done is that we had a team 

that has come together to take a look at all the various capabilities 

that we have as a Department, but also outside of the Department 

of the Air Force, they are bringing in development to figure out 

what the best tools are to counter threats like that in the future. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. The NORTHCOM (United States Northern Command) commander has told us that he has additional unfunded requirements for Air Force Over-the-Horizon Long Range 

Expeditionary Radars. We need to provide the resources, and I 

think this committee, on both sides of the aisle; wants to make 

sure our Nation is safe, okay, and provides the resources to do that. 

So why has the Air Force decided to put this on the unfunded 

list instead of a higher priority? 

Secretary KENDALL. Chairman, if I could? 
111 

Senator TESTER. Sure, Frank, go ahead. 

Secretary KENDALL. We have funded two new Over-the-Horizon 

Radars in the budget. There is quite a bit of money in the budget 

to fill those, and get them in place. The money that I believe is on 

that list for General Vanherck is to accelerate that process on the 

margins. It is not a fundamental change; it just tries to move it a 

little bit faster. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Let us talk about the industrial base, because it is a concern on all the branches of the Military. There was 

about $900 million put into last year’s budget for the industrial 

base and supply chain issues. Can you tell me if that money has 

gone out the door, and what kind of benefits it has provided for the 

Air Force? 

Secretary KENDALL. Yes. I think a large fraction of that money 

has gone out the door, but I will have to get that for you, for the 

record. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. 

Secretary KENDALL. There are a number of things we do with 

those funds, but essentially what we are trying to do is ensure that 

our supply chains are healthy. 

Senator TESTER. Yes. 

Secretary KENDALL. Identify any gaps in our supply chains that 

need to be addressed. 

Senator TESTER. Yes. And does that include workforce? 

Secretary KENDALL. Workforce in the industry? 

Senator TESTER. In the industry, yes. 

Secretary KENDALL. It can, but generally it has had some indirect effect rather than a direct effect. 

Senator TESTER. I got you. So I would really like to, before I turn 

to Susan Collins, or Senator Collins. I would really like to get information as to the money that we put in: Is it actually having an effect? Is it actually doing what we want it to do? And this, by the 

way, will happen across the board for all the services. And is it actually making a difference? 

Secretary KENDALL. Okay. 

Senator TESTER. Because regardless of what number we put on 

the Defense budget, if it is not being utilized in a way that makes 

a difference for you then we have got to do something else. 

Secretary KENDALL. It is fairly intensive work across the Department to identify weaknesses in the industrial base, and to 

prioritize the things that need some additional resources, you 

know, in ways appropriate. In the past we have done some things. 

In space, for example, we have already selected subcontractors in 

space specific technologies. There are other things we funded, like 

casting capabilities, and so on, where the return for industry isn’t 

there to make those investments without the Department’s support, assistance essentially. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me just follow up, General Brown, with the questions that 

the Chairman started with. As I read the press reports about the 

Airman First Class, who allegedly took, perhaps, hundreds of sensitive classified documents. The first thing that came to my mind 

is: Whatever happened to ‘‘Need to Know’’? That is the principle 
112 

that is supposed to oversee and restrict access to sensitive classified information. 

Instead, allegedly, this Airman First Class used the JWICS 

(Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System) System, 

the classified Internet system, to access all sorts of sensitive, classified documents that had absolutely nothing to do with his job. Is 

the Need-to-Know principle still in place? 

Secretary KENDALL. Chairwoman Collins, it is very much—— 

Senator COLLINS. Or, Secretary Kendall? 

Secretary KENDALL [continuing]. In place. General Brown mentioned the letter that the Secretary of Defense had put out tasking 

a review across the entirety of the Department, in very great detail, of all of our security practices. The two Chiefs and I put out 

a letter this morning which emphasized the point that you just 

made about, ‘‘Need to Know’’. 

We need to enforce it much more rigorously than it appears to 

have been in this case. I will say that we don’t know all the facts 

here yet. There is a criminal investigation going on, that has been 

the first priority, to make sure that wasn’t interfered with. But we 

have turned on three other things to look at this across the board. 

I have tasked our Inspector General to go look at the unit, and 

anything associated with this leak that could have gone wrong, 

from the point of view of implementing our policies, to see what 

things allowed this to happen, to get the Senator Tester’s initial 

question. 

We are turning on a complete review of our policies themselves, 

within the staff, to make sure our policies are adequate, and that 

will be illuminated by what we learn about what happened in this 

instant. We are asking the entire Force to do a stand down, to review their security practices, to conduct training as necessary, respond to the Secretary of Defense’s guidance. 

There is a full court press going on about this. We are all disturbed about it. And we are working very, very hard to get to the 

bottom of it, and take corrective actions. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. One follow-up question for you on this issue, and that is, it appears that this was 

going on for many months without the Airman, allegedly, being 

caught and when he was caught, it was because of investigative 

journalism, not the controls within the Air Force. That is equally 

disturbing. 

Secretary KENDALL. That is absolutely one of the things we will 

be looking at. And apparently he shared it, from press reports, with 

a group of friends in a chat group that was supposed to be isolated. 

It got out of that group, and it was there for, as you say, for a period of months. It got out of that group, and there is some press 

reports more recently about it being disseminated by some other 

people. And we are going to get to the bottom of all of that. 

Obviously, we have to tighten up our processes and our practices 

to make sure this doesn’t happen again. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. General Brown, last year I met 

with Former Defense Secretary Gates, and I asked him: What was 

the most important action that we could do to strengthen our national security? And I expected him to say: Have a larger Navy, or 
113 

improve recruitment; or answers like that. Instead, he said, ‘‘No 

more continuing resolutions.’’ 

And you made a reference in your testimony. Could you, so that 

everyone understands the harm, of putting the Department on a 

continuing resolution, illustrate the problems that it causes for our 

Military? 

General BROWN. Sure. The key area is that if we have a pacing 

challenge, we cannot outpace our pacing challenge if we have a 

continuing resolution. Those aspects of lost buying power, in this 

case, if we have continuing relations about $9 billion of lost buying 

power. 

The other aspect of the series of continuing resolutions we have 

had over the past, probably 10n to 12 years, we have lost probably 

about a quarter of that in continuing resolutions, which prevent us 

from doing new starts, getting equipment into the hands of our Airmen, and the rest of the Joint Team as quickly as possible. It impacts our families because their pay raises, and/or their ability to 

move to new locations and continue with their career, and their development, and education of their children. 

I think the key part is just the aspect of us not being able to 

have a steady pace of acquisition and supporting—and to the 

Chairman’s point, on the Defense Industrial Base; when we have, 

what I would call, a bit of a rollercoaster ride, it is hard for them 

to ‘‘facilitize’’, and get the workforce to be committed, and by having continuing resolution, it just slows us down, and when we are 

trying to accelerate, it is not helpful. 

Senator COLLINS. I completely agree with you. And thank you for 

your answer. 

Senator TESTER. Chairman Murray. 

Senator MURRAY. Well, thank you very much, Chair Tester, and 

Vice Chair Collins. I am really glad to join both of you again as 

we continue to hear about the resources that our Nation needs to 

stay strong, and safe, and competitive on the world stage. And as 

Vice Chair Collins just talked about, it is so important that we return to regular order and work to pass our funding bills in a timely, bipartisan way, which is what we are really focused on doing. 

These conversations also serve as a reminder to all of us about 

how the investments and decisions we make here in DC, help 

strengthen our country, and protect our families. 

If we are going to keep pace with our adversaries like China, and 

others; that means our investments have to keep pace too. We can’t 

fall behind, and we certainly can’t fall into uncertainty due to partisan gridlock. So I am really glad to have this opportunity today 

on this committee to hear from our witnesses about what that 

means for our Air Force and Space Force, and of course, how we 

can support our service members and their families. 

It is really important that we remember that includes getting our 

military families support, like child care, mental healthcare, good 

housing, schools, because really, at the end of the day, our best aircrafts aren’t going to go very far without the brave and talented 

men and women who pilot them and work to keep our country safe. 

So let me thank all of you for your service to our country. This 

committee and all of our members have a deep appreciation for everything our Service members do to keep us safe. 
114 

With that, Secretary Kendall, let me start with you. Quality of 

life for our military families is a priority for me, and I am pleased 

to see child care prioritized in this budget across all branches. 

However, I consistently hear from families at Fairchild Air Force 

Base about Child Development Center wait lists, and challenges 

finding high quality and affordable childcare. I know those centers 

struggle to keep staff because, in part, due to low wages. 

The President’s budget seeks to address this critical issue, and 

it includes a standardized Child Development Center employee discount for child care workers. And the Air Force has previously, I 

know, ran a pilot program to provide additional benefit to Center 

employees, what other tools has the Air Force used to support current employees and future hires to keep these Child Development 

Centers fully staffed? 

Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Senator Murray. As you indicated, this is a major issue for those across the Force, and across 

the country, actually, particularly after the pandemic. The biggest 

problem, as you mentioned, is staffing, we do have some new facilities that we are funding but the main problem we have right now 

is staffing. 

Secretary Austin is focused on this in his efforts to improve the 

quality of life for our service members and their families, and the 

Department of Defense put out a policy that could put a substantial discount, 50 percent, for staff members’ first child in a child 

care with us. The Air Force have gone farther than that, we have 

gone to 100 for the first child, and then we do 25 percent for subsequent children. That has had an impact. We have gone from about 

65- to 75 percent staffing overall, but there are still places where 

there are difficulties. 

We have a number of other efforts underway. We work very hard 

to provide support for our men and women, and the hours that 

they work, which are not always standard hours. So we would need 

to have child care available more broadly. We are using child care 

from individuals in their homes, and we are doing things to encourage that and incentivize that, financially and otherwise. So there 

is a lot of effort going into this area. It is making a difference, but 

we have more to do. 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. This is such an important issue for those 

families, and for recruitment, in general, for keeping those talented 

people that we need in the military, so I will continue to work with 

you this one. 

Secretary Kendall, last year’s Defense Appropriations Bill directed the Air Force to provide a plan to this committee on the 

transfer of KC–135s to Air National Guard units, like the 141st Air 

Refueling Wing in my State. We are still waiting for that plan. Can 

you give me a timeline for when we expect to see that? 

Secretary KENDALL. Senator, that plan should be available within the next few weeks. And I will get a firm date for you after the 

hearing and let you know when you can expect it. 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. And you have you been coordinating 

with the Air National Guard on the transfers? 

Secretary KENDALL. We will definitely coordinate with the 

Guard, and I want you to know that. There has been no decision 

to make those transfers. It is an opportunity, we will look at them. 
115 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. I will look forward to hearing from you 

on that soon then. 

General Saltzman, as our competitors around the world continue 

to closely link their space industries and militaries, they can quickly put new technology into the field. We need to make sure we are 

doing the same if we want to stay ahead of our adversaries. Washington State is home to a number of these cutting-edge commercial 

space companies that are developing really revolutionary technologies, and I believe this is the kind of innovation that we should 

be supporting. 

How are you working with the rapidly growing space industry in 

Washington State, and really elsewhere, to bring these new technologies and capabilities into the Military? 

General SALTZMAN. Thanks Senator Murray. We are working 

closely with industry. In fact, Secretary Kendall and I are leaving 

this afternoon to go out to Colorado for a Space Symposium to continue to work with industry. 

Fully support Honorable Frank Kendall’s—I am sorry—Honorable Frank Calvelli—— 

Senator MURRAY. He is sitting next to you, so. 

General SALTZMAN [continuing]. Calvelli’s Go Fast formula, 

which is buy small, have small requirement sets, small satellites, 

to use existing technology to reduce nonrecurring engineering costs. 

And then short-term, fixed-price contracts, 2 and 3 years, this allows us to advance the tech refresh cycle that actually pulls more 

contributors into innovating, and producing capabilities, that we 

can rapidly deliver to our Guardians. 

And so, we are seeing, even in the Space Development Agency, 

that model play out very successfully. Putting satellites on orbit in 

about 27 months, and so that is one of the key efforts that we are 

taking to make sure we can deliver; work with industry and deliver 

capabilities faster. 

Senator MURRAY. I appreciate the answer to that. And again, you 

just made the point that Senator Collins did, that a CR is not going 

to work for those short-term contracts. So thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Moran. 

Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you. Nice to know there is 

more than one Honorable Frank, we need all we can get. 

Let me start, though, with you, Secretary Kendall. I have heard 

you say that the cost of hypersonics is a challenge that will drive 

a smaller inventory. DOD (Department of Defense) investment into 

hypersonics is primarily focused on capability with, in my view, 

minimal attention to ability to scale production. Are you looking at 

nontraditional suppliers, or commercial aerospace manufacturing 

companies to leverage their expertise, to scale production and to 

meet higher rate, needs? 

Secretary KENDALL. Yes, we are, Senator. The components for 

hypersonics, in particular, tend to be very specialized, they have to 

endure very high temperatures, for example, and operate for a period of time, and we need high reliability for any of our weapon 

systems. But yes, we are always looking for suppliers outside the 

normal traditional Defense primes, if you will. 

Senator MORAN. Is manufacturing the—and I think you have to 

answer this question, yes, but I want to highlight that manufac-
116 

turing needs to influence the development of hypersonic technologies, right? 

Secretary KENDALL. Absolutely, and our leading program, the 

HACM program, the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile; there are 

considerations being given in the design to manufacturability, and 

to reliability, so that we have a design that meets the technical requirements which are very stressing, but also is producible. So that 

that is a factor that we take into account through the design process. 

We are about to transition that program which came out of a 

DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Technology 

Program, into a full-scale development program, and I can assure 

you that manufacturability will definitely be part of that program. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. You may have answered this 

when you responded to Senator Murray, but I am not sure it is the 

same. What is the Air Force’s plan to recapitalize the National 

Guard Fighter Fleet? And how does that impact the Guard’s ability 

to complete its missions? 

Secretary KENDALL. We are recapitalizing across the Force. The 

Guard, of course, is an essential part of that. I think General 

Brown mentioned, and I mentioned the additional production of F– 

35s and F–15EXs. So we are bringing fighters into the Force faster 

than we had planned a year ago, but still not at a pace that can 

replace every fighter, one-for-one, as they retire. 

We do need to retire some aircraft, like I mentioned, the A–10. 

And what we are trying to do, wherever we are retiring aircraft, 

particularly in the Guard, is replace programs with like programs, 

fighters with fighters, where we can. And if we can’t do that, then 

we try to bring in a flying mission so it is still a flying mission. 

And if we can’t do that, then we want to bring in a mission that 

is important to the Department and that the Guard can perform. 

I think it is important to recognize that they are enduring missions, and missions that are critically important to the Department, that don’t necessarily involve flying. ISR (Information, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) is one, C3 battle management is one, 

cyber is one, and electronic warfare is one. 

So I think people need to be open to alternatives to what they 

might have traditionally done, if that is what the country needs the 

most. So we are working, as we lay out strategic plans for the different elements of the Force, including the Fighter Force, to try to 

get to the Force that we are going to need to be competitive with 

China. And it won’t look exactly like the Force that we have today. 

Senator MORAN. Mr. Secretary, I would only highlight what I 

think is, you know, when you talk about flying for flying mission, 

the importance in today’s world of recruitment and retention, if we 

are going to have retention within our Air Guard that, I think, is 

an important component as you make these decisions: How do we 

keep our professionals in place? And I saw you shaking your head, 

so I feel comfortable—— 

Secretary KENDALL. I fully agree, Senator. Thank you. 

Senator MORAN. Let me turn to General Saltzman for just a moment. You have testified about the Air National Guard’s existing 

space capabilities as ‘‘must haves’’. In the context of establishing a 

Space National Guard, I understand that you are evaluating sev-
117 

eral options, and you mentioned this in your oral testimony, and 

it is in your written testimony as well. 

Can you explain to me the options that you are looking at, and 

the costs associated with them? How do you avoid degradation of 

readiness or capabilities with those options? And what is your best 

military advice, or that is yet to come? 

General SALTZMAN. Well, thank you, Senator. The three options 

that we have looked at are, of course, our status quo. We can leave 

things as they are. But I think this is the most problematic course 

of action, because the capabilities that live inside the Air Force, in 

the Air National Guard, General Brown relinquished those capacities to train and develop those Airmen when the Space Force was 

established, in those capacities for organized training and equip of 

the space missions move to the Space Force. 

And so we have a little bit of a disconnect between capabilities 

inside an Air Force, when the capacity to organize, train, and equip 

them are in the Space Force. So status quo is probably the most 

problematic. 

The other two options are to establish the Space National Guard, 

which you mentioned, or reconstitute those capabilities inside the 

Space Force. We are currently going through a detailed analysis of 

exactly what the costs associated with each of those are, and there 

are pros and cons of both. 

And my best military advice would simply be, to make sure that 

we choose the most cost-effective way of implementing, because we 

have a lot of high priority projects that require a lot of money, but 

also to minimize the operational impact in any kind of transition. 

So whichever one maintains the operational capabilities that are 

currently there in the most cost-effective way, would be my advice. 

Senator MORAN. General, you mentioned earlier in your testimony that you would take the possibility into account for a time, 

different arrangements; is that a new opportunity within the Air 

Force? 

General SALTZMAN. So slightly. There are two different concepts 

at play here. One is the legislative proposal that we have on the 

table, which is about taking the Air Force Reserve component performing space missions and integrate them into the Space Force, 

because those are already Title 10 Forces in both sides, it was a 

little easier to integrate in the near term, those capabilities. So 

that is the current ledge proposal. And that would create a fulltime and part-time Force inside the Space Force. We think that is 

tremendous for retention, for flexible career paths. 

Secondarily, we would consider: What is the best disposition of 

the capabilities in the Guard? 

Senator MORAN. Thank you, all. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Baldwin. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

General Brown, in April of 2020 the Air Force officially selected 

Truax Field in Wisconsin to receive the F–35 Mission. And I wanted to raise it again today because the F–35 aircraft will start arriving this month in Madison, and it will take roughly a year to get 

the full squadron in place. But as we discussed during last year’s 

hearing, even though there is significant support for the basing de-
118 

cision, I do continue to hear concerns about the potential noise impacts to residential areas in the flight path. 

I worked with Senator Leahy to fund noise mitigation through 

our annual appropriations, and the Department of Defense has provided the Wisconsin Department of Military Affairs a grant to conduct community outreach about noise mitigation planning, to be 

followed by actual funding for that noise mitigation to begin to 

occur. 

Because the F–35s are arriving this month, and throughout the 

next year, I am very anxious to be able to share with my constituents an update on that funding. Can you provide me with an update on the implementation of the F–35 transition? And what 

mechanisms are already in place to support these communities during the transition process? 

And in particular, what your outreach and communication efforts 

are? Is the Air Force pursuing these outreach and communication 

efforts to ensure that the public is knowledgeable and has access 

to all of the relevant information about what is happening in their 

community, and what assistance is available? 

General BROWN. Senator Baldwin, first of all, we are happy to 

have Truax join the F–35 community, it is a great capability. And 

one of the things that we will continue to work on, is the Department of Air Force will work very closely with the unit there, but 

also the community on the noise impacts. And so part of this is, 

as we bring in F–35s, and the warning of those noise impacts, but 

also working with the Airport Authority, the Federal Aviation Administration. 

And then we will also put into place noise mitigation measures. 

And having flown fighter aircraft throughout most of my career, 

and having to do our departures and arrivals a bit differently just 

to support the noise mitigation, this is something we will work very 

closely with the community as we move forward. 

I will have to get back to you and provide you a bit more details 

on the exact funding and the time lines as far as the engagements, 

but we will, you know, engage with the local community, and will 

be available to the local community to answer whatever questions 

they may have as we move forward. 

Senator BALDWIN. Yes. Well, I will just share to underscore, that 

there is widespread support for basing the F–35s at Truax, but particularly I don’t believe that the information about noise mitigation 

resources are getting out to folks who will be most impacted in the 

population centers, sort of immediately south of the airport. It is 

rather rural on the northern part of the airport, but people really 

are searching for information and need to be able to get that. So 

I urge you to continue, and double up on those efforts. 

General BROWN. Most definitely. 

Senator BALDWIN. All right. General Brown, also for you; I wanted to talk about the retention and recruiting shortfalls that remain 

an issue in all the service components, but of particular concern is 

the shortage of pilots in both the Active component and Air National Guard. 

With a reported shortage of approximately 1,600 Active Duty pilots, the reliance then on the Air National Guard to fill those gaps 

is critical. However, the Air National Guard itself is short approxi-
119 

mately 1,000 pilots, and this could have significant implications 

both in the near-term and long-term readiness for the Air Force’s 

mission. 

So can you speak to how the Air Force plans to address this 

shortage and attract more talent to the Active component, as well 

as to the Air National Guard, particularly in light of the significant 

competition for pilots from both the commercial sector, and other 

branches of the Military? 

General BROWN. Most definitely, yes. You know, one of the key 

areas we focus on, as we do look at our shores, the first thing we 

do is to put 100 percent of our manning into—our 100 manning 

into our cockpits. It would take the shortage on our staff positions, 

where it says, we are inclined to take up that gap, versus on the 

flight line in the development of very young pilots. 

We actually have a lot of young people that want to become pilots, and so one of our key parts is how do we increase that production, and would have some initiatives to do that. And one of the 

legislative initiatives is to convert some of our civilian SIM instructors to contractors so we can actually get more of our uniform 

members on a flight line to help the production and move that forward. 

We also actually have to balance between our Active and our 

Guard, because if we retain a lot on the Active Duty, it impacts our 

Guard and Reserve, because that is how they get many of their pilots. So it is a combination of factors that we are working through 

on the production, and then the absorption into the cockpits as 

well. 

So we have a number of initiatives in how we have adjusted our 

pilot training to increase that production, and then at the same 

time, as we take care of the Airmen, but also their families, also 

impacts retention. 

As you mentioned, there is competition with the commercial sector, and that is something we have got to pay attention to as well, 

and how this is a national asset, from an aviation standpoint, both 

for commercial, but also for our military. 

Senator BALDWIN. Yes. Well, please if you can, and follow up, 

point to any legislative measures or actions that this committee 

could take to support these efforts to increase recruitment and retention of pilots, please do let us know. 

General BROWN. Will be happy to work with you. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to thank all three of you for the work you are doing, 

and your strong leadership with the Air Force and Space Force. It 

is very much appreciated. And you are willing to be creative and 

innovative as we need to be these days. 

Secretary Kendall, I was just in South Korea and Taiwan, clearly 

both want to continue to build their defenses, and work with us to 

do so. In regard to Taiwan they have about $19-plus billion in 

hardware, military hardware, that they have ordered, and that 

they are paying for, and that they are waiting for, and they are, 

obviously, anxious to upgrade their defenses, and to do it soon. 

What can we do to help? And things like the F–16, obviously, 

very important to them right now, what can we do to accelerate 
120 

getting them those weapon systems? And what can we do to work 

together, jointly, to strengthen their defenses? 

Secretary KENDALL. Good question, Senator Hoeven. The best 

place to defend Taiwan from is Taiwan. And in having Taiwanese 

have the capability to defend themselves against the threat that 

they face I think is a high priority for us. 

The F–16s are a program that we are trying to move through 

some supply chain and some production difficulties to get into 

place, getting through the bureaucratic pipeline would be very 

helpful getting those sales approved. One of the things that we 

have been working with Taiwan on is the mix of things that they 

have in their military, to make sure that it is appropriate to the 

mission, that they have their highest priority. 

I think you may have seen in the press recently that they are 

attempting to buy some Harpoon anti-ship missiles, which would 

be very helpful actually. 

Senator HOEVEN. Mm-hmm. 

Secretary KENDALL. So we are working with Taiwan. It is not an 

area that I am leading in, but it is one that we work very hard on 

to make sure that their requirements are met. At the end of the 

day, Taiwan has got to decide for themselves what they want to 

have in their inventory. But once they do that, and we are happy 

to advise them on that, then we need to do everything we can to 

move that through as efficiently and effectively as possible. Appreciate your support for that. 

Senator HOEVEN. Absolutely and we want to work with you, and 

with General Brown and General Saltzman to find ways to maybe 

help our military-industrial complex respond faster, not only for 

their needs, but also for yours, for ours. 

Secretary KENDALL. Absolutely. 

Senator HOEVEN. Along those lines, General Brown, in regard to 

modernization in your comments—which all three of you had and 

which I absolutely agree with, it’s vitally important. The effort to 

modernize the nuclear mission which is incredibly important. It’s 

certainly important to our Chairman, and myself, with bases at 

Malmstrom and at Minot Air Force Base, Minot being the only 

dual nuclear base. 

How are we doing? And we have worked very hard to fund this. 

How are we doing? Are we on schedule with modernization of both 

the—not only the B–52, but the LRSO (Long Range Stand Off 

Weapon) as a replacement to the LCM, and also with the GBSD 

(Ground Based Strategic Deterrent) as a replacement to the ICBM? 

General BROWN. Yes, Senator Hoeven, one of the things that has 

been really helpful to maintain the time lines associated with these 

programs and nuclear portfolio is the consistent funding and full 

funding. And that has helped us move in a very positive way. What 

I would tell you, as we look at, like Sentinel, for example, and the 

B–52, we do know that as we go into these large programs that 

there is potential supply chain and other issues, and we are working very closely, internally, with our industry partners to look 

ahead and figure out how best to do long lead items well in advance. 

And so we have been able to restructure some of our approaches, 

acquisition approaches, with Dr. LaPlante from OSD (Office of the 
121 

Secretary of Defense), to help mitigate those areas so we can keep 

everything on time, and in some cases we are moving things forward. For example: some of our telecommunication lines, we will 

move those forward so we actually can get ahead in certain areas, 

and we don’t have anything on a critical path that is going to impact the overall program; so good collaboration with—internal to 

the Department of the Air Force, but also with OSD and our industry partners. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you. 

General Saltzman, in regard to both the LEO Mission, which we 

work with; are you on schedule for getting those Low-Earth Orbit 

satellites into space for the Communications Mission; can you do 

so under the budget you have? And also what is your plan for upgrading PARCS in a timely way; obviously, highlighted by the recent Chinese spy balloon? 

General SALTZMAN. Thank you, sir. First, the Space Development 

Agency is on track. We conducted our first launch of Tranche 0, 

just a couple of weeks ago. The satellites are performing well. And 

as I mentioned earlier, tremendous success, and I think it demonstrates a new model for acquisition, 27 months from putting it 

on order to being on orbit—— 

Senator HOEVEN. Wow. 

General SALTZMAN [continuing]. Which is a pretty impressive capability. 

Senator HOEVEN. Very. 

General SALTZMAN. Especially for space acquisition. Congress 

added 250 million, which we greatly appreciated, to accelerate 

those. We are going to need the launch investment now to actually 

pay for putting them on orbit, so I think there is some cleanup that 

we are going to do across the program to make sure that happens, 

but the good news is, we are on track to not only deliver those capabilities, but accelerate the delivery of those capabilities. 

And with regards to the PARCS Radar we have, with the plusup, again, thanks to Congress, we are looking at, through RDT&E 

(finances research, development, test and evaluation), what is the 

most appropriate way to upgrade them, move them from analog capabilities into more digital, that includes data storage, some beam 

forming. We are going to bring that radar into the 21st century, 

and make sure that it can meet all those space situational awareness, as well as missile warning responsibilities. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thanks Chair. I want to thank the Chairman 

and Ranking Member of this committee, too, for accelerating some 

of that funding in the last go round, which I agree was very important for that Low-Earth Orbit Satellite Mission, and we are seeing 

how important that is with what is going on. 

Thanks to all three of you again. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Gentlemen, thank you for being here today, and just—all, regarding your leadership. I understand that in questions from Senator 

Tester, he had acknowledged the NORAD, NORTHCOM, and the 

Department of Air Force’s unfunded priority list. I am encouraged 

that you have placed the number one request there as the E–7 delivery, and the acceleration of that. I think we recognize that it 
122 

cannot come soon enough, and we are urging it along as quickly as 

we possibly can. 

I want to ask about where we are with Long-Range Radars currently. They were fielded in the 1980s, to reach their life in 2025. 

Right now there is no current program of record to replace the existing Long-Range Radars, making the 3DELLR the only viable option to maintain the required domain awareness for Homeland defense there. 

So this is directed to you, Secretary Kendall. Do you think that 

the budget that we are looking at adequately funds this 3DELLR 

System to include upgrades to the system, such as Over-the-Horizon Radar, or the advancement of the Archer? So where are we 

with the Long-Range Radars? 

Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. If I could 

just clarify, the Department of the Air Force does not have an 

upper list, we support the President’s budget. General Brown has 

an upper list, which I think includes the E–7 acceleration that you 

are mentioning. We are funding the sustainment of the various 

Long-Range Radars that you mentioned for a missile warning system. Some of those Raiders, as you mentioned, are old. We just 

talked about PARCS a moment ago. The BMU System itself is 

quite old. We don’t have a program in place, as far as I know, to 

replace that yet. We are sustaining it right now. But we are looking at all that. 

The major investment we have in our budget for 2024, is the 

Over-the-Horizon Radars, that we talked about, as you mentioned 

earlier. Those are focused mostly on airborne threats coming 

across, particularly in the northern approaches. So we are looking 

at that entire suite of capabilities we have, to protect the United 

States against a variety of threats. 

One of the things we are focusing on is the C3 battle management and the integration—excuse me—of all those systems together, so that we can get the most accurate picture as possible of 

any threats that emerge. 

And I will be happy to get with you in a classified setting, and 

go through the details of all that. Show you what we are investing 

in, and what other things we are considering. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I would appreciate that, and I recognize 

that the value of this integration, I had an opportunity, just last 

week, to go out to Sparrevohn, in the center of Alaska, one of the 

older sites, actually not that old, got built in the ’80s, but it seems 

old. But recognizing the role that is played with Over-the-Horizon, 

but also what we have had in place for it for some decades now. 

And General Brown, we talk a lot in this committee about all 

that we do to modernize our Air Force, everything that we need to 

do to replace aging weapon systems, but we also know that the 

ability to train, and to train well has got to be key. And we talk 

about our exceptional training opportunity with the Joint Pacific 

Alaska Ranch Complex, JPARC. 

What more do we need to do to ensure that the JPARC remains 

this extraordinary training asset for our Air Force and for those 

who also come to share partnership in the training exercises? 

General BROWN. As you highlighted, training is very important 

to our Air Force, and the aspect of not only our Air Force, but the 
123 

Air Forces of other nations that come to participate with us and 

also our joint teammates. And two of them are premier Ranges, one 

of those is JPARC, and the other one is known as the Nellis Test 

and Training Range. 

In this particular budget, in fiscal year 2024, we have over $750 

million that are placed into our Range infrastructure, to ensure 

that we have the right threat emitters to support our Airmen as 

they engage, so they have a threat emitter that replicates the 

threat as well as the improvements on the targets that they are 

able to go against it as well. And then on top of that it is the supporting infrastructure to support the Ranges. 

So we are on a good path, but we have got to continue to keep 

focus on, and as we have this money into this year’s budget, just 

continue to see that for both of those Ranges, JPARC and the 

Range at Nellis, are two key Ranges that we are going to continue 

to invest in to ensure we have the capabilities to train our Airmen. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. I want to note that we are going to 

continue to place a priority on that. 

Mr. Chairman, I have a question regarding the Combat Rescue 

Helicopter, and the significance of that mission, particularly for the 

176th Wing on JBER, that is the primary SAR Rescue Force there 

in Alaska, but because my time has expired I will submit that 

question; as well as one for General Saltzman for the record. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. 

And with that question and others, we would ask that you get 

the response back as soon as possible. 

Senator Boozman. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking 

Member, for having this hearing. And we appreciate you guys very, 

very much, and all you do and represent. 

I have had the opportunity to visit with many of our Allied Partners regarding training, the opportunity to train with our Airmen 

as far as F–35 training. 

General Brown, can you speak to the importance of pilots from 

our partner nations training with our pilots here in the U.S., and 

how crucial that is to national security? 

General BROWN. Senator Boozman; thanks for the question. I 

will tell you just from my own personal experience in my many 

years operating with our allies and partners, most of my time as 

general officer, working with allies and partners, and how much 

they value the opportunity to train together, whether it is at locations overseas, but primarily here in the United States where they 

can actually use some of our advanced Ranges like I just talked 

about. 

And so there is real value in the aspect of them being able to 

train. And as we bring on the F–35, not only for the United States 

Air Force, but with our allies and partners, their ability for us to 

train very closely together as we bring in this new capability, it 

helps provide additional capacity as we look at our collective security, not just our security, but the security we share with their allies and partners as well. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. And this is the cream of the crop. 

So not only are they, you know, helping with defense, but also the 
124 

ability to develop those relationships with future leaders of their 

countries. 

The other important point I continue to hear from our allies is 

the need for training to start on time. They have time lines and 

commitments along with the need to be ready to fight if needed. 

As we continue to build F–35 capacity, our U.S. bases are becoming 

resource constrained and affecting our allies’ ability to train. 

General Brown, with U.S. Air Bases becoming more crowded, can 

you speak to why it is important to have the ability to invest in 

future F–35 training centers? 

General BROWN. What I would like to highlight to you, Senator, 

one of the areas we have looked at is, overall, as we have more and 

more countries that are interested in the F–35 and bring that in, 

we also have to take a look at how we, across the board, have our 

capability to not only train them but train ourselves, but as we remain our combat capability. 

We have the locations where we have done traditional training, 

are starting to get a bit more crowded, and so, as you know, we 

have been looking very closely at Ebbing as a location, and we are 

doing that work to get Ebbing up to speed, and a part of that is 

also to meet the time line associated with the work we have done 

with our allies and partners so they can get their training on time. 

And in the big scheme of things it helps us all to get their training on time, to get certain capability, but that we appreciate the 

support from your delegation. And we have done some really deep 

work internal to the Department of Air Force to align things, to 

make sure we get that capability on time at Ebbing. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Good. Thank you. 

Mr. Secretary, do you feel like you have got all of the authorities 

that you need regarding, you know, things going forward to help 

build the training capacity that we need? 

Secretary KENDALL. Senator, yes, I do. I am not aware of anything that I need that I don’t have. But I will be happy to share 

with you if I come to that conclusion. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Good. We appreciate that. Let me just talk 

about one thing that I think has already been talked about, but I 

think it is so, so very important. Senator Tester, and I chaired a 

roundtable regarding quality of life issues, and Mrs. Brown came 

and, you know, she did a tremendous job, and could speak as somebody, you know, that not too-too long ago, was in the situation of 

our Airmen, Airwomen, you know, that are struggling now to starting their careers, making ends meet, all of the challenges as you 

move every 2 or 3 years. 

So I guess what I would say, and it doesn’t matter if you are in 

the Space Force, regular, you know, Reserves, whatever, but particularly, like I say, the challenge of moving, spousal, you know, opportunities regarding their ability to work, schools child care is 

such a huge issue. 

And I want to compliment you all, you all are doing a really good 

job in those arenas. But also it is going to become more and more 

important, from recruiting and a retention standpoint, those quality of life issues. 

Looking back, you know, now that I am older and appreciate my 

parents so much more than I did as a kid, as we all do, but my 
125 

dad doing 23 years as a Master Sergeant realizing that those were 

the first things they looked at, you know, taking care of us. 

So I guess what I am saying is, we do appreciate the fact that 

you really are looking hard at those quality of life issues, and realize how important they are, and doing your very best to take care 

of the men and women that work for you, and we do appreciate 

that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. The only thing I have to add to that is General 

Brown is a fine outstanding man, but you obviously, married up. 

Senator BOOZMAN. I agree with you. 

Senator TESTER. Exactly. 

Senator BOOZMAN. After getting to know her, I agree with you 

totally. In fact, that is probably an understatement. 

Senator TESTER. General Saltzman, and it was the same way in 

last year’s budget, you submitted an unfunded priorities list that 

includes classified, high priority space programs. It seems to me 

that the decision did not include these programs in the budget, is 

not driven by physical constraints, but by disagreements within the 

administration over the future of our space architecture. Can you 

please explain those different schools of thought? 

General SALTZMAN. Well, you know, you say it is not about priorities, but in the end I think all these resourcing issues do come 

down to some level of priorities, and where we are willing to fall 

in our sword or not. I am comfortable with the level of resourcing 

we have, especially in the classified programs. I think there was 

some back and forth towards the end of the budget submission that 

maybe align funds in a way that we are going to have to figure out 

other ways to manage the programs, for example. 

But we have those ways. We can collaborate with the other 

stakeholders, we can make sure that our concept of operations are 

clean, and that we can put the right kinds of demand signals, for 

example, on partners that are building capabilities for us. So I feel 

like although it may not be the way we would have designed it, I 

feel like I am comfortable that we have the kinds of mechanisms 

in place to collaborate appropriately, and get what we need in 

place. 

Senator TESTER. This committee added significant funding for 

your classified unfunded priorities last year. Can you give us some 

insight on the return on that investment? 

General SALTZMAN. I am happy to say that I expect; that by the 

end of my tenure, if I make it all the way to 2026, that you are 

going to see a substantial on-orbit capability that allows us to compete in full spectrum operations. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. 

General SALTZMAN. I am not sure I could have said that 2 years 

ago, but the fact that we have accelerated the programs, and we 

have built a program that delivers in capability in terms of 3, 4, 

5 years, I am very comfortable that we have a program in place 

that will do just that. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Secretary Kendall, you made a decision 

on a different power source for the F–35, and you chose the Pratt 

& Whitney over the GE, and I have got no dog in this fight, I want 

to just make sure we are doing what is right for the Air Force. 
126 

The question that I have was; that it is my understanding of the 

Pratt & Whitney engine is on paper, and the GE engine is sitting 

on a stand. Can you give me some of the thoughts, process that you 

went through when you made that decision? And why you chose 

one over the other? 

Secretary KENDALL. Thank you, sir. That is a Department of Defense decision actually, and a decision I support. The competition, 

essentially, was between an advanced technology that had been in 

work for several years, I was part of the starting of that, and continuing, it is called the ATP, which provides a substantial improvement in fuel efficiency, as well as other features. 

The unfortunate thing about this is that it is a very expensive 

program to continue. There is a large upfront cost associated with 

engineering, manufacturing development for that program. And at 

this point the only—of the three F–35 variants, the Marine Corps, 

the Navy, and the Air Force, the only one that is definitely compatible with that program is the Air Force. 

So the Air Force sort of had to carry that entire cost, several billion dollars, to do development before you start production. So that 

was just simply not affordable. The enhanced core upgrade that we 

did fund; provides an acceptable level of improvement to meet our 

known needs, and it is compatible with all three variants of the F– 

35. So that was where we ended up. 

Senator TESTER. So to add, the issue was compatibility? 

Secretary KENDALL. Cost and incompatibility. I would say affordability for us was the first concern. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. 

Secretary KENDALL. We couldn’t get past that threshold, and if 

we had then it would have been probably a different answer. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Senator Shaheen. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all. 

I am sorry I missed much of the questioning, for other hearings. 

But Secretary Kendall, and I guess General Brown, both; we continue to be concerned in New Hampshire about the level of PFAS 

(per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) that continues to contaminate 

the former Pease Air Force Base. And I know that the Air Force 

is taking steps to address that, and to plan for the aqueous film 

forming foam, whatever is going to succeed that, in terms of being 

able to fight fires. 

Can you speak to where you are in terms of developing that alternative, and what you expect to be a time line for when that will 

be available? 

Secretary KENDALL. Senator, we have been unsuccessful in finding an equivalent alternative to the PFAS. So what we are doing, 

basically, is going to water as the alternative for now. I think, as 

you are aware, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has 

come out with new criteria, which is in the final stages of regulatory consideration. 

The Air Force has assessed our bases, including Pease, to understand how much contamination we have, and once there is a finalization of that, then we will start looking at remediation, and moving forward to try to do something to clean this up. 

You and I spoke about this before but you know it is something 

of great concern. We want to make sure that nobody around any 
127 

of our bases is in an unsafe condition, particularly with regard to 

their drinking water. 

Senator SHAHEEN. I appreciate that. And I do appreciate very 

much the cooperation that we have gotten from the Air Force in 

New Hampshire. It has made a huge difference. One current challenge, that I think you are aware of, is there is a difference in interpretation of something that was in the NDAA (National Defense 

Authorization Act) about making information available to the local 

public about contamination, and hopefully we will be able to work 

that out in a way that is agreeable to both the Air Force and communities. 

Can you also speak to when the Remote Vision System—this 

may be for you, General Brown, for the KC–46 is going to be operational? 

General BROWN. What? 

Secretary KENDALL. You go, yes. 

General BROWN. If I have my facts right, I think it will be fiscal 

year 2026, is when they will be operational, and will be able to 

start cutting it in. But I will make sure I come back to you, and 

get the answer. 

Secretary KENDALL. I mean the current system is being used 

now. It is cleared for all but one of our aircrafts. But the fixable 

problems we have with the remote viewing system, as General 

Brown said, will be coming in, and I think in 2026. We will confirm 

that though. 

Senator SHAHEEN. That has slipped again has it? It is my understanding that that was originally going to be fielded in 2025. 

General BROWN. This may have slipped a little bit, but I think 

we are on a good path. And as the Secretary highlighted, we were 

able to, operationally, employ the KC–46 worldwide today, with the 

only exception, the only airplane we can’t refuel with it is the A– 

10. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And I understand that there is also a recently 

identified issue with the KC–46’s load guidance system. Is that affecting the aircraft’s ability to carry cargo, in a significant way? 

General BROWN. I am not aware of that issue, but I will look into 

it, and I would be able to get back to you. 

Senator SHAHEEN. I would appreciate that. Thank you. 

General Saltzman, I know, I just had an opportunity to meet 

with a number of National Guard members in New Hampshire, 

and one of the things that they are still not clear about is how the 

one-component proposal is going to operate in terms of National 

Guard across the country. Can you talk about how you see that 

working, and what you are doing to address the concerns of the 

state adjutant generals on that issue? 

General SALTZMAN. Yes, ma’am. Thank you. The legislative proposal that we put forward for this year simply takes the Reserve 

component and integrates them into the active Space Force. So 

that is just the Title 10 Air Force Reserve aspect of this. It was 

a simpler administrative lift to make sure that we understood exactly how to do this. But it also set aside the discussion for the National Guard at this point. 

So it is a two-step process. I think if we get the legislative proposal in and signed off in law, that will allow us to start looking 
128 

at how the Space Force can actively use both full-time and parttime Guardians to do its Mission set. Then I think you have the 

opportunity to open up and evaluate whether that same model 

could be extensive—extensible out to the National Guard as well. 

But it is a two-step process at this point. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And do you anticipate any opportunity for or 

adjutants general, or other representatives of the Guard to weigh 

in with you as you are thinking about and have this second 

iteration should go? 

General SALTZMAN. I talk to Dan Hokanson all the time, he is 

of course the Chief of the National Guard Bureau. He reflects the 

opinions of all of those tags that are out there. And so I would say 

that, at least from a space perspective, we are engaged already to 

make sure we understand what the requirements are, what the 

limitations are, what the opportunities are to better integrate. 

We are a little bit stuck, as I said, with the status quo, where 

the Air Guard has responsibility for training a space mission, but 

we don’t really have the capacity on the Air Force side to do that; 

and so we have got to come up with some solution, and the tags 

are fully engaged in helping us do that. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Capito. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all, 

here, and it is nice to see you again. And we had our meeting several weeks ago, and I appreciate that. 

Secretary Kendall, as you know, the conversion of the Air National Guard C–130 units to the J models has been ongoing. And 

I am pleased to say that I have seen the impressive J model myself 

while visiting the West Virginia Air National Guard’s 130th Airlift 

Wing, in my hometown of Charleston. But they made us aware 

that the aircraft our Guard units are receiving may be behind in 

some of the modification processes for Tactical Data Link capabilities, an upgrade that is necessary to integrate with the rest of the 

Joint Force if we found ourselves in a combat environment. I am 

wondering: Does the fiscal year 2024 budget address this Tactical 

Data Link deficiency? 

Secretary KENDALL. Yes, I believe it does, Senator. I think we 

are doing that. There was a period of time over which we were 

going to do that with some of the fleet. I can get the details to that, 

too, for the record though. 

Senator CAPITO. Okay. So General Brown, how does improving 

that Tactical Data Link, what kind of difference does that make in 

a combat environment, and how important is that? 

General BROWN. What the Tactical Data Link does is really increases situational awareness for the air crew. And so they have, 

not only a better sense of where they are, but a better sense of the 

other activities that is going on around their aircraft, and how they 

can help contribute to the mission. And so, you know, having flown 

with Tactical Data Links in Fighters, personally, it really does help 

your situational awareness to have a good understanding what is 

going on in the environment. 

Senator CAPITO. So it was the goal to transition? I mean, you 

said ‘‘most’’. Secretary Kendall, is the goal to transition all of those 

to that more advanced data link; or some, or what? 
129 

General BROWN. Yes, Senator. 

Senator CAPITO. Oh. 

General BROWN. I mean, that the goal is to actually move as 

many of those as we can as the—as those aircraft have service life, 

and wanted to put the Tactical Data Link into. 

Senator CAPITO. Okay. Good, that is good news. 

Secretary Kendall, again, a more technical question here; and we 

know that range would mean everything if we ended up in an IndoPacific situation, and also have the 167th Airlift Wing in Martinsburg, West Virginia, which operates the C–17 Globemasters. But 

they are not equipped right now with the extended fuel range tank, 

which would make a big difference if we found ourselves in the 

Asia Pacific. How does the budget deal with that? Is that something that you are planning to transition all the C–17s to? 

And then General Brown, I am going to ask you, too, what kind 

of impact that would have? 

Secretary KENDALL. Yes. We are transitioning C–17s. I don’t 

think the entire fleet will transition, the largest fraction, it will 

split among the parts of the Fleet that are in the Active Guard and 

Reserve. 

Senator CAPITO. Mm-hmm. 

Secretary KENDALL. Roughly equivalent percentages of each I 

think. 

Senator CAPITO. Okay. 

Secretary KENDALL. We can give you the exact numbers for that. 

Senator CAPITO. Okay. Yes, we will follow up with that, and appreciate that. 

General Brown, do you have a comment on that, what that could 

mean and what difference it makes? 

General BROWN. You know, as the Secretary said, that modification is roughly equivalent across the Active Guard and Reserve, 

and what it does do is provide options as far as being able to go 

further in different locations. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

General BROWN. And be able to break capability and capacity. 

Particularly in the Indo-Pacific where, again, having served there 

as the Commander of Pacific Air Force, is just, you know, the extended ranges that we have to operate in, this is where that capability will be very helpful. 

Senator CAPITO. Well, I mean, you won’t find any better Airlift 

Wings than I have in West Virginia, I can tell you that. I have to 

put that advertisement in. I might have some disagreement here, 

but—— 

Senator COLLINS. I beg to differ. 

Senator CAPITO [continuing]. I will say that. Secretary Kendall I 

know that—and I haven’t been here for the whole hearing—but 

certainly the data breach and the leak of the classified information 

I think was alarming to everybody. And I could maybe even put 

you in that category, who are concerned about the damage that has 

been done. But I mean I think we need to look forward here. 

I understand that DOD is conducting a review of the processes 

at the DOD level. Are you doing the same at the—within the Department of the Air Force? 
130 

Secretary KENDALL. Absolutely. And ‘‘alarming’’ I think is as 

good a word as any to describe what has happened. We are doing 

a number of things, and I discussed some of them earlier, but we 

are investigating to see what errors might have occurred, or 

breaches of policy, and so on, that could have allowed this to happen, in addition to, obviously, whatever wrongdoing by the individual. 

We are looking at the unit, we are looking beyond the unit, other 

things that could have influenced this. We are reviewing all of our 

policies, and we have direction from the Secretary of Defense to do 

a review across the Department of a whole number of things that 

have to do with information protection, basically. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Secretary KENDALL. So Secretary Austin signed out a memo yesterday on that, with a lot of detailed guidance, and a fairly quick 

suspense to come back. The two Chiefs and I signed out a memo 

this morning amplifying on what the Secretary had said, but also 

emphasizing some areas such as Need to Know, and enforcing 

Need to Know. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Secretary KENDALL. This individual, whatever else was true, had 

no reason to be looking at, or having possession of those documents. And we have to do a better job of that. That is clear, if nothing else is from this. 

Senator CAPITO. Well, we will be interested in hearing what the 

results of that are. I think that is important for not just systemwide, but for us to know, and the American public to know, so a 

transparent process there. 

Just a quick comment on the information that has come out 

about this individual that was arrested, I think there is a lot of discouraging things about it, but for me, I was just sitting here thinking about it, thinking: it is almost like it was a game. You know, 

it was a—you are in this chat room with—supposedly, with small 

amounts of people. And, you know, all this kind of chatter. 

It is not a game. You are endangering lives. You are endangering, you know, freedoms, just eroding trust. And so I think that 

that is one aspect of it that is incomprehensible, I think, to many 

of us. And I will put myself in that boat. You don’t need to comment on that. I just wanted to make a quick comment. 

Secretary KENDALL. I agree with you. What you described it exactly the same way that any Airman, or Guardian, or anyone in 

uniform could not appreciate the seriousness of this material, and 

how damaging it would be to have it get out into public domain. 

That is a fundamental problem of its own, right. That is what the 

appearance is in this case. It is a criminal investigation. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Secretary KENDALL. So we don’t want to say too much about the 

case itself. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

Secretary KENDALL. But that appearance is very disturbing. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. We have saved the best for last. Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
131 

Mr. Secretary, I want to return to the F–35 engine issue. As I 

understand it, there are two factors driving the administration’s 

decision. And I support that decision. 

One, is the Adaptive Engine Transition Program was not compatible with the Navy and Marine Corps variants of the F–35. The 

second factor, as I understand it, is the Joint Program Office did 

a business case analysis which described stark differences in the 

overall lifecycle costs between proceeding with the engine core upgrade path chosen by the administration, compared to the more expensive engine replacement. 

As I understand it, the engine core upgrade would actually decrease the overall costs of the program while the engine replacement option would have the opposite effect, it would, substantially, 

increase the cost of the program well into the billions of dollars 

even after you account for fuel cost savings. Is my understanding 

correct? 

Secretary KENDALL. Roughly, let me just tell you my view on 

this. I have seen a number of business analyses, but basically there 

is a large upfront cost associated with the ATP engine. You have 

to go through an engineering development program that is going to 

cost several billion dollars and take several years. So that upfront 

cost, the affordability of that, for the Air Force at least, it was a 

major factor. 

There is a return. There is a value to having that enhanced performance. You get more range, you get more capability out of the 

aircraft, and you get more power off of the engine that you can use 

to drive all the things on the aircraft. So there is a judgment call, 

if you will, about the value of those things relative to their cost. 

The fuel savings, over time, would take a very long time to pay for 

themselves. So that is really not, I think, at the end of the day, in 

terms of financial impact, a major factor. 

The fact that the ATP would not fit in all three, and it certainly 

will not fit in the Marine Corps version, there is some disagreement about whether it would fit in the Navy version, or could be 

made to fit in the Navy version. And I will defer to the Navy to 

give an opinion on that. 

So at the end of the day, when you looked at the needs of the 

whole, Department of Defense, the decision was made, and I supported, was to go ahead with the engine core upgrade. It is not 

quite as mature, so there is a little bit of risk in that, but it gets 

us to our known requirements. And so that is the path that we are 

on right now. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. In my opening statement I mentioned my concern about fuel costs. In the last 2 years the budget 

requests greatly underestimated fuel costs on the very day the 

budget was released, the fuel costs were already much higher, they 

appear to be going up again. Do you anticipate requesting a supplemental to cover increased fuel costs? 

Secretary KENDALL. If we have to we will. Mike McCurdy, Under 

Secretary for Financial Management communicated earlier to the 

Congress about how we deal with inflation, or things like this. I believe the budget includes an assumption of fuel cost inflation between 3- and 4 percent, so what we will do, as we did last year, 

is we will watch and see what happens with fuel prices, and if nec-
132 

essary we will work with the Congress to try to solve that problem, 

if it emerges. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. General Saltzman, I applaud the 

Space Force’s effort to develop a more resilient space architecture. 

However, we in Congress often hear complaints and concerns about 

how long it takes to develop new capabilities, especially for those 

in space. 

The Space Development Agency recently launched the first set of 

its satellites in less than 3 years from contract award. Could you 

tell the committee, what other steps you are taking to accelerate 

the development and delivery of space-based capabilities? 

General SALTZMAN. Yes, Senator. To some degree that is just a 

mindset shift. Instead of developing large exquisite satellites, and 

developing, and pulling in requirements from a myriad of stakeholders; because we know that when we launch a satellite we want 

it to last 10, 12, 15 years, that is what extends the length of the 

program; Mission Assurance that we have to layer on to those kind 

of programs. 

We are taking a wholly different approach: smaller satellites, 

smaller requirement sets allow us to go faster, and the contracting 

piece of that, put something on orbit, recognizing that we may have 

to do some tech refresh on a faster time line but that will actually 

have better capability, and even more cost effective over the long 

run. 

And so I think that what Frank Calvelli has done by establishing 

this formula for going fast, is effective and paying off, existing technologies, small contracts, fast contracts, fixed price, we are delivering the capability in much faster time lines. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary KENDALL. If I could add to that. One of the things that 

we are taking advantage of is that the transformation of the commercial world in space to a much more efficient, much more costeffective designs, and engineering practices that support the business case that commercial firms have. So we are basically able to 

capitalize on that in things that we are building for Military purposes. So it is a nice synergy there between the commercial world 

and the Department of Defense’s world now. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins. 

And I want to express my appreciation to all three of you for 

your testimony here today, and the questions that you have answered. 

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may submit additional written questions, and as I said 

earlier, we would ask you to respond to all of them as quickly as 

possible. 

[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were 

submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hearing:] 
133 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO FRANK KENDALL

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons so that our 

weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies. In this year’s budget, the 

Air Force is requesting $1.0 billion to achieve time and cost savings via multi-year 

Procurement contracts for the production of several missile programs. This includes 

significant investments by the Government to increase industry’s production capacity. However, it is not yet clear what the private sector investment will be in return 

for this procurement predictability from the Government. 

Secretary Kendall, what industry investments are you expecting in return for 

these Government investments? General Brown, are these programs fully funded 

across future budgets and is the Air Force committed to protecting those investments in future years even as the Air Force seeks to increase procurement of newer, 

more modern missiles? 

Answer. The FY24 budget request shows a renewed commitment to munitions procurement throughout the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) by the Department. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) worked closely with industry partners 

while building this plan and does not foresee any additional or separate industry 

investment is necessary to ensure that our procurement profile is executable. Increasing industry production capacity and providing procurement predictability will 

benefit the DAF by maximizing procurement quantities and stabilizing the industrial base. 

Additionally, the Air Force is pursuing a multi-year procurement strategy for our 

most critical munitions such as the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile 

(AMRAAM), the Joint Air- to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM), and the LongRange Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM). We are fully funding these programs through the 

FYDP to their current maximum production capacities, which will protect these investments and ensure a stable industrial base over the next four to 5 years. 

Question. In the last five budget cycles, the Air Force’s request for research and 

development funds compared to the request for procurement funds has doubled. The 

Air Force has invested heavily in the development and testing of important systems 

and capabilities, but it is a disservice to the taxpayers if these investments don’t 

translate into fielded systems. 

Secretary Kendall, does the Department of the Air Force have a plan to combat 

this trend of funding disparity between R&D and Procurement? Why are programs 

not transitioning from the research, development, and prototyping phase? 

Answer. The DAF increased its Research and Development (R&D) budget by $20.0 

billion from the FY20 budget request to the FY24 budget request. This is principally 

due to the stand-up and resourcing of the Space Force, but also driven by a shift 

in investments to address the pacing challenge, as well as ensure Air, Space, and 

Cyber mission dominance. The DAF is taking a balanced approach to implement the 

National Defense Strategy (NDS) by procuring capabilities that deliver this mission 

and making necessary R&D investments to transition technology to deliver future 

capabilities. The strategy includes modernization and pivots to address the China 

fight including Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), Command, Control, Communication, Battle Management (C3BM), and resilient space architectures. While the 

Department begins R&D investments with the general intent to procure systems, 

each system is evaluated on its merits against cost, schedule, and performance requirements, as well as resource constraints. In limited cases, the outcome may result in a decision not to continue to procurement. DAF prioritization of Operational 

Imperatives facilitates a sharp focus on technology transition. This is complemented 

by a series of enabling initiatives including digital transformation, facilitating innovation pathways for small businesses and ensuring acquisition, requirements, as 

well as resourcing processes are integrated and tailored to accelerate capability delivery. 

Question. Due to this large increase in R&D over the previous fiscal year, I presume a Continuing Resolution (CR) would have a significant impact on the Air 

Force modernization budget. What areas are most at risk in the event of a CR? 

Answer. Modernization of the Air Force and Space Force is critical to DAF implementation of the NDS. At the forefront of the FY24 DAF budget request are the 

Operational Imperatives, modernization efforts intended to close key capability gaps 

and directly address our pacing challenges. A CR would further erode our competitive advantage to China by stopping the investment of at least $2.0 billion in 88 

new modernization efforts including 20 aligned to critical capabilities within the 

Operational Imperatives, including 71 Air Force new starts totaling $1.4 billion and 

17 Space Force new starts totaling $595.0 million. 
134 

Further, during a CR, the DAF is limited to operating at FY23-enacted funding levels resulting in $9.3 billion of lost buying power. The DAF would be forced to 

delay on-going development, stop work, or terminate programs to remain within 

funding limits if a CR extends into FY24 for a long period. These programs are key 

to the high-end fight with a near-peer competitor. Modernization is necessary to not 

only keep pace with our strategic competitors but required if we are to establish a 

new high ground in the Air, Space, and Cyberspace domains. 

Question. The Air Force is requesting $9.0 billion to continue modernizing the nuclear enterprise. For the air- and land-based legs of the nuclear triad, we are running out of time to replace existing, aging systems. 

Secretary Kendall, we discussed the ongoing modernization of the ICBM fleet extensively during your visit to Malmstrom Air Force Base earlier this month. This 

is more than a missile program. We’re talking about significant infrastructure and 

construction investments, too. Are we sufficiently tapping into our existing manufacturing workforce to achieve our ambitious construction goals for ICBM modernization? 

Answer. The construction goals for ICBM modernization are ambitious. To best accomplish those goals, the Air Force is accelerating some initial construction efforts 

at FE Warren AFB, WY to begin in FY24 instead of FY26. The Air Force is also 

managing construction and transition risks from the industrial base, the age of the 

launch facilities, and the need to maintain Minuteman III operations while fielding 

LGM–35A Sentinel. Congress can help address these issues by supporting our request for contract type flexibility for the early construction lots. 

Question. In January, we learned that former missileers at Malmstrom Air Force 

Base in Montana are dying of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma at rates higher than the 

national average. 

Secretary Kendell, you recently joined me at Malmstrom—along with the Air 

Force Surgeon General, Lieutenant General Miller—to discuss the Air Force’s response to this crisis. 

As a follow up, can you tell us what the Air Force is doing to reach out to former 

missileers whose information is not captured in electronic health records? 

Answer. The DAF has taken many steps to reach out to former servicemembers 

and other populations who have worked in missile fields to better understand the 

extent and severity of the issue, as well as track population trends over time. Leadership has been using townhalls, open forums, and webcasts to communicate updates to the impacted communities and leveraging installation Public Affairs offices 

to communicate directly to local communities. 

Additionally, the Department is working with the Director of the Air Force Association of Missileers to amplify Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) and Air 

Force Surgeon General communications on this issue. The Department of Veterans 

Affairs and other veteran service organizations have assisted in expanding outreach, 

as well. 

Finally, AFGSC has consolidated pertinent information on a public-facing website 

which provides the most updated information on the progress of the ongoing study 

and addresses questions from the impacted community. The website can be accessed 

here: https://www.airforcemedicine.af.mil/Resources/Missile-Community-CancerStudy/. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. In the FY23 NDAA, SEC. 603 authorized several policies that will drastically improve the quality of life of Airmen stationed in Alaska. After making inquiries with the Air Force leadership in the state, I understand that there has been 

no guidance released for how these new policies should be implemented. Because of 

this, servicemembers in Alaska are missing out on time-limited incentives to help 

alleviate the unique hardships of serving in Alaska, as well as improve the recruitment and retention of Airmen. 

What is the status of the implementation of Section 603(a) of P. L. No. 117–263 

regarding pay for cold weather special duty pay? What is the status of the implementation of Section 603(b) of P. L. No. 117–263 regarding the requirement that the 

Secretary of the Air Force reimburse eligible servicemembers for the cost of airfare 

for that member to travel to their home of record while assigned to a duty location 

in Alaska? When should Airmen expect to begin receiving a cold weather duty pay 

and reimbursements for eligible travel to their home of record? 

Answer. Alaska has several unique bases and missions vital to the Air Force. We 

understand the importance of providing quality-of-life improvements to our Airmen 

stationed there. The FY23 NDAA expanded our capabilities to offer additional bene-
135 

fits for this initiative. AF/A1 is working closely with the Pacific Air Force team to 

request Cold Weather Special Duty Pay, under the authority created by Section 

603(a), on behalf of Alaska. Then it will be routed through the Secretarial process. 

The travel reimbursement incentive for service members who travel to their home 

of record from Alaska is near the end of the Per Diem Travel and Transportation 

Allowance Committee process. The final steps are to receive the Committee principal’s signature, followed by the Joint Travel Regulations update. Once approved, 

the Air Force will implement the incentive. The Air Force has been monitoring both 

guidance initiatives closely and works diligently to implement these new authorities 

as soon as possible and continues to look for new, effective ways to improve the 

quality of life and the unique hardships for Airmen stationed in Alaska. 

Question. Alaska provides the only location capable of supporting both short- and 

long-range hypersonic weapons testing within the United States. This unique geographical location offers the only location where hypersonic testing can be conducted 

without overflying populated areas and provide the DoD, with unrestricted flexibility to meet hypersonic mission objectives. 

The Pacific Spaceport Complex.—Alaska (PSCA) provides an unparalleled test 

range for hypersonic vehicles and other advanced aerospace systems. Specifically, 

PSCA’s launch site on Kodiak is ideally located to serve as the anchor for the Aleutian Test Range (ATR) stretching westward to Shemya Island. Through instrumentation strategically placed throughout the Aleutian Islands, AAC could provide telemetry data and vehicle safety throughout extended flight profiles. 

Currently, the most feasible long-range capability for hypersonic testing requires 

the use of ships and aircraft positioned along the flight route of the hypersonic vehicle to track and receive data. This is a logistics challenge that is extremely expensive to mobilize for each test. Land-based instrumentation provides higher reliability 

and lower cost than ships and/or airborne platforms. Furthermore, the ATR can support air-, sea-, undersea- and land-launched systems to provide maximum test flexibility. 

Additionally, the Federal Government and State of Alaska have jointly invested over $120.0 million of capital improvements at PSCA. As only one of two U.S.-based 

spaceports that can launch into high-inclination and polar orbits, PSCA is a national asset to provide critical resiliency for U.S. access to space and to facilitate 

keeping national security space payloads launching from U.S. soil. This FAA-licensed commercial spaceport is a low-cost operation, capable of launching solid- and 

liquid-fueled rockets and has supported numerous government orbital, suborbital, 

and test missions since 1998. In recent years, Kodiak was the only spaceport able 

to support DARPA’s Launch Challenge to demonstrate agility and flexibility key to 

military missions. However, the Space Force has not recently used PSCA. 

SEC. 237 of the FY23 NDAA includes a provision directing the Secretary to identify non-DoD test facilities to expand testing of ‘‘operationally relevant, live-fire’’ 

hypersonic weapons. What steps has the Air Force taken to evaluate the PSCA and 

the Aleutian Islands for the potential to support hypersonic weapons testing? Do 

you support such an effort, and if so, when will we see a commitment to move this 

forward? What are the Space Force plans to make PSCA, and other orbital capable 

commercial spaceports, part of the USSF launch architecture and regularly fund 

missions at these locations to demonstrate critical resiliency capability for national 

security space, Responsive Space Launch, and Rapid Launch missions? 

Answer. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Test Resource Management 

Center (TRMC) has an extensive existing hypersonic test infrastructure road map 

and is the lead with oversight over all Department of Defense (DoD) hypersonic test 

infrastructure investment across the Major Range Test Facilities Base (MRTFB) in 

order to avoid duplicative Service investments. The Department of the Air Force 

supports any DoD efforts to expand hypersonic test infrastructure that will enable 

more rapid fielding of hypersonic weapons or vehicles. 

The Space Force is seeing unprecedented demand for launch capacity from both 

government and commercial sectors. We are working hard to expand access to existing U.S. spaceports and increase the number locations available via a National 

Spaceport Interagency Working Group (NSIWG). The NSIWG is led by the FAA Office of Commercial Spaceports and has membership from the Space Force, OSD Policy, Department of Commerce, Department of State, and NASA. The NSIWG is 

drafting a National Spaceport Strategy that seeks to encourage the growth of spaceports nationwide and interoperability between them, all in an effort to expand resiliency to space access and ensure U.S. leadership in this domain. 

Additionally, the Space Force recognizes that increased access to space by spaceports in diverse locations is important to our resilience and national security. The 

Rocket Systems Launch Program has used PSCA for several of their small-launch 

missions and continues to execute contracts to invest in PSCA. The Space Force also 
136 

plans to take advantage of the increased capability offered by new vendors in National Security Space Launch (NSSL) Phase 3, Lane 1. The Space Force procures 

commercial launch services and we are limited to locations where launch providers 

have established capabilities. Additionally, four locations in the U.S. can address 

high inclination launch: Cape Canaveral SFB, FL; Vandenberg SFB, CA; NASA 

Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), VA; and PSCA, AK. 

Question. I understand the Air Force has had to make difficult budget decisions, 

but in my view, a top priority should be the capability to rescue our men and women 

in harm’s way. I am concerned about the Service’s decision to terminate the Combat 

Rescue Helicopter (CRH) program. I believe the moral imperative to ‘‘leave no one 

behind’’ is critical to show our commitment to the men and women who risk their 

lives to protect and defend us in all theaters of operation. It also concerns me that 

of the existing CRHs, the Air Force’s current fielding plan places the National 

Guard at the lowest priority. 

As you know, the 176th Wing on JBER is the primary Search and Rescue (SAR) 

force in Alaska. They have the Air Force’s highest tempo and utilization rate (UTE). 

The Wing reports that their HH–60 Fleet has the highest UTE average at 130 bymonth hours per tail over the last 6 years, with the next highest being Moody at 

115 and Patrick at 107. Our footprint in the Arctic will only grow; the 176th must 

be better outfitted to support the AORs SAR requirements. Last year alone, they 

conducted 106 sorties and had 62 rescues. Further, I understand the additional 10 

CRHs Congress added last year are planned to be Attrition Reserve aircraft, so you 

really only have 75 helicopters to accomplish what the original program of record 

says is 113 aircraft. 

How does the Air Force plan to address this capability shortfall for the rescue 

mission? 

Answer. The Air Force remains committed to the Joint Personnel Recovery (PR) 

mission and its own Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) fleet, forces, and supporting 

architecture. The Air National Guard is a key component of the Total Force and will 

be recapitalized at all locations with HH-60Ws. The reduction in procurement of 

HH–60W will not result in a near-term capability shortfall, but will limit the capacity for dedicated CSAR forces available to the Joint Force. This will require the 

Joint Force to carefully adjudicate use of Air Force-dedicated CSAR forces and make 

use of other assets for less demanding PR missions. The Air Force recognizes the 

HH-60W’s inherent capability limitations in the future threat environment and 

plans to mitigate this by modernizing how it trains and equips personnel for extended survival, improving communications architectures for distributed operations, 

enhancing its Find-Fix-Track capabilities in support of isolated personnel, supporting science and technology efforts to mature technological solutions that may 

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

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

Question. Last fall, the administration released a draft regulation that would require contractors to report on any greenhouse gas emissions they make that can be 

linked to the work they perform on DoD contracts. Further, it would make contractors set emissions reduction targets. This will severely impact oil and gas companies 

that are major contractors. 

What is your plan to continue to procure fuel if this regulation makes it impossible to offer contracts to oil and gas companies? 

Answer. The DAF and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), which procures most 

of the fuel on behalf of the Air Force, procure fuel in full compliance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. The DLA will continue to comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations when procuring fuel on behalf of the military services. If there is a regulatory change that impacts how we or DLA procures fuel, the 

DAF will work closely with DLA and in coordination with our industry partners to 

determine how to best meet all operational requirements for the military services. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CHARLES Q. BROWN, JR. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. General Brown, we have very little margin in the modernization schedule for the land and air legs of the nuclear triad. Are you concerned about the modernization strategy? 
137 

Answer. As you point out, there is very little margin in our modernization schedule for the land and air legs of the nuclear triad. In the FY24 budget request, nuclear modernization remains the DAF top priority. Our acquisition professionals, 

working with our industry partners, are proactively identifying and looking for ways 

to mitigate potential schedule challenges and/or program risk. Also critical to successfully executing our modernization strategy will be on time and fully funded 

budgets and we greatly appreciate Congress’ support for these programs. 

Question. The Air Force has requested congressional support for the divestment 

of 310 aircraft in the FY24 budget request. However, you are only procuring 96 replacement aircraft. Furthermore, some of these divestments are planned to be replaced with modernized aircraft that are still in development and not yet ready for 

production. 

General Brown, I’m all for getting rid of older systems that aren’t relevant to current and evolving threats, but how do we avoid a capability gap if we’re retiring 

more aircraft than we’re able to field? 

Answer. There are several challenges within our fleet today, many stemming from 

the age of our fleet and the number of missions performed over the past 20 plus 

years of continuous conflict in the Middle East and the relevance to the evolving 

threat. The FY24 budget request balances between current risk and future risks. 

While divesting older systems reduces current inventory numbers in some cases, divestment allows for procurement of new and more capable aircraft to address the 

current and future threat in a high-end conflict. 

The Air Force endeavors to procure a modern force while remaining ready for today’s challenges. We received great support from Congress for the last several budget cycles to move beyond legacy force structures that are not supporting the current 

defense needs for the Nation. These divestments free up dollar amounts and, most 

importantly, manpower to operate and maintain new aircraft. The transition from 

legacy aircraft to modernization requires a balanced risk and the Air Force is taking 

deliberate steps to manage near term capacity risk. Specifically, the FY24 budget 

requests to divest legacy A–10 and F–15 aircraft that would not contribute lethality 

in a high-end conflict, as well as balances risk across the Joint Force along with 

allies and partners. 

In order to provide maximum capacity across the spectrum of conflict, the DAF 

is increasing its force mix of multi-role platforms while divesting older platforms designed for narrow mission sets. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

Question. You’ve described the importance of domain awareness for both air and 

space. After the Chinese flew a spy balloon over the US earlier this year, the commander of Northern Command described how this revealed gaps in our domain 

awareness. 

With atypical threats like high-altitude balloons, does the line between air and 

space responsibilities create a gap in our domain awareness investments? 

Answer. Our acquisition model has been focused on specific platforms operating 

in specific domains. The shift to multi-domain operations has highlighted our need 

to reevaluate our approach to platform and domain integration. The DAF is reconciling that through the standup of the DAF Program Executive Officer (PEO) for 

Command, Control, Communications, and Battle Management (C3BM), which 

serves as an integrating PEO for DAF capability and system requirements. In particular, the PEO’s Architecture and System Engineering Division is tasked with 

architecting solutions that work both in, and across, domains to architectural needs. 

Question. The Air Force did not include Air National Guard Federal Tuition Assistance in its budget request. This continues to be a benefit only afforded to the 

Army National Guard. In your written testimony you acknowledged that in fiscal 

year 2023, the active-duty Air Force is ‘‘projected to miss military enlistment requirements by about 10%, over three thousand individuals’’ and that ‘‘the Air Guard 

and Reserve components are projected to miss their goals by even higher margins.’’ 

Do you agree that Air National Guard Federal Tuition Assistance could be an important tool in helping the Air Guard and Reserve and meet its recruitment and 

retention goals? Will this be prioritized in future budget requests? 

Answer. Air Force Tuition Assistance (MilTA) is funded for those Air National 

Guard service members on Title 10 active-duty status and those on Title 32 Active 

Guard Reserve (AGR) orders under Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 2007. MilTA remains an important retention tool for those already serving on active-duty status. 

All Air National Guard States and Territories (except Guam) offer State Tuition Assistance programs and many Air National Guard service members qualify for Post- 
138 

9/11 GI Bill benefits. Considering these other opportunities members have, and due 

to competing budget priorities, the Air Force does not plan to budget for the National Guard Federal TA program (FedTA). The Air Force Recruiting Service continues to pursue accession goals by offering targeted enlistment incentive programs. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO. 

Question. Does the FY24 Budget include funding for Tactical Data Link upgrades 

for Air National Guard C–130J units? Will all Air National Guard C–130Js receive 

this upgrade? If not, how many? What is the projected timeline for these upgrades? 

Answer. In FY24, 15 additional Active Component C–130J aircraft will be upgraded with Block 8.1, which includes the tactical data link (TDL) capability. Older 

C–130Js in the Air Force Reserve (AFR) and Air National Guard (ANG) are projected to begin receiving upgrades in FY28. The Mobility Air Force (MAF) fielding 

plan, approved in 2015, upgrades one Airlift Wing at a time. Air Mobility Command 

(AMC), ANG, and AFR Command concurred with the 2015 modification plan. ANG 

and AFR elected not to expend National Guard Reserve Equipment Appropriations 

(NGREA) on modifications and agreed Block 8.1 funding is an AMC responsibility. 

The Block 8.1 modification includes TDL (Link-16) and many other upgrades. 

Block 8.1 is incorporated in aircraft production lines. All Air Force aircraft starting 

with FY20 congressional adds will be delivered in a Block 8.1 configuration. The 

165th Airlift Wing, located in Savannah, GA, will begin receiving C–130Js in Block 

8.1 configuration from the production line in December 2023. There are 48 Congressionally-added C–130J aircraft between FY20 and FY23. The ANG is expected to receive 40 Block 8.1 C–130Js directly off the production line by the second quarter 

of FY28. 

The Block 8.1 system complexity impacts crew qualifications and the associated 

training pipeline. Factoring Congressional additions and established training pipeline limitations, the current phased approach addresses urgent operational needs 

while incrementally building qualifications across the total force. 

Question. Will all U.S. Air Force C–17s, across components, receive the Extended 

Range modification? If not, how many Active, Guard, and Reserve C–17s, respectively, will receive the upgrade? 

Additionally, what is the projected timeline for these upgrades? How would the 

cost and time schedule of these upgrades be affected by combining modifications for 

the Extended Range Fuel Tank with the On-Board Inert Gas Generation System 

(OBIGGS) II System upgrade? 

Answer. The C–17 Extended Range (ER) modification provides additional fuel for 

increased range but does not increase aircraft efficiency. The Air Force is not planning to modify the remaining aircraft to ER configuration since the C–17 ER modifications provide minimal impact to pacing scenarios and we have higher priority 

modernization requirements. Ability to aerial refuel the entire C–17 fleet mitigates 

the mission completion risk. Currently 69% of the AFR fleet, 62% of the ANG fleet, 

and 79% of the Active Component fleet have received the upgrade. 

The C–17 OBIGGS II System upgrade is a modification to correct a safety of flight 

issue known as ‘‘C–17 OBIGGS II Filter Fire Mitigation’’ on only those 112 aircraft 

equipped with the OBIGGS II System. This mod will continue to be installed until 

FY29. Additionally, to restart the C–17 ER production line would take an extensive 

reinvestment of Non-Recurring Engineering costs and would be executed separately 

from the current OBIGGS II program so as not to delay delivery. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL B. CHANCE SALTZMAN

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. Alaska is home to one of nation’s few state spaceports on Kodiak Island. 

It is a national asset and I think it’s not utilized as much as it should be. According 

to a recent FAA report—the National Spaceport Policy—the number of launches will 

increase from 74 last year to 186 in 2026, a nearly 300% increase. Meanwhile, according to the same report, 4 out of every 5 of these launches takes place either 

at Cape Canaveral or Vandenburg. Last year during Space Symposium you stated, 

‘‘the United States Space Force must transform its space capabilities to increase our 

resiliency against these and other threats—and we must do so quickly.’’ Meanwhile, 

RocketLab—a U.S. company—recently shifted a pair of NASA launches to New Zealand. This is in addition to the 4 launches that USSF/NRO has already allowed 

RocketLab to launch from foreign soil. 
139 

Should the Space Force make more of an effort to launch from U.S. spaceports 

instead of foreign ones? Without greater use of and investment in our state spaceports, is our domestic space launch infrastructure resilient and ready for a future 

conflict? Shouldn’t we invest more in alternative spaceports to ensure we’re not 

wholly dependent on a couple Federal space ports, one on each coast? 

Answer. The Space Force is working hard to expand access to U.S. spaceports and 

increase the number of them via a National Spaceport Interagency Working Group 

(NSIWG). The NSIWG is led by the FAA Office of Commercial Spaceports and has 

membership from the Space Force, OSD Policy, Department of Commerce, Department of State, and NASA. The NSWIG is drafting a National Spaceport Strategy 

that seeks to encourage the growth of spaceports nationwide, and interoperability 

between them, all in an effort to expand resiliency to space access and maintain 

U.S. leadership in this domain. 

The Space Force recognizes the importance of strong domestic spaceports, as well 

as the value of having access to diversified launch locations to increase resilience, 

including utilizing launch facilities available to us through our allies. In addition, 

launch locations are assigned to missions based on optimizing the path from launch 

to the desired destination of the satellite or spacecraft. These factors are each considered as the NSWIG develops their strategy. 

The current Space Force OSP–4 launch contract enables launch from any of the 

U.S. ranges. Additionally, the intended Phase 3 dual-lane strategy extends the ability to launch NSSL Lane 1 missions from launch complexes other than those associated with the two Space Force-managed ranges. 

Question. Phase 2 of the National Security Space Launch Program was designed 

when space was far less contested, congested, and competitive. In Phase 2, the Department chose just two providers in a 60%/40% split for 34 launches and this decision is proving to be, at best, minimally sufficient to meet the Department’s space 

launch needs. Phase 3, which is currently being developed for a highly contested, 

competitive, and congested domain, includes 39 launches in the ‘‘block-buy’’ lane and 

66 or more throughout Phase 3. 

If two providers are just barely sufficient for Phase 2, how are the same two providers, 60%/40% split sufficient for Phase 3’s block buy? How is this acquisition resilient if two providers just barely meet the need now and the need increases dramatically in Phase 3? 

Answer. The NSSL Phase 2 acquisition strategy was designed to end U.S. reliance 

on Russian-made engines, drive competition, and deliver assured access to space for 

the Nation through two qualified launch service providers. Phase 2 does not restrict 

the number of missions the Space Force can order from each of its two contracted 

launch service providers and both providers have the required capacity to meet all 

NSSL needs. The Phase 2 Request for Proposal (RFP) forecasted about 34 missions 

across the five-year ordering period and is projected to end with a total of about 47 

missions ordered. 

For NSSL Phase 3, the Space Force selected an approach that aims to take full 

advantage of the United States’ robust and evolving commercial launch market. The 

draft NSSL Phase 3 acquisition strategy proposes a dual-lane contracting approach, 

allowing access to an unlimited number of qualifying providers to promote resiliency 

through diversity and best meet Space Force and National Reconnaissance Office 

(NRO) requirements for launch. To meet this intent, the Space Force divided the 

66 projected missions in the Phase 3, five-year ordering period between two contract 

lanes: 

—Phase 3 Lane 1 (∼27 missions): Designed to provide access to multiple launch 

system providers, systems, and launch sites, allow on-ramp of new launch systems and technology when ready, and offer tailored mission assurance based on 

a satellite’s risk tolerance. 

—Phase 3 Lane 2 (∼39 missions): Designed to secure launch capacity and provide 

assurance and stability for our most stressing National Security Space missions 

through two qualified launch service providers. Lane 2 also garners economic 

order quantity savings. Lane 2 is projected to have approximately the same 

number of missions projected for NSSL Phase 2; therefore, two launch service 

providers can provide sufficient capacity to meet the Phase 3 projected mission 

count. 

The projected 66 missions to be ordered in the NSSL Phase 3 enables the Space 

Force to employ a flexible acquisition strategy to meet multiple objectives and provide the warfighter more resilient launch capability. 

Question. Space is more contested that ever, and the Department’s need to access 

space has also radically increased with both proliferated constellations and exquisite 

needs. As you also know, and has been reported widely, you are also seeing dramatic increases in launch demand—commercial, civil, and national security. Even 
140 

ULA’s CEO Tory Bruno has stated, ‘‘There is a worldwide shortage of 

launch... There’ll be more missions than both [ULA and SpaceX] are really able 

to fly and that’ll be for a number of years.’’ 

So why, in a supply-constrained environment of space launch would the Department further constrain supply by artificially limiting the numbers of providers in 

Phase 3 of the National Security Space Launch program to just two? Wouldn’t a 

three-provider block buy promote additional competition, drive down launch costs, 

and be more resilient and redundant for the Department, especially if something 

bad were to happen to one of the launch vehicles or one of the space companies were 

to happen to one of the launch vehicles or one of the space companies were to be 

sold? 

Answer. The draft NSSL Phase 3 acquisition aims to take full advantage of the 

United States’ robust evolving commercial launch market. The draft NSSL Phase 

3 strategy proposes a dual-lane contracting approach, allowing access to an unlimited number of qualifying providers to promote resiliency through diversity and best 

meet Space Force and NRO requirements for launch. 

—The draft Phase 3 strategy fully supports the expected increase in launch demand and launch providers while simultaneously fostering greater competition. 

—Phase 3, Lane 1 is designed to capitalize on emerging launch capability for 

our more risk- tolerant missions and provide annual on-ramp opportunities 

for the Space Force to tap into new launch technology as systems are ready. 

—Phase 3, Lane 2 is designed to secure launch capacity and provide the full 

mission assurance required by our nation’s most stressing NSSL missions. 

—The Phase, 3 Lane 2 strategy is a full and open competition and the 60/ 

40 allocation split incentivizes launch service providers choosing to compete 

to provide their most competitive pricing to meet all NSSL requirements. 

—With only three potential bidders for Phase 3 Lane 2, awarding three contracts is likely to disincentivize launch providers to bid competitively and 

will drive increased costs. 

—The Space Force estimates that carrying a third launch service provider in 

Lane 2 could drive a $1.0 billion increase or more due to additional launch 

service support (NSSL-unique costs not directly associated with any one 

mission), and space vehicle integration costs across three different launch 

vehicles versus two. 

Question. I understand the Air Force has had to make difficult budget decisions, 

but in my view, a top priority should be the capability to rescue our men and women 

in harm’s way. I am concerned about the Service’s decision to terminate the Combat 

Rescue Helicopter (CRH) program. I believe the moral imperative to ‘‘leave no one 

behind’’ is critical to show our commitment to the men and women who risk their 

lives to protect and defend us in all theaters of operation. It also concerns me that 

of the existing CRHs, the Air Force’s current fielding plan places the National 

Guard at the lowest priority. 

As you know, the 176th Wing on JBER is the primary Search and Rescue (SAR) 

force in Alaska. They have the Air Force’s highest tempo and utilization rate (UTE). 

The Wing reports that their HH–60 Fleet has the highest UTE average at 130 bymonth hours per tail over the last 6 years, with the next highest being Moody at 

115 and Patrick at 107. Our footprint in the Arctic will only grow; the 176th must 

be better outfitted to support the AORs SAR requirements. Last year alone, they 

conducted 106 sorties and had 62 rescues. Further, I understand the additional 10 

CRHs Congress added last year are planned to be Attrition Reserve aircraft, so you 

really only have 75 helicopters to accomplish what the original program of record 

says is 113 aircraft. 

How does the Air Force plan to address this capability shortfall for the rescue 

mission? 

Answer. The Air Force remains committed to the Joint Personnel Recovery (PR) 

mission and its own Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) fleet, forces, and supporting 

architecture. The Air National Guard is a key component of the Total Force and will 

be recapitalized at all locations with HH–60Ws. The reduction in procurement of 

HH–60W will not result in a near-term capability shortfall, but will limit the capacity for dedicated CSAR forces available to the Joint Force. This will require the 

Joint Force to carefully adjudicate use of Air Force-dedicated CSAR forces and make 

use of other assets for less demanding PR missions. The Air Force recognizes the 

HH–60W’s inherent capability limitations in the future threat environment and 

plans to mitigate this by modernizing how it trains and equips personnel for extended survival, improving communications architectures for distributed operations, 

enhancing its Find-Fix-Track capabilities in support of isolated personnel, supporting science and technology efforts to mature technological solutions that may 
141 

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

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. This Defense Subcommittee will reconvene on 

Tuesday, May 2, at 10 a.m., for a Hearing with the Department of 

the Army. 

We stand in recess. 

[Whereupon, at 11:39 a.m., Tuesday, April 18, the subcommittee 

was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, May 2.] 

(143) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 2, 2023 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met at 10:01 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen 

Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators Tester, Murray, Schatz, Shaheen, Murphy, 

Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTINE WORMUTH, SECRETARY 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. I call the subcommittee to order. 

I want to thank Secretary Wormuth and General McConville for 

being here. Welcome back to both of you. We appreciate your leadership of our Nation’s Army and look forward to discussing the 

Army’s budget priorities for fiscal year 2024. 

Before we begin, I’d like to express my condolences to the entire 

Army family following last week’s tragic death of three soldiers in 

a helicopter accident in Alaska and that comes on the heels of the 

recent death of nine soldiers following a midair collision of two helicopters in Kentucky. 

Ensuring our brave men and women in uniform have access to 

the best training and equipment they need is the Number 1 priority of this committee. I will want to hear more from you about 

your order for Army aviation units to complete a 24-hour safety 

stand-down and any corrective actions that you plan to take. 

The fiscal year 2024 budget request for the Department of Army is a $185.5 billion, which is $300 million below the amount enacted 

in fiscal year 2023 and nearly $11 billion more than enacted in fiscal year 2022. 

So let me repeat that. $185.5 is $300 million below last year’s 

but $11 billion more than the year before that. 

Worldwide challenges and threats are constantly evolving. The 

Army’s response to increasingly complex battlefield of the future is 

to transform the Army into the Army of 2030. This transformation 

includes investments of people, the reorganization of forces, the de-
144 

velopment of new equipment, and adoption of new concepts to defeat our adversaries. 

We can best help the Army on its path to transform to the Army 

of 2030 through the timely enactment of a defense appropriations 

bill for fiscal year 2024. On-time appropriations provide the resource predictability that enables the Army to execute training and 

operate plans effectively and efficiently for the entire fiscal year. 

Let me put it this way. In order for the Army to be all it can 

be, we, Congress, must do our jobs. 

I look forward to working with Senators Murray and Collins, the 

Chairman and Ranking Member of the Full Committee, for putting 

us in a position for success in getting the budget passed on time. 

The Army’s biggest military advantage is its people but these are 

difficult times. We look forward to hearing more about how you’re 

tackling recruiting challenges. Given the need to modernize in light 

of an ever-evolving threat, we also look forward to an update about 

the pace of modernization. 

You all have my full support to develop and field modernized capabilities, but I’m growing increasingly worried about repeated proposals by the Army to break production lines and destabilize industrial base when we need them most. 

Once again, I want to thank you for your service to the country. 

Senator Collins is not here, as you can see. She has a Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee markup this morning. She 

may arrive later, but before we get to your opening statements, I 

have one quick statement. Then I want to turn it over to Senator 

Moran. 

We heard yesterday that the moment in time we default on our 

debt is coming up in 1 month, June 1. I talked about getting a 

budget out on time. I do not know what the people in this Senate, 

House are thinking. The truth is, is the deficit needs to be dealt 

with in a common sense way. What the House has done last week 

is not a common sense way and it makes us a weaker country. 

If we continue down this line, I’m very concerned about funding 

for the military, funding for Homeland Security, funding for every 

agency that we have within the government, and so hopefully, 

hopefully common sense will prevail here and we’ll be able to continue on the path of getting a budget out, a defense budget in this 

case, by the end of September so that you guys have the certainties, not to waste a lot of taxpayer dollars, and the military industrial base has the certainty to know what we need and are able 

to deliver it on time. 

With that, I’ll turn it over to Senator Moran. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR JERRY MORAN

Senator MORAN. Chairman Tester, thank you. 

I would add my support for all of our efforts in this committee 

to make certain that we get our appropriations process completed 

and done on time and that we avoid a continuing resolution that 

would be very damaging to lots of aspects of government but particularly to our national security. 

As I begin my opening statement, I’d like to take a second to recognize the three Army aviators who lost their lives in a training 

accident over the weekend in Alaska. Another solemn reminder of 
145 

the sacrifices servicemembers and their families make every day, 

whether deployed or at home. 

Thank you both for your service to our Nation and for being here 

today to discuss the United States Army’s budget request for fiscal 

year 2024. 

General McConville, it’s my understanding that this will be your 

last posture hearing. While that saddens me, it may be a pleasurable thought for you. This is your last posture hearing as Chief of 

Staff for the Army. I’d like to especially thank you for your decades 

of service in uniform to the defense of our Nation. 

I’m grateful for the relationship, the friendship that we’ve had, 

the conversations that you’re willing to engage with me, and I’m 

especially grateful for your visits to Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth last summer. 

Kansans take a lot of pride in the Army’s presence in our State 

and in these installations’ role in the defense of our Nation. Kansas 

communities are engaged and supportive of the soldiers and their 

families who call these posts home. 

Secretary Wormuth, as we discussed recently, in fact as recently 

as 5 minutes ago, I look forward to hosting you in Kansas in the 

near future to showcase the capabilities of Kansas military posts 

and the support of our Army’s soldiers. 

The United States is in the midst of one of the most challenging 

national security situations of my lifetime and the Army is critical 

to the support of the security of our Nation. The Army is critical 

to the future of our country. 

This Administration’s Army’s budget request for fiscal year 2024 

does not adequately address these concerns. Assuming the best inflation estimates, the Army’s fiscal year 2024 request represents a 

real growth rate of a negative, a negative 2.4 percent. 

As Co-Chair of the Senate Army Caucus and a Member of this 

subcommittee, it is my priority that the Army have the resources 

necessary to fill the national security obligations. 

We continue to hear of the ongoing recruiting crisis within the 

Army. The force will look different from just 2 years ago, roughly 

35,000 below its fiscal year 2022 authorized end strength of 

485,000 soldiers. 

Congress should be informed of all the alternatives as the Army 

considers options to manage this significant reduction. Let’s work 

with you, let’s work together to find satisfactory solutions and help 

the Army in its recruitment efforts. We need to overcome this deficit of soldiers. 

No one, I think it’s true in this room, wants to see the Army return to a tiered readiness model. I believe the retention of Army 

force structure is critical. While force structure reductions may be 

a quick fix solution, it will set the Army back at a time when the 

need for a ready Army is as essential as ever. 

Army senior leadership should keep Congress aware of any 

changes under consideration. I want to be your ally, not your critic. 

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted deficiencies in the 

U.S. industrial base, particularly as its ability to produce an adequate munitions stock and supply. 

American and Kansan workers stand ready to support the U.S. 

warfighter. I support the Army’s recent investment into the muni-
146 

tions industrial base. I recently had a chance to visit the former 

Kansas Army Ammunition Plant, which will have a vital role now 

re-engaging and supporting the increased munitions production 

needs. 

I also want to applaud the Army’s recent selection of the V–280 

to be the Army’s future long-range assault aircraft. This aircraft 

provides the needed speed and distance to support the Army 2030. 

I will continue to use my position on this committee to help support the modernization of the Army aviation fleet to keep pace with 

our challenges. 

The Army is the backbone of the Joint Force. If the United 

States is in conflict, our Army answers the call. While air and Marine superiority are essential, this is only possible with the Army’s 

presence. 

The U.S. ability to project power, to hold critical ground relies 

upon the Army’s ability to compete in the Pacific Theater. 

I highlight just at least from my own perspective that our country faces real and serious challenges. We need to do the things necessary to make sure we counter those circumstances. The Army has 

a significant role. This Congress has a significant role in supporting that effort. 

I look forward to your testimony and your responses to the questions. 

Thank you both. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Moran. 

We’ll start with you, Secretary Wormuth. You have the floor. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTINE WORMUTH

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you. 

Good morning, Chairman Tester, Senator Moran, and Distinguished Members of the Committee. 

Thank you for your ongoing support as we continue to build the 

Army of 2030 and thank you in particular for your condolences for 

our Army aviators. It has been a difficult several weeks for our 

aviation community and as soon as we got the word about the incident in Alaska, I asked the Chief to look into making sure that we 

were going to do a stand-down to make sure that we understand 

exactly what’s going on here and that we can make sure that our 

aviators share lessons learned from these recent incidents. 

We’re both very pleased to appear before you today. I want to 

thank General McConville for his decades of service and leadership 

in the Army. This is indeed his last hearing and it has been a 

pleasure to do three cycles of budget hearings with you, Chief. So 

congratulations. 

We’ve accomplished a lot in the last year but we still have a lot 

of work ahead of us. We remain focused on our three priorities: 

people, modernization, and readiness. The fiscal year 2024 budget 

enables us to support the National Defense Strategy, provide ready 

forces to our combatant commanders, and take care of our people. 

By investing over $39 billion in procurement and RDT&E (research, development, test, and evaluation), we are maintaining our 

momentum on our modernization programs and are largely on 

track to bring 24 systems across the finish line in 2023. 
147 

This is a big year for long-range precision fires. Prototypes of the 

precision strike missile, the mid-range capability, and the longrange hypersonic weapon will be in the hands of soldiers in this fiscal year. 

It’s also a big year for next generation combat vehicles. Mobile 

protected firepower is in production and the AMPV (Armored 

Multi-Purpose Vehicle) is also being fielded, and it’s a big year for 

our Integrated Air and Missile Defense Programs and the Future 

Vertical Lift Program, as well. 

As we shift from two decades of counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations to large-scale combat operations, we’re also 

transforming our force structure. We are going to need to adapt our 

force structure to make room for things like the multi-domain task 

forces as well as other new units, like the indirect fire protection 

capability and our M–SHORAD battalions. 

We are a ready Army and we continue to emphasize readiness 

in everything we do. We’re funding 22 combat training center rotations. We have a robust exercise program, and we’re implementing 

our new readiness model which helps us balance modernization, 

training, and ongoing missions. 

We’re also investing in preposition stocks which have served us 

very well in Europe and will continue to serve us well in other theaters. 

To assist Ukraine in fighting Russia, the Army has provided over $20 billion in lethal assistance, including a wide range of munitions, radars, and combat vehicles, just to name a few items. 

One of the most important lessons we’ve learned from the situation in Ukraine is the need for a more robust defense industrial 

base. So in our budget this year, we have $1.5 billion to invest in 

arsenals, depots, and ammo plants. 

We’re also working very closely with our Defense partners and 

industry to increase munitions production so that we can continue 

to help the Ukrainians but also very importantly to replenish our 

own stocks. 

Even as our soldiers provide lethal assistance and train the 

Ukrainian Armed Forces, we haven’t taken our eye off of the pacing challenge of China. INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command) may 

be a theater named after two oceans, but the Army does have an 

important role to play there. 

The best way to avoid fighting a war is to show that you could 

win any war you might have to fight. So the Army is contributing 

to strengthening the deterrence in INDOPACOM every day as we 

campaign in the region through our exercises and partnerships and 

if deterrence fails, the Army will be a key player on the Joint Force 

Team if there’s a conflict. 

As important as it is to build new weapon systems and maintain 

our readiness, people are the strength of our Army. This budget includes a 5.2 percent pay raise and funds important quality of life 

improvements, like family housing, childcare initiatives, and new 

and renovated barracks. 

We also, of course, want to build cohesive teams of soldiers that 

are trained, disciplined, and fit. So the Army is committed to positive command climates across the force where our soldiers can be 

all they can be. 
148 

We’re also continuing to strive to prevent suicide in our ranks. 

Suicide is a national challenge, of course, but we have to do everything we can to reduce suicide in the Army. 

So we’re pursuing a range of initiatives to help our soldiers be 

more resilience. One of the most important things we can do is 

make sure that we have engaged leaders at every level who know 

their soldiers and make sure that their soldiers are connected to 

their leaders, to their buddies, and to their families. 

Our Army is the greatest Army in the world but to keep it that 

way, we have to solve our recruiting challenge. The difficult recruiting landscape we face didn’t happen in a year and it’s going 

to take us more than a year to turn this around. We are laser focused on this challenge and we are not going to lower our standards to solve the problem. 

We are generating positive momentum from initiatives, like our 

Future Soldier Prep Course, our Soldier Referral Program, and our 

new advertising campaign Be All You Can Be. 

Our efforts are geared towards one thing: reintroducing the 

Army to the American public and inspiring a renewed call to service. We very much need your help to be successful in that effort. 

I’m proud of everything our soldiers do to protect our country 

and look forward to your questions this morning. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 

Next up we have General McConville. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL JAMES C. McCONVILLE, CHIEF OF STAFF OF 

THE ARMY 

General MCCONVILLE. Secretary, thank you for your leadership. 

Chairman Tester, Senator Moran, and Distinguished Members of 

the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to be here today 

and for your continued support. We appreciate your condolences 

and certainly, our condolences go out to the families of our fallen 

aviators in Alaska. 

The United States Army exists for one purpose, that is, protect 

the Nation by being ready to fight and win our Nation’s wars as 

a Member of the Joint Force. To do this, the Army has set three 

clear priorities: people, readiness, and modernization or, in other 

words, future readiness. 

We have remained aggressively committed to these priorities 

while answering the Nation’s call during every crisis and every 

challenge. 

This year the Army continues to undergo its greatest transformation in almost 50 years and we are delivering on modernization because we have been consistent and we have been persistent 

on our modernization priorities. 

Last year we officially updated our capstone warfighting doctrine 

to Multi-Domain Operations, which incorporates emerging lessons 

from Ukraine. We continue to stand up new organizations to support our new doctrine. 

Last June we reactivated the historic 11th Airborne Division in 

Alaska. In September, we stood up the third of our five multi-domain task forces. As the Secretary noted, we are on track to field 

24 signature weapon systems in fiscal year 2023. 
149 

But at the end of the day, we must get the right people in the 

right place in order for any of these initiatives to be successful. 

This is why people remain the Army’s Number 1 priority. 

We want every young person and every parent to know that service in the Army is a pathway to success both in and out of uniform. 

Whether you serve for 4 years or you serve for over 40 years, the 

Army offers endless possibilities. We are not only a profession of 

arms but we are a profession of professions. You can be whatever 

you want to be in the United States Army. In fact, you can be all 

you can be. 

I’m often asked how people can help us and my answer is inspire 

young men and women to serve because when we get the call, we 

go with the Army we have. The Army we have is the world’s greatest fighting force because we serve with the world’s greatest soldiers. With your continued support, we’re going to keep it that way. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHRISTINE E. WORMUTH AND

GENERAL JAMES C. MCCONVILLE

ENDURING ARMY PRIORITIES

For nearly 248 years, the United States Army has dedicated itself to fighting and 

winning the Nation’s wars. As old threats evolve and new ones emerge, the Army 

is making decisions and prioritizing investments that not only contribute to current 

readiness but will also pay dividends on the battlefields of 2030 and beyond. That 

is why we are especially grateful to Congress for providing the funding necessary 

to produce highly trained and lethal forces ready to meet an array of challenges at 

home and abroad. Our ability to maintain continuity through crisis is a testament 

to our solemn commitment to the Army’s three enduring priorities: people, readiness, and modernization. The Army’s Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 of 

$185.5 billion supports these priorities and will enable us to deliver the Army of 

2030 in support of the National Defense Strategy. 

READY TO FIGHT AND WIN

America’s Army exists to protect the Nation by fighting and winning our wars as 

a member of the Joint Force. There is nothing more reassuring, and no greater deterrent, than American soldiers on the ground, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with 

our Allies and partners. 

Linchpin of the Joint Force in the Indo-Pacific. From Washington and Alaska, to 

Hawai‘i and Guam, to Japan and South Korea, there are currently 71,000 soldiers 

serving in the Indo-Pacific theater. The Indo-Pacific is not just an air and maritime 

theater, but a joint theater with joint problems that require joint solutions. The 

Army is the linchpin Service, enabling and sustaining our joint and Allied partners. 

Our fundamental goal is to deter conflict in the region. Thus, the best way to avoid 

fighting a war is to make it very clear that the Joint Force, in concert with our Allies and partners, can and will win such a war. To that strategic end, the Army contributes to deterrence by campaigning, which plays three important functions in the 

Indo-Pacific: complicating Chinese decisionmaking; enhancing U.S. access to the region; and placing combat-credible and interoperable land forces forward to create interior lines for the Joint Force. 

This year is going to be one of historic modernization for our force posture in the 

Indo-Pacific. We are working closely with our regional Allies and partners to secure 

greater operational access and basing arrangements in strategic locations to enable 

adversary-focused training and exercises. In terms of logistics, the 8th Theater 

Sustainment Command in Hawai‘i will oversee the delivery of supplies, fuel, munitions, and activity sets for U.S. Army Pacific’s (USARPAC) joint and multinational 

training and exercises. Strengthening our ability to operate across the theater requires not only logistics at scale, but also the resiliency to operate in contested environments. 

It has been a consequential year for the Army in the Indo-Pacific. USARPAC completed its inaugural iteration of Operation Pathways, representing the Theater 

Army’s new posture paradigm to build and thicken Joint Force interior lines. This 
150 

gives USARPAC the operational endurance to see, sense, and understand regional 

threats; sustain, protect, and command and control (C2) large-scale operations; and 

conduct maneuver and fires. USARPAC demonstrated those capabilities by offloading APS afloat in support of exercise Salaknib in the Philippines. USARPAC, 

alongside our Indonesian partners, expanded exercise Super Garuda Shield from a 

modest bilateral venture to a major regional undertaking with 14 partner nations 

and 4,000 combined forces. Next, we established the Joint Pacific Multinational 

Readiness Center, bringing the first combat training center to the Indo-Pacific with 

inaugural rotations at our Hawai‘i and Alaska campuses, along with an exportable 

capability we employed in Indonesia. 

Capitalizing on that momentum, the 5th Security Forces Assistance Brigade 

(SFAB) persistently trained and advised 12 of our Allies and partners across the region. The Army also activated the 11th Airborne Division in Alaska—a unit with 

an historic Indo-Pacific lineage that provides our soldiers with a clear purpose, identity, and mission. As part of our Arctic Strategy, the 11th Airborne Division is being 

tailored as a rapidly deployable operational command headquarters. Finally, 

USARPAC initiated the Unified Pacific Wargame Series, offering key insights on 

Army capabilities, posture, and contested logistics for a protracted conflict in the 

Indo-Pacific. In October 2022, America’s First Corps certified as a Joint Task Force 

as part of the Mission Command Training Program Warfighter Series, with participants from Washington, Hawai‘i, Colorado, and Kansas. I Corps’ experimentation 

with distributed C2 will enable commanders to present multiple dilemmas to a potential adversary. We also activated the third of five planned Multi-Domain Task 

Forces (MDTF), task-organized to provide anti-access, area-denial capabilities 

through long-range precision fires and effects. The 3rd MDTF at Fort Shafter, 

Hawai‘i joins the 1st MDTF at Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington as the second MDTF supporting U.S. Indo-Pacific Command. 

Tip of the Joint Spear in Europe. Since Russia’s unjust and unprovoked invasion 

of Ukraine in February 2022, the U.S. Army’s tactical readiness and strategic readiness have been on full display across continental Europe. The 43,000 American soldiers in Europe underscore our ongoing commitment to the region, further bolstered 

by President Biden’s force posture announcement at the NATO Summit last June. 

In Germany, we are forward stationing an air defense artillery brigade headquarters, a short-range air defense battalion, a combat sustainment support battalion headquarters, and an engineer brigade headquarters. In Italy, we are forward 

stationing a short-range air defense battery. In Poland, the Army has forward-stationed the V Corps Headquarters Forward Command Post—the first permanent 

U.S. forces on NATO’s eastern flank. We are maintaining a substantial rotational 

force in Poland, including an Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), combat aviation brigade, and a division headquarters. In Romania, we have headquartered a rotational brigade combat team, supporting an additional maneuver force on the eastern flank. In the Baltics, we have enhanced our rotational deployments—which include armored, aviation, air defense, and special operations forces—to reinforce Baltic security, enhance interoperability, and demonstrate the flexibility and combat 

readiness of U.S. forces. 

We have been able to demonstrate our steadfast support to NATO thanks to years 

of investments in setting the European theater, where we continue to invest in and 

modernize a robust set of Army Prepositioned Stocks (APS). Importantly, we are 

moving some of our APS into Poland this year to reinforce NATO’s eastern flank. 

We are also leveraging NATO Common Funding to build a new equipment complex 

in Poland to house, maintain, and issue an ABCT equipment set. The XVIII Airborne Corps—America’s Strategic Response Force—similarly highlighted the Army’s 

investments in rapid power-projection capabilities. The XVIII Airborne Corps’ ninemonth deployment to Wiesbaden, Germany built upon years of cooperation with the 

Ukrainian military, providing the training and support required to aid the heroic 

defense of their homeland. These investments in strategic readiness would not have 

been possible without congressional foresight and support. This is especially true for 

the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI). Total EDI funding for the Army in FY 

2023 is $2.8 billion to support 9,800 rotational Army forces in Europe, and enhance 

our forward posture, training, and interoperability. 

The United States remains committed to supporting Ukraine’s near-term combat 

needs and its long-term defense requirements against future Russian aggression. 

The Department of Defense (DoD) has established Security Assistance Group— 

Ukraine (SAG–U), commanded by an Army three-star general under U.S. European 

Command, in Wiesbaden, Germany. SAG–U is purpose-built to execute the full 

range of our security assistance activities in a more efficient and sustainable manner. SAG–U will reach full operational capability in Q3 FY 2023. The lessons we 

observe in Ukraine underscore our Army’s greatest strengths: combined arms ma-
151 

neuver at scale; the importance of empowered leadership through mission command; 

and the immeasurable value of a professionalized Non-Commissioned Officer corps. 

The Army continues to supply critical weapon systems, equipment, and munitions 

to Ukraine, including Stinger anti-aircraft systems, Javelin anti-armor systems, 

155mm artillery rounds, and other items. We have provided billions of dollars of 

Army materiel to Ukraine through the Presidential Drawdown Authority. We are 

also working to execute billions in procurements for Ukraine through the Ukraine 

Security Assistance Initiative. 

The Army will initiate multi-year procurement contracts for artillery rounds and 

artillery charges in FY 2023. For FY 2024, the Army will work with Congress to 

explore additional multi-year procurement contract opportunities for critical munitions. In addition to these potential multi-year contract efforts, the request includes 

additional funding for a range of munitions, including Javelin and Stinger missiles, 

and artillery, combat-vehicle, and small-arms ammunition. 

We were able to fill critical gaps in Ukraine’s defense thanks to our comprehensive modernization initiatives, but we must be able to replenish these stocks. Russia’s war in Ukraine is further highlighting lessons from the pandemic that military 

readiness depends upon a robust and modern Organic and Defense Industrial Base. 

The Army is working closely with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and 

our industry partners to rapidly increase production capacity and transform our 

processes from vulnerable supply chains to a more resilient supply fabric. 

Readiness is our most effective form of deterrence. The best way to win without 

fighting is by demonstrating our ability to win decisively by fighting. Forward deployed combat capability, prepositioned stocks, and a resilient sustainment infrastructure will be key to future deterrence. One of the many ways we showcase our 

combat-credible forces in Europe is through DEFENDER-Europe, the Army’s annual 

joint and multinational exercise series. Last year, concurrent with our support to 

Ukraine, and alongside our NATO Allies, DEFENDER-Europe 22 stretched across 

nine European countries, featuring 3,450 American troops and 5,200 multinational 

service members from eleven Allied nations. DEFENDER-Europe 23 will include 

over 7,800 U.S. troops, training alongside 15,000 multinational forces from 26 Allied 

and partner nations. National Guard units from 10 U.S. states will also participate, 

marking the 30th anniversary of the National Guard State Partnership Program. 

DELIVERING THE ARMY OF 2030

The Army continues to progress through our greatest transformation in almost 

half a century. Fifty years ago, Army senior leaders closely observed the 1973 ArabIsraeli War and incorporated its lessons into the emerging AirLand Battle doctrine, 

the creation of new Army organizations, and the development of the ‘‘Big 5’’ weapons systems. Today, we are not only supporting Ukraine but paying close attention 

to the characteristics of modern warfare as they unfold, and incorporating those lessons into new doctrine, organizations, training, and materiel. Last October, the 

Army officially adopted Multi-Domain Operations (MDO) as our official capstone 

doctrine, the most significant shift in warfighting doctrine since AirLand Battle. 

MDO acknowledges that the Army of 2030 will be contested in every domain—air, 

land, sea, space, and cyberspace. Our soldiers must be ready to fight and win in 

multiple domains simultaneously to get from fort to foxhole in a contested environment. 

The Army has been consistent and persistent in pursuing our modernization initiatives as we work to deliver the Army of 2030 and design the Army of 2040. We 

remain aggressively committed to our six modernization portfolios—long-range precision fires, next generation combat vehicle, future vertical lift, the network, air and 

missile defense, and solider lethality—and are on track to deliver 24 new systems 

into the hands of soldiers by the end of FY 2023. That includes eight fielded systems, six systems issued for testing, and ten systems undergoing soldier 

touchpoints. Our annual Army Futures Command-hosted experiment, Project Convergence, continues to evolve and expand from the Army-centric inaugural event in 

2020 to last fall’s combined, joint series of experiments with the entire Joint Force, 

the United Kingdom, and Australia. 

To succeed on the future battlefield and continue to dominate the land domain, 

there are six operational imperatives the Army of 2030 must do. First, we need to 

see and sense more, farther, and more persistently at every echelon than our enemies. That is why we are modernizing our aerial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, to include the Multi-Domain Sensing System, Terrestrial 

Layer System, and the Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node, or TITAN. 

Second, we have to concentrate highly lethal, low signature combat forces rapidly 

from dispersed locations to overwhelm adversaries at a time and place of our choos-
152 

ing. To do this, we are investing in a faster, more survivable armored fist. Upgraded 

tanks and Bradleys will be joined by Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicles, or AMPVs, 

which are already in production. The Mobile Protective Firepower System, which 

was just awarded for production, will provide greater protection to infantry forces 

without sacrificing speed or mobility. 

Third, we must win the fires fight by delivering precise, longer-range fires as part 

of the Joint Force to strike deep targets and massing enemy forces. Since 2016, the 

Army has invested significantly in fire support systems, and we have made longrange precision fires a top modernization priority. We are working tirelessly to ensure that we have multiple options to service targets at ranges from 40 miles (Extended Range Cannon Artillery) to over 1,700 miles (Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon). 

Fourth, we need to protect our forces from air, missile, and drone attacks. We are 

continuing to field Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense, or M–SHORAD, to protect 

our maneuver forces against a wide range of air threats. The Army is also developing an enduring Indirect Fire Protection Capability, or IFPC, that will work together with the Army’s Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System 

to provide an unparalleled ability to identify, track, and defeat aerial threats. Current events also highlight the proliferation and significance of enemy Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems (UAS). To address this threat, we are investing in counter-UAS division sets that place fixed, semi-fixed, mobile, and portable counter-UAS capabilities in the hands of our maneuver forces. 

Fifth, we must rapidly and reliably communicate and share data not just with 

ourselves, but with our Sister Services, and Allies and partners. The Army has demonstrated how to rapidly combine targeting data from our joint teammates and pass 

that information to the correct Army fires element—reducing the targeting cycle to 

mere minutes. The Integrated Tactical Network architecture, in fielding now, enhances classified data transfer with both better network bandwidth efficiency and 

resilient relay links to ensure persistent connectivity for our warfighters. 

Finally, we must sustain the fight across contested terrain for both short, sharp 

operations as well as for protracted conflict. This will require not only standard 

equipment, like field kitchens, fuelers, and trucks, but also the niche, often overlooked capabilities like Army watercraft and Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore, or 

JLOTS. Sustainment must be at the forefront of our planning, preparation, and 

training—not something that we can assume will always be readily available. Army 

logisticians are the best in the world, and they are up to the task. 

PEOPLE ARE OUR GREATEST STRENGTH AND FIRST PRIORITY

Recruiting Initiatives. We are experiencing the most challenging recruiting landscape in a generation. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. Nevertheless, we are 

committed to tackling these problems head on by recruiting a force that looks like 

the Nation it serves. All our recruiting initiatives will be informed by first principles: (1) we will not sacrifice quality for quantity; (2) we will not lower our standards; and (3) we will invest in America’s young people so they can meet our standards. The Regular Army Accessions Mission for FY 2023 is 65,500. While we are 

singularly focused on meeting this mission, we need help from community leaders, 

parents, educators, coaches, and influencers to inspire young people to serve. 

The Army is implementing several important changes to improve organizational 

understanding, recruiter management, regional awareness, marketing, and applicant eligibility. First, we established the Army Recruiting Task Force, under the direction of a two-star general, to examine the current state of the Army’s recruiting 

enterprise and to make recommendations to Army senior leaders for action. Second, 

we are overhauling how the Army recruits by selecting recruiters differently, improving recruiter training, increasing recruiter resources, and creating new incentives for high-performing recruiters. For instance, the Army recently launched a 

‘‘Recruiting Scholars’’ program to identify, incentivize, and send top-notch captains 

to graduate school after completing a recruiting-company command. There are 21 

talented captains in the first cohort. 

Next, the Army designated 15 major cities as priority markets for FY 2023. With 

help from community partners, including Veterans Service Organizations, Military 

Support Organizations, and our Soldiers for Life, we are saturating these markets 

with activities and initiatives to maximize awareness regarding the benefits of Army 

service. Fourth, we established the Future Soldier Preparatory Course (FSPC) pilot 

program in July 2022 at Fort Jackson, South Carolina to support the accession of 

recruits who are inclined to serve but might need help improving their test scores 

or physical fitness. As of March 22, 2023, 4,219 FSPC recruits have graduated and 

moved on to Basic Combat Training (BCT). This represents a 98 percent success 
153 

rate. FSPC recruits improved their Armed Forces Qualification Test score by an average of 18.5 points. Similarly, 97.6 percent of FSPC recruits achieved the Army’s 

accessions body composition standards. Most importantly, FSPC graduates are performing very well in BCT with just a 4.8 percent attrition rate, as compared to the 

average BCT attrition rate of 6.1 percent in 2022. 

Be All You Can Be. On March 8, 2023, the Army officially reintroduced ‘‘Be All 

You Can Be’’ as our marketing slogan. ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ featured prominently 

in Army advertisements and marketing materials from 1981 to 2001. After a twodecade hiatus, we are excited to introduce ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ to a new generation 

of young people. The Army Enterprise Marketing Office hosted numerous in-person 

focus groups and tested ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ against 18 other taglines, eventually 

surveying 20,000 people across five target audiences: prospects, soldiers, veterans, 

influencers, and engaged citizens. Our extensive market research revealed that the 

‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ slogan, once popular with Generation X, resonates with Generation Z by signaling a sense of purpose, passion, possibility, community, and connection unique to the Army. With support from Congress, the Army will spend 

$116.7 million in FY 2023 to launch this rebranding campaign across multiple 

media platforms. Additionally, we believe that the ‘‘Be All You Can Be’’ narrative 

will help veterans and retirees tell their Army stories and inspire a new generation 

of young people toward military service. 

Quality of Life. Recruiting and retaining the next generation of the All-Volunteer 

Force requires sustained investment and quality-of-life improvements in Army housing, barracks, child care, spouse employment, healthcare, and the exceptional family 

member program. 

High-quality housing and barracks are key to ensuring overall health and 

wellness, thereby contributing to readiness and critical for retaining Army soldiers 

and their families. First, the Army supports DoD’s continuous assessment of Basic 

Allowance for Housing (BAH) rates, ensuring military paychecks keep pace with 

market conditions across the country. Average BAH rates have increased 12.1 percent since 2022. Personnel in 291 of 300 military housing areas received a BAH rate 

increase. Second, privatized housing companies began a six-year, $3-billion investment plan in 2020 to improve the Army’s housing inventory, to include new builds 

and major or medium renovations through 2026. The Army has programmed $1.6 

billion for FY 2024–2028 to improve the government-owned Army Family Housing 

inventory. Third, the Army historically invests an average of $1 billion per year in 

barracks for construction, restoration, and modernization across all three Army components. In FY 2024, the Army is requesting support for permanent-party barracks 

in Fort Wainwright, Alaska; Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington; Fort Bragg, 

North Carolina; and Natick Soldier Systems Center, Massachusetts. Importantly, 

Army senior leaders remain vigilant in their housing and barracks oversight responsibilities. 

With congressional support, the Army has expanded on- and off-post child-care options by increasing staff compensation and benefits, investing in facilities, growing 

family child care, and extending care hours. Entry level salaries are now $17.39 per 

hour. We are offering recruiting and retention bonuses for child-care staff and providing them with a 50 percent child-care discount for the first child and a 15 percent 

multiple-child discount for additional children. In terms of off-post care options, we 

continue to provide Army Fee Assistance to approximately 10,000 children of the active and reserve component per month, all while exploring new initiatives and partnerships. We also increased the provider rate cap to $1,700 per month, thereby reducing out-of-pocket expenses for hard-working Army families. Since FY 2021, Congress has funded seven new Child Development Centers (CDCs) in Alaska, Hawai‘i 

(2), Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana. The Army is planning to fund more 

CDCs in the out years. 

Army spouses—over 431,000 across all three components—play an important role 

in soldier and family readiness and soldier retention. Leveraging both Army and 

DoD programs, and partnerships with other Federal and non-governmental organizations, we remain committed to improving spouse employment and career opportunities. When spouses are satisfied with their careers, employment options, access to 

services, and overall quality-of-life, they are far more likely to support their soldier’s 

continued service. 

There are 46,000 active-component soldiers—nine percent of the force—with family members enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP), totaling 

55,000 family members. We are committed to reforming the EFMP and to providing 

comprehensive and all-inclusive support to Army families with a family member 

with a qualifying condition. In August 2022, we launched the Enterprise EFMP system to improve enrollment, transparency, assignment coordination, and access to 

support. We have also created a centralized EFMP office within the Headquarters, 
154 

Department of the Army to coordinate healthcare services, reassignment processes, 

and education support services. Taken together, these initiatives will help reduce 

the bureaucratic burden on Army families. Moreover, the Army continues its close 

partnership with the Defense Health Agency to ensure access to high-quality 

healthcare for our soldiers and their families. 

Reducing Harmful Behaviors. People are the Army’s number one priority. We take 

care of our people by building cohesive teams that are highly trained, disciplined, 

and fit, that are ready to fight and win, and where each person is treated with dignity and respect. Leaders across the Total Army are steadfastly committed to reducing the harmful behaviors that break trust with our soldiers and the American people—including sexual assault and harassment, acts of extremism, and racism, 

among others. To reduce harmful behaviors, we are shifting the paradigm from focusing on intervention and response to prioritizing integrated prevention activities. 

Integrated prevention activities address the conditions that lead to harm by reducing risk factors and increasing protective measures to preclude harmful behaviors. 

To that end, we are aggressively implementing the FY 2022 Independent Review 

Commission’s recommendations to counter sexual assault and sexual harassment 

within our formations, to include realigning Sexual Assault Response Coordinators 

(SARCs) and Victim Advocates from the operational chain of command to the Lead 

SARC at each installation. This independent reporting structure will enable Sexual 

Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention, or SHARP, professionals to advocate 

for victims more effectively. 

The Army is committed to working with Congress and the OSD to effectively implement the military justice reforms directed by the FY 2022 and FY 2023 National 

Defense Authorization Acts. In July 2022, the Army issued a General Order establishing the Office of the Special Trial Counsel (OSTC) as a field operating agency. 

The Senate confirmed our nominee for Lead Special Trial Counsel in November 

2022 and set his subsequent promotion to brigadier general in January 2023. The 

Army expects the OSTC to reach full operational capability by December 27, 2023, 

as required by law. 

Every single suicide is one tragedy too many. Exposure to harmful behaviors, such 

as sexual assault, harassment, or other acts of violence, may increase the risk of 

suicide. The Army is committed to supporting those exposed to harmful behaviors 

and doing everything we can to address this critical issue. Fortunately, we saw significant decreases in suicide across all Army components in 2022. The Army is 

leveraging a new public health approach to prevent and respond to suicide at the 

individual and community levels. We will publish a comprehensive suicide prevention regulation to define this new approach for the force by the end of Q3 FY 2023. 

Army leaders continue to employ the Health Readiness and Suicide Risk Reduction 

Tool across our formations. Last year, we introduced the ‘‘Stories of Hope’’ podcast 

to raise awareness, reduce stigmas, and increase help-seeking behaviors. 

50 YEARS OF THE ALL-VOLUNTEER FORCE

As we commemorate 50 years of the All-Volunteer Force, it has never been more 

important to recruit and retain the talented individuals who make our Army the 

world’s greatest fighting force. We win through our people—our active duty, Guard, 

and Reserve soldiers; our families; Army civilians; and our veterans and retired Soldiers for Life. We need every American to know that the U.S. Army is an organization of endless possibilities that provides a pathway to success both in and out of 

uniform. Our message is clear: if you want to serve something greater than yourself, 

if you want to belong to the world’s greatest team, if you want to BE ALL YOU 

CAN BE, then join us. With the limitless talent our Nation has to offer and continued support from Congress, we will remain ready to fight and win, against any adversary, anywhere in the world. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you each for your testimony. 

Last week, as I said in my opening statement, the three soldiers 

were tragically killed when the helicopters collided during a training mission in Alaska, and as I also pointed out, this is on the 

heels of another fatal helicopter accident in Kentucky that cost 

nine lives on February 2. Two soldiers lost their lives in a helicopter accident also in a training mission this time in Alabama. 

So, General McConville, you issued a stand-down order to the 

Army Aviation Units last week and directed additional safety training. 
155 

Would you please give us an update on what you will be reviewing specifically? 

General MCCONVILLE. Thank you, Chairman, and, you know, last 

year for Army Aviation was the safest we’ve had in the history, but 

we’re only as good as our last flight and as you mentioned, we’ve 

had two tragic flights in the last month and as a result, the Secretary and I directed a safety stand-down. 

That’s an opportunity for all our aviation commanders and senior 

commanders to bring their aviators together to take a look at the 

procedures that they’re using, to take a look at crew mix, to understand the type of training they’re doing, and making sure that we 

have the right crews in place, that we’re taking the proper steps, 

crawl, walk, run, to get after some of the maneuvers we’re going 

after, and to realize that this is a very dangerous business. 

Unlike maybe operating a vehicle close to a curb, with aviation 

if you make a mistake or something happens it can be very catastrophic and we need to bring that safety philosophy we’ve had for 

the last couple of years back into the cockpits and make sure we’re 

able to do that. 

Senator TESTER. So assuming that the stand-down will result in 

some solutions to the problem, whether it’s in safety or whether it’s 

in crew training, how long do you think it’ll take to implement anything that comes out of this stand-down? 

General MCCONVILLE. Well, I think it’s going to be over the next 

couple of days. So they’ll bring it back and we’re expecting immediate results. 

Senator TESTER. All right. Secretary Wormuth, in addition to the 

lives that were lost, those accidents also cost—aviation accidents 

since 2020 have cost the Army about $600 million in equipment. 

Are you appropriately funding for some of the training the General just talked about for spares, for simulators? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, we have been fully funding our flying 

hours for the last two budgets that we’ve submitted, for example, 

and so, you know, we have put investments into making sure that 

we have sufficient resources for our simulators, for our flying hours 

for all of our pilots. 

You know, there are challenges, of course, in terms of looking at 

spare parts and maintenance on all of that. So I think one of the 

things that we need to look at is are our pilots actually getting 

enough flying hours but to do that, we’ve got to make sure that the 

aircraft are ready to fly and so there’s sort of a lot of pieces that 

fit together in that, but we are definitely investing fully in that in 

my view. 

Senator TESTER. Any of the money in this budget to be able to 

continue to invest fully in that? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Yes. 

General MCCONVILLE. Yes. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. 

A little over a year ago you informed this committee of the decision to reduce end strength from 485,000 to 476,000 in order to 

maintain what you talked about in your opening statement, a high 

quality Army. 

Now based on the latest recruiting data that number looks to be 

further reduced to about 452,000 which, by the way, we should 
156 

have an exact number on that, but around 452,000 for this fiscal 

year, and we understand that that goal may not be reached. 

So where do things stand with Army recruitment? Are you seeing 

a positive connection between additional advertising and recruitment bonuses resulting in more men and women signing up for the 

Army? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Chairman, we are seeing improvements in 

our recruiting situation. We are in a better position, for example, 

at this time last year than we were in the previous year. 

At the same time, the Chief and I set a very ambitious goal of 

65,000 new recruits this year and we are not going to make that 

goal. We are doing everything we can to get as close to it as possible but we are going to fall short of that, and as I said in my 

opening statement, you know, we didn’t get into this situation in 

a year and I think it’s going to take us more than a year to increase recruiting and we are going to have to look at, as I also 

mentioned in my opening statement, that for our (audio glitch.) 

Senator TESTER. This is not a good thing and it’s not a good 

thing for a couple reasons. 

First of all, this is information that a new system should be able 

to do without a lot of screwing around and, quite frankly, it’s not 

giving you the numbers to be able to track and have solid data on 

recruitment. You get soldiers that are booted off of Tricare because 

of a glitch in a damn program. That’s a problem. 

How are you able to track needs without solid data? 

Secretary WORMUTH. It took us 6 years to build IPPS–A and it 

brought together 40 different systems. So it was very complicated 

and that’s why we had glitches, for example, like the soldiers with 

Tricare, but we have worked through that. We have a Tiger Team 

that is working all of the specific, you know, problem areas that 

have emerged as we’ve gone live with IPPS–A (Integrated Personnel and Pay System—Army). 

The challenge with our recruiting numbers, frankly, is more that 

our models don’t incorporate some of these new initiatives that 

we’ve undertaken, like the Future Soldier Prep Course, but we 

know how important it is to this subcommittee to get that data and 

we will work with you to get it to you as soon as possible. 

Senator TESTER. I appreciate that. I would just tell you that Senator Moran and I serve on the VA Committee as the Chairman and 

Ranking Member, too, and if I have one major main in my behind 

it’s computer systems and it doesn’t matter if it’s military, it 

doesn’t matter if it’s VA, it doesn’t matter if it’s Montana State Tax 

System. There’s always something wrong, and, I mean, it’s just not 

something that can make the Army all it can be or the VA all it 

can be either. 

So with that, I’ll turn it over to Senator Moran. 

Senator MORAN. Chairman Tester, thank you for concluding that 

conversation by indicating that pain was the computer system. The 

way you started I wasn’t certain where you were going to go. 

Let me start with really both of you. So if we’re not going to meet 

our recruitment goals that means consequences in a practical way 

to how the Army operates. 

What can you tell me first as someone who’s interested in the 

overall well-being of the Army what you are thinking, what are 
157 

your plans that will alter the structure of our Army across the 

country and around the globe and then as a Senator from Kansas 

tell me what concerns, if any, I should have about what those 

changes mean to installations and the assignment of soldiers to 

places, to bases, to forts, to posts across the country? 

Is this a consequence that will have a modest impact across the 

board or a consequence in which you will be making decisions 

about who stays the same, who gains, and who loses? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Senator Moran. Let me try to 

answer that concisely. 

We do not want a hollow Army, as you indicated. You know, we 

do not want to have tiered readiness. So part of the hard work of 

the Army in the next couple of years is going to be bringing down 

that over-structure, you know, what we call the spaces, to be closer 

to the actual amount of spaces, soldiers that we have. 

We are—and, frankly, we have to undertake that transformation 

in any case because we have to make room for some of the new 

types of structure we need for the Army of 2030. 

So what we’re trying to do is basically spread out some of those 

changes really and so, for example, we did sort of what I would call 

a people night court where we basically went and looked at all the 

different types of soldiers in units and said do we need to have 60, 

you know, cooks or can we use 40 cooks? So we’re doing that. 

We have looked at what we call unit priority and we’ve looked 

over the years at the units that we have used very heavily as opposed to those that we may have used much less frequently and 

those are areas where we can probably do some thinning out. 

So the reality is, you know, our end strength right now is about 

455,000. So at most large installations around the country right 

now the number of actual soldiers is fewer than the authorizations 

that are there. So I think, you know, we’ll be able to make many 

of these changes without it having large impacts to any of the 

major installations. 

But if we don’t turn our recruiting situation around, I can’t guarantee you that the Army won’t have to make some more substantial potential force structure reductions because we’ve got to make 

sure that our units, for example, that are on the immediate response force are manned adequately so that they’re ready to go. 

Senator MORAN. Your planning and your conversations, have 

they gone to that point in which you are discussing about what significant changes might take place if recruiting doesn’t turn around? 

Secretary WORMUTH. We are looking at that right now, Senator, 

but we haven’t come to any firm conclusions. I think, you know, we 

would very much obviously like to avoid making any large force 

structure changes because it can be hard sometimes to reverse 

that. 

Senator MORAN. It can be very hard to reverse that. What kind 

of timeframe—when could this committee have a view as to what 

your thinking is in a more formal way? 

Secretary WORMUTH. I think, Senator, we will probably be able 

to come to you in the next few months and talk with you about how 

all of that is looking for us. 

Senator MORAN. And that would be before a decision is made? 
158 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, we have a document called The 

ARSTRUC (Army Structure Memorandum) which essentially does 

look at finalizing the changes and I think we would want to come 

and talk to your staffs, for example, about how that’s looking. 

Senator MORAN. And when does the decision have to be made in 

order for this to really live up to the consequences of the less end 

strength? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, the ARSTRUC looks 5 years out and 

we do one every year. You know, I think major—we won’t have to 

make final decisions probably about any significant changes until 

2025, but we need to start thinking about that because again we 

want to make sure that our brigades are adequately manned. 

Senator MORAN. Madam Secretary, you understand why this is 

such a significant topic of conversation for the country, for this 

committee, for you. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Of course. 

Senator MORAN. I appreciate that. 

General McConville, anything you would want to add to that response? 

General MCCONVILLE. I think, you know, one of the concerns 

why we really need to increase recruiting is because I think as we 

take a look at, you know, getting ready for the next fight that we 

see is we’re moving from counterinsurgency, counterterrorism, irregular warfare. So those type systems that would be more valuable in large kill combat operations, like some of the systems that 

you have at Fort Riley and other places are going to be more important, but we’re also developing long-range precision fires, air 

and missile defense, counter UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) 

systems, and we’re going to do this on pretty much a flat budget 

and flat end strength. So there will be some decisions eventually 

what that looks like. 

The concern we have right now is on end strength is, you know, 

it may not be a structure change, but if we can’t fill the actual 

units, you know, they may be at 70 percent strength and so, you 

know, the structure still there but you don’t have the soldiers filling those ranks and that’s what we’re concerned about. 

Senator MORAN. Let us know how we can help recruit.Thank 

you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Schatz. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you, Chairman. 

Thank you both for being here. I want to start with the status 

of the lease negotiations with the State of Hawaii. 

In 1964 the United States military was awarded a 65-year lease 

for 23,000 acres of Hawaii State lands for $1. We are now coming 

up on the potential renewal of that lease and I think we’re all in 

agreement that the people of the State of Hawaii are entitled to a 

fair deal on all leasing moving forward. 

Many of these leases do expire in 2029. That includes Pohakuloa 

Training Area, Kakaaho Training Area, Makua Valley, and I think 

where we are all landing is that promoting our national security 

and treating the citizens of the State of Hawaii with fairness and 

respect are not mutually exclusive. In fact, at this point they’re 

completely intertwined. 
159 

So, Secretary, could you just give me an update on the status of 

the negotiations? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly, Senator Schatz. As you know, we 

have two environmental impact statements that are underway 

right now that are relevant to looking at the lease agreements and 

those I believe will be completed at the end of this year and then 

the next step would be for, you know, the Army to be looking at 

what we would come forward with as a proposal for what the final 

agreement would look like and that record of decision won’t come 

forward until 2025. 

So we have some time to be talking with—you know, when I was 

last in Hawaii I met with Governor Green, had a very productive 

discussion with him. I met with leaders from the Native Hawaiian 

community, and we are very much now trying to engage—you 

know, as the environmental impact statements work their way 

through the process, we are trying to engage with all of the different stakeholders in Hawaii to understand, to help us understand 

what the shape of an arrangement might look like. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. 

General McConville, we all agree Hawaii is entitled to the same 

guarantee of homeland defense as every other State. 

Army’s IBCS (Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System) expands the line of sight for defensive launchers to 

better our odds of intercepting missile threats. 

Are there considerations for how the IBCS Program could apply 

to the defense of Hawaii? 

General MCCONVILLE. Well, right now it just is a potential consideration. I’m not aware of anything right now that put IBCS, but 

as you said, it’s a game-changing technology that allows us to integrate sensors and shooters for air missile defense and that does 

give us that capability and if we lay out that requirement, then we 

can take a look at it. 

Senator SCHATZ. There’s a lot of talk about Guam and the defense of Guam. I completely support that. I want to just remind everybody that Hawaii is the homeland. Hawaii is not an insular 

area. It is the 50th State. It is the home of INDOPACOM. It is the 

home of U.S. Army Pacific. It is the home of Marine Forces Pacific, 

and even if it’s difficult, even if it’s expensive, we still need to 

have—and I get that HDRH (Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii), 

you know, was abandoned and perhaps for legitimate reasons, but 

I just want to flag for you that as we’re gaming out our scenarios 

that we are focusing right now on the kind of Central and Western 

Pacific and then the Continent and Hawaii deserves protection, too. 

On recruiting, just following up, Secretary, on what Senator 

Moran talked about, you know, you’re going to fall short and I 

think you are doing what is necessary to try not to fall short, but 

I think it’s fair to say that the Pacific is the priority area and although I know you’re kind of pre-decisional here, I’d like you to 

kind of talk at least in conceptual terms about how you’re going to 

absorb some reduction in the number of Army soldiers in a way 

that is consistent with our Indo-Pacific strategy. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly. And I’ll maybe draw again a little bit on what I said before. 
160 

One, I think it’s important to realize that the actual number of 

soldiers that are at places like, you know, 25th ID at Fort Riley, 

for example, at Fort Bragg, at Fort Hood,—— 

Senator SCHATZ. Fort Humphreys. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Exactly. Is below the number of authorizations that are on the books. So, you know, we have the soldiers 

that we already have. 

What we’re trying to do is look at—you know, as we think about 

the new kinds of force structure that we need to build, as the Chief 

mentioned, the multi-domain task forces, the indirect fire protection capabilities, a lot of the integrated air and missile defenses, for 

example, we are looking at where can we shed maybe some types 

of structure that was very useful for COIN and counter-terrorism 

but we don’t need as much of right now to make room for new 

structure and the way we’ve gone about that, among other things, 

is we’ve looked at, as I said, what we’re calling people optimization. 

So there’s places where we can just kind of thin out across the 

whole force structure and then we’re also looking at the types of 

units that are maybe under-utilized. Those are obviously candidates for elimination, for example. 

So, you know, I think all of this will be spread around our major 

installations and, you know, National Defense Strategy requirements are primary. We’ve got to be able to have the readiness levels and the structure that we need to execute the strategy and certainly paying attention to the Indo-Pacific is core to that. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Murphy. 

Senator MURPHY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you both for being here today. 

Mr. Chairman, I wanted to take my time to ask a few questions 

about the Future Vertical Lift Program. 

First of all, this is the first opportunity to talk about this in this 

subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, as you know, I made, along with 

Senator Blumenthal, a series of requests of the Army to get a briefing on a Flora Award and was denied that briefing by the Army 

multiple times. 

I think this subcommittee and more broadly the Appropriations 

Subcommittee has to pretty rigorously guard our equities when it 

comes to getting information from the Army and from the Administration when it comes to contract awards. 

In fact, the regulations governing the awarding of contracts 

carves out a very specific role for Congress to be briefed on these 

matters even while the award is pending, and I hope this committee will continue to work on what I think is a misaligned equilibrium right now between the Administration, the Department of 

Defense, and this committee when it comes to how much information is shared. 

Ms. Wormuth, I wanted to talk to you about this specific award. 

I understand I have parochial interests, right? This was a contest 

between Bell, Textron, and Sikorsky, and the award went to the 

Bell Program, but I guess I want to talk to you a little bit about 

my concerns regarding Tilt Rotor Aircraft. 

My understanding is that past performance did not factor in to 

the contract award and this committee is going to be charged with 
161 

picking up the full cost of this new program. Tilt Rotor Aircraft, 

like the V–22 Osprey, have a pretty miserable performance, reliability, and safety record over the last 30 years. 

The V–22 is supposed to have a mission readiness of 82 percent 

but over the last 5 years the Osprey has been at 56 percent. The 

procurement cost went from $33 million to almost a hundred million. Today, the cost per flight of the V–22 is $10,000 an hour 

which is double the initial estimate. 

You know, what was interesting about this particular contract 

award is that the bid that came in from Textron was twice, twice 

the amount of the bid that came in from Sikorsky. Layered on top 

of that, this history suggesting that the Tilt Rotor is going to end 

up costing our taxpayers inordinately more than even the initial 

bids and I worry that we’re going to have a hard time being able 

to fund the full cost of this award. 

So I guess my question is do you have any information as to why 

the Army did not take past performance of Tilt Rotor Aircraft into 

account when awarding the Flora contract, and what do you say 

about my concerns that if the cost curve on this new helicopter, 

which is obviously a foundational program for the Army is anything like what we saw for the Osprey, then we’re in for some pretty big unexpected costs that we’re going to have to bear on this 

subcommittee? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Senator Murphy, first of all, I want to say, 

you know, of course, I completely support and value the important 

oversight role of Congress in these matters. So we want to be good 

partners with you in terms of being transparent and if you have 

not already, you know, received a detailed briefing now that the 

GAO (Government Accountability Office) has issued its decision, if 

you will, on the competition, I certainly will make sure that Mr. 

Doug Bush and their team get up to talk with you about that. 

My understanding is that the things that were valued or emphasized, if you will, in the selection process did include looking at 

lower technical risk precisely because of the fact that in the past 

if the technical risk is higher, a lot of times that means the costs 

in the out years are higher. The sustainment costs can be higher 

because they’re not appropriately baked into the competitive process. 

So one of the reasons, as I understand it, that we selected the 

Bell-Textron aircraft was because it was assessed to have lower 

technical risk, even though the bid that came in from Sikorsky 

from an overall dollar amount was lower. You know, it was a best 

value competition. It wasn’t strictly based on price, and we in the 

Army had some considerable concerns about our visibility into the 

design process that came from Sikorsky. 

So I can get back to you in more detail in terms of how exactly 

we incorporated past performance of the Osprey into the calculations, but we absolutely emphasized the importance of having 

lower technical risk in the program. 

Senator MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, I will just note that our subcommittee has a GAO report on this very specific question of 

whether risk is being properly calculated when awarding programs 

within the Future Vertical Lift Aircraft process and what this GAO 

report comes to the conclusion is that right now the Army is not 
162 

properly identifying sort of long-term risk on these programs and 

so look forward to being in a dialogue about some of the recommendations in this GAO report and getting a better holistic 

sense of how much this is going to cost the taxpayer in the long 

run. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator TESTER. Very quickly, Senator Murphy, have you been 

briefed by the Defense Department? 

Senator MURPHY. And I have, I have, and I thank you for arranging for that. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven, would you yield to the Chairman of the Full Appropriations Committee? 

Senator HOEVEN. Absolutely. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. 

Senator Murray. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you so much, and I do have to get back 

to a markup. So I really do appreciate that. 

But, first of all, let me just say, Chairman Tester and Vice Chair 

Collins, who is being filled in by Senator Moran today, I’m really 

glad to join both of you to keep talking about the investments that 

we’ve got to make to support our troops and keep our country safe. 

These hearings that we’re having are so important to remind us 

that we need to return to regular order and pass our Nation’s funding bills in a timely bipartisan way and I will keep saying that till 

we get back to regular order. 

Now if we are going to stay ahead of our competitors, like China 

and others, that means that our investments have to keep up, not 

fall behind or fall into uncertainty because of partisan gridlock. 

So I’m really glad we have this opportunity today to hear from 

our witnesses about what that means for the Army and, of course, 

how we support our servicemembers and their families, like the 

troops at Joint Base Lewis McCord and Yakima Training Center in 

my home State of Washington. 

It’s really important to me that this conversation also focuses on 

getting our military families the support they need, like childcare 

and mental healthcare and good housing and schools, and we also 

have to make sure we’re keeping men and women in uniform safe. 

My heart goes out to the families of the soldiers we lost in the recent helicopter crashes. I expect to hear more following the Army’s 

review of the safety procedures about how we are preventing future 

tragedies because at the end of the day the heart of our military 

isn’t our weapons or our equipment, it is the brave and talented 

men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line to 

keep our country safe. 

So before I ask my questions, I just want to thank each of you 

for your service to this country. This committee has a deep appreciation for everything our servicemembers do to keep their members safe. 

With that, let me just ask a few questions. Secretary Wormuth, 

in my home State of Washington we are still seeing issues with the 

availability of suitable and affordable housing, especially at JBLM 

(Joint Base Lewis-McChord), and I’m hearing that as many as 250 

servicemembers and their families spend from three to 4 months 

in hotels or other accommodations while they wait for a home on 
163 

base to become available. These servicemembers and their families 

have to have a safe and reliable and affordable place to live, period. 

I wanted to ask you what you were doing to make sure that 

housing needs are being met both on and off base. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Thank you, Chair Murray. 

Availability of housing is a challenge around JBLM and in a 

number of other locations around the country. We’re doing a few 

things to try to work on that. First of all, this budget has $690 million in it for family housing 

and then we also obviously have our privatized housing that we 

work with the five different companies that provide that housing. 

So we are constantly looking at how can we invest more, how can 

we encourage those companies to invest more so that we’re able to 

generate more inventory at places like JBLM. 

Another thing that we’re doing, I think, is we are really pushing 

OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) to reopen how they calculate the basic housing allowance and this goes to obviously being 

able for our soldiers and families to afford housing off post and I 

think the way that we have calculated—I personally am not fully 

comfortable with how we’re doing BAH (Basic Allowance for Housing) and I think we’re going to look at that, open it up, look at the 

anchor points that we use, look at the utilities, the cost factors that 

we’re using because in some cases I think we may need to raise the 

BAH rates to allow our soldiers and families to be able to afford 

housing off post. So that’s some of what we’re trying to do. 

Senator MURRAY. Good. I look forward to hearing more about 

that. Thank you. 

A Department of Defense review that was finished last year 

found that the drinking water supplying 24 installations exposes 

about a 175,000 servicemembers a year to dangerous levels of 

chemicals linked to cancer and other illnesses. 

The presence of these environmental contaminants, including 

PFAS (Army Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances), on installations 

and their surrounding communities continues to be a huge concern 

of mine and I know many others here in the Senate, especially with 

some of the worst contamination levels at JBLM and Yakima 

Training Center. 

Are there barriers you have identified in cleaning up these contaminants on active installations? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Chair Murray, to my knowledge, there are 

not barriers to cleaning that up. I mean, you know, if there are 

cases where drinking water is not found to be safe, we will immediately work with the affected areas to get, you know, access to 

safe drinking water, whether that’s by looking at, you know, new 

wells or other ways to solve that problem. 

I am aware that I think the EPA (Environmental Protection 

Agency) is contemplating making some changes to how it assesses 

what is a safe level of PFAS and I think that will have potentially 

very substantial—— 

Senator MURRAY. So are you coordinating with the EPA to make 

sure the Army is testing at the most recent recommended lifetime 

drinking water health advisory levels? 

Secretary WORMUTH. I’m sure that we’re coordinating with the 

EPA. If the EPA changes what they determine to be a safe stand-
164 

ard that will have implications for us that I think will be significant financially. 

Senator MURRAY. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman, and thank you, Senator Hoeven. I appreciate it. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

First, thanks to both of you for your service. Secretary Wormuth, 

are you aware that the Administration has released a draft regulation that would require contractors to report—defense contractors 

to report—on their greenhouse gas emissions for the weapon systems they make and also set emission reduction targets? Are you 

aware of that regulation? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I don’t think that I’m aware of 

that specific proposal at this time. It hasn’t come to my attention. 

Senator HOEVEN. It’s a draft proposal, but essentially if we’re 

going to make contractors track their emissions on the weapon systems they make as well as from their suppliers, aren’t we starting 

to prioritize, I guess, emission standards over weapons performance? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, Senator, without seeing the specifics 

of the draft, I can’t really speak to the implications of it. I mean, 

for example, if contractors are being asked to just track their emissions and maybe report them, that’s different from having some 

sort of a consequence if their levels are deemed to be, you know, 

not acceptable. So I think I would just need to know a little more 

about the proposal. 

Senator HOEVEN. So the tracking the emissions and setting 

standards for things like munitions and bombs and things like 

that, we’re going to now make that a factor in deciding which ones 

that the military procures? And won’t that affect both the effectiveness of those weapon systems for our warriors as well as the cost? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, Senator, again I haven’t seen the proposal, so I hesitate to comment on it. What I will say is obviously 

our soldiers need to have the best possible equipment to defend 

this country and I would want to make sure that that’s what we 

would put our emphasis on. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you. Thank you. 

And then, General, so I was just in South Korea and Taiwan. 

Taiwan’s ordered and is paying for I think on the order of $19.5 

billion worth of military hardware that they want to use obviously 

to counter aggression by the PRC (People’s Republic of China), 

China, in the Taiwan Strait and obviously we’re working with 

other allies in the Indo-Pacific, Japan, Philippines, the South Korean President is here now and so forth, to deter China’s aggressive behavior. 

One of the issues is getting those munitions. So it’s not just 

about modernizing our forces, which we must do and obviously this 

committee funds that effort and is working with you to do it, it’s 

also providing those enhanced armaments to our friends, our allies, 

partners and friends—that should sound familiar to you—in the 

Indo-Pacific. 

By the same token, we need to and are providing assistance to 

Ukraine but they’re needing to procure these weapon systems, as 
165 

well, and we’re modernizing our forces. That puts a real strain on 

the supply chain. 

What are we doing, what can we do to expedite that which is crucially important in Ukraine right now, it’s crucially important in 

the Indo-Pacific right now, and it’s crucially important to our own 

forces and making sure they have the very best armaments? 

General MCCONVILLE. Well, Senator, I think it’s really important 

that we invest in our organic industrial base and, you know, as we 

talk about—and for the long term, and as we—— 

Senator HOEVEN. Sir, I agree with the investment, but my question is we need to expedite the production now. That’s—what can 

we do to expedite the production now with the investment we’re 

making is my question, sir. 

General MCCONVILLE. Yes. I guess, you know, my response, having watched this, is, you know, the defense industry doesn’t operate 

on enthusiasm. They want contracts. They want long-term contracts they can invest in their systems and when they see that, you 

know, we’re starting to ramp up. We’re doing 155 rounds. We’re 

doing it on some of the systems that we’re doing right now and I 

think it’s very, very important that we project outwards in some 

cases with multiyear contracts. That helps. They know that when 

they invest this year, they’re going to have a 3- or 4- or 5-year 

funding stream that’s going to allow them to invest and ramp up 

these capabilities. 

We also need to work with our allies and partners to make sure 

they’re doing the same thing in their organic industrial base because these countries need to have the capabilities with the weapon 

systems. They need to have the capacity, which is enough of them. 

They need to have the confidence in those weapon systems and 

their soldiers need to have the will to fight if they’re going to defend their country. 

Senator HOEVEN. For both of you, are we providing the assistance in terms of the weapon systems requested by Ukraine to end 

the conflict so they can be successful rather than stalemate? I 

would ask first you, Secretary, and then you, General. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I believe that we are providing the 

Ukrainians with what they need to fight against the Russians. So, 

you know, we are giving them systems and certainly the Army is 

giving them systems—— 

Senator HOEVEN. Win versus stalemate now. 

Secretary WORMUTH. I think we—— 

Senator HOEVEN. Win versus stalemate. 

Secretary WORMUTH [continuing]. Want to see the Ukrainians 

prevail obviously. I think that is in the national interests of the 

United States to do more than achieve a stalemate. You know, we 

can’t let the—there can’t be a precedence of being able to just declare that a country doesn’t exist. 

So we need to give them the equipment they need to defeat the 

Russians and I think that we are doing that. 

Senator HOEVEN. General? 

General MCCONVILLE. I would add it’s not just the equipment, 

it’s the training, and we’re seeing and there’s a lot of higher level 

combined arms training up to the brigade level and, you know, in 

another venue we can give you the exact numbers, but we have sig-
166 

nificantly increased their capability to do combined arms operations at the brigade level and above. 

Senator HOEVEN. Again, thanks to both of you. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen, 20 minutes ago you were one 

minute away from asking questions. It’s your turn. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Finally. Well, it was worth waiting for. 

Secretary Wormuth, I’m sorry Senator Murray isn’t here because 

your response on the testing of our servicemembers I think was not 

totally accurate. I’ve been trying to get that done through the 

MBAA for several years now and in fact what we’re being told by 

DOD (Department of Defense) is that we don’t have the lab capacity to do that and there’s been opposition from the Department of 

Defense to actually get that done. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I intend to share that with Senator Murray 

so that she knows that in fact we are not doing that. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Well, I’m happy, Senator Shaheen, to look 

into that and do what I can. 

Senator SHAHEEN. That would be great. Your advocacy would be 

very much appreciated. 

For both of you, when you appeared before the Armed Services 

Committee earlier this year, I asked why the Army had once again 

failed to include full funding for the enhanced night vision goggles 

binoculars, ENVGB. Congress stepped in last year to restore the 

full $300 million. 

Senator Murphy talked about the GAO report on the Vertical 

Lift. There’s also a GAO report on the potential impact of what will 

happen if an IVAS (Integrated Visual Augmentation System) System gets fielded before it’s ready and the potential for men and 

women in the military not to actually make use of that because 

there’s so much concern about it. 

So again how do we explain the fact that you haven’t requested 

funding for the ENVGB? We’ve seen just last week another 2-year 

delay in terms of fielding the IVAS System. So do we not think the 

ENVGB is working well, and as we’re talking about Senator 

Hoeven’s question about the defense industrial base and as you replied, General McConville, very appropriately, they’re concerned 

about contracts. 

Well, when we say to companies we want you to produce these, 

they gear up to do that and then the contracts aren’t forthcoming. 

It sends a message that we can’t be counted on and we don’t really 

need what’s being proposed. 

So tell me again because I don’t feel like I’ve gotten an adequate 

answer on why you’re not requesting funding for the ENVGB Program in this year’s budget. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Okay. Senator Shaheen, I will try again. 

First of all, I want to emphasize that the ENVGB is a great system. This may surprise you, but the Pentagon had take your child 

to work day last week and in our courtyard the Army had many 

of our systems that kids could look at and the ENVGB was one of 

them. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Doesn’t surprise me at all because I think it 

is a great system—— 

Secretary WORMUTH. It is. 
167 

Senator SHAHEEN [continuing]. And that’s what we’ve heard from 

you. 

Secretary WORMUTH. It is a very good system. Our soldiers like 

it and they’re very comfortable with it. 

I think (1), you know, we have a finite amount of resources that 

we can apply to modernization. So we are having to make choices 

and that is, you know, relevant whether it’s about JLTV (Joint 

Light Tactical Vehicle) and other kinds of vehicles or whether it’s 

about, you know, what I would call wearable tech for our soldiers. 

What we’re trying to do with ENVGB and IVAS is strike a balance. IVAS, as I know you know, does more than what the goggles 

do. It is a system that allows our soldiers to train, rehearse, and 

then fight in a synthetic training environment. 

Senator SHAHEEN. But it’s not ready yet. Our soldiers—— 

Secretary WORMUTH. We are working on it. You are absolutely 

right. We are still working on it and I think if Congress gives us 

the money that we’ve requested for IVAS in this year’s budget, we 

are going to use that to work with Microsoft to get the system to 

a place where our soldiers will want to use it and if Microsoft isn’t 

able to do that, we will not develop the program further. 

You know, we are not—I know the GAO report, you know, talks 

about $22 billion. That assumes fully—— 

Senator SHAHEEN. And the IG report. I mean,—— 

Secretary WORMUTH. Right. 

Senator SHAHEEN [continuing]. It’s not the only report, and the 

Army’s own report all said the same thing. 

Secretary WORMUTH. We’re not going to spend $22 billion on a 

system if it doesn’t work, but I think the Chief and I both believe 

that this is important wearable technology for our soldiers. We 

want to see if we can get it to a place where it is going to be desirable for our soldiers. We think it can be, but I think Microsoft 

knows that this is it. They either get it done and get it to a place 

where our soldiers want to use it or we will move on and I don’t 

know, Chief, if you want to add to that. 

General MCCONVILLE. I think, you know, first of all, the enhanced night vision goggles bravo (ENVG–B) is a cutting edge technology. 

Where we are today, I would say that is—you know, if you go 

back when we first started flying goggles with PVS–5s, they were 

big clunky things you wore on your head and how far we’ve taken 

the technology is great, but to me IVAS is transformational. It’s 

going to fundamentally change the way our soldiers operate in the 

battlefield and when we take a look at where we are with resources 

is we want to give the next 3 to 5 years to get that edge that’s 

going to transform how our soldiers are going to fight and that’s 

the trade-off that we’re trying to make right now. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And I understand that aspiration, but it’s not 

working yet and until it works, it seems to me that we are short 

changing those people who need the current system that does work 

in a way that is not acceptable as we’re looking at warfighting. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
168 

Thank you both for being before the committee here. I join other 

colleagues in expressing sadness and condolences at the loss of life 

with the helicopter crash in Alaska this week. Families are grieving, the community is grieving, and I know for Army all are grieving, and there is a great deal of review that will come forward as 

a consequence of this. 

General McConville, I’m looking forward to being with you in 

Alaska on Friday, hopefully the opportunity to be up there at Fort 

Wainwright. 

Secretary Wormuth, I know we have in place now this standdown for a period of time. I am hoping that this stand-down will 

achieve the desired outcome which is really to really determine the 

safety there and not just a messaging tool that we’re kind of looking at this, but I think we recognize that not only this horrible 

tragic incident but that this follows others that we have seen unfortunately. 

So if you care to comment very quickly on that? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, Senator. The safety stand-down, as the 

Chief and you have discussed, will, you know, allow all of our aviators to focus on safety, to review their procedures, you know, 

make sure that they are doing everything that they should be 

doing and that absolutely will involve more than just messaging. 

And then, of course, you know, there will be investigations. 

There’s already an investigation underway at the crash that we 

had at Fort Campbell, and we will probably learn additional insights from those investigations that we will also make sure the 

aviation community has and can make any changes that are needed. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you for that. 

Let me ask a couple questions about provisions within the 2023 

NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) and this is under Section 603. We authorized some policies that we’re hoping will improve the quality of life for the soldiers that are stationed in Alaska. 

I have been told that right now there has been no guidance released for how and when these new policies are going to be implemented and my concern is, is that we have servicemembers that 

are missing out on some of these time-limited incentives that are 

again designed to help alleviate some of the hardships that are just 

inherent with being in the North. 

One is the provision that allows for cold weather special duty pay 

and the second is the requirement that the Secretary reimburse eligible servicemembers for the cost of airfare to travel to their home 

of record when they’re assigned to Alaska as a duty station. 

Can you give me any information in terms of when soldiers can 

expect to receive either the cold weather pay or again receiving the 

reimbursement for eligible travel? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, on the cold weather pay, the Army has 

actually been providing cold weather pay to soldiers since 2020 

through our Remote and Austere Location Incentive Pay. I don’t 

quite have the acronym off the top of my head, but basically if 

you’re above 63 degrees North, so if you’re at Fort Greeley, for example, or Fort Wainwright, single soldiers get $2,000 and soldiers 
169 

with dependents get $4,000. So we have been paying that since 

2020. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Right. But this provision in NDAA was additional to that. 

Secretary WORMUTH. My understanding, and I’m not an expert 

on this, Senator, so I may have to get back to you for the record, 

I think there’s concern with OSD that somehow we will be double 

counting. So, you know, I would be happy to work with you and 

your office if you think that the amount of the current incentive 

isn’t sufficient, but I think there’s concern from OSD about creating 

a second incentive. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. Well, then we need to talk about this 

and do so quickly because this is not about double dip. This is truly 

about addressing some of the realities that come when you are in 

these cold weather environments and the ability to take care of 

yourself and your family with that. 

How about on the travel piece of it? 

Secretary WORMUTH. The travel piece is in draft right now and, 

frankly, when I learned that it’s in draft because I’d heard personally from soldiers how important it is to be able to fly home sometimes and I know how expensive those are. 

So I will commit to you to sort of look to see if we can speed that 

up. There’s no issue with it. It’s just sort of going through the staffing process. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Okay. I know that when I’m up there this 

weekend, these will be questions that I will be asked and I’m sure, 

General McConville, you will, as well. So the more information we 

have on that the better. 

Thank you. 

Senator MORAN [presiding]. Senator Murkowski, thank you very 

much. 

Senator Capito. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you all both 

for being here, very much appreciate not just being here but your 

service and appreciate all the men and women that serve with you. 

I would just add my voice of concern to the accidents that we’ve 

seen. Obviously you’re working very affirmatively, too. I’m sure it 

hurts everybody’s heart and the hearts of the folks that you serve 

with probably more than others with the families. 

I wanted to ask about munitions, General McConville. How has 

the observing the Ukraine conflict helped the Army assess the performance of existing Army munitions and assumptions about our 

requirements for the future fight? 

General MCCONVILLE. Yes, Senator. First of all, you know, as far 

as our performance, I think it’s showing. You know, things like 

HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) become game 

changes. We look at the amount of 155 rounds that are being utilized. They’re very, very effective and, quite frankly, you know, 

U.S. weapon systems across the board have been in great demand 

and are working extremely well, but the usage rates have gone beyond what we, you know, historically have used. 

So we have been at war, you know, 20 years. We’ve never used 

the amount of, you know, 155 rounds doing that. So, you know, at 

the Secretary’s directive we are doing that right now but really 
170 

standing up our organic industrial base so we can manufacture and 

have the capability to do it in a timely manner to get our stockage 

rates up to what we think we may have to use in large-scale combat operations. 

Senator CAPITO. Madam Secretary, would you say in terms of 

what our capacity is now—let’s just say we were to be engaged— 

I know hypotheticals are terrible, but be engaged in something 

where we would need those munitions for our own purposes, are 

we ready to do that? I mean, I know we’re not bleeding ourselves 

down to a point where we would not be ready, but we need to replenish. Is that the case? 

Secretary WORMUTH. As we’ve looked at the Ukrainian request 

for support, we’ve weighed that very carefully. So we are not, you 

know, giving away more than we can afford to, if you will, although 

I think we’ve been very creative at finding ways to be able to give 

them as much as we possibly can without going too low in our own 

stockpiles. 

But we have a lot of work to do, I would say, Senator, in regenerating our industrial base and that’s why we’re investing $1.5 billion in this budget to invest in our own organic industrial base. 

You know, we’ve made, I think, very good use of the resources Congress has given us through the supplementals to get that on contract quickly and get our partners in industry, like Lockheed-Martin and Raytheon, to increase their production, and I think we are 

rebuilding that capacity now and that will, I think, serve us quite 

well in the future. 

Senator CAPITO. Good, good. In West Virginia, we have some 

good resources that can help with that. 

Let me switch gears and talk about recruitment. I understand 

that in August you stood up a pilot program, the Future Soldier 

Prep Course, to help those individuals, in other words, improve up 

to the standards rather than lower your standards. 

So, General, how is that working? Are you getting a lot of uptake 

on it? Is it making improvements? I know you’re having recruiting 

issues. How do you see that program? 

General MCCONVILLE. Yes. I think it’s transformational, Senator. 

You know, I think the one thing the Secretary and I’ve done is 

made a blood oath. We’re not going to lower standards and I think 

this is really important. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. 

General MCCONVILLE. So we’re going to invest in young men and 

women and as we talked, recruiters, they said they were having 

challenges passing what we call our Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Battery Test, which is like an SAT for the military and also 

having challenges meeting the physical requirements because of 

body weight. 

So we’ve stood up the program and with that a little over 8,000 

actually go through the program right now. We’ve seen a 95 percent success rate. I think there’s something there. I think it’s the 

future and it’s amazing. Not only are they meeting the standards, 

in many cases they’re exceeding and they’re going on to do really 

good things in the Army. 

So I think this is something we really need to take a hard look 

at and is a potential for expansion. 
171 

Senator CAPITO. So when you’re looking at, say, a high school 

graduating class that’s interested in pursuing the Army as a next 

step, how does somebody find that? I mean, do you have to be in 

a recruiting program to be able to access that? Is it generally accessible? 

General MCCONVILLE. Well, the best way—it’s very accessible, 

you know. You can go on the Internet and contact a recruiter. You 

can go to a local recruiting station and then what happens, you 

start taking the tests and if you’re having challenges, we can help 

you get into the program. 

Senator CAPITO. So the best way to access that is through a recruiter, an actual recruiter? 

General MCCONVILLE. Sure. On the Internet or through a recruiter. 

Senator CAPITO. Yes. Okay. A couple weeks ago, hundreds of soldiers for the 101st Airborne and the 82nd Airborne came to Rural 

West Virginia for a unique training experience. They were able to 

get their hands on developmental technology, use it in a realistic 

training environment and provide real feedback that will impact 

the final product. 

I don’t know if you’re aware of that training exercise and if you’d 

have any comment on what that looks like in the future. 

General MCCONVILLE. Well, you know, firstly, I’m a little privy 

to 101st Airborne. It has a special place in my heart. But having 

units go out in places like West Virginia and work with people is 

really important for the work they’re doing but also for the exposure. 

One of the things that we need to work on is making sure that 

people get exposed to our soldiers so they know what the military 

is about and that type of training. 

Senator CAPITO. I think one of the values in this particular exercise is for the soldiers to get ahold of some of the newer technology 

or the breaking technology so that it’s not stuck in this developmental phase and you can actually see what’s in a simulated real 

situation, see what’s going to work and what isn’t so we can get 

them into the actual production phase. 

Thank you very much. 

General MCCONVILLE. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator TESTER [presiding]. Senator Boozman. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Chairman Tester, very, very much 

for having this important hearing, and it’s good to be with you all. 

We appreciate all of your hard work. 

I understand, General, that you’re retiring and we appreciate 

you, appreciate your service. You’ve had more than an outstanding 

career and we also appreciate your family. These are certainly family affairs and the sacrifices that they’ve made through the years. 

It’s always good to talk about the budget, talking about the fiscal 

year 2024 budget, trying to figure out what your priorities are, and 

then again how we can help you, Madam Secretary and General, 

as you work through this. 

General, you’ve been focused on maintaining readiness and modernizing the Army to ensure it has the tools needed in future conflict in the Pacific. After recently visiting with Army leaders in the 

Pacific and visiting with Army personnel in Singapore, I learned 
172 

the importance the Army plays in supporting the Joint Force in the 

Pacific. 

Can you highlight the importance of the Army’s future role in a 

Joint Fight in the Pacific? 

General MCCONVILLE. Yes, Senator. I think the Army has a critical role in the Indo-Pacific along with our joint partners. Some of 

the things that we do, the long-range precision fires, air and missile defense, contested logistics, and then certainly providing 

ground troops and, more importantly, working with our allies and 

partners on the ground to increase their capabilities, capacities, 

and competence so they can defend their countries. That is very, 

very important and where the American soldier goes it really reassures those armies that we deal with and they have the confidence 

to fight. So I think it’s very, very important. 

Senator BOOZMAN. What in the budget specifically supports the 

Army’s role in Joint Force and where does it assume risk regarding 

the Indo-Pacific? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I’m happy to speak to that a little 

bit. We are making a lot of investments in this year’s budget aimed 

at the Indo-Pacific. 

So, for example, the Chief talked about contested logistics. We have over $850 million in this year’s budget for Army pre-positioned equipment. Also, for contested logistics, we are investing in 

new composite watercraft that will allow us to take supplies and 

move it around, you know, that very large theater, and then, of 

course, in terms of our RDT&E Programs, we are investing in the 

long-range precision fighter support portfolios, so things like the 

precision strike missile, the mid-range capability, the long-range 

hypersonic weapon. We are investing over $550 million in integrated air and missile 

defense programs, things like Patriot, the indirect fighter protection capability which will be able to intercept advanced cruise missiles, and then we’re also looking at deep sensing capabilities, 

things like HADES (High Accuracy Detection and Exploitation System), which is our airborne ISR, (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) sensing and then the Titan network and so that’s another about $300 million for deep sensing in that theater. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. I want to touch on something I 

think Senator Moran touched on earlier, but the Army’s fiscal year 

2024 budget request is a $185.5 billion short of the 2018 National 

Defense Strategy’s recommendation of three to 5 percent real 

growth. When adjusted for inflation, the Army’s fiscal year 2024 

budget is actually a rate of negative 2 percent growth over fiscal 

year 2023. 

Madam Secretary, moving forward, how can we help you? Can 

the Army afford to continue its 2030 modernization strategy without increased top lines or reducing force structure? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I feel that our budget of a $185 

billion, as I said in my opening statement, allows us to do our part 

in the National Defense Strategy. It allows us to keep our momentum on modernization, keep investing in readiness, and to take 

care of our people. 

I think the challenge for us is going to be as we look to the out 

years, frankly. You know, the Future Vertical Lift Programs, for 
173 

example, are very, very expensive. You know, the Optionally 

Manned Fighting Vehicle Program is very expensive, and as we 

look at, you know, trying to—as those become programs of record 

and the Army needs to start fielding them at scale, that is going 

to get very expensive and so where I worry under the current budget is how are we going to manage all of this in the out years and 

still take care of our people. 

We have a lot of infrastructure bills, frankly, not just associated 

with our housing for soldiers and families but also power projection. If Senator Schatz were here, he knows all about the infrastructure situation in Hawaii. 

So it’s looking more to 2030 and beyond where I think it gets 

challenging. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. I will turn it over to Senator Moran for his 

close. 

Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you. 

I’ll submit for the record this question to both the General and the Secretary. The unfunded priorities list includes $530 million to 

bring the total procurement of Abrams Tanks to a full brigade 

level. 

I’d like to hear why that’s not included or why it’s important and 

see if we can be of assistance in that regard. 

And then so much of what we’ve talked about and so much of the 

capabilities of the Army is dependent upon this issue of recruitment. It strikes me as at least interesting and maybe there’s a good 

explanation why is recruitment so difficult when retention is so favorable. 

One would think that those who are serving, who are making the 

decisions to re-enlist have encountered a good experience but it’s 

not translating into people who have not yet served. 

Is there some analysis or a way to take advantage of the circumstance in which people are reupping to get people to up for the 

first time? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Senator, I would say that’s part of what our 

Soldier Referral Program is aimed at is you’re right. We’ve got really good retention, historically good retention. So people who are in 

the Army, you know, many of them are having good experiences. 

So we’re asking our soldiers then to turn around and take that 

good news story to their communities and then if they’re able to, 

you know, bring forward people who sign up and go to basic, they 

get points towards promotion. 

So, you know, I think some of it is again about re-introducing the 

Army to the American public and really, you know, addressing legitimate concerns that parents have sometimes about what kind of 

housing their kid is going to be in or concerns about sexual harassment. I think there’s some misperceptions sometimes about the 

Army, that it’s somehow slowing people down, when in fact I would 

argue it can accelerate kids towards college degrees, but we need 

to do a better job of telling our story and we’d welcome your help 

with that. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you. Thank you both. 

General McConville, thank you for your service to the country. 
174 

Senator TESTER. I’ve got to ask a real quick question, too. This 

is on modernization programs and the transition. 

The Army is going to invest in six modernization portfolios to 

build the Army of 2030. This requires sufficient funding for research, technology, maturation, prototype development, and experimentation of advanced military systems to meet future operational 

force requirements. However, the Army also is slashing enduring 

programs and hot production lines while undergoing this modernization. The impact on the defense industrial base and suppliers 

and workforce is significant and I would tell you after all we’ve 

heard in this committee about our industrial base and predictability, it is somewhat contrary to that and that’s being kind. 

So what are you hearing from the defense—this is for you, Secretary Wormuth. What are you hearing from the defense industrial 

base and our critical suppliers in response to repeated proposals to 

terminate hot production lines of enduring programs? 

I don’t mean that to be a pointed question. I mean that to be a 

question that I’m very concerned about our supply chains, very concerned, and I think one of the questions we’ve tried to do on this 

committee and all branches of the military and the defense budget 

overall is to make sure there is predictability in purchasing. 

That being said, there are antiquated programs that need to go 

away and that’s perfectly acceptable and good business, but the 

question is, is I don’t want this to impact critical supply chain 

bases. So tell me what you’re doing. 

Secretary WORMUTH. Certainly, Chairman. First of all, it’s very 

much in the Army’s interests to have a robust and healthy defense 

industrial base. 

Senator TESTER. Agreed. 

Secretary WORMUTH. So we share that. With finite resources, we 

are constantly, the Chief and I, having to strike a balance between 

putting resources towards the new systems that we’re developing 

in those six modernization portfolios that you mentioned but also 

trying to maintain our enduring programs, things like Abrams, 

things like PIM (Paladin Integrated Management), things like 

Striker, for example, and we, in making those choices and in setting that balance, do weigh the health of our industrial base. 

So my view is we’ve tried carefully to not make any decisions 

that severely damage our industrial base and we are also—you 

know, the supply chain, that goes well beyond obviously the Army’s 

organic industrial base and what we’re trying to do there is work 

with our partners in industry, the big primes, to help them rebuild 

their supply chains. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen for one question. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I’m sorry I didn’t realize things were going to move so fast, but 

I wanted—because so much of the hearing has focused on recruitment and the challenges with recruitment, I wanted to raise a 

question that was presented to me last week. I had a chance to 

meet with members, former members of the Afghan female tactical 

platoon who are here and as you know, there are a number of Afghan former servicemembers who worked with us during that conflict. 
175 

I was interested to hear them say they would very much like the 

opportunity to continue to serve the United States. So as you think 

about recruitment challenges, are there ways in which we can enable people like these women who have honorable service who want 

to continue to support this country to serve? 

Secretary WORMUTH. Yes, Senator. I actually met with those 

women, as well. They were incredibly inspiring and a number of 

them, when asked, held up their hand and said they’d like to join 

the United States Army. 

We are looking—we do have pathways for folks who do not have 

U.S. citizenship to join the Army. You know, we have green card 

holder pathways, lawful permanent residents. My understanding is 

that the current immigration status that those women have, you 

know, may not be high enough, if you will, to allow them to join 

the Army at this time, but I offered, for example, to write a letter 

to Secretary Mayorkas at DHS (Department of Homeland Security) 

to try to help with their political asylum proceedings, but if they’re 

able to, you know, be granted asylum, for example, assuming they 

meet our requirements and I think they will, these women are very 

skilled, if anything, the biggest issue for them will be the language 

requirement, but we are ready and able to receive them as soon as 

they’re able to come through the process. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would urge the committee to think about what we can do to help advance that because 

we have a number of committed people who want to serve this 

country and we should give them the opportunity. 

Senator TESTER. I appreciate you bringing up that point, Senator, and I think it’s certainly worth considering and finding out 

how we can add to making the Army all it can be or all it wants 

to be or all it will be or all it is. Okay. 

General McConville, I, too, want to add my voice to the folks saying thank you for your service. Thank you for what you’ve done. 

Thank you for being very professional in front of this committee. 

I might add I think your testimony took about 3 minutes. We like 

that. Get to the point. 

I would also say that you may not be able to retire this summer. 

There is a hold on all flag officers right now, you know. So your 

placement is not confirmed and may not be confirmed unless we 

get a level of common sense around here to allow you to be able 

to go to Montana and retire like I’m sure you’re going to do. 

But we do appreciate what you’ve done and what you’ll continue 

to do even in retirement. 

We appreciate both of your testimonies. Secretary, thank you. 

General, thank you. 

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may submit additional written questions and we would 

ask that you respond to those questions as soon as possible within 

a reasonable time. 

[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were 

submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hearing:] 
176 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO CHRISTINE WORMUTH

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons so that our 

weapons magazines are loaded up for future contingencies. 

In this year’s budget, the Department is proposing to lock-in procurement quantities for 9 different weapons programs over the next 3–5 years to provide a predictable demand signal to industry. 

This proposal includes two Army programs: the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket 

System, and Patriot missiles. 

However, it is not yet clear what the private sector will invest in return for this 

predictability from the Government, nor is it clear that industry can actually ramp 

up and build the weapons at a rate that Army desires. 

Secretary Wormuth, what industry investments are you expecting in return for 

this multi-year predictability? Have you directly engaged with the defense industrial 

base to ensure they can get you what you need when you need it? 

Answer. The Army is confident industry can meet the demands of both the Guided 

Multiple Launch Rocket System and PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3 multiyear 

contracts if they are approved by Congress. Prior to requesting them, the Army did 

extensive reviews of both programs to ensure the targets required under the proposed contracts are achievable. 

With regards to industry investments, Army acquisition leaders have been in discussions with the related companies concerning their intended investments related 

to the proposed multiyear contracts. However, the information about industry investments is proprietary in nature. The Army can provide information in a separate 

briefing to you facilitated by the committee. 

Question. For several years, this Subcommittee has criticized the Department for 

not having a robust plan to defend Guam against high-end air defense threats. So 

I am pleased that this year’s budget includes a total of $1.5 billion to accelerate this 

capability. 

However, we need people and infrastructure to get this done right, and these efforts need to be coordinated across all the military services and with the Missile Defense Agency. 

Secretary Wormuth, the Army has a growing presence on Guam, but our understanding is that you have not yet signed a Memorandum of Agreement with your 

sister services regarding the use of resources. Why are the obstacles here? 

Answer. The Army is developing elements to incorporate into the Joint Memorandum of Agreement (JMOA) with sister services for support of Guam. The process 

to develop, review, and evaluate the JMOA will involve stakeholders throughout 

DoD and could take several months to finalize. The JMOA lists how 44 distinct 

services will be delivered. Army support requirements for people, facilities, and sites 

where Army assets will reside are among the elements the Army is assessing. As 

part of this process, the Army will carefully assess the personnel requirements and 

phasing timeline for arrival of units in Guam. The requirements assessment will be 

informed by whether tours will be accompanied or not. If tours are accompanied, 

myriad support facilities will be required, such as schools, child development centers, healthcare facilities, family housing, etc. Existing support facilities are undersized for the current population, so even if tours are unaccompanied, support facilities will need to be expanded. Finally, Joint Region Marianas anticipates it will take 

10 months to a year before the Secretary of the Navy conveys permanent basing/ 

stationing decisions. 

Question. When Congress provided authorities and funding for rapid prototyping, 

the intent was to rapidly develop, try out, and field initial capabilities that would 

inform future requirements before committing to large-scale programs. 

We have supported this approach in the past in order to accelerate fielding decisions, and will continue supporting funding for prototypes where it makes sense, so 

we can see what works and want doesn’t. 

However, it appears the Army now wants to just continue buying prototypes well 

after initial prototypes have been fielded instead making substantial acquisition 

commitments. 

This is concerning: it circumvents the spirit of the law; fails to field capabilities 

at scale; and does not provide a predictable and stable path for industry with respect to the Army’s needs. 

Secretary Wormuth, what steps are you taking to comply with the law, which prohibits funding excess prototype quantities that aren’t specifically needed? 

Answer. Middle Tier of Acquisition (MTA) Rapid Prototyping (RP) programs are 

required to create test strategies or plans that clearly identify the number of devel-
177 

opmental items needed to support developmental testing or operational assessments 

and must seek written approval to purchase quantities that exceed those needed. 

This direction will be formally documented in the upcoming update to the Army’s 

MTA policy. The Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) personally approves any effort 

seeking entry into MTA RP. This authority is not delegated below the AAE. Quantities required to fulfill the MTA RP are included as part of the program initiation 

decisions. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN

Tactical Wheeled Vehicles and the Defense Industrial Base 

Question. Wisconsin is home to Oshkosh Defense, a company that is a global leader in the design, production, and sustainment of military vehicles. In particular, 

Oshkosh specializes in manufacturing the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), the 

Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV), and the Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles (FHTV). 

Army recently awarded the JTLV contract to AM General, after years of procuring 

that vehicle from Oshkosh. 

Additionally, year after year the budget request includes procurement amounts for 

the FMTV and FHTV that are well below the minimum sustaining rate necessary 

to keep the production line running and skilled workers in place. 

What is the Army’s plan for managing the health of the defense industrial base 

for tactical wheeled vehicles? 

Answer. A healthy and competitive tactical wheeled vehicle industrial base is key 

to controlling costs, enhancing innovation, and improving quality. The Army exercises frequent and deliberate engagements with industry to identify and address 

risks and issues that affect the industrial base with a focus on, minimum sustaining 

rates, potential production breaks, and supply chain impacts. The Army is balancing 

Tactical Wheeled Vehicle modernization by prioritizing Light Tactical Vehicles investments, by maintaining warm Heavy and Medium Tactical Vehicles production 

bases, and by increasing competition across the industrial base for programs such 

as the Common Tactical Truck (CTT) and electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle 

(eLRV). 

Question. I am concerned that when work for tactical wheeled vehicles is divided 

between two manufacturers, the budget request will not provide enough work for 

both companies to sustain their workforce and supplier networks. As such, how does 

Army plan to sustain the workforce and supplier networks? 

Answer. The Army continues to assess the health of the industrial base to understand its ability to support military demands. In the case of the Joint Light Tactical 

Vehicle (JLTV), the Army planned for a multi-year transition phase. As the Army 

ramps-down the JLTVA1 production with Oshkosh through Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, 

the Army will ramp-up production of the JLTVA2 with AM General. The Army 

plans to award split procurements in FY 2023 and FY 2024 between Oshkosh and 

AM General and in FY 2025, all JLTV procurements are scheduled to be through 

AM General. 

Additionally, Oshkosh will continue to produce Heavy and Medium Tactical Vehicles and AM General will continue to produce High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled 

Vehicles. 

Tactical Wheeled Vehicles and the future of logistics 

Question. Tactical wheeled vehicle modernization programs—like FHTV, FMTV, 

and JLTV—with the latest advancements in payload, safety, and mobility are essential to supplying combat vehicles with fuel, ammo, and spare parts to take and control ground. In other words, tactical wheeled vehicles are a critical backbone of the 

logistics needed to sustain and win a fight. 

Would you agree with this statement? 

Answer. As the Army looks toward the future, multi-modal distribution is essential as is reduction in supply requirements within the tactical force. No single domain of transport will meet the distribution requirements of the Joint Force. Another key to this problem is human-machine integration that may allow for reduced 

manning in multi-modal transport systems providing reduced risk and higher efficiency to meet the Army and Joint Force supply requirements. 

Question. With the Army developing a new Cross Functional Team focused on 

Contested Logistics, will Tactical Wheeled Vehicles be a focus area of the CFT? 

Answer. The Contested Logistics (CL) Cross Functional Team (CFT) is still finalizing an approved portfolio. AFC will assign three to five modernization efforts to 

the CL CFT, focused on tactical level logistics. Multi-capable or multi-modal dis-
178 

tribution platforms, which includes tactical wheeled vehicles, is one area that is 

being considered as an area of focus for the CL CFT. 

Question. Will future Army budgets start to reflect Tactical Wheeled Vehicles’ role 

as critical and primary enabling warfighting capabilities? 

Answer. The Army is updating the Tactical Wheeled Vehicle (TWV) strategy with expected completion next year. In FY 2024, the Army is investing $1.31B in the 

TWV fleet including FMTV, FHTV, JLTV, High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV), Palletized Load System (PLS), and the development of the Common Tactical Truck. The Army will continue to invest in a mix of vehicles within 

the TWV fleet in future budget submissions as we build the Army of 2030 and design the Army of 2040. 

Future Army budgets will continue to take a fiscally responsible approach to procurement that minimizes risk while providing balanced modernization to our units. 

The Army recognizes the challenges of a contested logistics environment, and the 

Army addresses that challenge in the FY 2024 budget submission by continuing investment in Army watercraft, modernized fuel and water storage and distribution 

systems, and enhancing our aerial delivery capabilities. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM

Question. The Scales Child Development Center (CDC) at Fort Jackson is the installation’s largest CDC and supports 313 children ranging from 0 to 5 years of age. 

This 34-year old facility is in poor condition and experiences frequent failures of the 

air conditioning and sewer systems. These failures result in extreme heat and sewage backup within the building. Additionally, the facility has multiple line of sight 

issues that make it challenging for staff to properly supervise the children. Given 

this: 

Can you provide an update regarding the Army’s plans to replace this structure? 

Answer. There is a 338-child capacity replacement Child Development Center 

(CDC) for Fort Jackson in the FY 2024–2028 Future Year Defense Program (FYDP) 

for construction in FY 2025. 

Question. What is the current design percentage of the new structure? 

Answer. The project is at 35% design. 

Question. Will this project be eligible for authorization and funding in FY25? 

Answer. Yes. 

Question. How has inflation impacted the projected cost of the project? 

Answer. The current estimate for the total project cost is now $41M. There has 

been an increase due to inflation and cost escalation. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN

Question. You mentioned a challenge for the Army in the coming years is to reduce structure to better align with manning. You also answered that the Army is 

currently considering options but has yet to make any conclusions on the best path 

forward. 

When should we expect implementation to begin on these changes? You mentioned the Committee can expect a formal briefing within the next few months. 

Please specify a target date. 

Answer. The Army continues to conduct analysis on the transformation to the 

Army of 2030 and will formally brief the committee at the earliest possible opportunity. 

Question. You stated the Army must make force structure changes regardless of 

the end strength deficit to make room for the new structure needed for Army 2030. 

Some of this structure is already established or will be soon. This analysis should 

have included reductions to offset the new structure. 

What changes is the Army considering to establish this new force structure? 

Answer. The Army is moving to a Multi-Domain organizational design, this requires re-orienting from Brigade Combat Team (BCT) centric operations tailored for 

counterinsurgency (COIN) to division centric operations tailored for Large Scale 

Combat Operations (LSCO) against peer/near-peer adversaries operating in a multidomain environment, naturally resulting in smaller, but more mobile, lethal, and 

agile formations to account for the pace of future warfare. Additionally, the Army 

seeks to grow capabilities that enable it to see and sense farther, mass highly lethal 

forces, win the first fight, protect the force, communicate, and sustain the fight in 

LSCO. 

Question. Are any decisions final on force structure changes to manage the additions of new units? 
179 

Answer. The Army is still developing the plan for how these changes will be implemented by looking carefully at our operational requirements as well as military 

and community value analysis. Certain force structure changes will be needed to 

shed capabilities no longer needed for large scale combat operations and to make 

room for new capabilities, while other reductions due to decreasing end strength 

could be avoided if recruiting improves. 

Question. Please provide a complete assessment of specific units and MOSs impacted by reductions if the end strength deficit is unresolved. 

Answer. The Army must transform its force structure to make room for new capabilities relevant to current and future threats. The Army is in the process of determining how and where to make these changes. To make room for the new capabilities and shed over-structure at the same time, the Army will thin out various Military Occupational Specialties, reduce numbers of lower priority unit types, and divest some structure optimized for COIN and counter-terrorism missions. This will 

ensure Army units are modernized and sufficiently manned so they are ready to 

fight. 

Question. To spread out these changes, you highlighted the Army’s ‘‘people night 

court’’ and evaluation of ‘‘unit priority.’’ 

What were the findings of this night court? 

Answer. These sessions sought to adapt branches and functional areas to support 

Army 2030 based on the National Defense Strategy and Defense Planning Guidance. 

This included creating new capabilities in some branches, while reducing or reallocating capabilities in other branches. These sessions were a component of how the 

Army is transforming from a COIN fight to support LSCO and the Army continues 

to conduct analysis on the transformation to the Army of 2030. The Army looks forward to briefing Congress on force structure changes later this summer. 

Question. What were MOSs identified by the Army as ones who could handle reduced structure? 

Answer. The Army continues to conduct analysis on the Transformation to the 

Army of 2030 and will brief the committee at the earliest possible opportunity. 

Question. When evaluating ‘‘unit priority,’’ which units were identified as lowusage units whose force structure could handle reductions? 

Answer. The Army utilized an extensive modeling process to determine the most 

highly used and needed units relative to total Army inventory in Large Scale Combat Operations examining 8 years of recent deployment data. However, this is a 

component of the Army’s Transformation to Army 2030 and the Army is still developing the plan for how these changes will be implemented. It is too early to make 

commitments on changes. The Army looks forward to briefing Congress on force 

structure changes later this summer. 

Question. Please provide a complete list of assessed units and the Army’s recent 

and projected usage determination. 

Answer. This is a component of the Army’s Transformation to 2030 and the Army 

is still developing the plan for how these changes will implemented. The Army looks 

forward to briefing Congress on force structure changes later this summer. 

Question. It has been several years since the Army signed a new ARSTRUC. 

Why has the Army not signed an Army structure document in recent years? 

Answer. The Army signed Army Structure Memorandum 2024–2028 on 12 January 2022. The Army is currently conducting analysis for Army Structure Memorandum 2025–2029. 

Question. Force structure reductions will impact the quantity and types of equipment procured each year. As was mentioned at the hearing, the Army is managing 

the transition to Army 2030 amidst a flat budget—the Army must effectively 

prioritize the acquisition and fielding of equipment based on the future structure 

of the service. 

Is a reduced force structure a consideration when scheduling modernization priorities and Army procurement? 

Answer. The Army must transform its force structure to make room for new capabilities relevant to current and future threats. Guided by the National Defense 

Strategy, the Army is in the process of determining how and where to make these 

changes. Once analysis is complete, the Army will assess impacts to modernization 

priorities and Army procurement. 

Question. Are these assumptions already built into Army MTOEs? 

Answer. The Army is still developing the plan to transform to Army 2030. Once 

finalized, those decisions will be built into an Army MTOE. 

Question. Can the industrial base adapt to a potentially lower Army demand 

quantity? 

Answer. The industrial base has the flexibility to accommodate the demand profile 

based on the level of funding. Communicating with the organic and commercial 
180 

partners early and often is critical to managing the industrial base to ensure balance between requirements and capacity. 

Question. The Army communicated to our office last June there is no operational 

need for a Multi-Domain Task Force to support a Division HQ. 

Has this changed? 

Answer. The Army does not have an operational need for MDTFs to support Army 

Divisions. The Army 2030 concept does make the Division the tactical unit of action 

and through our annual Total Army Analysis process we are reviewing options that 

build multi-domain capabilities to enable the division to fight and win in Army 

2030. 

However, over the past 12 months, the Army’s considerations for MDTF locations 

have evolved to allow for options to make efficient use of CONUS facilities while 

providing combatant commanders flexibility to employ all or part of MDTFs from 

CONUS locations. 

Question. What criteria is the Army considering for each of the remaining MDTF 

pending basing decisions? 

Answer. MDTF stationing is a decision reserved for the Secretary of the Army. 

The Headquarters Department of the Army HQDA develops options to station our 

limited resources based on operational requirements found in the National Defense 

Strategy (NDS) and the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG). The Army Staff is currently assessing those requirements in our annual Total Army Analysis (TAA) that 

will be approved by the Secretary of the Army. 

The Army makes stationing decisions for new formations under Army Regulation 

5–10. The Army’s primary consideration for stationing is operational need informed 

by guidance from the NDS and DPG. The Army assesses installations that satisfy 

operational needs using Military Value Analysis (MVA) and Community Support 

Value Analysis (CSVA). Lastly, no decision is final until the Army completes assessments in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. 

The following is a summary of the MVA attributes the Army considers for stationing. 

a. Training 

(1) Total Maneuver Land: total acres of maneuver land. 

(2) Accessible Maneuver Land: the amount of usable maneuver land with a 

factor applied for soil resiliency 

(3) Training Facilities: ranges, battle command centers, and training support 

centers 

(4) Airspace: area of largest single restricted airspace and total of all restricted airspaces 

(5) Dudded Impact Area: size and number of impact areas 

b. Power Projection 

(1) Surface Deployment Infrastructure: rail loading and classification tracks, 

rail marshaling area, truck loading ramps, unit cargo stationing, and truck 

loading area 

(2) Air Deployment Infrastructure: Aerial Port of Embarkation (APOE) runway length, Max Aircraft on Ground, and hot cargo pads 

(3) Deployment Support Infrastructure: container transfer pad, inspection 

lanes, vehicle scales, and inspection staging area 

c. Well Being 

(1) Access to Medical Care: assessment of the Medical Treatment Facility 

based on bed capability, out-of-area capability, case mix index, market share, 

and supported population. 

(2) Soldier and Family Support Facilities: Army Community Service, Child 

Development Service, Fitness Center, Chapels, Youth Service. 

(3) Family Housing: number of houses and the quality of those houses based 

on age and recent renovations 

(4) Brigade Complex: quantity, quality, and functional assessment of facilities 

for a brigade headquarters 

d. Expansibility 

(1) Developable Area: total of all the buildable acreage on the installation not 

counting training land. 

(2) Population Impact: density of people in a 10-mile zone outside the installation, plus a growth factor. 

(3) Connectivity: long haul network, computing capacity, and critical infrastructure. 

The following is a summary of the CSVA attributes the Army considers for stationing. 
181 

e. Professional License: This attribute assesses spouse license reciprocity using a 

weighted sum of three metrics: state policy, implementation, and interstate compacts. 

f. Housing: This attribute assesses the private sector shortfall, which gives the 

number of families likely to be unable to find suitable off-post housing. 

g. Schools: This attribute incorporates data from public sources that assess 

schools at more local levels using a weighted sum of high school graduation rates, 

3rd–8th grade learning rate (the change in test scores among a cohort of students 

from 3rd grade through 8th grade), and student to teacher ratios. 

h. Medical: A measure, for each of a list of weighted specialties, of the percent 

of patients seen in under 28 days. 

i. Intergovernmental Support Agreements (IGSAs): This attribute considers efficiencies in Joint Basing through the number Common Levels of Support (CLS) services at an installation under an IGSA. 

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

Question. The Army’s unfunded priority list includes a number of cost-to-complete 

projects. These projects have already been authorized and appropriated for, but additional funding is needed in order to account for inflation, which has increased the 

cost of materials, and supply chain disruptions. Many of these projects are Army 

National Guard readiness centers, which play an integral role in ensuring the joint 

readiness of the Total Force. 

Why didn’t the Department prioritize these projects in its fiscal year 2024 budget 

request? 

Answer. These cost increases emerged too late in the budget submission process. 

To the extent possible, the Army will program future existing project funding shortfalls in its base budget. Waiting for the next budget cycle to program these projects 

would delay the construction of the critical infrastructure, as well as cause further 

cost increases. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN

Question. I anticipate the demand for munitions to remain high due to the war 

in Ukraine having no end in sight. Manufacturers in places like Camden, AR, are 

rapidly expanding and increasing their capabilities to meet demand. I saw in this 

year’s budget it substantially expands investments in critical munitions through 

taking advantage of multi-year procurement authorities. 

What concerns you most about the industrial bases capacity to meet increased demands for production? 

Answer. A significant concern the Army has is that historically the Department 

of Defense (DoD)’s policy has been to operate effectively and efficiently and utilize 

competition to drive cost-effective solutions which necessitated lean manufacturing 

and lean capacities. Now, the Army is pivoting to rapidly expand capacities at orders of magnitude not seen in decades. This rapid expansion requires acquiring 

unique manufacturing equipment that can have long lead times of up to one to 2 

years and the manufacturing locations are sometimes in remote locations that 

present significant workforce hiring challenges to meet the second and third shifts 

necessary to meet maximum production quantities. 

In the area of artillery, a very large consumption item in Ukraine, the required 

volume of projectiles, propellants, explosives and the Load, Assemble and Pack 

(LAP) function are of concern. With the assistance of Congress, the resourcing being 

provided is enabling us to ramp up production as quickly as possible; however, required quantities of propellants and explosives are commodities to which the Army 

still needs to pay close attention. Global capacity for propelling charges and their 

associated supply chains have been taxed given the Ukraine demand signal and associated Army replenishment efforts. To that end, Multi-Year Procurement authority is being implemented in Fiscal Year 2023 that will help provide the Modular Artillery Charge System (MACS) LAP and MACS Metal Containers contracts with predictable and stable requirements. 

Question. What measures does the Army propose to expand the supply and industrial base to support increased production of critical munitions? 

Answer. The Army has three key lines of effort to increase production and deliveries of critical 155mm munitions. They are: (1) modernize the Organic Industrial 

Base; (2) expand and accelerate the commercial industrial base production capacity; 

and (3) leverage our foreign partners’ capabilities and manufacturing capacities. 
182 

Also included in these lines of efforts is the on-shoring of select critical precursor 

energetic material that is currently only obtained through foreign sources. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO

Question. What is the Army’s plan to field hard-kill active protection systems 

(APS)? 

Answer. The Army has fielded four Brigade Combat Team (BCT) sets of Trophy 

hard kill Active Protection Systems (APS) (Israeli, Rafael Systems) for Abrams platforms. The Army is also continuing with the platform integration and testing of the 

Iron Fist Light Decoupled (IF-LD) hard kill system (Israeli, Elbit Systems) for Bradley to support fielding one BCT set and are completing characterization of two other 

hard-kill APS solutions (Trophy MV, Rafael-ISR; and Strikeshield, Rheinmetall(GE)/ 

UBT (US, Michigan)) on test rigs to determine suitability for future ground combat 

vehicles. Further development of advanced active protection is continuing in the 

Science & Technology arena under the Combat Capabilities Development Command, 

which is the appropriate place for development, given the maturity levels of the 

technologies involved. 

Question. Did the Army hold a competition for Abrams and Bradley APS capabilities, or was this a sole source award? If sole source, what was the rationale? 

Answer. In 2016, a Department of Army memorandum provided a directed requirement to procure, and rapidly field Non-Developmental APS. To execute this, 

the Army leveraged existing competitive Science and Technology Other Transaction 

Authority APS proposals that had already been competed and selected under the 

National Advanced Mobility Consortium to begin characterization work of three systems for Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker. Additionally, a market survey was posted 

on FedBizOpps in 2017 to determine if other sources capable of satisfying an APS 

requirement on the Abrams and Bradley existed. Platform integration of the systems was subsequently performed either by government integration, or by the platform’s Original Equipment Manufacturer on a sole source basis where insufficient 

technical data was available for competitive integration. The only system to enter 

production, Trophy, was awarded via a sole source contract to DRS SSI (St Louis, 

MO) based upon the sole responsible source exemption to the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (6.302–1). 

Question. Has the Army only proceeded with testing of foreign-made hard-kill 

APS solutions? If so, has this potential reliance on foreign sources raised concerns? 

Answer. No, the Army has performed testing of numerous U.S. and foreign (industry and government) developed systems. Recent interim efforts associated with the 

Expedited Active Protection Systems (ExAPS) effort were informed by an extensive 

Office of the Secretary of Defense live fire evaluation of all available systems foreign 

(Trophy, Iron Fist) and domestic (Iron Curtain) that concluded in 2012. Subsequent 

development of hard-kill active protection systems under the Combat Capabilities 

Development Command’s Ground Vehicle System Center is using U.S. sources 

where available. 

Question. Is the Army open to further testing of a U.S. industry-developed hardkill APS capability? 

Answer. The Army has completed its assessment of available mature off-the-shelf 

active protection systems for Abrams and Bradley, having qualified installations for 

two systems and procured one (Trophy). The Army has yet to identify a system that 

is both suitable and mature enough to support Stryker. Continued development of 

advanced active protection is continuing in the Science & Technology arena under 

the Combat Capabilities Development Command. The Army is interested in industry solutions and test results; however, it is not currently resourced to test and 

verify every industry-claimed APS capability. 

Question. Has observing the war in Ukraine raised any concerns about the vulnerability of U.S. armor to top attacks? 

Answer. The Army Vehicle Protection community regularly collaborates with the 

Intelligence community to understand the threats observed in the Ukraine War (and 

elsewhere). Ongoing efforts exist within the development and acquisition communities to address a wide variety of top attack threats and those efforts continued 

to be informed by current world events. 

Question. Does the Army plan to halt testing and development of hard-kill APS 

with industry partners in favor of a government-developed solution? 

Answer. The Army remains committed to the development and testing of a HardKill APS system, run by Combat Capabilities Development Command’s Ground Vehicle System Center, in partnership with several companies from across the U.S. industrial base. Additionally, the Government continually evaluates available APS 
183 

technologies based upon their maturity, capability, and ability to support platform 

requirements in the full relevant environment. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL JAMES C. MCCONVILLE

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. For several years, this Subcommittee has criticized the Department for 

not having a robust plan to defend Guam against high-end air defense threats. So 

I am pleased that this year’s budget includes a total of $1.5 billion to accelerate this 

capability. 

However, we need people and infrastructure to get this done right, and these efforts need to be coordinated across all the military services and with the Missile Defense Agency. General McConville, The Army is requesting well over $600 million this year for 

its portion of air defenses for Guam. Has the Army budgeted for the personnel to 

operate these systems as they arrive on the island? How is the Army coordinating 

its efforts with the Missile Defense Agency? How is the Army coordinating its efforts 

with the Missile Defense Agency? 

Answer. Yes, the Army has incorporated the personnel requirements into our 

Total Army Analysis planning and will man and operate the Defense of Guam systems. 

The Army and the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) have been coordinating the Defense of Guam efforts every step of the way since the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. The Army and MDA co-led last year’s Office of the Secretary of Defense, 

Defense of Guam Operational Planning Team that helped formulate Presidential 

Budget 24 and have continued to meet on a regular basis. The MDA participates 

in the biweekly program. 

Executive Office (Missiles and Space) Defense of Guam Integrated Planning Team 

and the weekly U.S. Army Pacific (USARPAC)-led All Things Guam Operational 

Planning Team. The Army Staff and USARPAC Senior Leaders participate in MDAled Senior Executive Review Group and MDA planning charrettes. The Army Staff 

also provides input to MDA’s quarterly report to Congress and its in constant communication at the action officer and Senior Executive level. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JERRY MORAN

Question. The Army’s Unfunded Priorities list accompanying the FY24 budget re- quest includes a compelling argument for adding $530M to bring the total procurement of tanks to the full brigade level while lowering the unit cost of each tank 

greater than $4.3M. 

Please explain why the Army didn’t include such funding in its budget request 

for this enduring platform. 

Answer. The Army made the difficult choice to fund modernization efforts required to face near peer threats on the multi-domain battlefield. The base budget 

request maintains the production line and funds facility improvements at the Lima 

Tank Plant. The request included $800.3M for 34 tanks (a battalion set) and 

$105.8M for industrial base updates to facilitate production for a total of $906.1M 

in procurement and an additional $96.2M in Research Development Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) in FY 2024. The Abrams tanks we currently have in our formations 

(M1A1 SA, M1A2 SEPv2 and M1A2 SEPv3) remain the best in the world. The Unfunded Priorities List provides an option for the government to take advantage of 

the best available price point on Abrams if funding becomes available. 

Question. We understand from the Department that the initial estimates for delivery of M1A2 Abrams tanks to Ukraine were about 1 year, but that will be sooner 

now that they have decided to ship M1A1 Abrams tanks instead. 

Can you confirm whether the specific Abrams tanks have been identified? 

Answer. Yes, the specific Abrams tanks that will eventually be provided to 

Ukraine have been identified. Additional details can be provided in a classified 

briefing. 

Question. Please provide an update on the overall timeline for transfer, including 

where those tanks are and how the movement to Ukraine aligns with the training 

of Ukrainian troops. 

Answer. The Department will begin delivery of the 31 tanks to Ukraine this fall, 

and earlier if possible. The tanks are now in the maintenance and conversion process to the proper combat configuration. The tanks are on schedule and their delivery 

is being synchronized to align with the training of Ukrainian forces. 
184 

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

Question. We want the best individuals to serve in the military and, as you know, 

educational benefits are one of the most effective ways to attract, retain, and develop outstanding Soldiers. Amongst many competing priorities, I applaud the Army 

for making tuition assistance a priority, including for those serving in the Army National Guard and Reserves. 

How important is the Tuition Assistance Program to meeting the Army’s recruiting and retention goals? 

Answer. For many years, the Tuition Assistance (TA) program has consistently 

played a major role in supporting Army’s recruiting and retention missions. In repeated surveys of new recruits, a majority report that education benefits, including 

Tuition Assistance (TA), are ‘‘very’’ to ‘‘extremely’’ influential on their enlistment decision. The Army knows from additional surveys and internal analyses that education benefits are repeatedly cited as a top reason for Soldier reenlistment. A 2021 

study conducted by the Army’s Office of Economic and Manpower Analysis (OEMA) 

found that TA usage is associated with a 9.5% increase in reenlistment among first 

term Soldiers. 

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. This Defense Subcommittee will reconvene next 

Thursday, a week from this Thursday, on May 11, at 11 a.m. for 

a hearing with the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint 

Chiefs of Staff. That will be an interesting hearing. 

Until then, we stand in recess. 

[Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., Tuesday, May 2, the subcommittee 

was recessed, to reconvene at 11 a.m., Thursday, May 11.] 
(185) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 

THURSDAY, MAY 11, 2023 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met at 9 a.m. in room SD–124, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators Tester, Durbin, Murray, Reed, Schatz, Shaheen, Murphy, Collins, Murkowski, Graham, Moran, and Boozman. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III, SECRETARY 

ACCOMPANIED BY HON. MICHAEL J. McCORD, UNDER SECRETARY OF 

DEFENSE (COMPTROLLER)/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. I want to call this hearing to order. 

Good morning. I want to begin by welcoming our witnesses, Secretary Austin and General Milley. We appreciate your willingness 

to be in front of this committee this morning. 

General Milley, this will be your last appearance before this subcommittee. I want to go off script here a little bit. You are the ultimate professional. You are somebody that has been very good for 

me and, I think I can say this for the whole committee, to work 

for with. You’re a straight shooter and you’ve done a hell of a good 

job and I appreciate that and I just hope that the Senate will be 

able to find some common sense to be able to confirm your successor so that the department isn’t forced to rely on an interim 

placeholder for your position because it’s simply too important for 

that. 

This is an unprecedented indefinite hold on military promotions 

that has frozen over 60 nominations and can affect as many as 650 

by the end of the year. 

I will tell you the people on this committee know what the 

threats are in this world, we need to be able to assist the military 

in being successful and this is not assisting the military to be successful. It is plain dangerous. 

We are meeting today to discuss an $842 billion budget request 

for next fiscal year. A few months ago, we passed the overdue 
186 

budget for this fiscal year of $816 billion, which provided a $74 billion increase over fiscal year 2022. 

I bring up fiscal year 2022 because there are some who advocate 

for keeping all government spending at fiscal year 2022 levels. 

In light of China’s continued military aggression, that sounds 

plain irresponsible to me, but a majority in the other chamber proposes that. 

It is my hope that today you can detail for us what such a drastic 

funding reduction would mean to our national defense. 

Of course, all bets are off if we don’t reach a bipartisan agreement on the debt soon. We have yet to deal with the debt in a responsible and a common sense way. I am hopeful that bipartisan 

talks can get going in earnest and that cooler heads will prevail before we come to a default. 

The challenges we face are numerous. We need to solve the debt. 

We need to agree upon a top line for government spending. We 

need to agree on a top line for defense. We need to get qualified 

people into their jobs. 

The risk of a government default is real. The risk of a government shutdown is real. The risk of a long-term CR (Continuing 

Resolution) is real, none which are good, by the way, and while 

we’re busy fighting amongst ourselves, the Chinese continue their 

military buildup and aggressive behavior. The Russians continue 

their unjust war against Ukraine. Iran is continuing its malign influence in the Middle East and violent terrorist organizations plot 

to do us harm. 

We have to get the budget done so that the men and women in 

uniform supported by the tireless civilians at the Department of 

Defense can go about their business of keeping us safe. 

I support the ongoing efforts of Senators Murray and Collins who 

will work with anybody to get the job done. We will get to the specifics of your budget request here shortly, but my main question is 

are our troops getting what they need when they need it? Are we 

keeping up with our military modernization? Is industry spending 

taxpayer dollars wisely and delivering as promised because the 

truth is we can’t afford to waste time and we can’t afford to waste 

money. 

Once again, I want to thank the witnesses for their testimony 

today. Before you make your opening remarks, I would turn it over 

to Senator Collins for her statement. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Chairman Tester, for 

holding this hearing on the fiscal year 2024 budget request for the 

Department of Defense. 

General Milley, let me echo the Chairman’s thanks and praise of 

you as you approach your retirement. Thank you for your more 

than 40 years of service to our country. 

I am, however, not as confident as the Chairman that this is 

your last appearance before our subcommittee. So don’t take any 

hope in that statement. 

The Administration’s 2022 National Defense Strategy rightly 

captures the importance of deterring China. I strongly support that 

objective and know that you both, the Secretary and General 
187 

Milley, have worked hard to develop a strategy-driven request 

within the top line that you were provided. 

I also agree with Chairman Milley’s written testimony that completing appropriations bills on time is a necessary condition to 

credibly deter China. 

I would, however, suggest that it is not a sufficient condition and 

that the President’s budget is inadequate to achieve this goal. 

No matter how talented, innovative, and hard working our 

Armed Forces are, no matter how good their leadership, the military must also have a sufficient budget top line, and I have serious 

doubts that the Administration’s budget request provides all of the 

resources necessary to deter an aggressive China and to deal with 

other global threats. 

For example, the budget request would result in a smaller Navy, 

a fleet of 291 ships. This is five ships fewer than today’s fleet of 

296 ships and further from the Chief of Naval Operations’ requirement which is informed by the INDOPACOM (Indo-Pacific Command) scenarios. 

Moreover, China has the largest Navy in the world and is growing to 400 ships in the next 2 years. The story is very similar for 

the Air Force. 

In the absence of a higher defense budget, this committee will 

have to fill in the gaps to deter China and to maintain readiness. 

Let me highlight a few examples of what from my perspective is 

missing from the budget request. $3.5 billion in INDOPACOM unfunded priorities, $266 million to fund NORTHCOM (Northern 

Command) unfunded priorities to detect airborne targets, such as 

Chinese spy balloons, funding to replenish $1 billion in presidential 

drawdown authority for Taiwan that Congress authorized last year. 

The costs to fully implement what the Administration’s own zero 

trust architecture policy to protect against insider cyber threats, 

the costs for the deployment of 1,500 Active Duty troops sent to the 

Southwest borders just this week, security assistance for Ukraine 

beyond September, and $1.6 billion in under-budget fuel costs according to the Government Accountability Office analysis. That figure is 20 percent more than the budget request. 

I recognize that fuel cost assumptions are driven by the White 

House, but last years’ experience is instructive. If Congress had 

funded the department at the level that was requested last year by 

the Administration, our troops housing, food, healthcare, fuel, and 

readiness would be facing an $8 billion inflation hole. That hole 

does not exist today because Congress insisted upon a higher and 

more realistic funding. 

One final point on Ukraine about which I share the Chairman’s 

commitment. It is critical that the Administration provide Ukraine 

with what it needs in time to defend and take back its sovereign 

territory. We expect the Administration not to wait until the 11th 

hour if the Ukrainians need more before the end of the fiscal year. 

There are many issues for us to discuss today. Again, I thank all 

three of your witnesses for their extraordinary service and I look 

forward to discussing these issues with them. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins, for your statement. 

Secretary Austin, you have the floor. 
188 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. LLOYD J. AUSTIN III

Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, sir. 

Chairman Tester, Vice Chair Collins, and Distinguished Members of the Committee, I’m glad to be here with you to testify in 

support of the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2024. 

I’m joined as always by General Milley, and I remain grateful for 

his leadership and I’m also glad to be joined by the department’s 

Comptroller and CFO (Chief Financial Officer) Mike McCord. 

This is a strategy-driven budget and one driven by the seriousness of our strategic competition with the People’s Republic of 

China. 

At $842 billion, it is 3.2 percent increase over fiscal year 2023- 

enacted and it is 13.4 percent higher than fiscal year 2022-enacted, 

and this budget will help us continue to implement our National 

Defense Strategy and the President’s National Security Strategy. 

Now I have three key priorities at the Pentagon: to defend our 

Nation, to take care of our outstanding people, and to succeed 

through teamwork. 

The PRC (People’s Republic of China) is our pacing challenge and 

we’re driving hard to meet it. Our budget builds on our previous 

investments to deter aggression and we’re investing in a more resilient force posture in the Indo-Pacific and increasing the scale 

and scope of our exercises with our partners. 

This budget includes a 40 percent increase over last year’s request for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and it’s an all-time high 

of $9.1 billion. That will fund a stronger force posture, better defenses for Hawaii and Guam, and deeper cooperation with our allies and partners. 

I look forward to being back next week before the full Senate Appropriations Committee to go into more depth on how we’re working with our interagency partners to continue to outpace the PRC. 

Now this budget also makes the department’s largest-ever investments in both R&D (Research & Development) and procurement. 

We’re requesting more than $61 billion to sustain air dominance. 

That includes funding for fighters and extraordinary B–21 Strategic Bomber that I helped unveil last December. 

We’re also seeking more than $48 billion for sea power, including 

new construction of nine battle force ships, and we’re boosting capacity at America’s shipyards to build the ships that our strategy 

demands. 

We’re investing a total of $1.2 billion in the submarine industrial 

base and we’re buying two Virginia Class attack submarines and 

one Columbia Class ballistic missile submarine. 

On land, we’re investing in air and missile defense and defenses 

to counter unmanned aerial vehicles. We’re also requesting $11 billion to deliver the right mix of long-range fires, including major investments in hypersonics. We’ll also continue to modernize all 

three legs of our Nuclear Triad and bolster our strategic deterrence, and we put forward the largest space budget in Pentagon 

history. We’ve requested $33.3 billion to improve our capabilities 

and our resilience in space. 
189 

Now let me again thank Congress for providing the department 

with multiyear procurement authorities and appropriations for critical munitions. 

In this budget, we’re requesting more multiyear procurement authorities and we’re asking for more than $30 billion to further invest in the industrial base and to buy the maximum number of munitions that American industry can produce. 

This budget also moves us away from aging capabilities that 

aren’t relevant to future conflicts so we can focus on the advances 

that our warfighters will need. 

Now our National Defense Strategy calls out Putin’s highly-aggressive Russia as an acute threat and under President Biden’s 

leadership, the United States has rallied the world to help Ukraine 

fight Russia’s indefensible invasion. 

We reinforced NATO’s (North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s) defense and deterrence on Eastern Flank and our allies and partners 

have provided crucial security assistance, coordinated through the 

Ukraine Defense Contact Group that I lead. 

We will support Ukraine’s defense for as long as it takes and 

meanwhile the department remains vigilant against other persistent threats, including North Korea and Iran, and we will take 

all necessary measures to defend our troops and our interests overseas as seen from our air strikes in March against facilities linked 

to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. 

We’re also investing in over-the-horizon counter-terrorism capabilities. Now I know that you have been following the reports of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and classified U.S. material. 

I take this issue very seriously and I’ve ordered a comprehensive 

review of the department’s security programs, policies, and procedures for safeguarding classified information. I’ve also discussed 

this issue with our allies and partners around the world. I’ve been 

struck by their solidarity and their commitment to reject efforts to 

divide us and we will not let anything fracture our unity. 

Our Joint Force stands ready to meet any challenge. You could 

see the force’s readiness after Russia’s unprovoked invasion of 

Ukraine when we swiftly deployed elements of the 3rd Infantry Division to Poland to show up on NATO’s Eastern Flank. 

We closely monitor radios at the unit level and maintain response forces at our highest states of readiness while the rest of 

the force by design is preparing for future contingencies. 

So this budget will help us maintain our readiness with a $146 

billion in funding for operations, training, and maintenance. This 

budget also invests in improving our readiness and resilience in the 

face of climate change and other 21st Century threats, and we are 

going to remain the strongest military in the world. 

As we mark the 50th Anniversary of our all-volunteer force, I am 

enormously proud of the brave men and women who choose to wear 

the cloth of our Nation. We owe it to them and to their families 

to take the best possible care of our people and over the past 2 

years we’ve made moves easier. We’ve cut commissary prices. 

We’ve made childcare more affordable, and this budget funds other 

key steps to increase the quality of life of our teammates, including 

the largest military and civilian pay raises in decades. 
190 

Now we’re also pushing hard to eliminate suicide in our ranks, 

including immediate steps to hire more mental health professionals 

and improve access to mental healthcare. 

Meanwhile, we’re working toward a military that’s free of sexual 

assault and we work with Congress to improve the response to sexual assault and related crimes under the Uniform Code of Military 

Justice and those reforms will be fully implemented by the end of 

this year. 

And the department is also investing in a specialized workforce 

to combat sexual assault, harassment, suicide, and more. 

Now the department’s third priority is succeeding through teamwork. Our unrivaled network of allies and partners magnifies our 

power and expands our security, and in recent months our friends 

in the Indo-Pacific have taken major steps forward. 

The Philippines has agreed to nearly double the number of sites 

where we cooperate together. Japan committed to double its defense spending and through the historic office partnership, we’ll 

work with our Australian and British allies to build game-changing 

defense advantages that will deter aggression and boost our defense industrial capacity. 

In sum, this is the budget that will meet this moment and I respectfully ask for your support and the single most effective way 

that this committee can support the department and our outstanding troops is with an on-time full year appropriation. 

So I look forward to working with all of you so that we can continue to defend our democracy and support the forces of freedom 

in this hour of challenge. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LLOYD J. AUSTIN III 

Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, distinguished members of the committee: thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of the President’s budget 

request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024. 

On behalf of Deputy Secretary Hicks, the leadership of the Department of Defense, and our Service members, civilian workforce, and their families, let me also 

thank you for your continued support and partnership as we work to defend the 

United States. I also want to thank the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, and the Department’s Comptroller, Mike McCord, who are both 

testifying with me and are vital partners in realizing the Department’s priorities. 

The President’s $842 billion defense budget request for FY 2024 provides us with 

the capabilities and investments to advance our three key priorities: defending the 

nation, taking care of our people, and succeeding through teamwork. 

This is a strategy-driven budget that provides the resources to continue to implement our 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the President’s National Security Strategy. This budget will also enable us to strengthen our deterrent and defensive capabilities across domains, informed by our 2022 Nuclear Posture Review and 

our 2022 Missile Defense Review. 

As President Biden has said, we are in a ‘‘decisive decade,’’ and the choices that 

we make today will set our course for generations to come—not just for the United 

States but for the world. So the Department is rising to meet this moment, seizing 

on opportunities to outpace our competitors, strengthen our security, and move our 

world toward a more secure future. 

As our National Defense Strategy makes clear, the People’s Republic of China 

(PRC) is the Department’s pacing challenge. To meet this challenge, the Department 

is honing new operational concepts, deploying cutting-edge capabilities, and making 

essential investments for the long term. This budget request shows it, including requests for the Department’s largest procurement and R&D budgets ever—$170 billion and $145 billion respectively. And our budget request will also help us meet 
191 

the acute threat from Russia, as Russia’s unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine 

is now in its second year. 

To maintain our edge, this budget will invest in vital technological advancements 

for the Joint Force, while also reflecting the need to eliminate capabilities that no 

longer best serve our national defense. Such decisions can be difficult, but they will 

enable us to invest in the advanced programs that our security demands. 

The Department is also intensely focused on taking care of our people, who remain our greatest asset. This budget invests in significant quality-of-life improvements, including the largest military pay raise in 22 years and the largest civilian 

pay raise in 43 years. We remain focused on continuing to recruit, retain, and develop the best talent from across the country to serve in both uniformed and civilian 

roles. 

We owe it to our outstanding Service members, civilian employees, and their families to provide the support that they need to thrive. We also owe them environments 

that reward excellence, promote teamwork, and are free from harassment and 

abuse. So, we are implementing military justice reforms, fighting sexual assault, 

and redoubling our efforts to end suicide in our ranks. These challenges are personal priorities for me, and this budget paves the way for even more progress. 

We rely on teamwork within our Department and beyond it—including with our 

interagency colleagues, Congress, the defense industrial base, and our peerless network of Allies and Partners worldwide. That network is a strategic advantage that 

no competitor can match. From rallying the world to support Ukraine’s fight for 

freedom to conducting joint exercises in the Indo-Pacific with like-minded countries, 

our Allies and Partners are a huge force multiplier. They magnify our power, advance our shared security interests, and help uphold a world that is free, open, prosperous, and secure, and this budget will support the security partnerships that 

make America even stronger. 

I have never been more confident in the power of our fighting force and the talents of our civilian workforce. The FY 2024 budget request will help ensure that 

we meet America’s national security challenges and use this decisive decade to defend our democracy and forge a world of greater security, prosperity, and liberty. 

I therefore ask for your support of our budget and our mission as Congress writes 

authorizing and appropriations bills in the months ahead. 

DEFENDING THE NATION

We are deeply aware of our responsibility to be responsible stewards of taxpayer 

dollars. This budget request has been carefully prepared to provide the resources 

for the objectives laid out in our 2022 NDS, Nuclear Posture Review, and Missile 

Defense Review. 

The NDS directs the Department to act urgently to sustain and strengthen U.S. 

deterrence, with the PRC as our pacing challenge. The NDS also directs the Department to tackle the acute threat of Russia, as well as the persistent threats from 

Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and global terrorist groups. 

The NDS clearly articulates our priorities: defend the homeland from the growing, 

multi-domain challenge posed by the PRC; deter strategic attacks against the 

United States, our Allies, and our Partners; deter aggression, while preparing to 

prevail in conflict if necessary, by prioritizing the PRC challenge in the Indo-Pacific, 

followed by the Russian challenge in Europe; and build a resilient Joint Force and 

defense ecosystem. 

Within the Department, the NDS is our North Star, and we have aligned our 

processes, policies, and plans to implement it. The FY 2024 budget is the latest concrete manifestation of our strategy—and its deep recognition that the PRC presents 

a challenge now and in the years to come. 

Prioritizing the PRC as Our Pacing Challenge 

In recent decades, the PRC has demonstrated both the will and, increasingly, the 

economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to reshape its region and the 

international order to suit its preferences. The United States will not let that happen. This budget will enable us to continue executing our strategy and outpacing 

the PRC, across all timeframes and domains. 

Through the FY 2024 budget, we will strengthen U.S. deterrence and continue advancing new operational concepts, deploying cutting-edge capabilities across all domains, and investing in the innovations that we will need in the future. Through 

a $9.1 billion request for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, the largest ever, the Department is expanding the scope and scale of our activities to reinforce security and 

stability in the Indo-Pacific region, strengthen deterrence, and bolster our advantages and those of our Allies and Partners. 
192 

The Department is also investing in a more resilient posture across the Indo-Pacific region. For example, in Japan, Australia, Guam, and the Compact of Free Association States, we are forward-stationing and deploying more capable forces even as 

we make major infrastructure investments in airfields, logistics, domain awareness, 

and resilience. In addition, throughout Southeast Asia, we are executing rotational 

deployments, logistics cooperation, and targeted security assistance to strengthen 

our partnerships, deepen our interoperability, and enhance our collective readiness. 

This budget allows us to continue to support Taiwan’s self-defense, consistent with 

our longstanding commitments enumerated in the Taiwan Relations Act, the three 

U.S.-PRC Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances. 

Across the Indo-Pacific region, we have increased the complexity and scale of our 

exercises and operations. In addition to building interoperability with our Allies and 

Partners, we are experimenting to build our warfighting advantages, which will help 

us further refine our operating concepts and investments. This budget request will 

enable us to continue that crucial work. 

Meeting the Acute Threat of Russian Aggression 

Russia’s unprovoked further invasion of Ukraine poses a historic challenge to European and global security. Russia’s campaign of conquest is also an attack on the 

rules-based international order that has helped to make the world safer and more 

secure since its creation in the aftermath of World War II. If Russia succeeds, it 

would send a message to other aggressor nations that they can attack and conquer 

their neighbors. With U.S. leadership, a broad coalition of Allies and Partners have 

rallied to help support Ukraine’s defense of its sovereignty. 

Over the past year, the United States has committed more than $32 billion in 

game-changing security assistance to support Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression. This has helped meet Ukraine’s most urgent needs—including for air defense, artillery systems, tanks and other armored vehicles, and other crucial capabilities—and it has translated to tangible gains on the battlefield. In the year since 

Russia’s unjust war of aggression began, Ukraine’s military forces have won the battles of Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Kherson—and they have inspired the world with their 

courage and resilience. 

We will continue to support Ukraine’s fight for freedom for as long as it takes. 

To keep pace with Ukraine’s urgent security needs even as we maintain our own 

readiness, we are pushing to expand production from the defense industrial base. 

We are focused on increasing the resiliency of supply chains that are critical for national security. And we are focused on accountability of the security assistance that 

we have provided. 

Our NATO Allies face a historic challenge from Putin’s aggressive Russia, and we 

are making significant investments in bolstering European security. Those build on 

foundational investments in posture and presence that we have made in Europe 

since Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine and seizure of the Crimea region. These investments paid dividends in 2022 when we rapidly surged an additional 20,000 U.S. 

forces into the European theater to deter Russian aggression and reassure our 

NATO Allies. With little advance notice, the United States deployed additional combat power, repositioned U.S. forces already in Europe, and integrated deploying 

forces with prepositioned stocks of munitions and supplies. Our continued investments in posture and presence in Europe help deter Russian aggression against 

NATO—now and in the future. 

Tackling Advanced and Persistent Threats 

We remain vigilant against the advanced and persistent threats from the DPRK, 

Iran, and global terrorist organizations. 

We continue to shore up security on the Korean Peninsula despite the DPRK’s 

provocations, including through bilateral and trilateral cooperation. We will continue to stand with our Allies, the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Japan. We remain 

steadfast and ironclad in our extended deterrence commitments to the ROK and 

Japan, and we continue to demonstrate our ability to respond rapidly and firmly to 

any DPRK provocation. We are working to strengthen and modernize our alliances 

with the ROK and Japan and will continue to ensure that our forces in and around 

the Korean Peninsula are ready to ‘‘Fight Tonight’’ in the event of DPRK aggression. 

Iran’s nuclear program, its dangerous proxies, its support for terrorism, its cyber 

threats, and its proliferation of one-way attack unmanned aerial systems (UAS) all 

undermine Middle East security and threaten U.S. forces and Partners. We have 

acted decisively when Iran-backed militia groups have attacked U.S. forces in Iraq 

and Syria. As Iran deepens its partnership with Russia, including Russian military 

support to Tehran in return for Iranian one-way attack UAS to deploy in Ukraine, 

we are developing and fielding effective approaches to counter the proliferating 
193 

threats from Iran’s UAS. This budget request seeks to tackle these persistent challenges through investments in integrated air and missile defense, maritime domain 

awareness, and counter-UAS systems. We have repeatedly demonstrated our ability 

to deploy combat-credible forces into the region to deter potential Iranian aggression, and we will continue to take necessary and proportionate military action to 

defend U.S. forces and facilities from attack, or threat of attack, from Iran or Iranbacked proxies. The United States will support and strengthen partnerships with 

countries that subscribe to the rules-based international order, and we will make 

sure those countries can defend themselves against foreign threats. These actions 

have the added benefit of demonstrating our commitment to the region’s security 

that will offset the efforts by external powers to reshape the region in their interest 

and to our detriment. 

Meanwhile, ISIS, al-Qa’ida, and other terrorist groups continue to threaten the security of the United States, our citizens, and our Partners in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. We are investing in a modernized, over-the-horizon counterterrorism architecture to prevent future attacks on our citizens and the U.S. homeland, 

and we have proven our continued ability to remove the most threatening al-Qa’ida 

and ISIS operatives from the battlefield. 

One legislative authority that is key to our ability to tackle these advanced and 

persistent threats—Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—expires 

at the end of this year. Section 702 provides essential, irreplaceable insights on the 

activities of critical foreign targets. The loss of this authority, or its renewal in diminished or unusable form, would profoundly damage the Department’s ability to 

see and mitigate some of the most profound threats against the United States as 

well as its Allies and Partners. Reauthorization is therefore a matter of utmost priority. Along with our colleagues in the Intelligence Community and the Department 

of Justice, we look forward to working with this Committee and others, in order to 

secure Section 702’s extension. 

Innovating and Modernizing 

The FY 2024 budget request will enable the Department to develop, acquire, and 

modernize across all domains to address all the above challenges, especially our 

competition with the PRC. 

To maintain and expand our advantage over the PRC, we need to modernize not 

just our weapons systems but also our operational concepts and the ways that we 

do business. To operate effectively in a dynamic security environment, the Department is prioritizing investments to maintain a ready warfighting capability, build 

a skilled defense workforce, and work more effectively with our Allies and Partners. 

A safe, secure, and effective U.S. nuclear deterrent is the ultimate backstop to 

deter strategic attacks on our country and our allies. The Department is committed 

to maintaining and modernizing our nuclear triad, while seeking to reduce the role 

of nuclear weapons in U.S. national strategy. The FY 2024 budget request, including 

an investment of $37.7 billion in FY 2024, fully funds the nuclear triad and nuclear 

command, control, and communications, demonstrating our commitment to maintain 

reliable and effective legacy systems while pursuing their timely replacements. 

The Department is also accelerating investments in cutting-edge defense capabilities, such as uncrewed systems that can operate on the water, underwater, in the 

air, and on land. Integrating human-machine teaming, autonomous systems, and resilient networks will make our operations significantly faster, more lethal, and more 

survivable. 

The FY 2024 budget request includes $30.6 billion specifically for our munitions 

enterprise. It invests in modernizing and growing our munitions industrial base and 

expanding production capacity and procurement quantities. The Department is 

seeking to use the unprecedented multiyear procurement authorities provided by 

Congress to affordably acquire critical munitions, while bolstering our inventories 

and providing our industry partners with a more predictable ‘‘demand signal.’’ 

The FY 2024 budget request makes long-term investments of $33.3 billion in the 

resilience of our space architecture in the event of an attack. These investments will 

further expand and diversify constellations for space sensing and communications 

resilience, as well as augmenting our space warfighting capabilities. These steps 

will drive even deeper cooperation with the robust American commercial space sector. 

In the cyberspace domain, this budget request makes targeted investments to 

speed the development and management of new cyber tools. This will help us integrate our sequentially developed Cyber Mission Force capabilities. It will also aid 

our transition to, and sustainment of, advanced cyber capabilities from the Department’s Science and Technology (S&T) activities. These efforts will enhance the interoperability and effectiveness of our Joint Cyberspace Warfighting Architecture and 
194 

maintain an efficient pipeline from America’s world-class cyber- innovation workforce into the Department’s cyberspace operations forces. 

The Department is also adapting to America’s changing labor market to ensure 

that we have the right team to execute the NDS. This budget funds a new civilian 

cyber workforce-incentive program to target skill gaps, and it develops a curriculum 

of advanced cyber training for our military. We are also increasing investments in 

international research partnerships on critical technologies with our Allies and Partners. Our technological superiority is not a given; we have to work for it every day. 

That includes rapid prototyping and commercial integration. So, the Department is 

investing in tomorrow’s technology, such as responsible cutting-edge artificial intelligence, enhancing our critical supply chains, and modernizing our testing and training capabilities. 

The Department continues to vigorously develop and test advanced weapons prototypes. Against the backdrop of our recent successful flight tests, the FY 2024 

budget request expands the development of several hypersonic weapons programs, 

as well as demonstration and testing activities. This budget will also improve our 

subsonic cruise missiles to ensure their effectiveness against rapidly changing 

threats and targets. 

The Department is pursuing a range of initiatives to harden U.S. basing and ensure that it is resilient against air and missile attacks. For example, we have made 

major investments in missile defenses for Guam and Hawaii, as well as infrastructure improvements across the entire Indo-Pacific region. 

This budget request also funds the advancement of our joint warfighting concepts 

and the rapid experimentation and fielding of emerging capabilities across all domains. Ultimately, these initiatives will ensure a Joint Force that is increasingly 

agile, innovative, interoperable with allies and partners, and resilient. 

After decades of combat and coalition experience for our Special Operations Forces 

(SOF) in recent conflicts, we are pioneering new SOF approaches to help meet today’s primary challenges. This budget enables our SOF enterprise to continue to 

modernize its crisis-response capabilities, while developing creative, adaptable, and 

asymmetric options that ensure our Joint Force will present a range of dilemmas 

to our adversaries. 

The Department will also expand the Pacific Multi-Domain Training and Experimentation Capability, which will help our forces train in the ways and places they 

may be called upon to fight. These investments boost our readiness and lay the 

foundation for advances in sensor-to- shooter networks that will multiply our forces’ 

lethality. To improve the speed and global integration of our operational decisionmaking, we will deliver proven Joint All Domain Command and Control enhancements to our warfighters by 2027. 

The FY 2024 budget is rooted in the recognition that our competitors and adversaries are not standing still, and we must make the right investments now to retain 

our technological advantages in the decades to come. 

The Department will continue to draw on America’s longstanding strategic advantages by investing in critical innovations—such as quantum computing, advanced 

materials, renewable energy projects, integrated networks, and future-generation 

wireless technology. To maintain the United States’ position as the global leader in 

research and development, we are cultivating a strong, adaptive, and highly skilled 

workforce of scientists and engineers through programs like the Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation scholarship-for-service program. 

Investing to Win Across All Domains 

On land, the FY 2024 budget continues to build a combat-credible, ready, and lethal Army that can tackle challenges around the world. Our budget request seeks 

to strengthen Army capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region, with significant investments in our air and missile defenses as well as land-based long-range fires. We 

are also revitalizing and strengthening the Army’s Organic Industrial Base by modernizing the Army’s arsenals, maintenance depots, and ammunition facilities. 

The FY 2024 budget builds on past investments in the Marine Corps Force Design 

2030 concept, which focused on fielding capabilities and updating the Corps’ force 

structure in the Indo-Pacific region. It also makes important new investments in 

electronic-warfare capabilities, command and control systems, air and missile defenses, and ground-force survivability, as well as in training and exercises. 

At sea, this request helps deliver a ready and formidable naval force focused on 

deterring potential aggression from the PRC. The budget request continues the transition of our naval force to Distributed Maritime Operations, with an increased focus 

on uncrewed surface and underwater vehicles. Our request expands investments in 

long-range fires, more advanced weapons systems, and next-generation platforms, 
195 

including development of the COLUMBIA-class submarine. The Department also 

continues its critical investments in the submarine- construction industrial base; we 

will begin investing in better submarine-maintenance capacities, and we will increase our investments in the optimization of our shipyard infrastructure to make 

our industrial base healthier and more capable of meeting future needs. The budget 

request continues to move the Navy away from systems that are ill-suited for operations in highly contested environments. 

In the air domain, the FY 2024 budget request makes significant investments to 

ensure air dominance in future conflicts. This includes F–35 and F–22 aircraft modernization, next-generation fighter development, and autonomous combat collaborative aircraft. These investments complement global strike capabilities such as the 

B–21 family of systems. The budget request invests in the development of strategic 

nuclear capabilities, such as Sentinel and the Long-Range Stand Off weapon. It also 

prioritizes long-range fires like hypersonic weapons, as well as a modern air command-and-control framework, rapid global mobility, and improved electronic warfare 

capabilities. To fully realize the tremendous advantages offered by our next-generation fighter and bomber platforms, we are investing in air-launched weapons that 

offer greater range, speed, precision, flexibility, and lethality. We are also closing 

shortfalls in supplying critical munitions by accelerating procurement where feasible, as well as expanding and procuring additional production capacity for our toppriority air-launched weapons. Moreover, this budget request continues to responsibly make the transition away from air- weapons systems that do not support our 

strategy, even as we invest in the maintenance and development of more advanced 

systems. 

In the space domain, we continue to build our advantages over our competitors 

by investing in missile warning and tracking, data transport, communications, and 

space sensing. This budget request also funds upgrades to our launch infrastructure 

to support more government and commercial launches. Consistent with our recently 

completed Space Strategic Review, additional investments will deter hostile uses of 

space, and if deterrence fails, ensure that we can prevail in conflict in this domain, 

too. 

This budget also strengthens our cyberspace operations force, which persistently 

engages both state and non-state cyber actors seeking to harm the United States, 

its interests, and its Allies. It upgrades our cyber operations training platform, accelerates the use of cloud-based capabilities, and invests in rapidly modernizing the 

software and hardware needed to further fortify our cyber posture. 

Finally, over the past 3 years of the COVID–19 pandemic, we have seen the massive impact that biological threats can inflict on our country. Accordingly, the President’s FY 2024 budget will enhance our ability to address any future pandemics or 

other biological threats. 

Meeting the Climate Crisis 

As the NDS makes clear, climate change is increasingly shaping the context in 

which the Department operates. That places new demands on the Joint Force, with 

implications for our readiness. Climate change is also creating new potential points 

of friction in places such as the Arctic, while affecting security relationships with 

Allies and Partners around the world. We are determined to ensure that the United 

States can meet and deal with these challenges. 

This budget therefore invests in enhancing operational capability, mission resilience, and readiness. This includes programs that mitigate the risk of energy supply 

disruptions to critical military facilities—whether caused by extreme weather, cyber 

operations, or kinetic attack. The budget request also includes funding to improve 

the energy efficiency of combat operations and platforms while deploying new technology to improve lethality and mitigate logistics risk in contested environments. 

Throughout, our focus is on building our operational advantages. These are not only 

essential steps for the climate of the world that we share, but also strategic moves 

to defend our country and strengthen our military. 

TAKING CARE OF OUR PEOPLE

The U.S. military is without a doubt the strongest fighting force in human history, and we remain determined to keep it that way. The foundation of that strength 

is our people. The Department is deeply committed to taking care of our total workforce by growing our talent, building resilience and readiness in the force, ensuring 

accountable leadership, and tackling even the most difficult workforce challenges. 

This budget prioritizes our ongoing actions to take care of our outstanding Service 

members, and their families, including by increasing Service member and civilian 

employee compensation, raising housing allowance, and improving military housing. 

The budget also helps make quality childcare more accessible and affordable, includ-
196 

ing through the launch of universal pre-kindergarten at all Department of Defense 

Education Activity schools. We are also making investments to fight a range of problematic and harmful behaviors. That includes continued efforts to combat sexual assault and sexual harassment, reform the military justice system, and prevent suicide in the Force. 

Growing Our Talent 

To defend our Nation’s security, we must tap into the talent that exists all across 

our Nation. We must recruit and retain the best of America, building pathways of 

opportunity for all qualified patriots who seek to serve. In this budget, we continue 

to provide our force with exceptional opportunities for service and professional development. This means being the employer of choice for personnel with technological 

skills, mastery of foreign languages, and more. We are also investing in training and 

education, as well as creating scholarships for science, technology, engineering, and 

math. We will continue to deepen the Department’s partnerships with America’s 

best universities, paving the way for the next generation of leaders. I am proud that 

the Department recently established its first university-affiliated research center at 

an Historically Black College and University—just one of the many ways that we 

are building new ways for talented Americans to join our team. 

Building Resilience and Readiness 

Ensuring the safety, health, and well-being of our Service members is a sacred 

trust—and a matter of readiness. We know that when economic challenges hit our 

teammates where they live, it can make it even harder to serve. However, we also 

know that when we take care of our Service members and ensure they are well 

trained and well equipped, they continue to serve. 

So, in addition to robustly funding the factors that immediately contribute to 

readiness—training, equipping, and maintaining—we have made continued investments to support our Service members and their families, launching targeted initiatives to bring down daily costs for Service members. Those efforts have made 

childcare more accessible and affordable, lowered prices in the commissary system 

and made access to affordable food easier through online ordering, eased moving 

costs, and increased opportunities for spousal employment and career mobility including through the launch of the Military Spouse Career Accelerator Pilot, a paid 

fellowship for military spouses that allows employers to connect with this diverse 

and talented pool of talent. We have also raised pay and allowances across the 

board. The FY 2024 budget will support a 5.2% pay raise for our Service members 

and our civilian employee workforce—the largest pay raise in decades. The FY 2024 

budget also invests in full day pre-kindergarten at all Department of Defense Education Activity schools, providing our military children an essential head start on 

their education. There is no greater testament to the resilience and readiness of our 

force than the historically high retention rates across the Services. 

Ensuring Accountability 

The Department of Defense is committed to the health, safety, and well-being of 

our Service members and will not tolerate prohibited harmful behavior. This is a 

leadership issue, and we will lead. In February 2021, I ordered the creation of a 

90-day independent review commission (IRC) on sexual assault in the military. The 

Department, including the Military Services, are now implementing the IRC recommendations that I approved. 

The Department also worked with the President and Congress to enact historic 

legislation improving the response to sexual assault, domestic violence, and related 

crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The Offices of Special Trial 

Counsel, newly established to prosecute these crimes with independence and specialized expertise, will reach full operating capability in December 2023. 

We will continue to work relentlessly to end sexual assault and related crimes, 

including through investments in a specialized prevention workforce and through 

important tools like the On-Site Installation Evaluations, which help us identify 

where our efforts are working and where more support is urgently needed. 

The Department remains focused on efforts to eliminate suicide in the ranks and 

to respond better when these tragedies occur. This budget makes a significant investment in suicide prevention, and we are accelerating efforts to expand and increase access to mental healthcare, to including increased hiring and training of 

mental health professionals, to ensure that our Service members can access the help 

they need when they need it. 
197 

SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Our world is increasingly defined by strategic competition, profound technological 

change, and 21st century challenges that pay no heed to borders. In this changing 

strategic environment, the United States is far stronger because of the power of our 

like-minded Allies and Partners, the improvements in industrial exchanges with our 

friends, the integration and development of innovation, and the interoperability of 

our forces. Our cooperation with Allies and Partners is central to co-developing advanced capabilities and rushing tangible improvements to our warfighters. These 

are strategic advantages that no rival can match. The Department is deeply committed to further strengthening our work with the Allies and Partners who magnify 

our might. 

The AUKUS Partnership 

The historic AUKUS partnership breaks new ground in working with two of our 

closest Allies—Australia and the United Kingdom—to take on the threats of the 

21st century, just as we did together in the 20th century. As the President outlined 

in his State of the Union address, we are building bridges between Partners in the 

Pacific and those in the Atlantic, and AUKUS is a generational opportunity at the 

center of this change. This initiative translates our strategy into action, and it helps 

to forge a more advantageous balance of power in the Indo-Pacific, where the United 

States, Australia, and the United Kingdom are actively strengthening deterrence 

across the region. AUKUS will enhance our collective military capabilities, especially in the advanced technologies that we believe will be critical for security and 

stability in the future. 

On March 13, 2023, the President announced our plans for the first major initiative of AUKUS: providing Australia with a conventionally armed, nuclear powered 

submarine capability. This phased approach will allow us provide this capability on 

the fastest possible timeline, while upholding the highest standards for nuclear 

stewardship and setting a precedent that strengthens the nonproliferation regime. 

As the President made clear, our three nations are making concrete commitments 

to each other, and we are backing these commitments up with significant investments to strengthen the industrial bases of each of our nations. 

Allies and Partners in the Indo-Pacific Region 

In the Indo-Pacific region, we continue to build and strengthen our peerless network of alliances and partnerships. Recent progress only underscores the enormous 

value of our Allies and Partners in the region. 

For example, we are working closely with Japan to expand the roles and missions 

of our alliance. We are forward-deploying more versatile, resilient, and mobile U.S. 

capabilities even as we enhance Japan’s capabilities, including in counterstrike, unmanned vehicles, and counter- hypersonic weapons. We are also increasing our trilateral cooperation among the United States, Japan, and Australia, further demonstrating regional commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region. 

We are working with the ROK to ensure that our combined forces are able to 

deter the DPRK and help ensure peace and stability in Northeast Asia, including 

by returning our defensive exercises to historical norms. 

In Australia, we have built a deep partnership on technology and the development 

of advanced capabilities, including space cooperation and space domain awareness. 

We are continuing the rotational presence of U.S. capabilities through Australia, 

across the air, land, and maritime domains. Working alongside our ally, we are 

identifying locations to support enhanced U.S. presence with necessary infrastructure improvements. In 2022, we also announced that we will preposition munitions 

and fuel to support U.S. capabilities in Australia. 

In the Philippines, we are modernizing the U.S.-Philippine Alliance by enhancing 

maritime cooperation, improving interoperability and information sharing, and adding four important new locations under the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. These steps underscore our unwavering commitment to the Mutual Defense 

Treaty with the Philippines. 

In Thailand, we are continuing to strengthen the long-standing U.S.-Thai alliance. 

Our annual Cobra Gold exercise, for example, contributes immeasurably to peace, 

security, and stability in the Indo-Pacific, while ensuring we are prepared to respond rapidly and effectively to a humanitarian disaster. 

Meanwhile, with India, we are advancing our Major Defense Partnership and 

launching a new chapter in U.S.-India ties. The Department is bolstering the Indian 

military’s deterrent capabilities to ensure that India remains the preeminent power 

in the Indian Ocean and can help uphold a favorable balance of power across the 

wider Indo-Pacific region. We are committed to working closely with India on technology cooperation; deepening our interoperability across key defense and security 
198 

domains, including space and cyberspace; and ensuring that the U.S.-India partnership supports the efforts of our broader network of like-minded Allies and Partners, 

especially the Quad. 

European Security Cooperation and Support to Ukraine 

Under President Biden’s leadership, the United States has changed the course of 

history by surging critical security assistance to Ukraine over the past year. With 

the support of Congress, our response to Russia’s full-scale reprehensible assault on 

its peaceful and democratic neighbor has provided historic levels of security assistance to Ukraine through a combination of Presidential Drawdown Authority and the 

Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. The United States has also rallied like-minded countries around the world to support Ukraine’s brave defenders. The engine of 

our efforts is the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, the coalition of some 50 countries 

that I convene regularly to spur and coordinate support to Ukraine. Our Allies and 

Partners have collectively committed approximately $20 billion in security assistance to Ukraine, including hundreds of tanks, thousands of other armored vehicles, 

vital air-defense systems, hundreds of artillery systems, and other crucial capabilities. 

In the face of the biggest threat to European security since the height of the Cold 

War, the NATO Alliance is more united than ever. We have moved urgently with 

our Allies to further fortify NATO and bolster its defenses on its eastern flank. Our 

commitment to Article Five of the North Atlantic Treaty remains ironclad. We will 

not be dragged into Putin’s war of choice, but we will stand with Ukraine as it 

fights to defend itself, and we will continue to strengthen NATO’s collective defense 

and deterrence. 

Building Teamwork at Home 

Our partners at the Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial levels provide essential support for our Service members and their families, caregivers, and survivors at military installations and communities around the country. The Department is committed to working even more closely with these vital partners. Meanwhile, our Service members continue to proudly support our fellow Americans in 

times of crisis, as they have this year during natural disasters and amidst the lingering COVID–19 pandemic. 

At the same time, we are supporting our Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners’ efforts to become more resilient and less reliant on Department of 

Defense support. Increased national resilience will ensure that America stands 

ready should an adversary choose to test our will with cyber or kinetic attacks on 

the U.S. homeland. 

In addition, our partners in industry remain an engine of innovation—one that 

ensures that our warfighters remain ready to tackle the security challenges of this 

century. Our budget request will shore up our defense industrial base, strengthen 

its ability to produce the capabilities that we need, and develop critical technologies 

for the future. 

It is the honor of my lifetime to lead our exceptional and dynamic team at the 

Department of Defense. We continue to strengthen our internal processes to ensure 

that we make timely decisions based on rigorous cooperation among civilian and 

military teams across the Department and with our interagency partners. We will 

demonstrate that spirit of partnership at the highest levels, and we will expect it 

from every person in the Department. 

CONCLUSION

The way that we respond to today’s challenges will help determine America’s 

course for generations to come. The Department is seizing this inflection point in 

history. We will never flinch in the defense of the democracy that we have vowed 

to protect, and we will take care of all of the extraordinary patriots who comprise 

the world’s strongest fighting force. 

The FY 2024 budget enables us to deliver on these priorities, and we ask for your 

support as we build the Department of the future. We remain deeply committed to 

working with Congress on oversight and appropriations to ensure that we have the 

resources that our Total Force needs and deserves—today, tomorrow, and in the future. 

We will be good stewards of those resources, for both warfighters and taxpayers. 

Defense reform will ensure that we use taxpayer dollars efficiently by modernizing 

our business processes, improving our financial and contract management, and completing the Department’s audit. Above all, our accountability to both our own forces 

and the American public is core to our democracy and sets us apart from our competitors on the world stage. 
199 

Finally, we are grateful for our extraordinary Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, 

Guardians, their families, caregivers, and survivors, and civilian employees. They 

are the foundation of America’s strength, and we are honored to serve alongside 

them. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Secretary Austin. 

General Milley, you have the floor. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT 

CHIEFS OF STAFF 

General MILLEY. Chairman Tester and Vice Chair Collins, and 

Distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. 

I’ve been privileged to defend this country for 43 years in uniform and next month I’ll start by 44th year and hopefully, Senator 

Collins, this is my last posture hearing. 

I thank Congress for your support to our military for the last 

four decades, not just for this budget but for four consecutive decades you’ve given great support to our military and I thank you all 

for that. 

We could not be the military we are today without the support 

of the American people and the American people’s representatives. 

So what I ask for you today is that once again you approve an 

on-time budget. 

I’m honored to represent the Joint Force and their families 

alongside the leadership of Secretary Austin and Under Secretary 

McCord both. I’ve been working with them both for many, many 

years and their leadership has been superlative. 

Our Joint Force today is the most lethal and capable military in 

the world because of your support. The military’s purpose is simple. 

It’s to defend the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic and there is no other purpose for our military. 

Fundamental to this is deterrence. More specifically, to deter 

great power war. To do this, our Number 1 priority is readiness 

now and readiness in the future and there is no other Number 1 

priority. 

The Joint Force will accomplish this with the fiscal year 2024 

budget request of $842 billion. Right now, the international system 

is under increasing stress. Both China and Russia have the means 

to threaten our interests and our way of life but war with China 

or Russia is neither imminent nor inevitable. 

The PRC remains our Number 1 long-term geostrategic security 

challenge and it’s been pointed out in our National Defense Strategy as the pacing challenge. The PRC has publicly stated that it 

intends to be the regional hegemon in Asia within the next 10 

years and to exceed the United States overall military capability by 

mid-century. 

Chinese actions are moving it on a path toward potential confrontation with its neighbors or the United States, but again war 

with China is neither inevitable nor imminent. 

Additionally, Russia is an acute threat and remains very dangerous, especially under current conditions. Over a year ago, Russia undertook a war against Ukraine, threatening peace on the European Continent and global stability for the first time since the 

end of World War II. 
200 

We are supporting Ukraine to protect its sovereignty and supporting NATO with a force presence in every single nation on 

NATO’s Eastern Flank. 

Iran threatens to push the Middle East yet again into instability 

by supporting terrorists and proxy forces and they continue to improve their capability to produce a nuclear weapon. 

From the time of Iranian decision by the Supreme Leader Iran 

could produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in less 

than 2 weeks from time of decision and it would only take several 

more months to produce an actual nuclear weapon. 

The United States policy remains the same and the United 

States remains committed that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. 

North Korea’s continued ballistic missile testing and nuclear 

weapons development also pose threats to our homeland and our 

allies and partners, but we stand with the Republic of Korea shoulder to shoulder to deter North Korean aggression as we have for 

70 years. 

Terrorists continue to operate around the globe, threatening fear, 

destruction, and destabilization. 

In short, the United States military stands ready to protect our 

Nation’s interests and the American people. 

We are currently standing watch on freedom’s frontier with nearly a quarter of a million, 250,000, deployed troops around the world 

today, 5,000 sorties of United States Air Force and Naval and Marine aircraft and Army aircraft per day, a hundred ships at sea on 

a given day, and we never fight alone. 

A key source of our strength is our large network of alliance and 

partnerships, and lastly our operational readiness rates are higher 

now than they’ve been in many, many years. 

Currently, 60 percent of our Active force is the highest states of 

readiness and could deploy to combat in less than 30 days, well exceeding the minimum one-third standard we established many 

years ago. 

Ten percent of our force, 10 percent of the United States military 

could deploy to combat in less than 96 hours. Examples of that, the 

President of the United States a year ago ordered the United 

States military to react to the unprovoked aggression by Russia. 

We deployed one core, two divisions, three brigade combat teams 

under the Army. We doubled the amount of fighter squadrons, and 

we doubled the amount of ships and submarines in the European 

theater of operations and we did that in 35 days. That doesn’t happen by accident. 

Another example just a few weeks ago, the President ordered the 

United States military to evacuate more than 70 governing personnel from Khartoum in a joint operation and so far the United 

States along with our allies and partners have facilitated the departure of more than 1,300 American citizens out of Sudan. That 

operation put Naval Special Operations forces on the ground, delivered by Army Special Operations aircraft, with U.S. Air Force support above with fixed wing fighter bombers, Army Rangers and a 

Quick Reaction Force, United States Marine Corps, and Vertical 

Lift and Reserve, and five U.S. Naval vessels off the coast along 

with National Guard in Djibouti ready to go. 
201 

That was a joint operation in support of 18th Airborne Corps and 

the AFRICOM (Africa Command) Headquarters as part of a whole 

of government effort to support the Department of State alongside 

many of our allies. 

All of that was planned, coordinated, synchronized, and executed 

from a cold start. Our force can rapidly project flexible, responsive 

power anywhere around the globe and no adversary should ever 

doubt that. 

Your military, the United States military, is ready. However, the 

Joint Forces are at an inflection point and we must balance operations, readiness, and modernization. We must not allow ourselves 

to create the false trap that we can either modernize or focus only 

on today. We must do both. We must integrate advanced technologies, including precision long-range fires, hypersonic weapons, 

quantum computing, artificial intelligence, robotics, and all the 

main sensors. 

The time is now. We have very little margin to wait and the common thread critical to all of this is our people. We must continue 

investing in their training, their education, and their talent management. 

I urge Congress to support this budget significant pay raise, 

healthcare, housing, and childcare initiatives. 

The only thing more expensive than preparing for war is actually 

fighting a war. It is much cheaper to prevent war. This budget will 

significantly improve our military’s current and future readiness in 

order to prevent war. We must act with a sense of urgency to deter 

war. 

Thank you and I look forward to your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY

After 43 years in uniformed service, 4 years as Chief of Staff of the Army, and 

3.5 years as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, this will be my last set of posture 

hearings. I want to thank the Congress up front for your continued support to our 

military, not only this year but every year for the last 4 decades. We would not have 

a military without the generous support of the American people and their elected 

representatives. Thank you for what you have done and, yet again, I ask that you 

support this year’s request with an on-time budget approval. 

I am honored to represent the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Guardians, and 

their families of the United States Joint Force. They are the most lethal and capable 

military in the world. Our troops are the best led, best equipped, and best trained 

force anywhere because of your support. Side by side with our allies and partners, 

250,000 American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Guardians are standing 

watch on land, sea, air, and space in 158 countries and conducting operations every 

day of the year to keep Americans safe. 

The United States military is a key component of our national power. In concert 

with our diplomatic corps, economic organizations, and democratic institutions, we 

support efforts to sustain a stable and open international system. This hard and soft 

power provides a range of options to this legislative body and the Commander-inChief. Our strength deters adversaries and preserves peace. Although, if deterrence 

fails, the United States military is prepared to fight and win against those who attack the United States or our vital interests. 

The Joint Force appreciates the work that our elected representatives do to ensure that we have the resources needed to train, equip, and man the force in order 

to be ready. The increased level of military funding beyond last fiscal year will ensure we continue future modernization while simultaneously meeting the national 

security readiness requirements of today. 

The Joint Force will deliver modernization of our armed forces and security to the 

people of the United States at the FY 2024 budget request of $842 billion. The people of the United States, through this body, have committed significant funding and 
202 

we will work diligently to ensure it is spent prudently in the best interest of this 

Nation. This budget will enable the investments and transformations necessary to 

build the Joint Force of 2030 and beyond. 

In alignment with the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and National Military 

Strategy (NMS), this budget delivers a ready, agile, and capable Joint Force that 

will defend the Nation, while taking care of our people, and working with our partners and allies. There are direct linkages from the NDS and NMS to the Joint 

Warfighting Concept (JWC) which describes how we will employ and succeed as a 

Joint Force. The JWC is threat informed and fully integrated into our resourcing 

and requirements processes to build the force required for the future. 

Stable, predictable, and timely budgets are critical for this Nation’s defense. The 

passage of these budgets enables proper planning, prioritization, and programmatic 

investments necessary for continued progress. Continuing resolutions risk future 

modernization and impair our ability to meet our missions. 

Preventing great power war through readiness and deterrence is very expensive 

but not as expensive as fighting a war and the only thing more expensive than 

fighting a war is losing a war. This budget is a significant step in the right direction 

to ensure that the United States military maintains the current readiness and develops the future modernization necessary to deter war and, if deterrence fails, to 

fight and win. 

STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENT

The People’s Republic of China (PRC): War with the PRC is neither imminent nor 

inevitable, however the potential for armed conflict is growing. The PRC remains 

our #1 long-term geostrategic security challenge. Since the reforms of Deng Xiaoping 

in 1979, the world has witnessed the greatest geopolitical shift in economic power 

in over 100 years. In the wake of the PRC’s economic growth has come a rapidly 

increasing PRC military capability. Using economic and military hard power, the 

PRC’s goal is to revise the global international order by midcentury, and it intends 

to be the regional hegemon in Asia within the next 10 years. Its intention is to exceed the United States’ military capability within the Western Pacific in the next 

decade and to exceed the United States’ global military capability by 2049. 

The PRC continues to take increasingly aggressive actions to reshape the IndoPacific region and revise the global order. It is making significant economic investments in its military to improve technology and modernize its military forces. The 

PRC continues to challenge the stability and security in the Pacific as well as across 

the globe. Through economic coercion, the PRC is expanding its global footprint and 

increasing its ability to project military power at range and scale. It is aggressively 

modernizing its military in order to protect its authoritarian interests and are prepared to use force if required. The PRC seeks to strengthen its hard power enabling 

the PRC to coerce others with militarily might. These PRC actions continue to move 

it down the path towards confrontation and potential conflict. 

The PRC remains focused on revising the global international order by 

midcentury. In short, the PRC continues to develop significant nuclear, space, cyber, 

land, sea, and air capabilities. It is working every day to close the technology gap 

with the United States and our allies. We must maintain our military superiority 

over the PRC in all the domains of war if we are to preserve the great power peace 

of the last 80 years. The PRC represents a real and growing national security challenge. This is a matter of national urgency. 

History is not deterministic and war with the PRC is not inevitable. While the 

PRC is clearly an increasingly capable strategic competitor, it is imperative that we 

keep our relationship in competition and not in conflict. By maintaining a strong 

military with overmatch against the PRC, we are postured to deter conflict with the 

PRC. Through integrated deterrence, we will raise perceived costs to the PRC and 

deter aggression. If deterrence fails, then we will end the conflict on terms favorable 

to the United States. 

Russia: Over 1 year ago, Russia undertook an illegal and unprovoked war against 

Ukraine threatening peace and stability on the European continent—a peace that 

ensures global stability and an international order where all nations can prosper. 

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in complete contradiction to the basic rules that underline the United Nations Charter established at the end of World War II. Russia’s 

war is a brazen assault against the free people of Ukraine and threatens to destabilize all of Europe and beyond. 

In response to this Russian war of choice, we are supporting Ukraine as it fights 

to protect its sovereignty and supporting our NATO allies with a United States force 

presence in every single nation on NATO’s eastern flank. Putin’s war of choice has 

caused untold human suffering and terrorized a free country and its people. Putin 
203 

attempted to seize Kyiv, overthrow its government, and fracture the NATO alliance. 

NATO remains more unified than ever, and Ukraine remains free and independent. 

The Ukrainian people have demonstrated immense bravery and resilience and inspired the world. The international community has come together to ensure that 

this unambiguous act of aggression by Russia does not go unanswered. This fight 

is not just in Ukraine’s interests, it is in the global interest to protect the system 

and rules that have prevented great power war since the conclusion of World War 

II. 

With the backing of the United States Congress, the United States is determined 

to continue to support Ukraine with the means to defend themselves. The United 

States has committed to provide Ukraine 160 155mm Howitzers, over 1,000,000 

155mm artillery rounds, 38 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS), a 

Patriot air defense battery, 8 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems 

(NASAMS), 31 Abrams tanks, and 109 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles. 

A broad mix of air defense systems protect the skies over Kyiv and the cities of 

Ukraine. Armor systems strengthen Ukrainian front lines enabling offensive and defense operations. Ukrainians employ long range fires to challenge Russian command 

and control and its ability to sustain Russian aggression. These systems will enable 

Ukraine to ensure that Russia does not achieve its strategic objectives. Russia failed 

in its initial war aims and continues to revise its strategic goals due to its sustained 

operational failures. Russia continues to pay extremely heavy costs on the battlefield. 

Last year, in Poland, we established the first permanent United States installation on NATO’s eastern flank. The United States maintains significant numbers of 

combat capable forces in Europe to deter aggression and to stand shoulder to shoulder with our allies and partners. 

Russia retains a large nuclear capability to threaten the United States, Europe, 

and the globe. Vladimir Putin and his regime continue to use irresponsible nuclear 

rhetoric and posturing. Russia has repeatedly demonstrated its capability and will 

to conduct complex malicious cyber activities targeting American digital infrastructure, both military and commercial. 

Through private military companies, Russia continues to undermine other nations’ sovereignty and create unstable security situations. Aside from its brutal war 

in Ukraine, Moscow’s actions in Africa and the Middle East demonstrate its aggressiveness, resourcefulness, and opportunism. Russia is an immediate acute and very 

dangerous challenge to the United States’ national security. 

North Korea: Its continued weapons testing and development pose real threats to 

our homeland as well as allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific. North Korea’s rhetoric is becoming increasingly aggressive as it is growing more confrontational and 

continues to enhance its ballistic missile capability and capacity. Pyongyang shows 

no signs of relenting in its focus on its Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program at the expense of its citizens and the peace of the Korean Peninsula as well 

as the entire region. Readiness of United States military forces on the Korean Peninsula and our ability to rapidly respond to provocation ensure stability and prevent war. 

Iran: Iran’s support for and involvement in conflicts in the region and its neighbors threaten to push the Middle East into broader regional instability and chaos. 

Through its funding of terrorist activities and support to partner and proxy forces 

inside the borders of its neighbors, along with its ballistic missile programs, Iran 

seeks to revise the regional order and balance of power in its favor. Iran’s proliferation of UAVs across the region and into Russia pose critical security challenges for 

the United States and our partners. Iran is taking actions to improve its capabilities 

to produce a nuclear weapon, should it make the decision to do so, while continuing 

to build its missile forces. From the time of a national decision, Iran could produce 

enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in approximately 10–15 days and it 

would only take several months to produce an actual nuclear weapon. The United 

States remains committed, as a matter of policy, that Iran will not have a nuclear 

weapon. The United States military has developed multiple options for our national 

leadership to consider, if or when Iran decides to develop a nuclear weapon. 

Violent extremist organizations: Terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, ISIS, 

Al-Shabaab, and others continue to export terror, destruction, and destabilization. 

Unless the root causes of instability that give rise to these types of groups are resolved, terrorists will continue to take root around the globe, threaten others with 

attacks, and undermine legitimate governments. The root causes can only be effectively addressed by including governments of the region and we can best influence 

outcomes with diplomatic, economic, information, stability, and counterterrorism efforts. Through coalition efforts to train, advise, and assist partners and allies as 

well as intelligence sharing, we will continue to ensure that terrorists do not possess 
204 

the capacity and capability to exert their will. Our counterterrorism strategy is to 

work by, with, and through our regional allies and partners and to conduct direct 

action counterterrorism strikes when necessary to protect the United States or our 

interests. 

Allies and partners: Our alliances and partnerships are key to maintaining the 

rules based international order and a stable and open international system promoting peace and prosperity. This budget allows us to build our partners’ and allies’ 

capabilities, foster interoperability, and strengthen relationships. Doing so allows 

us, our allies, and our partners to counter the coercion of our strategic competitors, 

oppose the malign activity of regional threats, and meet the varied security challenges posed by state and non-state actors. We are stronger when we operate closely 

with our allies and partners. 

READINESS AND MODERNIZATION

Right now, we are experiencing a fundamental change in the character of war. 

The character of war—how, where, and with what weapons and technologies wars 

are fought—is changing significantly. We must fully integrate developing technologies including precision long range fires, hypersonic weapons, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, robotics, and pervasive all-domain sensors. 

The current rapidly changing technology will provide decisive advantage to the 

nations that can integrate and optimize the capabilities into military weaponry, doctrine, training, organization, and professional development. The future operating environment will be highly lethal and will be characterized by the ability to see and 

sense the environment like never before. The attributes of the future Joint Force 

will be characterized by stealth, resilience, and speed with agile, adaptive units operating in a constant state of motion. Most importantly, the Joint Force will be highly lethal. Our leaders and forces will operate independently and distributed in degraded communication environments with mission type orders and austere logistics. 

Continued modernization is imperative for the Joint Force. Building the Joint 

Force required to implement our National Defense Strategy demands modernizing 

our capabilities, design, and employment. We must not allow ourselves to create the 

false trap that we can either modernize or focus only on today. We must do both. 

The United States has always had the advantage of time to conduct a long build 

up prior to the beginning of hostilities. Our fortunate geography with oceans on our 

east and west borders and friendly neighbors to our north and south have given us 

the strategic advantage of buffer zones to threats. With advances in technology and 

a growing global interconnectedness, we will no longer have the luxury of a long 

protected buildup prior to conflict. It is imperative that we have a modern advanced 

force in sufficient size and readiness to enable sustained deterrence and, if required, 

to be able to fight and win. We must make some fundamental changes to our Joint 

Force in order to leverage our military overmatch to deter conflict in a future operating environment. 

Our strategic competitors are modernizing their militaries, weapons, and capability. We must continue to modernize ours; we have no choice. We must divest legacy systems to enable our modernization. 

In the fall of 2019, the Secretary of Defense tasked the Joint Staff to develop the 

Joint Warfighting Concept (JWC) to address strategic conflict. This year, after extensive wargaming, the Joint Staff published the third iteration of JWC and will 

integrate the ideas into new joint doctrine, Joint Publication 1 to be published this 

summer. Today, JWC is the unifying vision to guide future force design, force development, and force employment to ensure we have the right people, equipment, 

training, roles, and doctrine. It will continue to incorporate evolving threats to help 

us shape our strategic environment and future operations. JWC 3.0 contains an updated description of the overarching military challenges facing the Joint Force, a refined explanation of the military solution—expanded maneuver—and a detailed description of how the Joint Force will apply this solution. This version of the JWC 

includes greater fidelity on key warfighting concepts and more precision on the operational approaches that will enable the Joint Force to gain positions of advantage 

against peer adversaries. 

Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2) is a warfighting capability to 

sense, make sense, and act at all levels and phases of war, across all domains, and 

with partners, to deliver information advantage at speed to our forces and decision 

makers. 

We are revising our leader development Joint Professional Military Education 

(JPME) to support the JWC. We are modernizing our JPME curriculum to develop 

strategically minded joint warfighters, who think critically and can creatively apply 

military power. Our focus remains on instructing mission command, operational 
205 

agility, and ethics to ensure our military leaders can effectively employ forces at all 

levels of warfare and respond to a dynamic battlefield. Additionally, we are increasing the amount of JPME devoted to the study of the changing character of war and 

Great Power Competition. 

We are focused on building a more lethal Joint Force by ensuring that we continue to modernize our concepts, doctrine, training, and military education. We must 

continue to invest in capabilities that sustain our military overmatch, while 

strengthening alliances and attracting new partners. Investments in this budget ensure the Joint Force can execute all requirements leveed by our Nation. The investments made in this budget will ensure that we remain a capable and ready force 

while funding our priorities of nuclear modernization, long range fires, hypersonic 

technology, artificial intelligence, robotics, shipbuilding, space, and cyber. 

Nuclear modernization: The nuclear triad is the foundation of our strategic deterrent. Our adversaries are improving their nuclear posture and potential nuclear 

threats continue to emerge. It remains critical that all three legs of the triad— 

bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarines—remain a viable deterrent and allow us to hedge against geopolitical, technological, operational, and programmatic risks. Our legacy systems have been extended well beyond their original 

service lives and we must recapitalize our nuclear enterprise. Modernizing the nuclear triad will cost 3.7% of the Defense budget at its peak not including DOE/ 

NNSA warhead modernization. Costs will be significant but relatively less burdensome on the overall Defense budget relative to previous recapitalization efforts. 

Modernization of our nuclear forces, weapons complexes, and requisite nuclear command, control, and communications (NC3) capabilities are a high priority. 

Long range fires: The war in Ukraine highlights the strategic and devastating effect provided by long range fires. The Joint Force must have a long range strike 

capability without having to also maintain air superiority. Long range fires provide 

significant offensive capabilities that are both cost-effective and cost-imposing 

means of improving deterrence. By enabling power projection from standoff ranges, 

the risk to critical United States assets decreases while the defensive burden imposed upon the enemy increases. These fires challenge an adversary’s logistics, command and control, and basing forcing them to choose between increased risk or decreased effectiveness. The PRC has thousands of ground-launched theater-range 

missiles in its arsenal that would be difficult for the United States to counter given 

its current inventories. Investments in long range and hypersonic missiles launched 

from ground, sea, and air platforms are a cost-effective strategy that improves our 

ability to compete with the PRC. Recent budget requests have enhanced the 

lethality and resilience of the Joint Force by developing and expanding the longrange fires portfolio. 

Hypersonic technology: Our adversaries are undertaking hypersonic weapons testing and development from a variety of delivery platforms. These weapons operate 

at speeds greater than Mach 5 and are maneuverable, which make the weapons 

challenging to detect and defeat. Weapons operating at these speeds will provide 

significant offensive capability that will challenge an opponent’s decision timelines. 

We must invest in this technology to provide a suite of capabilities that provide 

transformational warfighting capability to our Joint Force. 

Artificial intelligence and robotics: Decision making in warfare is fundamental to 

the outcome. Militaries must be able to collect, analyze, and assess vast quantities 

of data in order to make effective decisions. The military that can iterate through 

the decisionmaking framework fastest will have decisive advantage. Artificial intelligence has the potential to reform military decisionmaking processes at the tactical, 

operational, and strategic levels of war to enable rapid assessments and decisions 

that outpace human abilities. Additionally, artificial intelligence combined with new 

military platforms could enable the proliferation of robots across the battlefield. Robots in the land, sea, and air domains could provide significant quantities of firepower, logistics, and communications capabilities while decreasing risks to our military forces. Through human-machine teaming, each human warfighter would have 

exponentially increased abilities to shoot, move, and communicate in battle to prevail over the enemy. 

Legacy platform divestment: Maintaining and operating weapons that are not relevant in the future fight and whose capabilities are matched by superior technology 

need to be divested. Continuing to purchase and maintain legacy equipment takes 

needed Defense dollars away from the acquisition of higher priority systems necessary for modernization. I strongly urge Congress to enact legislation that authorizes the Department to divest select legacy platforms to ensure that every Defense 

dollar spent on programs and equipment is relevant for the next fight. We must not 

be influenced by a sunk cost bias, and we cannot continue to mortgage our future 

by being wedded to technology of the past. 
206 

Shipbuilding: The United States Navy must always be the world’s most powerful 

naval force in capacity and capability. We must never accept 2nd place in naval 

power. We are a maritime nation and the vast majority of international trade moves 

across the world’s oceans. The United States is committed to a free and open global 

maritime common. Manufacturing our warships overseas is a strategic risk and is 

not in our national interest. Our shipbuilding and supporting industrial base are a 

national security capability that needs support to grow and maintain a skilled workforce. The FY 2024 President’s Budget reflects the Administration’s strong commitment to continued American naval dominance, including improvements to our industrial base to meet the demands of our current and future defense needs. This 

Nation must have the right ships, with the right crews, and the right capabilities 

on the right timelines in the theaters where they matter. This budget specifically 

procures warships and submarines with credible combat power to deter the PRC. 

We must continue to invest in the industrial base to support remotely operated ship 

development, fleet modernization, on time delivery of the COLUMBIA class submarine, and to accelerate production and maintenance of VIRGINIA class submarines to support both the United States and AUKUS needs. 

Recapitalization of the sealift fleet is necessary to enable joint power projection. 

Sealift ships transport 90% of war material and supplies in support of major combat 

operations. The DoD sealift fleet is approaching the end of its useful life with an 

average age of 48 years. Our overall sealift readiness rate is consistently below our 

stated requirements. I urge Congress to remove all limitations on the Department’s 

ability to procure additional used vessels to replace these aging ships. 

Space: Space is essential to our way of life. Space capabilities are vital to our 

economy, quality of life, exploration initiatives, and national security. Every year we 

see additional commercial space launches and increased competition for lower earth 

orbit. 

Our adversaries view space as a warfighting domain and believe that achieving 

supremacy in this arena will be a decisive factor in winning future conflicts. The 

exosphere is already contested as Russia has tested both a ground-based anti-satellite missile and an on-orbit anti-satellite weapon prototype, which threaten our 

space capabilities. Both the PRC and Russia view counterspace capabilities as a 

means to reduce United States and allied military effectiveness. Additionally, our 

adversaries have demonstrated space-jamming capabilities and maintain independent launch capabilities. Left unsecured, our capabilities in space will become 

strategic vulnerabilities. I urge Congress to support the significant increase in this 

budget for United States space capabilities. 

Cyber: Adversaries continue to use operations in the cyber domain to compete 

with the United States and attempt to gain an information advantage. Malign cyber 

actors exploit commercial software vulnerabilities to gain network access and conduct cyber operations against United States citizens, organizations, and institutions. 

The low-cost barrier to entry and attribution deniability make this a priority method 

for adversaries to compete below the level of armed conflict while minimizing risk 

of escalation. The PRC, Russia, Iran, and North Korea use a range of cyber capabilities from information operations (IO) to cyber-attacks to collect intelligence, position 

for future operations, impose costs, and signal to the United States and adversaries. 

Therefore, we must increase our ability to compete and prevail in cyberspace 

while ensuring all elements of informational power are integrated into operations, 

activities, and efforts to deter our adversaries and protect the United States homeland. This requires investments in technology, building and maturing cyber readiness and operations, reducing risk to weapon systems and critical infrastructure, 

strengthening cybersecurity, and improving network resiliency. 

Advanced Capabilities: The changing character of war necessitates that we continue to modernize and innovate our technology, capabilities, and training. Data and 

communication networks are fundamental to how the United States trains, plans, 

and employs force. We must have rapid and robust linkages from sensors to shooters in a networked information environment. This will require investments in microelectronics and quantum computing to ensure we maintain a technological edge over 

our adversaries. The current globally distributed supply chains as well as access to 

critical materials and rare earth metals present vulnerabilities to the Joint Force’s 

ability to acquire necessary parts and technology in the event of crisis. We must also 

find ways to deepen collaboration on advanced capabilities with our closest allies 

and partners, such as our trilateral cooperation under AUKUS. 

TAKING CARE OF OUR PEOPLE

People are our most important resource in the Joint Force. We must ensure that 

we are doing all that we can to take care of and guard our most critical resource. 
207 

Taking care of people is a critical readiness issue and it decisively impacts unit cohesion, recruitment, retention, and confidence in leadership. 

To attract, grow, and retain the best talent in the world, we must ensure that 

we are always taking care of our people. I urge Congress to support this budget’s 

significant pay raise, healthcare, and housing initiatives. Additionally, this budget 

strengthens our accountability and prevention measures for sexual harassment and 

sexual assault. Finally, this budget supports improving our mental health and suicide prevention programs. Each of these initiatives is fundamental to taking care 

of our troops and their families. 

We are ensuring that the military departments increase their childcare capacity, 

and the DoD system remains the gold standard of childcare. The DoD operates the 

country’s largest employer-sponsored childcare program, with over 27,000 staff 

members providing daily care for more than 160,000 children from infancy up to age 

12. This fiscal year, the DoD is making a significant investment in constructing new 

child development centers as well as repairing, renovating, and maintaining existing 

child development centers to ensure our children are in safe and well-maintained 

facilities. Funding support from Congress is vital for fully staffed military childcare, 

and to support efforts to expand capacity in the community. Childcare is key to 

keeping working families working, reducing the high unemployment faced by military spouses, and ensuring the safety of our military children. Despite the childcare 

capacity and quality provided by the DoD there are still challenges for military families to access that care or quality care in the community. 

This budget equips our service members and families with the tools, skills, and 

resources necessary to ensure their health and well-being. The health and wellness 

of our force is a readiness, retention, and recruitment issue. 

The Joint Force is committed to growing our talent and ensuring that all who 

meet the requirements to serve are able to serve. The Joint Force competes for the 

talent of America’s youth along with every other business and organization who 

seeks our Nation’s best and brightest. The Joint Force’s objective is to field the most 

lethal and combat effective fighting force in the world. We will continue to support 

the accessions of all qualified people to all jobs and positions within the Joint Force. 

CONCLUSION

The United States Joint Force is a flexible and adaptable force ready to deter, 

fight, and win our Nation’s wars. Significant threats exist across the globe and the 

United States is ready to respond to these challenges. The PRC continues its aggressive attempts to revise the global order for its own benefits. It is building up its 

military might to achieve its goals through the use of force. With its illegal and 

unprovoked war in Ukraine, Russia attempted to overturn the rules based international order and fracture NATO. Russia’s war of aggression and nuclear rhetoric 

is irresponsible and risks miscalculation and escalation. 

International aggression, where large countries use military force to attack smaller countries and change recognized borders, cannot be allowed to stand. The Joint 

Force will continue to work with the interagency and in cooperation with our allies 

and partners to deter aggression and threats to the free world. America’s network 

of allies and partners is a strategic source of strength. It is this robust network, this 

team of teams, that stands against those autocratic, revanchist, and revisionist regimes that are uninterested in a connected and prosperous world. 

It is within this framework that it is imperative we modernize our force, training, 

and doctrine to remain the most capable and ready force on the planet. The United 

States has been challenged before by many other adversaries. Yet, conflict is not inevitable—our military might makes war less likely by allowing us to deter across 

the spectrum of conflict. Our contract with the American people is that we, the 

United States military, will always be ready to protect the Constitution and the fundamental principles of what it means to be American. We will always protect and 

defend this experiment in liberty, to deter our enemies, and, if deterrence fails, then 

to fight and win. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Milley. 

To the members of the committee, everybody, almost everybody 

on this committee is going to participate today. So there will be 5- 

minute rounds. I would ask you to keep it as close to 5 minutes 

as you can. 

I would ask the distinguished panelists to be as thorough and 

succinct with your answers as possible. 
208 

I’m going to start talking about continuing resolutions and their 

ineffectiveness. No corporation in the world would restrict their 

cash flow for the development or production of programs at the 

start of a fiscal year. Yet, in the business of national security some 

would say for our most important business we do just that. 

So, Secretary Austin, if another CR is enacted for this fiscal year 

2024, what programs are you most concerned about? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly I’m concerned about all of the 

new starts that we won’t be able to perfect because of a CR. 

You lose time, Chairman, under CRs and you can’t—no amount 

of money can buy back time. Again, you can’t start new programs. 

I would point out that the PRC is not waiting. They will execute 

on their own timeline. I pointed out earlier, Chairman, that our 

budget is directly linked to our strategy and, of course, if we don’t 

have a budget, we can’t effectively execute that strategy. 

So if we look at the investments that we’re looking to make in fighter aircraft, you know, I mentioned earlier there’s the $61 billion in our investment in our Air Force, what we’re asking for $48 

billion in our Naval Forces, those kinds of things we won’t be able 

to get after because of continuing resolution. 

So I think the best way that the Congress can support us in our 

efforts to execute our strategy is an on-time appropriations. 

Senator TESTER. Inflation is real and it’s a concern. This is an 

$842 billion budget. 

Have you guys been able to put any sort of numbers to determine 

how much a CR would cost us? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Certainly, it would depend on how long that 

CR is in effect, Chairman, and I defer to Mike McCord there for 

any concrete numbers, but this is something that we’ll continue to 

evaluate on a daily, weekly, monthly basis if we have to go to a 

CR, but it will cost us money. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Mike, would you like to comment to that? 

Mr. MCCORD. Chairman, we’ve built significant funding into this 

budget to account for the inflation we project, including the pay 

raises the Secretary described, and that approach is $40 billion. A 

CR, by definition, doesn’t give us any of that, right. It keeps our 

top line where it was last year which is about a $25 billion reduction and inflation is a significant hit there as are things like the 

Columbia and all three legs of the Triad. 

Senator TESTER. Secretary Austin, I want you to talk about how 

a potential government default would impact your ongoing efforts. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly it would impact our reputation 

worldwide. You know, we are known for being very dependable, 

paying our bills on time, and a source of stability globally. 

What it would mean realistically for us is that we won’t in some 

cases be able to pay our troops with any degree of predictability 

and that predictability is really, really important for us. 

But this would have a real impact on the pockets of our troops 

and our civilians. 

Senator TESTER. General Milley, some would say that the department has gotten used to dealing with CRs, so they’re no big deal. 

How do you respond to that? 

General MILLEY. Thanks, Chairman. There’s several key things 

to that. First is current operations and readiness. I think you’d see 
209 

it and we’ve done this drill many times, run the numbers, you’d see 

a significant degradation in the readiness of the force. The force 

that I just rattled off to you that’s ready today, you’d see that depreciate over time. So your numbers of rotations at the CTCs (Combat Training Center), for example, for the Army here in D.C., the 

number of Red Flags, the number of Top Guns, all of those events 

would start being attrited over time. 

You’d start seeing the number of flying hours, the 5,000 sorties 

I mentioned upfront per day, that would be cut down by a certain 

percentage, depends on how long the CR went. So you’d see flying 

hours for both rotor wing and fixed wing helicopters go down. 

You’d see sailing time, those hundred ships that I said are sailing the seven seas right now, you’d have to cut that back because 

of fuel costs. So there’d be significant current operations and then 

for future readiness, future modernization, the Secretary mentioned the new starts. You’d also probably see some delays in some 

of the nuclear recapitalization. The Columbia could be at risk a little bit, I think. 

You could see that B–21 that was just rolled out in California not 

too long ago, things like that would be stretched out long-term. So 

it’s a terrible way to do business. I’m not a businessman, but it’s 

a terrible way to run a business when you’re doing basically budgets for 9 months at a time if you do a CR for 3 months. 

So it would have, I think, very, very significant negative impact 

on the readiness and then, of course, future readiness but also 

there’s the imponderable, the immeasurable one, which is morale. 

It sends a terrible signal to our soldiers, our sailors, airmen, Marines around the world when we do these CRs. 

So it always leaves people in a sense of uncertainty and then it 

sends a terrible message to our allies and partners and our adversaries around the world. So I think it’s significant. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. 

Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let’s assume that we do achieve our goal of enacting the DoD 

(Department of Defense) appropriations bill on time. If we use the 

Administration’s estimate for fuel costs, which the Government Accountability Office underestimates costs by 20 percent, General 

Milley, absent some relief from Congress, how would military readiness be affected in terms of the department’s flying hours, training 

exercises, and other activities needed to stay within the 20 percent 

shortfall? 

General MILLEY. Well, I think there’s a direct relation. If it’s 20 

percent shortfall in fuel, you’re going to have 20 percent less flying 

hours because all these aircraft, ships, as well, and ground vehicles, tanks and much infantry fighting vehicles. They all rely on 

fuel. 

The Department of Defense is the biggest fuel consumer in the 

United States. So we would end up reducing the amount of operational tempo of our vehicle fleets, whether ground or air, and the 

specific number of hours, we’ve done the math, and I’d have to get 

back to you for the record on the specific number of hours they 

would have. It would depend on how long and how deep the CR 
210 

was, but it would have significant impact on flying hours, driving 

miles per vehicle, and the sailing of the ships. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Secretary Austin, General Milley correctly noted in his statement 

when he was discussing Iran that Iran would only take several 

more months to produce an actual nuclear weapon and he goes on 

to say that the United States remains committed as a matter of 

policy that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. 

What are some of the policies that the Administration is pursuing to prevent Iran from developing very quickly a nuclear weapon? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, from a military perspective, you know, 

my responsibility is to make sure that is our policy. Iran will not 

have a nuclear weapon. 

My responsibility is to make sure that the President has options 

available to him to enforce that policy and so we remain focused 

on making sure that those options remain available and they are. 

Senator COLLINS. All right. I’ll move on to a different issue. 

In January, the department announced that 31 Abrams tanks 

would be delivered to Ukraine. The latest information I have is 

that that will not occur until this fall, is that accurate? Could you 

update us on what the current delivery schedule is and whether 

there’s any way to accelerate the delivery of these tanks to 

Ukraine? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thanks, Vice Chair. We are doing everything 

possible to accelerate the delivery of these tanks and early fall is 

a projection. 

In the meantime, we’ve moved a number of tanks over into theater so that the Ukrainians can begin training on this capability 

and when they complete that—by the time they complete that 

training, the tanks will be available for them to use. 

We’re putting in the infrastructure to be able to sustain and support this capability, as well. As you know, this is a different capability, turbine engine, and a number of pretty sophisticated systems. We’re moving as fast as possible to get the capability in the 

hands of the Ukrainians and will certainly have that available by 

early fall. 

Senator COLLINS. Another threat to the United States is a terrorist attack. I think with our focus on China and Russia and Iran, 

North Korea, we can’t lose sight of the fact that Afghanistan is 

once again a safe haven for many terrorist groups. 

General Kurilla testified before the Armed Services Committee 

that ISIS–K will likely be capable of conducting operations outside 

of Afghanistan within 6 months and that that would come with little or no warning. 

I know that the United States military made an effort to take 

most of its weapons and ammunition out of Afghanistan when our 

troops left, but the fact is that approximately $7 billion worth of 

valuable useful military equipment provided to the Afghan Security 

Forces by the United States remains in that country. 

Are you concerned about the fact that the weapons that the 

Americans gave to the Security Forces could now be turned against 

us and our Western allies in a terrorist attack? 
211 

Secretary AUSTIN. Vice Chair, you accurately described what 

we’re looking at in terms of that equipment. The equipment that 

the United States troops were using was retrograded by General 

Miller and his staff when the decision was made to retrograde our 

troops out of Afghanistan. So we closed 11 bases, brought out thousands of tons of equipment that we were using that was equipment 

for our forces, and that retrograde was done very successfully. 

As you know, over 20 years we did a lot to provide capability to 

the Afghan military and that over time turned out to be quite a 

bit of equipment. 

Now when that government collapsed and when the Security 

Forces laid down their arms, then that material became available 

to the Taliban. So, yes, that equipment is still in Afghanistan, but 

again its equipment that we had provided to their forces, their Security Forces, and not the equipment that we left behind because 

we couldn’t retrograde it. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Collins. 

Senator Murray. 

Senator MURRAY. Well, thank you very much, Chair Tester, Vice 

Chairman Collins. 

I’m really glad that we are continuing to hold these really important hearings and move closer to finally getting the committee back 

to regular order. So I appreciate it. 

We’ve made good progress, but we have to stay the course if 

we’re going to pass our Nation’s funding bills in a timely manner. 

We know that our competitors, like the Chinese Government, are 

doing everything they can to gain ground. So we cannot afford to 

let our efforts get sidetracked and our investments fall behind. 

Our military needs the certainty of a regular and smooth appropriations process that they can depend on. So I’m really glad to 

have this opportunity to hear from Secretary Austin about the resources needed to support our service members and keep our Nation safe, including support for our military families, like good 

housing and schools, mental healthcare, childcare, and a lot more, 

because, as I have said, our most important military asset isn’t our 

weapons or our equipment, it is the brave and talented women and 

men who are willing to put their lives on the line to keep our country safe. 

So we owe it to them to work together across the aisle, get our 

job done, get our government funded without drama, and get them 

the support they need. 

So, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. Let me start 

with a really important topic. Our Nation’s suicide crisis is devastating and we see serious risk among our servicemembers. The 

latest report on suicide in the military shows a steady increase 

over the past decade and we finally saw a small decrease in 2021 

but there’s still a lot of work to be done. 

Secretary Austin, you have previously noted how the stress 

caused by the unpredictability of life in the military, the demand 

for troops to confront so many threats abroad, real challenges accessing counseling, all contribute to this problem. 
212 

I understand the department is facing challenges hiring enough 

specialists to provide servicemembers with access to mental 

healthcare and counseling. 

Can you tell us what steps you are taking to increase hiring so 

servicemembers have access to mental healthcare? 

Secretary AUSTIN. This is something that’s very, very important 

to me. You’ve heard me talk about this. This is something that remains very important to me. You’ve heard me talk about this a 

number of times. 

Mental health is health, period, and I think we have to continue 

to maintain that outlook towards taking care of our troops. 

I just had all our senior leaders, both uniform and civilian, in for 

a senior leader session, and this was one topic that was prominent 

in that session. 

I’m asking you for $200 million in this budget plus to devote to 

suicide prevention which includes increasing access to mental 

healthcare and I am really emphasizing to leadership that we need 

to do everything possible to make sure that we’re working with, 

you know, the civilian capabilities in our communities to make sure 

that we have access to those, to increase the capacity that’s available to us. 

But we will remain sited on this and you’re right, we did see an 

improvement in 2021. We’re going to work hard to see if we can 

continue to improve, but this remains a challenge and access to 

mental healthcare is fundamental to this challenge. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you and we need to follow up on that. 

I appreciate it. 

Let me change the topic. As you know, the Navy is sending a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea for the first time since the 

1980s and the USS George Washington will replace the USS Ronald Reagan in Japan so it can head to Bremerton, Washington, for 

maintenance. 

These naval assets will only become more important as the U.S. 

works to strengthen our partnerships and support allies throughout the Indo-Pacific. 

Maintaining this fleet is really paramount to our success and the 

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is really vital, as you know, to the 

maintenance work. 

PSNS (Puget Sound Naval Shipyard) is the only shipyard on the 

West Coast with Nimitz and Ford Class capable of dry dock and 

it’s responsible for the maintenance of the majority of the West 

Coast-based attack submarines. Those dry docks are currently vulnerable to seismic activity. 

Secretary Austin, I am disappointed that despite knowing about 

the need to address those seismic issues, it was left out of the 

budget request this year. 

How is the department ensuring this multiyear project is and 

will continue to be a top priority for the Navy? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, thanks and thanks for your continued 

support on this issue. 

First of all, let me emphasize that the safety of our personnel 

and the protection of our assets is very important to the department. 
213 

When we experienced a challenge with the—because of the seismic activity recently, as you know, we rapidly deployed assessment 

teams to assess damage and also to outline steps that are necessary to get our capability back up and running. We have a high 

standard for safety and we have done that work and we are bringing those assets back online. 

In this budget, Chair, I’m asking you for $2.7 billion to continue 

to invest in our infrastructure. That’s in the SIOP (Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program) Program and we will continue to 

invest in this in future budget requests, as well. 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Moran. 

Senator MORAN. Chairman, thank you, Chairman. 

Secretary, thank you for your presence and your service. 

Mr. Secretary, what’s your explanation? How do we solve the 

problem with recruitment? What’s the cause for the failure for 

young men and women to sign up? It strikes me that it’s something 

that needs to be defined. I know at Fort Riley, we have the greatest 

level of retention of any military installation but recruitment is 

down. 

So retention is there but not recruitment. What’s your story? 

Secretary AUSTIN. There are a number of challenges that have 

come together, Senator, to create headwinds. Foremost among 

those challenges is 2 years of COVID. 

As you well know, sir, recruiters spend a lot of time interacting 

with prospective recruits at schools and so their access to schools 

is pretty important. If they don’t have that access for 2 years, then 

it certainly creates a challenge for us. 

You add that to the fact that we’ve seen the lowest unemployment rate in decades and so there are a number of things that 

have combined to create the challenge. 

It’s not the first time that we’ve seen challenges in recruiting, as 

you know. When I was in the military, I was a recruiter for a period of time and I know that the things that you have to do to improve, Number 1, you have to increase contact with your prospect, 

you have to invest in advertising and marketing, you have to have 

the right quality of recruiters out engaging the public, you have to 

engage centers of influence, like yourself and other key leaders in 

the community, and all of those things our services are working to 

up their activity in all of those areas and I’m optimistic that, you 

know, this trough that we entered because of the effects of COVID 

and other things we’ll climb out of and we’re seeing some positive 

trends and we’ll continue to do the right things and invest in the 

right things to make sure that gets turned around. 

Senator MORAN. Well, as you know, our capabilities of defending 

our country rest solely with the men and women who serve in uniform. I wish you well in those efforts and any way that I and I’m 

sure my colleagues can be of help to get folks to sign up, please 

include me. Please ask. 

Secretary AUSTIN. I would ask—make one strong request and 

that is that we all emphasize the value of service and whether or 

not you serve in the military or whether or not you serve your community or you serve as a member of the Federal Government, serv-
214 

ice is really important, but certainly hearing that from key leadership in the country I think would help this overall effort. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. 

Let me ask you about the National Guard. We’ve seen how important the National Guard is, what role they play in defending 

our Nation. The National Guard makes up 20 percent of the Joint 

Force, but the National Guard Vice Chief is the only vice chief 

that’s a three star. 

Thoughts about if that’s appropriate or is there a plan to remedy 

that circumstance. 

Secretary AUSTIN. I agree with you, Senator, that the National 

Guard is critical to our overall department, to the Department of 

Defense. 

I can’t overemphasize, you know, the capability that they bring 

to the force. This is something—you know, our structure and the 

number of billets that we have is something that we continue to 

evaluate. 

I have all the authorities that I need. I don’t need any authority, 

additional authorities or help, but that’s something we’ll continue 

to look at as we go from year to year into the future and right now 

I don’t see the need to effect any changes. 

Senator MORAN. Well, thank you for your consideration. 

Finally, Secretary Austin, my time is about to expire. Congress 

last year—so I’ll just make this point. Congress passed the PACT 

(Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics) Act dealing with toxic 

exposure by our service men and women. We have significant challenges of families and servicemembers who are impacted by contaminated drinking water at Red Hill and if the department has 

not established an exposure registry, I encourage you to do so and 

I hope that this budget has the resources necessary to care for 

those servicemembers and their families. 

Secretary AUSTIN. We have established a registry and so thank 

you, Senator. 

Senator MORAN. You’re welcome. General Milley, thank you for 

your service, appreciate you very much. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Durbin. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

General Milley, you’ve served our Nation well and when the history is written of your service, it will clearly recognize that America 

was safer under your watch and the troops you led had an effective 

and caring leader under your command, but this history may not 

tell the whole story unless you write it of your fidelity to our Constitution when there were serious questions of the peaceful transition of power which is essential to the preservation of our democracy. 

Because of you, our Constitution and our Union survived and we 

are stronger today. Thank you. 

Secretary Austin, yesterday I had a meeting in my office of several Senators with a man named Kareem Khan. He is the chief 

prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. He recently 

charged Vladimir Putin with war crimes. We know what he’s basing that on, the unspeakable atrocities caused by the Russian 

forces in Ukraine, stealing, kidnapping hundreds, if not thousands 
215 

of children, rape, beheadings, torture, mass executions, and targeting individual private citizens for his bombardment. 

Ukraine’s Prosecutor general has documented more than 77,000 

war crimes and crimes against humanity. Sadly, the number continues to grow. 

When I met with Kareem Khan I asked him if there was more 

the United States could do to help him gather the evidence and 

documents necessary to prosecute Vladimir Putin for these awful 

war crimes. He said three was cooperation from the Department of 

State, the Department of Justice, but he did not include the Secretary of Defense and your department. 

Khan’s efforts regarding war crimes are so important that Congress last year passed additional authority allowing the U.S. to 

share critical war crimes evidence and intelligence with the International Court of Criminal Justice. 

We have one president, we have one commander-in-chief, but I’m 

not certain that we have one policy when it comes to the War 

Criminal Vladimir Putin. 

I’d like to ask you directly. Why are you reluctant to share the 

evidence that we have gathered in the United States through the 

Department of Defense from those who are holding Vladimir Putin 

accountable for his war crimes? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, Senator. 

I absolutely agree with what you said in terms of the atrocities 

that we’ve witnessed throughout. It’s been absolutely despicable 

and we continue to see evidence of Putin deliberately targeting civilians, hospitals, and apartment buildings and you name it. 

The department firmly supports the goal of holding Russia accountable for its violations in Ukraine. There are multiple ways to 

promote accountability, including the domestic Ukrainian efforts 

that you mentioned, and I believe in a principled approach to promoting accountability. 

I will always prioritize the protection of U.S. military personnel 

in anything that we do. 

Senator DURBIN. So why is your department not sharing evidence that we have gathered to help that effort? The Department 

of State is. The Department of Justice is. Why is the Department 

of Defense not doing so? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Senator, I will just tell you that, you know, it’s 

important to us to make sure that Russia is held accountable and 

we support the goal of holding him accountable, but again I do 

have concerns about reciprocity going forward and so we will continue to look for ways to support the effort of holding Russia accountable. 

Senator DURBIN. Are you aware of the additional authorities we 

created by law that allow your department and the others of this 

government to cooperate with the ICC (International Criminal 

Court)? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I am aware of the legislation, Senator. 

Senator DURBIN. Do you feel there is a deficiency in that legislation that would hold you back from helping the prosecution of 

Vladimir Putin? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I see no deficiencies in your legislation, no. 
216 

Senator DURBIN. Then what is the explanation? There’s got to be 

a bottom line here. Why is it when these prosecutors come and 

meet with us they list the cooperating agencies of our government 

and specifically don’t list the Department of Defense? Why? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Again, Senator, we’ll do everything within our 

power to make sure that we support efforts to hold Russia accountable, but again I remain concerned about the protection of U.S. 

military personnel—— 

Senator DURBIN. I’ve got to ask for more—General, I respect you 

and I voted for you and I’d do it again, but I got to ask for more. 

Your personal feelings about whether you do it or not should be 

second to the law, should it not? 

Secretary AUSTIN. It is. They are, Senator. 

Senator DURBIN. Well, if the law says cooperate and you refuse, 

what am I—what conclusion am I supposed to draw? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Senator, we have not refused any—to abide by 

any law. So there could be some confusion here, but again we support the goal of holding Russia accountable. 

Senator DURBIN. I have to ask you to prove it by doing so and 

I have to ask you why the people who have observed the conduct 

and policy of the agency think you’re falling short and you’re holding back. 

Why we would hold back evidence against this War Criminal 

Vladimir Putin and the terrible things he’s doing? I don’t understand at all. You say you don’t think the law is deficient, but you 

have a feeling. 

Mr. Secretary, give me more than that. Tell me why. You must 

have a compelling reason for not cooperating. What is it? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Again, I will always prioritize protection of our 

military personnel. That’s my concern. 

Senator DURBIN. And you don’t think the law that we’ve passed 

does that? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I didn’t make a comment on the law, Senator. 

I think again the law is sufficient obviously. It’s been established 

by Congress and we are compelled to respect the law. 

Senator DURBIN. Well, I would never jeopardized our troops and 

I know Senator Graham feels the same. We both worked on 

crafting this law so it would necessarily protect our troops. You’ve 

drawn a personal opposite conclusion and I think it is frankly hurting the efforts to hold Putin accountable. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Graham. 

Senator GRAHAM. Rather than beating this horse, I would recommend that we probably have a meeting, Secretary Austin, if 

that’s okay with you. 

Listen. I’ve been a judge advocate most of my adult life and we’ve 

written this law in a way to make sure it applies to foreign nationals, Russians, involved in war crimes in Ukraine to help hold Putin 

accountable. 

Mr. Khan says we have a lot of valuable information that could 

accelerate his prosecution not only of Putin but of others. 

Are you familiar with the Wagner Group, Mr. Secretary? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I am. 

Senator GRAHAM. Do you think they’re a terrorist organization? 
217 

Secretary AUSTIN. I think they are a horrible terrorist organization. 

Senator GRAHAM. Well, I’d like to prosecute them, too. So what 

I would like to do is meet with you and your team to make sure 

that not only you follow the law but you understand the benefit of 

this legislation to help this war effort. 

So, General Milley, what do all those stripes on your arm mean 

on your right shoulder, right arm there, those white stripes? 

General MILLEY. Each one represents 6 months in combat. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Since 9/11 how many years have you 

been away from your family? 

General MILLEY. Seven, eight, nine, probably about half the time. 

Senator GRAHAM. Is that more typical than not for people in the 

military? 

General MILLEY. No, it’s actually very typical. I think my peers 

and those probably NCOs (Non-commissioned officers) at this point 

that have been in this thing since 9/11 have probably spent yearon/year-off for, you know, half the time basically deployed in Iraq 

or Afghanistan in combat. 

Senator GRAHAM. Well, I hope you get some time with your family and thank your family for their service to our country. 

Let’s go to Afghanistan right quick. Based on the withdrawal of 

Afghanistan, our withdrawal from Afghanistan, General Kurilla 

said that, as Senator Collins indicated, 6 months we could be attacked without warning. Is that a fairly accurate statement from 

your point of view? 

General MILLEY. 11 months ago I actually testified and said 12– 

18–24–36, I rounded it like that. So what Kurilla had said in his 

testimony, that’s within the ranges that I had mentioned, as well. 

So absolutely. I mean, look at our ability to monitor and track terrorists in Afghanistan is less than it was with boots on the ground, 

true, but we still have the ability to monitor. 

Senator GRAHAM. I know, I know, but let me ask this right quick. 

Are we less safe than we were before? 

General MILLEY. I would just say that the United States military 

is committed to continuing to monitor, track, and, if necessary, 

take action—— 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. All right. 

Senator MILLEY [continuing]. Against any terrorist threat. 

Senator GRAHAM. All right. I would just say we’re less safe. 

So Putin, if he wins, perceived at winning, what does that mean 

for the world? If he’s perceived as having lost, what does that mean 

for the world? Is there a correlation in your view between success 

of Putin or failure of Putin and China’s likelihood to invade Taiwan? 

General MILLEY. I think that the Chinese are watching the war 

between Russia and Ukraine very carefully and I think for Ukraine 

obviously it’s an existential threat for their very existence, but for 

Europe, for the United States, I think the issue is about a rulesbased international order and I think that what Putin has done is 

an illegal direct assault on that order and if he’s allowed to succeed 

in that, China will learn certain lessons and it may not be the single decisive point but I think it will calculate into their decisionmaking process as to whether or not they attack and seize Taiwan. 
218 

So I think the outcome of Ukraine is critical to much broader 

issues than just Ukraine. 

Senator GRAHAM. And if Putin is seen as having lost, does that 

make America safer? 

General MILLEY. I think it does because I think that what loss 

being defined as Ukraine remains a free independent sovereign 

country with its territory intact. If that is the end result of this 

war, then I think Putin will have failed in his attempts to take 

Ukraine and undermine that rules-based order and I really think 

that that order, which has been in existence for eight decades now, 

since the end of World War II, that’s critical to global stability and 

world peace. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. Mr. McCord, in 2033 under this budget, 

how much will we be spending on defense in terms of GDP (Gross 

Domestic Product)? 

Mr. MCCORD. Senator, we have been in the three range for quite 

a while and we’ll probably be right around three at the end of the 

process. 

Senator GRAHAM. Well, my information says 2.5. So check that 

one out, see who’s right. Okay? 

The Navy real quickly thinks they need 370 ships, 373, and to 

get there, they have to spend 5 percent above inflation. 

Do you agree this budget will not allow the Navy to get to 373 

ships? 

Mr. MCCORD. Within the FY DP (Future Years Defense Program), we will not be at that number. 

Senator GRAHAM. Yes. Cause we’re spending under inflation. 

So real quickly, Mr. Chairman, there’s a bunch of scenarios. 

None of them are really good. The House budget, 2022 plus one, 

is about a 14 percent cut, is that right, Mr. McCord? 

Mr. MCCORD. I’m sorry. The House—— 

Senator GRAHAM. The House proposal, the 2022 plus one percent, 

what would that mean to the military? How many dollars would be 

lost? 

Mr. MCCORD. In this year, it would be about a hundred billion 

below our request. Over—— 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. 

Mr. MCCORD [continuing]. Five years it would be about $600 billion. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. So a CR is a loss to the military, right, 

General—Secretary Austin? 

Secretary AUSTIN. That’s right, Senator. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. This budget puts you below inflation. So 

the committee’s task is to reject all of this stuff and come up with 

a number that keeps us safe. 

Senator SCHATZ [presiding]. Thank you very much. 

Secretary Austin, General Milley, thank you for being here. 

I want to start in Hawaii the people of Oahu have suffered tremendously with the biggest pollution event in the State of Hawaii 

at Red Hill bulk Fuel Storage Facility and the defueling and closure of Red Hill must continue to stay on schedule. 

I want to submit for the record a Unified Statement from Hawaii 

State Leaders about the importance of pure water and the remediation of the lands impacted by the Red Hill Fuel Spill. 
219 

Without objection. 

[The information follows:] 

Senator SCHATZ. Secretary Austin, can you reassure the people 

of Hawaii that Red Hill will never be used for fuel storage or fuel 

operations once it is emptied? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Yes, when I made that decision, that was my 

intent, Senator, and also thank you for everything that you and the 

delegation have done to help us move forward. 
220 

Senator SCHATZ. Are you on track to send your certification to 

Congress that our Indo-Pacific fuel needs won’t be adversely impacted by the closure? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Yes, we are on track and this is something 

that we work routinely. I just met with my leadership on Red Hill 

here last week to check to see where we are and, yes, we are. 

Senator SCHATZ. Thank you. 

As General Milley said, war with China is not inevitable. To 

avoid conflict, the department must use all tools available to it, 

new capabilities, alliances, partnerships and facilities in the AOR 

(Area of Responsibility). 

Secretary Austin, the budget includes $9.1 billion for the PDI 

(Pacific Deterrence Initiative). How are you going to ensure that 

these funds improve readiness and bolster deterrence without falling into the trap of fancy expensive gold-plated weapon systems? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, this is something that, as you know, 

Senator, that we track very closely as the Indo-Pacific Command 

commander develops his requests. We work through each request 

with him and we’re investing in those things that will provide us 

the ability to further forward station our troops and capability and 

so infrastructure is really, really important to us and you’ll see that 

reflected in the PDI. 

Senator SCHATZ. I think it’s really important that we understand 

how achieved partnerships are compared to these weapon systems. 

Obviously we need a balance of both, but I think it’s important for 

the Defense Appropriations Committee to make it clear to you that 

these partnerships are highly leveraged. 

I mean, I think about Pacific Pathways with the Army. This is 

really small money and an enormous impact. Whenever I’m talking 

to INDOPACOM or in the Asia Pacific Region, they don’t talk 

about the weapon systems. They talk about Pacific Pathways. I 

think Incas another example of a pretty highly leveraged partnership. It’s not zero dollars but it’s not nearly as expensive as the 

other stuff. 

Commanders are preoccupied with failing sewer systems, fragile 

electrical grids, and deteriorating barracks. Dealing with these 

issues have real opportunity costs and take away from our readiness. 

General Milley, the Active Army, Navy, and Air Force have requested over $14 billion for FSRM (Facilities Sustainment, and 

Restoration and Modernization), a $470 million increase over last 

year. 

How are services ensuring that they’ll make meaningful progress 

on improving the most critical aging infrastructure? 

General MILLEY. Thanks, Senator, for that. Each of the services 

have very, very deliberate inspection programs. They have readiness calculations for all of their infrastructure. They go through a 

very rigorous process to ensure that their infrastructure remains 

modernized and up to date both from an operational standpoint for 

training but also for taking care of the families and the troops. 

So they’ve got very rigorous processes to do that. Each one is 

slightly different, but I can come back to you with the exacts for 

each of the services if you’d like, but I’ve looked at those processes 
221 

when I was Chief Staff of the Army. They’re all very rigorous in 

each of those services. 

Senator SCHATZ. Please. Thank you. 

Last question for Secretary Austin. Last year I stressed the importance of interagency coordination and the COFA (Compact of 

Free Association) negotiations and DoD’s role as a silent but very 

important partner in the process. 

Negotiations are ongoing, but I think they’re going reasonably 

well and the strategic importance of these relationships with the 

Freely Associated States continue to grow. 

Can you just talk about how important it is that the United 

States successfully renew the COFA Agreements on time? 

Secretary AUSTIN. It’s critical, Senator. These are partners that 

have—we have a long history with. They’re incredibly helpful, incredibly patriotic, as you know. A large percentage of their population serve in our military and as you pointed out, State has the 

lead for this, but DoD is certainly a player and we will continue 

to contribute and hopefully help move things forward in a meaningful way. 

Senator SCHATZ. As does VA (Veterans Affairs). I just wanted to 

quickly point out this. You know, we are talking about relatively 

small money, for instance, to make sure that veterans who are residing in COFA States get the VA services that they deserve, but 

we need a statutory change for that. 

There’s some resistance as if it’s some big budget pressure item. 

It’s not. But as you deal with Pacific Island leaders, you know, I 

would say thank God for small favors. These are the kinds of 

things that define our relationship with these Pacific Island leaders, whether we respect them, whether we respect their citizens, 

whether Secretary Blinken’s slogan of friends, allies, partners is 

real to them, and so these big investments are important but it’s 

the taking care of the people as though they are true partners that 

I think makes the difference. 

Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. 

Gentlemen, thank you. Chairman Milley, I know in your written 

testimony you acknowledged that this is your last set of posture 

hearings. So I don’t know whether you’re celebrating after this 

morning’s hearing, but thank you. Thank you for your years of 

service and all you have provided us. 

Today is kind of a significant day. We’re all looking at the southern border with regards to Title 42 and all the implication there. 

The 11th of May is also a significant day far from the South in the 

Arctic. Today is the day that Russia is transferring the chair-ship 

of the Arctic Council to Norway. Hopefully all is going to be quiet 

and smooth and without a bump there and the governing body in 

the Arctic, the Arctic Council, will be moving forward, but it’s 

something that I’m paying attention to cause both of you well know 

we’re paying attention to the Arctic. 

We appreciate the fact that all five services have updated their 

Arctic Strategy. We’ve come a long, long way as an Arctic nation 

and being able to focus clearly and with intent and so I was curious 

as I read through in full both of your statements this morning and 
222 

I am concerned because in neither of your statements is there acknowledgment or recognition of the Arctic. 

Secretary Austin, you do use the word ‘‘Arctic’’ once in connection 

with the issue of climate, but I think we know that it is broader 

than just climate and certainly from a security perspective you’ve 

indicated that the budget is linked to strategy. It absolutely positively has to be and so the question to you this morning is whether 

or not you think the budget that we have in front of us is sufficient 

to implement these Arctic strategies? 

Given the significance of the Arctic geopolitically, given what 

we’re seeing out of Russia, given what we’ve just seen in the past 

couple weeks with a very clear intention from Russia to be cooperating on bilateral perspective with China with regards to the Arctic, this should send signals to us that the partnering up there is 

changing, that peaceful multilateral cooperation that we have seen 

historically is changing in a dynamic way as a consequence of what 

we’ve seen with Putin’s aggressive and awful war in Ukraine. 

But the question, I guess I’ll start with you, Chairman Milley, is 

whether or not you think that this budget is sufficient in regards 

to our priorities in the Arctic? 

General MILLEY. Thanks, Senator, appreciate that. 

I do think that because our forces are general purpose forces and 

they can be applied in the Arctic or they can be applied anywhere, 

and I personally think the Arctic is a critical geographic region of 

geostrategic importance and it’s increasing in its importance over 

time. That’s clear. 

I’m attending the Arctic Chiefs Conference here shortly in the 

next couple weeks which I do every 6 months or so and that has 

all the chiefs of defense, Military Uniform Chiefs of Arctic Nations, 

not including Russia, by the way, and we get together to discuss 

the security issues with Norway and Canada and the other Scandinavian countries, etcetera. So we recognize the importance of the 

Arctic. 

As you mentioned, all the services and all the commands have 

updated their programs, their strategies. In addition, we run a 

whole series of exercises and we’ve increased our capabilities. The 

111th Airborne Division, for example, up in Alaska. So the Arctic 

is clearly recognized within the Department of Defense, within the 

Joint Force, as having a critical geostrategic importance and we 

have forces that are able to operate in the Arctic right now. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I think we recognize, though, that the 

training to the Arctic is perhaps a little more unique and this is 

why—— 

General MILLEY. Very unique. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. This is why the 111th is so important with 

that focus. 

Secretary Austin, in last year’s NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), Section 603 authorized several policies that will improve the quality of life. We’ve been concerned about the issue of 

suicide, particularly up north, but we had included provisions related to special cold weather pay as well as an opportunity for the 

Secretary to reimburse eligible servicemembers for the cost of airfare, travel home to their home of record—well, their assigned on 
223 

duty location. All these designed to help offset some of the challenges that come when you are in a remote and expensive area. 

I had asked earlier for some updates on when the soldiers might 

be able to expect receiving the cold weather duty pay as well as beginning receivements for the eligible travel and have not gotten responses that have clarified that. 

So if you can help us with that? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Certainly. We’ll get you a response right away 

in terms of where we are in the process there in complying with 

the directive there. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER [presiding]. Senator Reed. 

Senator REED. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

First let me thank and commend General Milley for his extraordinary service. I first had the opportunity to meet the General 

when he was Assistant Commander of the 101st Airborne Division 

along with General McConnellville and since that time and before 

that you’ve been a remarkable soldier. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Secretary, you indicated to the Chairman that a default on 

our debt would have profound repercussions in the Department of 

Defense and that also tracks with the testimony of Avril Haynes, 

the Director of National Intelligence, before the Armed Services 

Committee. 

But there’s another aspect to this, too, and that would, I think, 

give China an opportunity to exploit this dramatically. 

Do you have any concept of the strategic competition with China 

if we default? 

Secretary AUSTIN. There is substantial risk to our reputation, 

Senator. Again, we are viewed as being a source of stability globally and we always pay our debts and there’s just a number of 

things that we’re working with allies and partners on that would 

come into question as to whether or not we’ll be able to execute 

programs, but most important, this will affect the livelihood of our 

troops and our civilians. We won’t be able to pay people like we 

should and I think that’s something that China and everybody else 

can exploit. 

Senator REED. Yes. Given the disposition of China, they would 

like to exploit every opportunity and this would present them a 

huge opportunity to provide disinformation to American citizens, to 

confuse them, and also in the world community, as you point out, 

to suddenly and miraculously look like the stable adult in the room 

and that would be—it’s interesting we’re all talking about strategic 

platforms and how do we, you know, operate vis-a`-vis China. 

This could be one of the greatest strategic eras vis-a`-vis China 

in history, is that fair? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I think that’s an accurate statement there, 

Senator. 

Senator REED. Thank you very much. 

The Chairman also brought up the issue, which is, I found, profoundly disturbing of the inability to routinely confirm general officers and I know seven former Secretaries of Defense wrote a letter 

actually deploring this as a gross politicization of the military. You 

yourself wrote a letter to Senator Warren. 
224 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to include both these letters in the 

record. 

Senator TESTER. Without objection. 

Senator REED. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The information follows:] 
225 
226 
227 
228 
229 

Senator REED. General Milley, we talked conceptually about this 

issue. Can you give us an idea of the impacts that are beginning 

to happen and that will accelerate? 

General MILLEY. Again, Senator, thanks. Let me make one comment on the default piece, though. 

Senator REED. Yes, sir. 

General MILLEY. China right now describes us in their open 

speeches, etcetera, as a declining power. Defaulting on the debt will 
230 

only reinforce that thought and embolden China and increase risk 

to the United States. 

With respect to the general officers, there’s about 650 that are 

on various lists throughout the services that are up for nomination, 

confirmation, and they’re all going to go replace someone and 

they’re going to be replaced. So it’s 650 really times three. So 

you’re looking at 1,800, maybe almost 2,000 officers. Probably all 

of them, I don’t know for sure, but probably most of them are married. They probably have some kids. So you’re probably looking at 

3,000 to 4,000 lives that are directly impacted in my view. So that 

will have significant personal impact. 

Then from a readiness standpoint, these are flag officers. So 

they’re in charge of very large complex organizations and this is 

unsettling for the institution and it will have over time, I think, a 

significant degradation in readiness and capability, morale. 

I think the impact is pretty significant on that whole—and I understand I’m going to stay out of the whole issue of why it’s being 

held, but I think holding up commissioned officers’ confirmations 

on anything other than their own personal talent and skills further 

politicizes the military and if the intent is to not politicize the military, I think it has the opposite effect. It drags the uniformed military right in the middle of a political argument. 

Senator REED. I think you’re exactly right and that’s why we’ll 

do our best to reverse this. Again, I think the cumulative effect is 

very, very dangerous to both readiness and certainly to the families 

of these officers. 

A final point. I’m running out of time, but we talk a lot about 

the number of platforms you’re going to have and etcetera. My 

recollection that has to be checked by the historians is that the 

French Army had many more tanks than the Wehrmacht in 1940, 

but what they didn’t have is the combined arms teams, the communications, etcetera, and one of the areas we’re trying to do is to get 

JADC2 (Joint All-Domain Command and Control) in place so that 

we can communicate which will multiply our power so that, you 

know, X number of platforms can be more effective even if our opponents have a lot more platforms. 

Is that accurate or fair? 

General MILLEY. It is, Senator. JADC2 is a critical component of 

the modernization of the Warfighting concept. It is the command 

and control section that brings it all together in a combined arms 

way. It involves software, hardware, procedures, etcetera. It’s a key 

piece of the way the United States military intends to operate in 

the future operating environment and without it, you won’t be able 

to execute combined arms operations. The JADC2 is critical. 

Senator REED. And multiply the number of platforms we have effectively. 

General MILLEY. Absolutely. 

Senator REED. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Austin, General Milley, Deputy Secretary McCord, 

thank you all for being here and, General Milley, let me echo all 

of the thanks from other members of the subcommittee for your 

long service to this country. 
231 

I would like to follow up on Senator Reed’s comments and I’m 

disappointed that more of the members of the subcommittee aren’t 

here because I’m not sure that everyone understands what the impact of holding these general officer nominations are on the military and I think Senator Reed and I are the only ones on this subcommittee on Armed Services who have had a chance to see this 

play out. 

And while you may not want to get into the reason why these 

officers are being held up, I’m going to ask you, Secretary Austin, 

to explain the policy that you put in place that is the reason why 

our colleague from Alabama says he is holding these nominees. 

Secretary AUSTIN. You’re speaking of our policy on reproductive 

healthcare. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Absolutely. 

Secretary AUSTIN. Thank you, Senator. As you well know, Senator, about 18 percent of our force is female. 

Senator SHAHEEN. That’s right, and can you speak to how important it is to be able to recruit those women into the military, especially given that recruitment is down right now? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I think it’s critical that people be assured that 

if they join the force they will continue to have access to reproductive healthcare and currently we have about 80,000 of our women 

that are stationed in those areas where they don’t have ready access to reproductive healthcare and they don’t get a chance to pick 

where they live and where they’re stationed. 

And so, you know, what this policy does is ensure that that access exists, that they have the means to access reproductive 

healthcare, especially those things that are non-covered reproductive healthcare, and again this policy is firmly rooted in law. We’ve 

talked about the fact that the DOJ (Department of Justice) has 

provided an opinion. That opinion is posted on their website and 

so this is important for our force and again we have a young force 

and about one in five of our troop’s area women and I think it’s 

critical that they be assured that they’ll have access. 

I want them focused on the mission and not worried about 

whether or not they’re going to have access to reproductive 

healthcare. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And I would just add that we know that 

women serving in the military have a higher rate of unintended 

pregnancies than the general population in this country. So that’s 

another reason why this is so important, but can you also address 

whether we would be making our recruitment numbers that we 

need to make for the military if we were not able to recruit women? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly that problem would be compounded by an order of magnitude. Again, our women do incredible 

work for us, Senator, and we are all very proud of them and they 

continue to amaze us each and every day and we would not be the 

force that we are without the contribution that they bring to the 

table and again it’s throughout DoD. I’ll make that comment. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate it as 

I do so many people the policy that you’ve put in place and I think 

it’s absolutely critical and I hope that we are going to see this body 

address those holes that are being placed on our general officers. 
232 

I talked to one of them yesterday who’s waiting to be sent out 

to another posting and he doesn’t have his new title. He’s basically 

in a holding pattern while he waits for that. 

Secretary AUSTIN. It would be tragic if that kind of talent began 

to vote with their feet and because of the unpredictability leave our 

service and go do something else. 

These people have earned the right to be promoted and their 

families deserve what comes with that, as well, and so we certainly 

don’t want to begin losing people because we can’t promote them. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Absolutely. Mr. Secretary, you were asked, I 

think by Senator Moran, about the registry for those people at Red 

Hill and you said that that is in fact in place which I appreciate. 

I think that’s important. 

But DoD has not sought to set up a registry for military members who have been exposed to PFAS (Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl 

Substances). Can you speak to why that is? 

Secretary AUSTIN. You’re right. Obviously we have not done that 

and certainly PFAS is a national challenge and DoD continues to 

do everything that we can to help address this issue. 

We recognize the importance of it and so we’ll take a look at 

whether or not we can and should do that. We’ve increased our 

testing across the board and so I’ll have our staff provide some recommendations to me and we’ll come back to you and discuss this 

with you. 

Senator SHAHEEN. I appreciate that. I’ve introduced an amendment in the last three NDAAs to try and set up a registry. We have 

a health study that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 

Registry is about to complete at eight sites around this country 

with the health impacts of PFAS that will give us that real health 

data on which to base the impact of PFAS, but it’s clear we know 

or we’re pretty sure it’s a carcinogen and so I hope that you will 

in fact take this seriously and I stand ready to be helpful in any 

way that I can. 

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Murphy. 

Senator MURPHY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you all for being here and for your service. 

As the new member of this subcommittee, General Milley, I’ve 

not had the pleasure to work with you through the appropriations 

process, but I am deeply grateful for your service and your willingness to continue to work with this committee. 

I wanted to speak with you for a moment about information warfare. Our National Defense Strategy today has a robust information 

component. Today, the amount of money that Russia and China are 

spending on propaganda unfortunately dwarfs the amount that we 

are allocating to fight misinformation. 

Obviously this has to be a component of your strategy, but you’re 

partnered often with the State Department. There are certain 

things you can do that the State Department cannot. For instance, 

the Global Engagement Center at the State Department funds notfor-profits and fact-checkers on China and Russia’s periphery that 

are trying to set the record straight. 

So I want to just to ask you about why that partnership is important. I think we have to a whole of government approach to fight-
233 

ing misinformation that involves making sure that your commanders have the ability to be nimble in fighting back against narratives that are endangering our Nation’s security and endangering 

their security, but also it means making sure the State Department 

has resources to do the same. 

General MILLEY. So, thanks, Senator, for the opportunity to comment. 

Information has always been critical to the conduct of war. 

Throughout history and it’s probably never more important than it 

is today, we’re in the Information Age. We’ve got a wide variety of 

information tools. We’ve got the explosion of social media. You’ve 

got all kinds of tools that literally you can walk around with, 

iPhones, for example, and these are very, very powerful tools. 

Now we’re in the age of artificial intelligence algorithms. You’ve 

got the ability to do deep fake stories out there with people or store 

other things. So this is an area in which we need to get better and 

we need to get more coordinated. 

Information oftentimes can be a decisive factor in the conduct of 

war. We’ve got a lot of really good programs inside the military and 

we know that we work well with intelligence agencies, for example, 

and the State Department, but this effort needs to be more coordinated and I think advanced to a greater level, given the capabilities of not only Russia but China. They have very significant information capabilities in cyber, very significant electronic warfare capabilities, and very significant disinformation capabilities, and 

they’re active every single day. 

So this is an area of real importance and we need to improve ourselves. 

Senator MURPHY. Well, thank you for challenging this committee 

to step up on that effort. 

General, Secretary Austin, there’s reports that the Pentagon has 

sought a high level meeting with your counterparts in China and 

obviously we have been missing high level dialogue with the Chinese since the flying of the Chinese balloons over U.S. air space. 

There’s no excuse for the provocative actions of the Chinese Government, but at the same time it’s not good when we’re not talking 

to each other at a high level and so my question is this. 

My belief is that there’s no choice to be made between having an 

effective China policy to try to make sure that their power does not 

expand in a way that hurts the United States and continuing a dialogue about the things where we can work together and the ways 

in which we address our challenges. 

Can you just talk about the state of the mil-to-mil dialogue with 

China and your views on whether it’s important to keep those 

channels open? 

Secretary AUSTIN. I think it’s critical, Senator. Thanks for bringing this topic up. 

I have reached out to my counterpart on a number of occasions. 

I have conducted face-to-face meetings with the former Minister of 

Defense. There’s a new Minister of Defense in the seat now. I’ve 

reached out to him. I’ve sent him a letter and offered to talk, as 

well. I’ll continue to do that. I think that’s critical. 

You know, when you have two countries with this kind of capability and we’re operating, you know, globally, I think we have to 
234 

have the ability to manage potential crises and really there are 

things that we will have to address from time to time and we really 

need to be able to pick up the phone and talk directly to senior people. 

So I’ll continue to work this. I think it’s really important. We’ll 

probably have another opportunity as we go out to Singapore for 

a conference in Singapore and if the opportunity presents itself, I’ll 

look to engage my counterpart. 

I think that we need to open that door and continue to engage 

each other. 

Senator MURPHY. Well, I appreciate your public statements to 

that effect and the outreach that you’re doing. Agree that these are 

not mutually exclusive goals to keep that dialogue open to avoid 

conflict, but also to make sure that we are plusing up resources 

both at DoD and at State to make sure that we are ready. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Boozman. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and — I’m 

sorry. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you for that. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOOZMAN. I was just with Senator Murray at another 

meeting. So I’ve got my Chairmen’s mixed up. 

I just want to say I agree with the point that Senator Murphy 

was trying to make that the communication really is real important. We’ve seen that in other areas when we’ve had situations like 

our situation with China and I know that you’re working really 

hard to do that. 

Congratulations to all of you for your great careers. We’re going 

to miss you, General Milley. Who would have thought that the 

young hockey player would have all the stars and have such a tremendous career? So again congratulations. 

Secretary Austin, you mentioned in your testimony that our cooperation with our allies and partners is central to co-developing 

best capabilities for our warfighters. 

Recently, the record of decision was signed by Secretary Kendall 

that will make Ebbing airfield in Fort Smith, Arkansas, the future 

home for F–35 U.S. allied pilot training. 

I continue to work with the Air Force to make having a premier 

pilot training center and ensure it’s ready for time to train our ally 

and partner pilots. 

Secretary Austin, can you briefly speak to how important this 

mission in Arkansas is to our national security? 

Secretary AUSTIN. It’s critical as our allies and partners invest 

in the kinds of capability that we have. F–35s are a great example. 

We need to make sure that we’re working together to increase 

interoperability and we do that, you know, by not only making sure 

that we have the policies and procedures in the right place but 

there’s frequent contact. This working together with each other is— 

you know, you can’t replace that. Also builds trust. 

We know that when you need trust, you can’t surge it. It has to 

be there. It’s something you’ve got to work on each and every day 

and so the capability that you’re speaking of in Arkansas I think 
235 

is critical and I know that we have some allies and partners that 

are really looking forward to using that capability. 

So thanks for what you’re doing to broaden our capacity here. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Okay. Thank you. In regard to the foreign 

military sales, there’s all kinds of benefits. We’ve seen that as stimulating the economy in our country and again just in providing the 

protection that we desperately need. 

Unfortunately, this system is overburdened with regulation, bureaucratic logjams, and according to Mr. Eric Fanning’s recent testimony in the Armed Services Committee it’s resulted in an average delay of over 18 months to get on contract. 

This leaves our allies vulnerable and turning to other countries 

to buy military capabilities. 

Secretary Austin, how does FMS (Foreign Military Sales) contribute to the department’s strategy of deterrence and what specific 

processes contribute to the unacceptable delay for getting capabilities on contract? 

Secretary AUSTIN. Well, certainly FMS helps us to magnify our 

capability because if our allies and partners are working with the 

same kinds of equipment and are skilled on that and using that 

equipment, then it’s really helpful in terms of expanding our footprint, our capability. 

In terms of the kinds of things that contribute to lags, there are 

a number of things that come together. One, industry owns a piece 

of that and we would hope that, you know, as the contracts are inactive that they’re able to meet the timelines and so coming out of 

a period of 2 years of COVID, that’s had an impact on a number 

of things. 

But there are also to your point bureaucratic issues that often 

get in the way. Now what we did, what I did early on 2 years ago 

was I put together a group of our senior people to really focus on 

the FMS process and to identify those bureaucratic issues and 

roadblocks that we could knock down and so that body continues 

its work and it’s hard work, but we’re going to do everything possible on our end to make sure that bureaucratic issues in the Pentagon are not solely holding things up, but again there are a number of things that come together to make this process more complicated than it should be. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Right. I know sometimes we make that more 

difficult. So I think I can speak for the committee if there’s anything we can do legislatively or, you know, be sure and let us know. 

That’s so very important. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Boozman, and I’m going to 

dovetail on to what you just said. 

I can tell you what Congress can do to make things easier, not 

default on our debt like the House of Representatives wants us to 

do. Get a budget done on time so these guys don’t have to deal with 

this uncertainty of a CR. Take the holds off the military promotions because, quite frankly, it’s flat stupid and politicizing our 

military. That’s what we can do and I know, Senator Boozman, 

you’re a good man and I don’t think you’d disagree with me. So 

thank you. 
236 

But the truth is, is this, Congress needs to step up and do their 

job. If we want to hold you guys accountable, if we want to hold 

the contractors that supply us with our military equipment accountable, we need to do our job and part of that job is making 

sure that we get a budget that keeps this country safe, and the 

other part of it is just not do stupid things like CRs and defaults 

and holding military promotions. 

I just want to say thank you. Thank you for what you do every 

single day to keep this country safe, to lead some of the finest people on earth in our military. We appreciate your testimony here 

today. 

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may ask additional questions. I would ask that you get 

back to them as quickly as you possibly can with a response. 

[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were 

submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hearing:] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LLOYD J. AUSTIN III 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. The budget request assumes an inflation rate of 2.4 percent. However, 

yesterday’s Consumer Price Index is now at 4.9 percent—lower than last year’s 

peak, but still higher than your budget. 

Secretary Austin, have you re-reviewed your budget request to account for price 

increases? Have you identified specific programs where you’re going to be short of 

what’s required to buy what you need? 

If yes, can you please provide that data to the Committee? 

Answer. This is a strategy-driven budget designed to implement the 2022 National 

Defense Strategy and the budget incorporates the Administration’s FY 24 inflation 

projections. The Department thanks Congress for the additional funding and authorities provided in FY 2023 to help us on key areas like fuel, housing, and subsistence allowances. 

The Department is working to counter the impacts of inflation and looks forward 

to working with Congress on this important matter. Our budget request uses inflation estimates provided by OMB, which are similar to those recently released by 

Congressional Budget Office. If those estimates do not prove to be on target, that 

will stress our ability to execute our budget. 

The Department continues to assess the impacts of inflation and will continue to 

work with both the Administration and Congress to address resource implications. 

I can assure you that I will never hesitate to ask the President for the resources 

I believe we need to execute the mission. 

Question. Based on current trends, are you comfortable with DoD’s 2.4 percent estimate for next year? 

Answer. The 2.4 percent estimate for FY24 is OMB’s government-wide inflation 

projection, which the Department is required to use. It is very similar to the most 

recent estimate of 2.7 percent from the Congressional Budget Office. However, if the 

inflation estimates once again undershoot the real inflation rate, it may stress our 

ability to get all of our programs on contract and delivered in full on time. Similar 

to prior years, we may have to reprogram funds, such as for utilities, to address 

emergent requirements. 

Question. For good reason, when we talk about China, we spend a lot of our time 

talking about its bad behavior in the Taiwan Strait. 

However, we can’t overlook the fact that China’s global ambitions are presenting 

problems for every Combatant Command, including in Africa and Latin America. If 

we only prepare for a high-end Indo-Pacific fight, we will come up short worldwide. 

Secretary Austin, these Combatant Commands aren’t afforded significant force 

structure. Are they sufficiently resourced to ensure we remain the preferred partner 

of these regions? It seems to me that for relatively minor investments, we could 

make major headway here. 
237 

Answer. In FY 2023, the Department allocated more than $130 million in appropriated funds for security cooperation programs to build the capacity of foreign partner national security forces in Central America, the Caribbean, and South America, 

and also $175 million for such programs for foreign partner national security forces 

in Africa. These investments are in addition to the up to $200 million appropriated 

under section 8068 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2023, for 

USAFRICOM or USSOUTHCOM to expand cooperation or improve the capabilities 

of allies and foreign partners in their areas of responsibility. This totals over a half 

a billion dollars in FY 2023 spending to expand cooperation and build partner capacity. 

With the concurrence of the Secretary of State, the Department will continue to 

prioritize smart, targeted investments in and with these partners to deepen our 

shared security and build real capability in a way that strengthens security sector 

governance and enhances strategic resilience, within a global prioritization of security cooperation efforts. 

Question. The War in Ukraine is now entering its second year, and both sides are 

gearing up for a spring offensive. 

There are some who argue that given the threat from China, we can’t afford to 

invest in Ukraine. I strongly disagree but defer to our military experts. 

Mr. Secretary, to date, over $60 billion has been appropriated for Ukraine’s defense needs. Do you have the resources you need to continue supporting Ukraine? 

Answer. Ukraine’s battlefield requirements have evolved over time since Russia’s 

unprovoked full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022. The security assistance we 

provide Ukraine is based on a collective assessment of the capability needed for success on the battlefield. Shifting dynamics on the ground necessitate agility in our 

security assistance efforts. The consistent and strong bipartisan support from Congress continues to help Ukraine make key gains, and we will continue evaluating 

the need for additional funding as the situation on the ground evolves. 

Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons to load up our 

weapons magazines for future contingencies. 

In this year’s budget, the Department is proposing multi-year procurement agreements for 9 different munitions. This would provide significant predictability and 

stability to the industrial base. 

Secretary Austin, what is the industry feedback to these proposed contracts? 

Answer. First, let me thank Congress for supporting our multi-year procurement 

authorities request in FY 2023. These authorities will help us send a clear demand 

signal to industry as we work to build our munitions stockpile to be read to fight 

and win in any contest if called upon. 

Industry feedback on our request for multi-year procurement authorities has generally been positive. Industry leaders see the advantages of increased predictability 

of demand from the Department. This persistent demand provides a signal to the 

industrial base, and it helps provide stability for sub-tier suppliers. Department and 

Service leadership are currently meeting with industry to map out the multi-year 

plans to increase inventory, reduce cost, and improve industrial base resilience. 

Multi-year procurement contracts remain a valuable tool for the Department to procure the munitions needed to support national defense. Moving forward, we will continue to advocate for ways to increase long-term flexibility for critical munitions to 

ensure that we have the rounds that we need. 

Question. Secretary Austin, have you mapped-out the supply chains for each of 

these contracts to ensure that there won’t be bottlenecks as quantities increase? 

Answer. That work is currently underway. There are multiple, critical components 

with long lead times across the Department’s programs, and several are common to 

multiple systems for which we are pursuing multi-year procurement. We are examining approaches for enabling those suppliers to meet the necessary ramp-up. Industry is also looking across its portfolios to identify commonality of critical components 

with long lead times and broadcast these demand signals across the industrial base. 

Question. Shortages in our supply chain are delaying major programs across every 

military Service, hampering our ability to field new capabilities to the warfighter 

on cost and on time. 

Secretary Austin, when the Department makes a contract award, how does it 

track the performance of suppliers? It seems we often rely on the prime contractor 

instead of identifying and managing key suppliers ourselves. The results have been 

mixed. 

Answer. The Department tracks performance of its suppliers via the Federal-wide 

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System to measure the quality and 

timely reporting of past performance information. The prime contractor is held responsible for managing their supply chains, including tracking sub-supplier per-
238 

formance. The Department is currently evaluating other methods and approaches to 

engage with sub-suppliers on a more regular basis. 

Question. Secretary Austin, this budget request includes billions of dollars of direct spending to suppliers in the industrial base. If we don’t have the data to track 

what they’re providing—and to whom—how are we ensuring that this investment 

is paying dividends and accelerating weapons deliveries? 

Answer. I agree that the Department needs data to track whether or not we are 

getting equipment into the hands of warfighters as soon as possible, an effort that 

is ongoing in the Department. We have also worked with industry to identify steps 

it can take to accelerate production, such as workforce initiatives and advance procurement of long lead time items. We have also leveraged authorities such as the 

Defense Priorities and Allocations System under DPA title I to help accelerate deliveries. 

The accelerated deliveries we are seeing from these engagements and investments 

show that these efforts are paying dividends, especially in Ukraine. For instance, 

these efforts have enabled production of 155mm artillery projectiles at a higher 

monthly throughput and did so 6 months earlier than were originally projected. 

Similarly, suppliers in the GMLRS supply chain have been able to increase production rates ahead of schedule, increasing overall deliveries compared to last year. 

These multi-pronged efforts are building enduring industrial capacity, both to support Ukraine and potential conflict with peer adversaries and to ensure the security 

of the United States, our partners, and our allies. 

Question. The Department of Defense spends roughly $40 billion a year on Information Technology systems. 

However, instead of delivering modernized and transformational IT systems, the 

end product is often behind schedule and over budget. This is not just a DoD problem, the VA struggles with the exact same issue. 

For example, the Navy’s new pay and personnel system has disrupted pay and 

benefits for thousands of sailors and veterans in recent years. This is unacceptable. 

Secretary Austin, how can we close the gap between what we need these IT systems to do for us and what is actually delivered in a timely and cost-effective manner? 

Answer. DoD recognizes the imperative of improved software to enable defense operations using modern development approaches. Following the publication of the 

DoD Software Modernization Strategy in 2022, the Department is transitioning to 

an agile approach to buy, develop, and deliver secure software at the speed of relevance, while adapting DoD culture to embrace modernization. Further, the Department has implemented the Software Acquisition pathway under the Adaptive Acquisition system to support this approach. By adopting this strategy, software is being 

delivered more consistently, faster, and more securely than ever before. 

Question. Secretary Austin, what processes do you have in place to ensure we are 

getting what we pay for? 

Answer. DoD has several procedures in place to ensure that it is receiving the Information Technology (IT) systems for which it paid. These include management of 

requirements, procurement, development, testing, deployment, operation, maintenance, and oversight. The complexity, speed, and cost of IT systems are some of the 

issues DoD must overcome to maintain the effectiveness and efficiency of its IT systems. Despite these obstacles, DoD is dedicated to making sure it receives value for 

the money spent on IT systems. 

Question. This budget request is again proposing record investments in research 

and development. You are asking for $145 billion dollars in R&D spending, which 

is more than $5.2 billion over the fiscal year 2023 enacted amount. 

Mr. Secretary for years, R&D has been used to mature and prototype technologies 

like hypersonic weapons and artificial intelligence. These technologies will give us 

decisive capabilities in a near-peer competition with China, so when will they become real programs that are fielded at scale? My concern is that we are at risk of 

falling into the trap of ‘perennial prototyping’, and not actually delivering capability 

in relevant numbers to our troops by increasing procurement. This budget does not 

transition prototypes to procurement in significant numbers. 

Answer. The Department is in a period of modernization that will ensure our ability to deter and, if necessary, defeat any potential adversary. This necessitates that 

the Department experiment with new capabilities and invest in inserting new technology into our systems to provide our warfighters with the capabilities they need 

to meet the pacing challenge. 

The Department is constantly working to improve existing tools and pathways to 

transition technology. The Middle Tier of Acquisition opens new opportunities for 

program offices to prototype and/or field new capability while developing the documentation for a formal program of record. The Department’s Competitive Advantage 
239 

Pathfinders initiative is identifying bureaucratic gaps in our system and working 

with the Services to develop or inform new processes in the Defense Acquisition System. 

Through the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve program, we are also developing the capacity for rapid prototyping, to deliver game-changing capabilities to the 

battlefield quickly. We are focused on getting the right capabilities as fast as possible to the warfighter. 

Finally, the Department has stood up a new Acquisition Integration and Interoperability office to address the challenges in acquiring and managing joint capabilities, including transitioning new technology. 

Question. Congress has established a Commission to review the Department’s 

budget process and make recommendations to speed up the process of getting stuff 

to the warfighter. Often, these Commissions point the finger at Congress (in some 

cases, rightfully so!) without addressing barriers inside the Department that you 

could fix yourself. 

Secretary Austin, where do you feel the primary pitfalls are in DoD’s current 

budget process, and what is the Department doing internally to improve its processes? 

Answer. Delivering state-of-the-art capabilities at speed and scale is critical to ensuring that we maintain our enduring military advantage. The Department regularly reviews obstacles across the acquisition, requirements, and resourcing systems 

to maximize critical capability delivery. Any discussion regarding speeding up acquisition must also account for the considerable effort required leading up to the initiation of procurement processes, namely the identifying military requirements and 

securing resources. For that reason, the Department works collaboratively between 

program and acquisition workforces to improve our policies and processes to get the 

right capabilities to the warfighter as fast as possible. 

Question. Mr. Secretary, Congress has already provided authorities to reduce paperwork and speed up acquisitions. Yet we continue to hear about internal roadblocks, such as long contracting times. How are you addressing this? 

Answer. Maintaining focused alignment to the strategy while balancing limited resources across the Department’s many competing missions, priorities, and constituencies is always the primary challenge throughout the programming and budgeting 

process. Over the last several cycles, the Department has made significant progress 

toward implementing the 2022 National Defense Strategy by actively shaping our 

internal review processes to ensure that senior leadership’s program and budget deliberations are tightly scoped to the most compelling challenges facing the Department. By streamlining the avenues for the submission of issues utilizing both topdown and bottom-up processes and emphasizing the analytic and programmatic 

links to the strategic priorities and focus areas, the Department continues to substantively improve the budget-to-strategy alignment. 

Delivering state-of-the-art capabilities at speed and scale is critical to ensuring 

that we maintain our military advantage. The Department brought together a team 

that is actively identifying obstacles across the acquisition, requirements, and 

resourcing systems, and working to deliver critical capability faster. We are also implementing organizational improvements, coordinating with allies and partners and 

industry, and using lessons learned from our Foreign Military Sales tiger team to 

ensure that acquisitions can rapidly support the joint force and our allies and partners. Through the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve program, we are also developing the capacity for rapid prototyping, to deliver game-changing capabilities to 

the battlefield quickly. We are focused on getting the right capabilities to the 

warfighter as fast as possible. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR RICHARD J. DURBIN

Question. Can the Department describe how it will engage with EPA to establish 

robust, safe, and science-based clean-up standards to protect communities and to 

continuing to update these standards with EPA as science and technology on PFAS 

contamination evolve? 

Answer. There is nothing I take more seriously than the safety, health, and wellbeing of the force, of our military families, and of the communities around our installations. The Department has taken a number of actions over the last few years 

to remove PFAS from things we currently use—like firefighting foam—to strengthen 

our drinking water monitoring efforts, and to provide support to Service members 

who have healthcare concerns about past PFAS exposure. PFAS are a national challenge, and the Department is committed to doing our part. We continue to work 

with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to understand the potential 
240 

health impacts from PFAS-impacted drinking water, and support EPA efforts to finalize a safe drinking water standard for PFAS to also be used in our PFAS cleanups nationwide. 

Question. Please detail the Department’s research and development of PFAS alternatives in critical uses in national security including but not limited to microelectronics and weapons systems, and non-incineration PFAS destruction technologies, 

including but not limited to: electrochemical oxidation, SCWO, and other thermal 

treatment processes? 

Answer. The Department is currently assessing the mission and readiness risks 

associated with emerging constraints in the PFAS supply chain. Currently, PFAS 

are enablers of critical defense technologies and have essential application to our 

critical infrastructure. PFAS also have essential uses in microelectronics, semiconductors, energy storage, and batteries. 

To fully address PFAS in our systems and to develop and scale alternatives, we 

have a long road of research and development ahead of us. We will work with suppliers to rapidly assess and adopt alternatives currently under development that 

meet performance specifications. The Department’s research and development officials are working with our best scientists across the interagency to develop a longterm plan for replacements. We estimate that it may be between six to 10 years 

before viable alternatives can be developed and demonstrated, with the potential for 

significant associated costs. 

Question. How does the Department plan on coordinating with relevant agencies, 

industry, and academia to research alternatives to these critical PFAS in both? 

Answer. We must be deliberate in taking a nationwide, cross government approach to ensure research investments are efficient and complementary as we jointly seek to determine the viability and scalability of alternatives to PFAS. The Department’s Emerging Chemicals Governance Council oversees coordinated lines of 

effort to identify essential uses of PFAS and prioritize actions according to 

vulnerabilities to national security. The Department is also expanding resources, as 

well as working within the Strategic Environmental Research Development Program, an interagency group established in statute to review development needs. In 

addition, the Department coordinates with industry and the interagency through 

routine engagement meetings to discuss obsolescence risks and possible PFAS alternatives. 

Question. As the Department advances in destruction technologies, can you work 

to assure that these alternatives do not release PFAS or products of their incomplete destruction into the air, water, or other environmental media? 

Answer. DoD is committed to using and advancing the best available science and 

treatment technologies to treat, destroy, and dispose of PFAS. The Department currently uses disposal options with the most stringent controls where an environmental regulator has issued a permit for the facility. The Department is engaging 

in robust efforts to advance our knowledge on destruction removal efficiencies, potential releases of products of incomplete destruction, and effective emission control 

devices. This year, the Department’s Environmental Security Technology Certification Program will award over $40 million to 16 projects focused on improving the 

effectiveness and reducing the implementation costs of advanced destruction technologies. 

Question. Can the Department achieve a broader phase-out of non-essential, or 

non-critical, PFAS uses and procurement in the next 10 years? 

Answer. We are rapidly and deliberately assessing uses of PFAS in the Department’s supply chain. However, it is difficult to determine a timeline for completion. 

We are phasing out non- essential and non-critical uses of PFAS where there is no 

mission impact such as in food packaging, cookware, furniture, and personal protective firefighting equipment in accordance with requirements. However, the PFAS 

supply chain is not transparent, and it will require multiple government agencies 

working together to phase out non-essential or non-critical PFAS uses and procurement. We will continue to keep the Congress informed on this issue. 

Question. If not, can you put a timeline on how long such a phase out may take? 

Answer. It is difficult to establish a timeline for completion. We are challenged 

by the need for transparency in the supply chain, the complexity of dissecting the 

defense industrial base value chain, anticipating market dynamics, identifying the 

number and specificity of products requiring alternatives, related requalification requirements, and the complexity of the supply chain dependencies. Nevertheless, the 

Department is committed to addressing this important issue deliberately and expeditiously, and keeping the Congress informed as we work through this process. 
241 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BRIAN SCHATZ

Existing Red Hill Health Registry 

Question. During the May 11 hearing, Secretary Austin confirmed that DoD established a registry of potentially exposed individuals to the Red Hill fuel spill. 

Is this registry synonymous with the DOEHRS Red Hill incident report? 

Answer. Yes, this registry is synonymous with the Red Hill Defense Occupational 

and Environmental Health Readiness System (DOEHRS) Incident Report. 

Question. What population is included in the registry? Are non-DoD affiliated individuals included? 

Answer. DoD-affiliated individuals potentially exposed to the JP–5 fuel release in 

November 2021 are included in the registry. Non-DoD-affiliated individuals are not 

eligible to be included in the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report. 

Question. Are individualized health data captured within this registry? 

Answer. No. Individual health data for TRICARE beneficiaries is maintained in 

the DoD electronic health record system, which can be linked to the Red Hill 

DOEHRS Incident Report by DoD Identification Number. 

Question. How will DoD utilize these data to track long-term health effects? 

Answer. DoD will analyze healthcare encounter data to determine whether there 

is any presence of health conditions which occur at a greater frequency than would 

otherwise be expected in the general population. 

Future Red Hill Health Registry Options 

Question. There is limited data on the long-term health effects of exposure to jet 

fuel, particularly for vulnerable populations like pregnant people and young children. This lack of data means that it is essential to take up ATSDR’s recommendation to launch a third-party registry and conduct long-term epidemiological studies 

of the exposed population. DHA has indicated that it is exploring potential avenues, 

including a third-party registry. Time is of the essence as the longer DHA delays, 

the harder it will be to ensure a comprehensive account of all who were exposed. 

How many individuals have been added to the Red Hill incident report through 

the hotline? 

Answer. 446 out of 28,626 individuals in the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report 

were added through the call center. 

Question. A critical function of an effective registry is as a communications tool, 

including sharing resources and new data as it becomes available. Beyond the initial 

outreach to housing sponsors to inform them that they and their dependents were 

included in the Red Hill incident report, how has DHA used this tool to share information with individuals included? 

Answer. DoD publicly presented an interim update on registry planning at the 

last Hawaii Fuel Tank Advisory Committee in November 2022 and will do so again 

in June 2023. We are also actively engaged in communication with the surrounding 

and affected community. Once Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam workers are added 

to the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report, which we expect to be within the next 

month, DoD will update all sponsors in the Red Hill DOEHRS Incident Report by 

email. 

Question. If DHA adopts a third-party registry: Would the registry be procured 

and administered by DoD or HHS? 

Answer. The registry will be funded by DoD. A third party will independently administer the registry via a DoD grant. 

Question. How does DHA intend to consult with subject matter experts on the design and operation of the registry, including ATSDR? 

Answer. DoD has been regularly consulting with exposure registry subject matter 

experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry and the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Question. How will DHA ensure it is managed and maintained independently? 

Answer. DHA is committed to a fully independent Red Hill registry through 

awarding a grant to a qualified third partner. 

Question. What is DHA’s plan to collaborate with trusted community partners on 

this effort? 

Answer. DHA expects that the selected registry partner will actively engage with 

the Red Hill community and consider their needs, values, and preferences in the design and conduct of the Red Hill registry. This will be written into the grant requirements. 

Question. Does DHA have authorities necessary to transfer data from DOEHRS 

to ATSDR/its contracted grantee? If not, what authorities are required? 

Answer. Yes, DHA generally has the authority to enter into a data use agreement. 

Question. What steps will DHA take to ensure effective recruitment of civilians? 
242 

Answer. DHA will work with the third-party registry partner, the Hawaii Department of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the EPA, and other partners to ensure individuals potentially exposed to the fuel release are educated and encouraged to enroll in the 

registry. 

Question. How long would DHA intend to maintain the registry? 

Answer. DHA does not have a registry end date at this time. DHA will support 

the registry as long as it maintains value to the Red Hill community, stakeholders, 

public health authorities, and researchers. 

Question. What factors would DHA weigh to decide whether to maintain or suspend the registry? 

Answer. DHA will support the registry as long as it maintains value to the Red 

Hill community, stakeholders, public health authorities, and researchers. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR TAMMY BALDWIN

Building and Maintaining the Defense Industrial Base 

Question. One takeaway military leaders mention regarding institutional lessons 

learned from our support for Ukraine is the importance of the domestic defense industrial base and the ability to quickly ramp-up production to meet replenishment 

requirements. The U.S. is currently struggling to replenish munitions stockpiles as 

the war with Ukraine continues—just one example why not just building a strong 

and enduring defense industrial base is critical to meet today’s challenges and future threats. 

What is the Department of Defense’s current assessment of the domestic defense 

industrial base’s ability to meet sudden increases in demand, particularly with regards to munitions production, in the wake of unexpected geopolitical developments 

such as the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine? 

Answer. America’s defense industrial base (DIB) is one of our core strategic assets, 

and the Department is focused on shoring up this advantage. Decades of under-investment in critical munitions and an uneven message to the DIB have resulted in 

some challenges to its ability to quickly respond to demand. However, we have seen 

significant improvement over the past 2 years, particularly as the DIB has moved 

to support Ukraine’s self-defense and maintain U.S. readiness. 

We are sending steady and certain demand signals to industry, in particular 

through a $170 billion FY24 President’s budget (PB) request for procurement—the 

largest ever—and seeking multi-year procurement authorities for critical munitions. 

I am regularly briefed on the status of our munition stocks given the ongoing need 

to provide weapons to Ukraine, backfill stocks for the United States, and support 

our allies and partners. Securing investments in munitions to meet the quantities 

necessary today and tomorrow is critical to our ability to deter and, if necessary, 

defeat any would-be challenger. 

Question. Does the President’s proposed defense budget provide sufficient predictability and support for the defense industrial base, particularly in capital and laborintensive areas such as shipbuilding, vehicle maintenance, and other related sectors? 

Answer. Yes. The Department is making major investments to shore up shipbuilding, including in the FY24 PB request: $2.7 billion for the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan, and $1.2 billion for the submarine industrial base. We are 

also working to on-shore defense supply chains, including FY24 budget request investments of $2.6 billion in microelectronics, $177 million in forging and casting, 

and more than $250 million in critical materials. This budget request also includes 

$48.1 billion for modernization of our naval forces, and you will see us deliver nine 

battle force ships this year. 

Question. What is the status of the Department’s implementation of Executive 

Order 14005? 

Answer. The Department is committed to maximizing the use of goods, products, 

and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States, consistent 

with Made in America laws and regulations. 

The Department plays an instrumental role with other Federal agencies to implement Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All 

of America’s Workers. The Department is supporting the implementation of the 

order in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rule (FAR Case 2021—008), effective October 25, 2022, that executes an initial increase of the domestic content 

threshold from 55% to 60% and then a phased, multi-year increase to 75% by calendar year 2029. 
243 

The Executive Order also requires the Department to submit bi-annual reports to 

the Office of Management and Budget/Made in America Office describing progress 

toward the implementation of and compliance with Made in America laws and the 

Department’s use of waivers or exceptions. The most recent report submitted in February 2023 included a Build America, Buy America Act Implementation Plan. The 

Department is currently supporting the development of further implementing guidance in the FAR and Defense FAR Supplement. 

Clean-up parity between Active Duty and National Guard locations 

Question. I am committed to ensuring that the Defense Environmental Restoration Program successfully cleans up all toxic elements in impacted areas, to include 

National Guard locations. In previous years there was a discrepancy between access 

to funding between active component and National Guard installations. Due to a 

policy change in 2017, the National Guard was removed from the Defense Environmental Restoration Program and no longer had the same access to funds as active 

duty locations. My colleagues and I secured a reversal of this policy to place National Guard installations back into the program. 

How does the program currently prioritize sites for clean-up of hazardous substances? 

Answer. The Department shares your concern about hazardous substances and 

the safety, health, and welfare of all personnel on DoD bases as well as members 

of the surrounding communities in and around our facilities. The Department 

prioritizes sites based on risk, by evaluating the relative risk to human health and 

the environment and addressing the highest risk sites first across all installations, 

including National Guard installations. 

Question. Do National Guard installations currently have access to clean-up funds 

through the Defense Environmental Restoration Program? 

Answer. Yes. National Guard installations that meet the requirements for the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), as updated by the FY 2023 

NDAA, have access to clean-up funds under that program. Each Military Department prioritizes the cleanup of its DERP sites based on risk. The Air Force and 

Army prioritize their sites and DERP-eligible National Guard sites together and address the highest risk sites first. 

Question. What was the impact of being removed from the program for National 

Guard installations and what is being done to address any backlog that National 

Guard installations may have experienced when they were excluded from the program? 

Answer. The Department is committed to addressing releases at National Guard 

installations. National Guard sites impacted with certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl 

substances, had full access to Defense Environmental Restoration Program funds 

during the time period covered in the FY23 NDAA provision, and the Department 

will continue to ensure that all facilities, including National Guard installations 

have access to clean-up funds. 

Noise Mitigation 

Question. The Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation provides critical assistance to counties and municipalities to both foster cooperation with military installations as well as to address any concerns or challenges communities encounter 

as neighbors to military installations. 

This office has provided critical assistance to Wisconsin in the form of a planning 

and outreach grant as the state starts to receive the F–35 aircraft at Truax Airfield 

in Madison. 

I’ve noticed a trend over the last few years in which the budget request for 

OLDCC falls well below what many deem necessary to accomplish its increasing 

program demands. 

What are you doing to support OLDCC as it expands in both staffing levels and 

in demand for its programs? 

Answer. The Department recognizes that defense communities provide indispensable support to our installations, our Service members, and their families, and that 

it is imperative that we be conscientious and committed partners with those communities. The Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation (OLDCC) staff and programs are a critical component of that partnership, and the Department remains 

committed to community outreach programs that improve community infrastructure 

and improve installation resilience. 

Question. Does the current budget for this program support this critical community outreach program? 

Answer. Yes, it does. The FY24 budget request for OLDCC is $118.2 million. The 

Department appreciates the work the OLDCC does with states and communities to 
244 

respond to defense activities and actions and will continue to ensure they have the 

resources necessary to fully carry out their programs of assistance. 

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Question. Budget Top-line: Today, China already has the largest Navy and Army 

in the world. Its Navy and Air Force will continue to grow and modernize while this 

budget request proposes to shrink our Navy and the Air Force. I am having trouble 

squaring the Administration’s national security strategy with a budget request that 

proposes to increase non-defense spending by 8.5 percent, while defense spending 

would increase at a rate of 3.3 percent, which is less than half the rate of growth 

for non-defense spending. 

Does the budget request include only those China-related investments that fit 

within external constraints (e.g. topline from OMB)? 

Answer. The President’s FY 2024 Defense budget request is a strategy-driven 

budget which aims to fund the right mix of capabilities necessary to deter and, if 

necessary, fight to win in any contingency. The 2022 National Defense Strategy 

(NDS) makes clear that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is our pacing challenge and we have crafted a budget that addresses that challenge. 

As the PRC races to modernize its military, this budget makes major investments 

in our dominance in all warfighting domains, including space and cyber, and invests 

in integrated air and missile defenses and operational energy efficiency. The budget 

also invests in critical munitions, including hypersonic and sub-sonic weapons, to 

sustain our military advantage. The FY 2024 budget request includes $9.1 billion 

for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, an increase of more than 40% over the FY 2023 

enacted level. These funds will support the development of advanced capabilities, 

new operational concepts, and a more resilient force posture in the Indo- Pacific region as we continue to work to build the Joint Force necessary to maintain dominance and have a distributed and resilient security architecture in the region. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. Secretary Austin, thousands of U.S. service members, five ships and 

more than 150 aircraft are participating in Northern Edge 2023 (NE23–1), a joint 

field training exercise at various locations in and around Alaska, which began 4 

May 2023. Preliminary reports state there have been challenges with the coordination of Link16 between the DoD and FAA. 

Are these challenges having a tangible impact on our military competitiveness 

both in the ability to execute training and to modernize our weapon systems? 

Answer. The Northern Edge joint training exercise is an important opportunity for 

the Department to learn about our capabilities in a high-end conflict, and to identify 

challenges that we must address to remain dominant on the battlefield. 

Link 16 is critical for coordinating joint fires between our partner nations and 

ourselves and providing essential situational awareness to protect Allied forces from 

hostile and friendly fire threats during this exercise. The spectrum employed by 

Link 16 in CONUS is allocated to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and 

used for radio navigation aids utilized in the national airspace, so we must strike 

a balance between our needs for operational training and the FAA’s requirement to 

prevent interference with navigation radars and collision avoidance systems. 

From a military competitiveness perspective, there have been no significant impacts to modernization efforts. However, DoD is currently working with FAA to develop new certification and deconfliction procedures to expedite the approval of Link 

16 systems to permit unconstrained operations in the national airspace. 

Question. Can you discuss some of the current impacts experienced? 

Answer. There have been some challenges to exercises and training due to this 

current restriction of requiring FAA approval within 200 nautical miles of the 

United States. My staff is engaged with the FAA to resolve this issue in a way that 

supports DoD use of the National Airspace System while ensuring safe and efficient 

use by commercial and general aviation. We also continue to work with the Services 

to ensure these impacts are minimal by initiating requests as early as possible and 

ensuring that FAA coordination is present during all exercise and event planning. 

Question. Were there difficulties getting Link16 approval from the FAA for NE23– 

1 and if the approval hadn’t gone through last minute what would the impacts have 

been to this exercise? 

Answer. While there were some challenges, FAA collaborated with DoD extensively to facilitate the objectives of the Northern Edge exercise. Without the approval of the FAA, our exercise would not have delivered a realistic training envi-
245 

ronment for our warfighters, and we would have lacked the interoperability we seek 

with joint counterparts and allies. 

Question. Secretary Austin, recently I was on a CODEL to Ukraine, and I continue to be awe-inspired by the resilience of the Ukrainian people and the leadership of President Zelenskyy in the face of the unspeakable atrocities unleashed 

against them by Vladimir Putin. More than ever, I am fully committed to ensuring 

that Congress provides the assistance that Ukraine needs. This assistance is not a 

waste and is vital to their success. We recently saw the Ukrainians use their Patriot 

Battery to shoot down an inbound Russian ballistic missile. I want to thank you, 

Mr. Secretary and Chairman Miley, for your unwavering support of Ukraine and for 

the assistance you provided them. However, for all this success, there are areas in 

which they need greater assistance. For example, Russia’s electronic warfare capabilities have been taking a significant toll on Ukraine’s forces. 

Mr. Secretary, can you explain what the DoD has done to bolster Ukraine’s electronic warfare capabilities? 

Answer. The Department provides Ukraine with equipment based on a collective 

assessment of the capabilities Ukraine needs to be successful on the battlefield, 

while balancing U.S. readiness requirements, required training, sustainability, and 

other factors. Our assistance to Ukraine has included defense articles to support 

Ukraine’s electronic warfare capabilities such as electronic jamming equipment and 

detection equipment. This equipment, combined with all the other security assistance we have provided, has helped the Ukrainians to achieve success on the battlefield. 

Question. What are we doing to bolster our own electronic warfare capabilities? 

Answer. The Department is taking actions to bolster our capabilities to fight in 

a contested and congested electromagnetic spectrum. We are investing in advanced 

technologies and fielding electromagnetic warfare capabilities with intelligent analytics to address the sophisticated near-peer threat. We continue to invest in offensive electromagnetic attack capabilities and pathfinder initiatives which leverage 

Service-specific electronic warfare investments and rapidly transition them to other 

Services. In addition, we have increased manning and resourcing at USSTRATCOM 

to expand training and exercising, which enable an assessment of the performance 

of our operational forces and systems in a contested and congested electromagnetic 

spectrum. 

Question. Secretary Austin, in the FY2023 NDAA, Section 603 authorized several 

policies that will drastically improve the quality of life of soldiers stationed in Alaska. After making inquiries with leadership in the state, I understand there has been 

no guidance released for how these new policies should be implemented. 

Servicemembers are missing out on time-limited incentives to help alleviate the 

unique hardships of serving in Alaska, as well as improve recruitment and retention 

in the state. This is not AIP (Assignment Incentive Pay) from the Army programmed budget, which includes all AIP programs (Korea, USASOC, CYBER, Operational Deployments, etc.) whereas when soldiers arrive in Alaska and signs a written agreement to serve the prescribed tour. Congressional intent is for this to be 

in addition to what the Army is currently providing service members through AIP. 

What is the status on implementation of Section 603(a) of P. L. No. 117–263 regarding cold weather special duty pay? 

Answer. The Department thanks Congress for enacting laws that allow the Department to assign incentive pay and special duty pay to members serving in coldweather locations. Implementation of policies pertaining to cold weather special 

duty pay is on track. 

The Military Departments have the necessary flexibility to offer the monetary incentives Congress envisioned to Service members assigned to cold weather locations. 

Monetary incentives in these locations are dependent on and driven by the needs 

of the individual Services. The Secretaries of the Military Departments have sufficient authority to establish or abolish assignment incentive pay or special duty pay 

for cold weather and to increase or decrease the amounts payable for any assignment, location, or unit at any time as necessitated by mission requirements. These 

incentives are currently being implemented within existing restrictions and limitations in accordance with the needs of the individual Services. In addition to the onetime, lump-sum assignment incentive pay the Army pays to Soldiers accepting assignments to Alaska, members of all Services serving in Alaska receive an overseas 

cost-of-living allowance to compensate them for the increased costs of non-housing 

goods and services. Furthermore, members assigned to installations above the Arctic 

Circle receive $150 per month in hardship duty pay. 

Question. When should servicemembers expect to begin to receive a cold weather 

duty pay? 
246 

Answer. Service members can expect to receive cold weather duty pay if the Secretary of the Military Department concerned determines such pay is required to 

meet and/or maintain mission requirements. 

Question. Secretary Austin, in response to Executive Order 14017, the DoD drafted a report titled Review of Critical Minerals and Materials—Department of Defense. This report highlights the challenges that DoD faces in their efforts to maintain secure supply chains and reduce net import reliance on necessary strategic and 

critical minerals. For many who have been following critical minerals, this report 

looks a lot like the reports that came before it. It screams out loud that we have 

a problem. It highlights the current vulnerabilities we face with our high levels of 

import reliance for some of these minerals and it highlights the potential dangers 

that reliance poses for the United States. 

Given that this report is nearly 2 years old, please explain what progress the department has made in addressing the key concerns? 

Answer. America’s defense industrial base is one of our core strategic assets and 

we are focused on shoring up this advantage, including by on-shoring several defense supply chains and mineral production. The Department’s FY24 budget request 

invests more than $250 million in critical materials. We are also deploying several 

tools to mitigate reliance on foreign produced critical minerals. This includes increasing our stockpiles and investing domestic capability under the Defense Production Act, where practicable. 

Question. Are we more or less import reliant on these minerals now than we were 

2 years ago? 

Answer. On balance, the Department’s net import reliance for 2023 is approximately the same compared to 2021. Reducing the Department’s reliance on imports 

will occur over the long-term. DoD has made key investments over the last 2 years 

to reduce import reliance for strategic and critical materials to safeguard supply 

chains and preserve national security. The DoD has awarded and is continuing to 

evaluate awards for Defense Production Act title III investment funds to build domestic mining and processing capacity for a range of critical materials, including 

rare earth elements, battery storage minerals, and more. 

Question. How has the war in Ukraine changed the DoD’s priority of addressing 

the vulnerabilities in this report? 

Answer. The war in Ukraine has reinforced the urgent need to secure supply 

chains for critical materials necessary for key DoD systems. The recent Presidential 

Waiver authorizing the use of the Defense Production Act to bolster domestic capacity for materials and systems demonstrates the Administration’s and DoD’s commitment to this effort. The waiver allows DoD to expand domestic production capabilities for key minerals to help secure munitions supply chains. The war in Ukraine 

has provided real-world data on supply chain dynamics in times of crisis, information which is informing analysis to model DoD materials stockpiling needs. 

Question. Congress supported the recommendation to open title III DPA funds for 

EV mineral projects. Can you please provide information into what projects have 

been funded, how much funding has been awarded to date, and the number of applications DoD has received for funding? 

Answer. The Department is grateful for Congressional support in our efforts to secure the battery supply chain. Batteries are a vital component in weapon systems, 

including missiles and munitions. The Inflation Reduction Act provided DoD’s DPA 

fund with $250 million to address sourcing for these vital raw materials. Currently, 

DoD is evaluating various proposals to resolve gaps in this supply chain. These potential projects range from feasibility studies to modernization and construction of 

production facilities. Planned investments in battery materials include graphite, 

lithium, manganese, nickel, and cobalt with an average project value of $28 million. 

The Department anticipates announcing awards in the next few months. 

Question. What additional authorities or resources does the DoD require to reduce 

the overall level of vulnerability that this report laid out? 

Answer. DoD’s continued efforts to secure critical and strategic materials require 

Congressional support of the Department’s FY24 budget request. DoD has several 

key methods for investing in the industrial base, including the DPA’s title III program and the Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS) program. Our budget request includes $968.6 million in DPA and $1 billion in IBAS funding to continue the Department’s commitment to strengthening the domestic industrial base 

essential to national defense. 

The Department also submitted a legislative proposal that, among other things, 

would expand the definition of the ‘‘domestic industrial base’’ within the DPA to include our AUKUS partners Australia and the United Kingdom. Expanding the definition of ‘‘domestic industrial base’’ would strengthen DoD’s ability to secure critical 

materials, establish robust secondary markets, and leverage allied nations to enrich 
247 

U.S. manufacturing and industrial base capabilities, increasing the nation’s advantage in a competitive environment. 

In addition, the National Defense Stockpile program is key to reducing U.S. vulnerability to near-term supply disruptions. The current stockpile inventory is insufficient to meet projected U.S. materials needs in the event of a national emergency. 

Appropriations would enable the National Defense Stockpile to acquire materials 

critical to preparedness, readiness, and national security. 

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM

Question. Section 1204 of the FY23 NDAA modified the authorities for the Irregular Warfare Center that was first authorized in the FY21 NDAA. It requires you 

to submit to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, within 180 days, 

a plan for establishing the Center, including a determination as to the desirability 

of establishing it at a university through a partnership like a UARC. 

I would like to note, first, that the 180-day deadline for that plan is fast approaching—June 21 will be 180 days since the President signed the NDAA on December 

23. That’s a little less than six weeks from now. 

I am aware that last July you directed an ‘‘expedited’’ basing analysis to find the 

permanent home for the Center. But that was more than 9 months ago now, and 

you have not even taken the first step of submitting to Congress the criteria by 

which a site will be selected. So, as far as we know, you have made zero progress 

in selecting a site. 

I will further note that the strategic basing analysis was your idea—it is not mandated by statute, nor directed by either the FY21 or the FY23 authorization. In fact, 

Congress has repeatedly signaled its intent to have the center located at and operated as a partnership with a civilian research university, and the NDAA also expressed the sense of Congress that the center should be named in honor of our late 

colleague, Senator John McCain. The preferred path here is clear. 

It has been more than 28 months since Congress gave you the authority and the 

resources to establish the center in accordance with this vision. Congress has renewed the appropriation three times now, and we have essentially nothing to show 

for it. Meanwhile, the challenges the center is meant to address are only growing 

more acute. Frankly, our adversaries are unmoved by your commitment to this protracted bureaucratic process. 

Can I have your commitment to delivering by June 21 a plan to establish the center in accordance with congressional intent? 

Answer. Yes, the Irregular Warfare Center (IWC) report will be provided in June 

2023. The Department has determined that the final location for the IWC will be 

at a DoD installation in order to address the IWC’s inherently governmental tasks 

and will note this determination in the report. However, the Department will contract for irregular warfare (IW) research, curriculum development, and teaching 

support with a civilian institution of higher education—including by establishing a 

Center of Excellence or University Affiliated Research Center. The Department has 

identified several DoD installations as potential locations for the Center and approved a set of criteria for evaluating those options. While the Department is still 

identifying the optimal arrangement for the civilian institution partnership, the priority of the Department is to identify an arrangement through a robust competition 

that optimally supports the IWC’s prescribed mission areas and can be completed 

expeditiously. The IWC reached initial operating capability in October 2022 and is 

conducting IW programs in accordance with section 345 of title 10, United States 

Code, as we identify a final location. The Department is committed to keeping Congress informed on this issue. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO

Question. What specific steps is the Department of Defense taking to analyze production constraints, and to expand capacity, at facilities within the (1) organic defense industrial base and (2) U.S. energetics industrial base? 

Answer. The Department is laser-focused on ensuring that our defense industrial 

base is resilient, and we appreciate the support from Congress as we work together 

to re-invigorate its capacity. In particular, our depots help ensure that our weapons 

systems are well-maintained, which is critical to maintaining readiness and is at the 

core of our strength as a Department. 

Over the past 2 years, the Department established organic industrial base (OIB) 

goals that define priorities, constraints, risks, and opportunities within the OIB to 

meet current and future readiness objectives. In addition, the Department created 
248 

an ammunition capacity framework assessment to facilitate production requirements to meet war munitions readiness levels. 

Our energetics base is also essential to generate new and innovative technologies. 

The Department is investing directly in the energetics industrial base, including 

over $200 million in onshoring energetics production that are high risk due to foreign-sourced or single-sourced materials. 

Question. What mechanisms are currently available to the Department of Defense 

to provide support or capacity expansion for the organic industrial base? 

Answer. The Military Services provide direct investments to the OIB through the 

regular appropriations process, as well as Ukraine supplementals and replenishment funding. The Department also can utilize the Defense Production Act to expedite and expand the OIB to promote the national defense. 

The Department also exercises existing authorities to designate depot-level activities and military arsenals as Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence. This 

encourages the use of Public- Private Partnerships to maximize the use of OIB capacity, reduce cost of ownership of industrial facilities, and leverage private sector 

investment to accelerate efforts like plant and equipment recapitalization. 

Question. Understanding the recent adjustment making the organic industrial 

base newly eligible for Defense Production Act funding, is the Department currently 

lacking any other authorities that would help provide support for the organic industrial base? If so, what are those authorities? 

Answer. The Department does not lack any authorities to provide necessary support to the OIB. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL MARK A. MILLEY

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. For good reason, when we talk about China, we spend a lot of our time 

talking about its bad behavior in the Taiwan Strait. 

However, we can’t overlook the fact that China’s global ambitions are presenting 

problems for every Combatant Command, including in Africa and Latin America. If 

we only prepare for a high-end Indo-Pacific fight, we will come up short worldwide. 

Chairman Milley, how are Combatant Commanders in AFRICOM and 

SOUTHCOM adjusting and planning for increased PRC activities within their areas 

of operation? 

Answer. The Joint Staff provides each Combatant Commander with campaign and 

posture planning guidance to ensure their strategies are globally integrated and 

support our National Security priorities. 

In line with this guidance, AFRICOM has developed a strategic competition 

framework that takes into account the PRC’s activities in Africa, and which is designed to adapt as required with dynamic conditions. Their plans are fully nested 

within global priorities, and synchronized with other Combatant Commands, the 

interagency, and select partners and allies to ensure unity of effort. 

Key efforts include monitoring PRC basing activity, countering Illegal Unreported 

Unregulated (IUU) fishing through increased maritime domain awareness, intelligence sharing with partner nations to expose illicit or malign activity, and security 

sector cooperation/capacity building to help African partner states to resist coercion 

and conduct independent security activities. 

AFRICOM continues to see tangible results from their activities, as many of our 

African partners continue to request increased U.S. security sector cooperation, and 

training. 

The Joint Force participates in a globally integrated approach to deterrence that 

seeks to deny the PRC the perceived benefits of aggression, while strengthening 

partnerships with, and the capabilities of, states across the SOUTHCOM AOR. By 

closely monitoring China’s military and dual-use activities in the region while supporting our regional partners, we aim to mitigate Beijing’s malign influence and 

maintain our position as the partner of choice. 

To do this, SOUTHCOM is extensively engaged in security cooperation efforts that 

train partner nation personnel and modernize equipment. Through Foreign Military 

Sales, Foreign Military Financing, the transfer of Excess Defense Articles, Joint Exercises, the National Guard’s State Partnership Program, and the International 

Military Training and Education Program, we help our partners meet shared 

threats to regional security, while demonstrating U.S. values and commitment. 

The Joint Force also counters China’s influence by supporting the people of Latin 

America and the Caribbean in ways that highlight shared American values. In 2022, 

for example, the USNS COMFORT hospital ship deployed to five countries in the 
249 

region, treating over 30,000 patients. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

also works with SOUTHCOM and regional partners on infrastructure development 

projects that advance U.S. security interests. In Peru, USACE is helping the Peruvian Navy to build port facilities, and in Ecuador, USACE is mitigating the negative 

effects of a substandard PRC construction project at the Coca Coda Dam. Activities 

like these, and many others, build good will and enhance our readiness and posture 

to operate in the region. Together, SOUTHCOM’s efforts help limit China’s ability 

to expand its military influence in the region. 

Question. The War in Ukraine is now entering its second year, and both sides are 

gearing up for a spring offensive. 

There are some who argue that given the threat from China, we can’t afford to 

invest in Ukraine. I strongly disagree, but defer to our military experts. 

General Milley, simply put, why is our continued support of, and investment in, 

Ukraine critical to our own national security? 

Answer. Russia poses an immediate and persistent threat to international peace 

and stability. Providing security assistance to Ukraine, coupled with Ukraine’s battlefield success against Russian aggression, sends a deterrent signal to our potential 

adversaries. Alongside our allies and partners, America is helping to make Russia’s 

war on Ukraine a strategic failure. The overwhelming multinational response to 

Russia’s unprovoked and unlawful war against Ukraine to restore international 

order is unprecedented and vital to the security of sovereign nations across the 

globe. 

Question. Last year, Congress accelerated investments in weapons to load up our 

weapons magazines for future contingencies. 

In this year’s budget, the Department is proposing multi-year procurement agreements for 9 different munitions. This would provide significant predictability and 

stability to the industrial base. 

Chairman Milley, are these planned procurement quantities enough to fund our 

munitions requirements for potential future conflicts and rebuild our stockpile? 

Answer. We thank Congress for the multi-year procurement and other flexible acquisition authorities granted in recent legislation. Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) 

authorities will improve taxpayer buying power, bolster inventory, and provide a 

more stable and predictable demand signal to industry. 

Following 20 years of conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq to combat terrorism, the 

Department is shifting its focus to near-peer conflict. The Department is constantly 

evaluating its munitions inventories and munitions procurement strategies, and this 

realignment of the munitions ecosystem will take time. Our PB24 request includes 

plans to pursue MYP for five munitions and will continue to identify additional opportunities to leverage existing MYP authorities, and recommend additional authorities. We will continue to work closely with industry to expand production capacity and deliver the needed quantities of munitions, while being good stewards 

of the capital provided by the American taxpayer. 

Question. This budget request is again proposing record investments in research 

and development. You are asking for $145 billion dollars in R&D spending, which 

is more than $5.2 billion over the fiscal year 2023 enacted amount. 

General Milley, for years, R&D has been used to mature and prototype technologies like hypersonic weapons and artificial intelligence. These technologies will 

give us decisive capabilities in a near-peer competition with China, so when will 

they become real programs that are fielded at scale? My concern is that we are at 

risk of falling into the trap of ‘perennial prototyping’, and not actually delivering 

capability in relevant numbers to our troops by increasing procurement. This budget 

does not transition prototypes to procurement in significant numbers. 

Answer. The Joint Staff continues to work with Combatant Commands, leveraging 

a portfolio management approach, to highlight our capability gaps, requirements, 

and prototyping opportunities. Further, the Joint Force is continually experimenting 

with new technologies to identify those capabilities most needed by the warfighter. 

While not every effort matures into a game changing capability, those that do transition often face challenges in crossing the ‘‘valley of death’’ from R&D to procurement. To facilitate technological transition the department has established new prototype pathways such as the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve (RDER) and 

the Accelerate the Procurement and Fielding of Innovative Technologies (APFIT) 

pilot. We have organizations such as the Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) and Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) to help guide promising technologies to programs. And 

the department is leveraging acquisition authorities such as Middle Tier-Acquisitions (MTA) to speed the delivery of innovation to our warfighters. 

For example, our first land battery of the Army’s Long Range Hypersonic Weapon 

(LRHW) will achieve its initial operational capability in FY23 thanks to the MTA 

pathway. In FY25 this hypersonic capability will expand to the sea as the Navy’s 
250 

Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) program achieves initial operational capability 

using the same missile as the LRHW. CPS will also deploy in the payload modules 

of VIRGINIA class SSNs currently under construction. 

We will endeavor to prioritize initiatives that enable R&D projects to deliver results in operationally-relevant timelines to allow us to deter and, if necessary, prevail against threats. 

Question. Congress has established a Commission to review the Department’s 

budget process and make recommendations to speed up the process of getting stuff 

to the warfighter. Often, these Commissions point the finger at Congress (in some 

cases, rightfully so!) without addressing barriers inside the Department that you 

could fix yourself. 

Chairman Milley, do you feel the warfighter is getting a fair shake in articulating 

their needs? 

Answer. In terms of addressing warfighter needs, I believe the Joint Capabilities 

Integration and Development System (JCIDS) offers our individual Services and 

Combatant Commands the venue necessary to identify requirements and inform our 

acquisition enterprise. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council provides necessary strategic guidance while facilitating warfighter need identification from the 

Combatant Commands to ensure that our capability development efforts are concept-driven and threat-informed. We will continue to work with Congress and across 

the Department to align requirements, resourcing, and acquisition activities to accelerate the fielding of capabilities to the warfighter. 

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator TESTER. Thank you for what you do. General Milley, 

your record speaks for itself. Thank you very much. 

This Defense Committee will reconvene on Tuesday, May 16, at 

10 a.m., in a classified session to hear from the Director of Military 

Defense Agency and the Commander of U.S. Northern Command 

on the Budget Request for Hypersonic Threats, Missile Defense, 

and the Protection of the U.S. Homeland. 

With that, we stand in recess. 

[Whereupon, at 11:26 a.m., Thursday, May 11, the subcommittee 

was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, May 16.] 
(251) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 

THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2023 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met at 9:30 a.m. in room SD–192, Dirksen 

Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators Tester, Durbin, Baldwin, Shaheen, Collins, 

Murkowski, Moran, Hoeven, Boozman, and Capito. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE

STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON, CHIEF OF THE NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JON TESTER

Senator TESTER. Good morning. We are going to call this committee to order. I want to begin by welcoming our witnesses. I 

thank you all for being here to discuss your fiscal year 2024 budget 

priorities. 

General Bellon, I think this is your last appearance before this 

committee. We extend a particularly warm welcome to you and 

wish you the best in your upcoming retirement. And we don’t really 

care whether you retire in Maine or Montana—— 

[Laughter.] 

Senator TESTER. But either one of the places will work, okay. 

Senator COLLINS. Split the year, maybe. 

Senator TESTER. Yes—house in each State. You can move back 

and forth. Either one will be a heck of a lot better in Kansas, right? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator TESTER. At any rate, I want to say thank you for what 

you guys do. The National Guard and Reserves have always done 

more with less, fewer full-time personnel, smaller budgets, older 

weapons systems and vehicles, and aging IT infrastructure and facilities. 

The men and women that you lead have one foot in civilian life 

and the other foot in the military. They juggle their homes, their 

families, their duties while unselfishly serving their country, both 

here and abroad. 

And the workload certainly isn’t decreasing, and the ongoing mission in the Southwest border, as well as your support to European 
252 

Command, demonstrate exactly that. However, over the last 5 

years alone, the National Guard and Reserves collective forces have 

shrunk by more than 40,000 servicemembers. 

You are not immune from recruiting challenges that our activeduty military services face, nor are you immune from disruptive 

impacts of Government shutdowns, continuing resolutions. It is my 

sincere hope that with the threat of Government default hopefully 

averted, we can now make progress on passing the Government’s 

budget on time, get it out of the cycle of annual continuing resolutions. 

I want to hear how you are managing these challenges and how 

you are providing a ready modernized Guard and Reserve Force, as 

well as ensuring the healthy work life balance and rewarding military career for these men and women. 

Once again, I want to thank you for being here. I want to thank 

you for your testimony ahead of time. But before you begin that 

testimony, I want to turn it over to Susan Collins. Senator. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR SUSAN M. COLLINS

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on the National Guard and Reserve component fiscal year 2024 budget request. As the Chairman is well aware, I am 

very concerned about the budget request and its adequacy. The citizens Soldiers of the Guard and Reserve serve in the proud tradition 

of the Minutemen who fought for the very founding of our country. 

In fact, the 133rd Engineer Battalion of the Maine National 

Guard has an unbroken line of service from 1760 to this very day. 

That is a distinction of which we are all very proud in the State 

of Maine. By design and consistent with the tradition of our Nation’s founding, the United States military is not able to fight a 

war without the Guard and Reserve. 

For the past 2 decades, Guard and Reservists have accounted for 

nearly half of deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. The Guard has 

also borne the brunt of supporting the Department of Homeland 

Security along the Southern borders since 2018, and they will continue to do so until our border is finally secured. 

The need to properly resource ready, well-equipped, and integrated Guard and Reserve components could not be more clear. The 

Guard’s State Partnership Program is also an essential international security cooperation tool. To date, Guard units have 

formed ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) partnerships with 

100 countries around the world. 

The Maine Guard’s partnership with Montenegro paved the way 

for that country’s successful accession to NATO (North Atlantic 

Treaty Organization) in 2017. And yet the President’s budget request cuts the Guard and Reserve budget by $3 billion compared 

to fiscal year 2023 enacted levels, impeding both modernization 

and readiness. 

As General Hokanson has previously shared with the committee, 

the National Guard represents a lower cost option to deliver deterrence and combat power. I understand all of you have considerable 

equipment shortfalls, and none of you has parity with the active 

components in terms of fielding the most modern capabilities available. 
253 

Congress has repeatedly needed to provide the National Guard 

and Reserves with up-to-date vehicles, platforms, and aircraft that 

were excluded from inadequate budget requests. Finally, the committee is aware of efforts to transition DoD’s (Department of Defense) ongoing mission at the border from active duty to guard or 

reserve units. 

I would welcome an update from our witnesses on the status of 

that plan and what the Department’s plans are to pay for those deployments. I look forward to the testimony and join the Chairman 

in thanking each of you for your service. 

Senator TESTER. We will start out with General Hokanson, Chief 

of the National Guard Bureau. General, you have the floor. 

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON

General HOKANSON. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, 

and esteemed members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. Your investment in the National Guard has built a ready, capable, and professional force vital 

to our Nation’s defense and our communities in times of crisis. 

Thank you for your support. I would also like to recognize the efforts of my wife, Kelly, and our senior enlisted adviser, Tony 

Whitehead, for their support and partnership in addressing Soldier, 

Airmen, and family needs. 

As a community-based force with the authorities to perform almost any mission, ensuring healthy and resilient Guardsmen and 

families is not only our highest priority, it is foundational to all we 

do. This is my third time before you on behalf of the Soldiers, Airmen, and families at the National Guard. 

In that time, the National Guard has repeatedly demonstrated 

its capability, capacity, and readiness, both at home and overseas, 

on a historic scale. Over the past 3 years, we performed over 28 

million man-days in our communities, responding to emergencies of 

every kind. And as I speak, Guardsmen are supporting typhoon relief operations in Guam. 

In the last 3 years alone, the National Guard has rescued or 

saved 18,826 individuals. In the midst of all those events, our formations still met every one of our overseas deployments. This included the Nation’s final days in Afghanistan, where National 

Guardsmen helped defend the Kabul airport, evacuate refugees, 

and then assist with Operation Allies Refuge. 

One of our other missions is the Joint Multinational Training 

Group-Ukraine. In concert with California’s 30 year State partnership with Ukraine, our Guardsmen helped establish a training center in Ukraine after Russia’s first invasion in 2014. Focused on 

combat arms and lessons learned, our National Guard trainers 

were some of the last to leave Ukraine before Russia’s unprovoked 

invasion. 

A few months after the war began, we reestablished our training 

group and have been training our partners every single day since 

then. Today, every Combatant Commander leverages our State 

Partnership Program, which was recently mentioned, now includes 

100 nations around the globe. 

Always ready, always there is not just our motto. It is our promise to America. A promise we have kept for over 386 years. And in 
254 

the 2,800 communities we call home, they know whenever or wherever a disaster occurs, the National Guard will be there because we 

already are. 

As I begin my final year as chief, there are still many things we 

must accomplish to ensure the National Guard remains always 

ready, always there. Today, I will shorten that list to four priority 

areas. The first is our Air National Guard units who have been 

performing space missions for over 28 years. In 1947, when the Air 

Force was established, the Air Guards’ 29 original squadrons were 

established concurrently, and today’s Air Force is the envy of the 

world. 

In 2019 when the Space Force was formed, it did not address 

nearly 30 percent of its operational squadrons that reside in the 

National Guard. With 1,000 personnel in 14 units, we are almost 

all tooth and no tail. These highly skilled Airmen are absolutely 

vital to the success of this space mission, and just like our Air 

Force, we want today’s Space Force to be the envy of the world. 

The second is premium free healthcare for currently serving 

Guardsmen and Reservists. There are many things we can surge 

in times of emergency, but medical readiness is not one of them. 

Access to care is critical to medical readiness and the number one 

concern I hear from our Guardsmen and recruiters when I visit our 

States and territories. To help recruit and retain the most talented, 

skilled, and ready force, all National Guard servicemembers, regardless of status, need medical coverage. 

This is a matter of readiness, a matter of duty to the Guardsmen 

who serve and sacrifice for our Nation. We are working closely with 

the Adjutants General and the Defense Health Agency to clarify 

the number of Guardsmen this would impact and what current programs could be reduced or eliminated so we can accurately identify 

the cost and the readiness benefit it could provide. 

The third is recapitalization of Air Guard fighter squadrons. We 

have 25 fighter squadrons in the Air Guard, and our Nation needs 

every single one of them. By working with the Air Force and Congress, we believe there is a path to recapitalize all 25 squadrons 

to the F–35, F–15EX, and our newest F–16s through fleet leveling 

and new aircraft buys. 

This would help the Air Force divest its older platforms and retain the capability, capacity, and force structure it needs to help 

meet Combatant Command and warfighting requirements. 

Lastly, I ask for your support in meeting the intent of the National Guard Empowerment Act. To be a full member of the Joint 

Chiefs of Staff and appropriately represent our 430,000 Guardsmen 

and their families, our Vice Chief cannot do that effectively as a 

subordinate to his peers. 

In closing, I want to thank you again for the National Guard we 

have today. All we do would not be possible without your support 

that you provide to our Soldiers, Airmen, and their families. I look 

forward to your questions. Thank you. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON

Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and esteemed members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this statement prior to my testimony. Your investment in the National Guard has built a ready, capable, profes-
255 

1The 2022 National Defense Strategy, p. 1. 

sional force that is vital to the Joint Force and our American communities in times 

of crisis. Thank you for your ongoing support. 

I would also like to recognize the efforts of my wife Kelly and Senior Enlisted Advisor Tony Whitehead for their support and partnership in addressing Soldier, Airmen, and family needs. We are a unique force with unique needs and ensuring 

healthy and resilient Guardsmen and families is our highest priority and 

foundational to all we do. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY

The 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS) identifies the People’s Republic of 

China (PRC) as our pacing challenge and most consequential strategic competitor. 

The NDS focuses the Department of Defense (DoD) on this pacing challenge while 

taking steps to manage other threats in this dynamic strategic environment. 

The National Guard plays a critical role in implementing the NDS and advancing 

DoD’s priorities of: Defending the homeland; deterring attacks against the United 

States, our allies, and our partners; deterring aggression while being prepared to 

prevail in conflict when necessary; and ensuring our future military advantage 

through a resilient Joint Force and defense ecosystem.1 These priorities are how we 

intend to meet and deter threats to our national security and the rules-based international order. 

National Guard Soldiers and Airmen are actively engaged in every aspect of our 

NDS. As twenty percent of the Joint Force, we are a significant component of integrated deterrence. As the combat reserve of the Army and the Air Force—manned, 

trained and equipped to fight our Nation’s wars, and currently serving in every 

Combatant Command—we play a key role in campaigning. As a dual-status force 

that builds key partnerships at every level—including international state partners, 

the Federal interagency, regional emergency management, and local law enforcement—we provide enduring advantages not found anywhere else in DoD. The NDS 

cannot succeed without the National Guard. 

NATIONAL GUARD SUPPORT TO THE NDS

Priority one is defending the homeland, and the National Guard is the fundamental element in this regard. The National Guard has a community-based force 

structure, and our wide-ranging geographic distribution provides unique advantages 

to defending the homeland. Guard members defend the National Capital Region, 

support Ground Based Missile Defense in Colorado and Alaska; man non-stop, 24- 

hour intercontinental ballistic missile defense systems from Alaska and California; 

protect American air sovereignty; support the U.S. Space Force with fourteen operational space squadrons; mitigate critical cyber vulnerabilities; and use National 

Guard manning, training, and equipment to assist our communities in times of 

need. 

Priority two is deterring strategic attacks against our homeland and our allies 

and partners. This priority clearly demonstrates both the interconnected nature of 

the threats and challenges we face and the cooperative approach we must take to 

counter them. Through the National Guard’s State Partnership Program’s (SPP) 88 

partnerships with 100 nations around the globe, Soldiers and Airmen experience the 

global operating environment, develop military-to-military relationships, improve 

readiness, enhance access and influence, and ensure our Nation has trusted, capable, interoperable Allies and partners at our side. With the assistance of Congress, 

the SPP has proven to be one of the most valuable security cooperation programs 

available and continues to grow in support of the National Security Strategy, NDS 

and Combatant Commanders’ theater security objectives. Fully funding the SPP 

through the services will ensure continued access to timely, consistent, and adequate resources to maximize the program’s potential and historically robust return 

on investment. As the NDS makes clear, mutually beneficial alliances and partnerships are an enduring strength, and a key to the integrated deterrence and campaigning efforts of the National Guard. 

Priority three is deterring aggression and preparing to prevail in conflict when 

necessary. This speaks directly to the National Guard’s purpose: fighting and winning our Nation’s wars. The National Guard is an operational force. We participate 

in combat, peacekeeping and stability operations, training exercises, and humanitarian missions’ shoulder-to-shoulder with our parent services, and the Joint Force. 

We serve in every Combatant Command, enhance the readiness of the Joint Force, 

and support missions within the Global Force Management Allocation Plan 

(GFMAP) process. Being fully modernized and interoperable with our parent serv-
256 

ices and the Joint Force ensures we present a combat-credible force that can successfully deter and defend aggression from our strategic competitors and prevail in 

conflict if needed. 

Priority four is ensuring our future military advantage by building a resilient 

Joint Force and defense ecosystem. This priority speaks to both people and systems—strengthening the resilience of the Soldiers and Airmen who serve, improving 

the resilience of the critical infrastructure on which we rely, and enhancing the resilience of our organization. We continue to devote time and resources to improve 

all aspects of National Guard culture to make service more appealing and inclusive, 

to include fostering an environment that values education and understands the importance of mental and physical well-being. We also continue efforts to enhance national resilience by protecting our nation’s critical assets, communications and control, and infrastructure; and increasing our ability to withstand the effects of natural and manmade disasters. 

LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

The Department’s FY 2024 budget request helps build a Joint Force that is the 

most lethal, resilient, survivable, agile, and responsive in the world. Paced to the 

China threat, it builds combat-credible forces able to deter, defend, and defeat aggression if required. It advances recruiting, retention, and readiness while enhancing unit and personal resilience; strengthens deterrence, Ally and partner nation capability, and interagency capacity. However, budgetary uncertainty and inflationary 

pressures could erode buying power, stressing National Guard programs and personnel, and diminishing our Joint Force readiness. Continuing Resolutions in particular impede our ability to implement the NDS, hurts service members and their 

families, and undermines the predictability needed for Reserve Component (RC) personnel to effectively support the Joint Force. 

As I engage with senior leaders and service members throughout the 50 states, 

three territories, and the District of Columbia, I remain concerned with several 

issues that directly impact future readiness and the health of the force. I look forward to working with the Subcommittee and your colleagues on solutions to address 

the challenges before us. 

National Guard Space Operations 

For 28 years, National Guard space units have been providing missions as varied 

as strategic missile warning, nuclear detection, space domain awareness, command 

and control, and electromagnetic warfare, and the U.S. Space Force continues to 

rely on these critical space capabilities. It is imperative we appropriately train, and 

equip in-line with U.S. Space Force standards and U.S. Space Command priorities. 

Modernization and Recapitalization 

To fulfill NDS obligations, the National Guard must be deployable, sustainable, 

interoperable and survivable on any battlefield, in any domain. For example, the Air 

National Guard has twenty-five fighter squadrons today, each essential to the defense of our Nation, our integrated deterrence capabilities, and our ability to campaign. As the National Guard transitions from legacy platforms, it is essential we 

pursue cost-effective solutions that preserve our capability, capacity and 

generational experience to meet the today’s threats. 

Recruiting and Retention 

The National Guard provides the unique opportunity to combine military service 

with a civilian career. Every member and potential recruit weigh the benefit of that 

military service with impact on their lives and that of their families. We’ve taken 

concrete steps to improve community outreach, bolster recruiting and retention programs, and foster a culture that makes service more appealing, inclusive, and secure. Ensuring we recruit and retain America’s best in the National Guard must remain a top priority; to do so, every aspect of our recruiting and marketing enterprise must be fully resourced. 

Healthcare 

According to a 2019 Office of the Secretary of Defense study, roughly 60,000 

Guardsmen are uninsured and lack access to healthcare when not in a duty status. 

If unable to seek treatment for a physical ailment or mental health crisis or obtain 

follow-on care due to a lack of insurance, it impacts their medical readiness and 

ability to serve. We cannot surge medical readiness; our people must be ready when 

they are needed. I have formed a working group dedicated to providing the best estimate of cost and areas of potential savings and look forward to sharing those find-
257 

ings soon so we can identify the true cost of premium-free healthcare options and 

how it would impact the readiness of our force. 

CONCLUSION

The NDS signals a new era of challenges and opportunities for our Nation. With 

the support of Congress, the National Guard will continue to be a force for integrated deterrence, campaigning, and building enduring advantages that empower 

our Nation to compete and prevail. With your continued support, we boldly face the 

future: Always Ready, Always There. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Hokanson. Next up, we 

have General Daniels, Chief of the Army Reserve. General. 

STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS, CHIEF OF 

ARMY RESERVE 

General DANIELS. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, 

distinguished members of the committee, on behalf of the 190,000 

Soldiers and civilians of the Army Reserve, Command Sergeant 

Major Lombardo and I thank you for this opportunity to testify, 

and for your continued support to our Soldiers, civilians, their families, and our other employers. 

Present in 20 time zones and on 5 continents, the Army Reserve 

makes up nearly 20 percent of the total Army’s personnel, at just 

5 percent of the total Army operation and maintenance budget. 

We provide key units and capabilities with nearly half of the 

Army’s maneuver support and a quarter of its force mobilization 

capacity, while sustaining the mobilization and deployment of more 

than 10,000 Soldiers and civilians annually. 

As a Federal response partner, the Army Reserve maintains a 

ready posture for defense support to civil authorities by providing 

critical dual use capabilities such as petroleum distribution, water 

purification, and railroad operations. 

In an extremely challenging recruiting environment, our highest 

priority is sustaining the resources required to recruit and retain 

the best today and into the future. We also rely heavily on the support of families and communities, as well as the willingness of employers to share their best talent. 

By changing our culture to refocus on tough, realistic training 

done safely, we are helping to bridge the knowledge divide between 

the military and the American public. This creates better experiences for civilian Soldiers who want to share with their communities. 

As we build the Army of 2030, we are grateful for the authorizations and appropriations that invest in our people, enhance readiness, and accelerate equipment modernization to maintain superiority over any potential threat. 

The need for Reserve component duties to perform cannot be 

overstated and is long overdue. That is why we support DoD proposal to fundamentally redesign the current system, aligning benefits to duties performed, and ensuring our Soldiers receive the entitlements that they earn. 

The Army Reserve also appreciates Congress’s efforts to improve 

access to childcare. However, access to quality and affordable 

childcare remains a challenge for our Soldiers, especially during 

battle assembly weekends. As the Army Reserve pilots new initiatives and deepens partnerships, continued Congressional support to 
258 

address weekend childcare gaps will help enhance retention and 

readiness. 

Finally, as the Army Reserve looks to the future, leveraging the 

National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account, or NGREA, remains a key component of our modernization strategy. This funding enables the Army Reserve to fill mission critical shortages that 

improve overall readiness interoperability. 

Command Sergeant Major Lombardo and I are incredibly proud 

to lead the men and women in America’s Army Reserve, and I look 

forward to your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS

THE UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVE

READY NOW! SHAPING TOMORROW . . . 

In today’s unpredictable global environment, the Army Reserve is more consequential than ever. Since its establishment 115 years ago, the Army Reserve has 

never failed to answer the call to serve. Since 1908, more than one million citizen 

soldiers have been mobilized in defense of the nation—at home and around the 

world. 

The core strength of the Army Reserve is its ability to provide high-quality military capabilities, enhanced by citizen soldiers’ civilian skills, education, training, 

and experience. As the Army prepares for Multi-Domain Operations, harnessing private sector education and expertise in areas such as artificial intelligence, cyber, 

and sustainment are vital in providing the Army and the nation an asymmetric advantage against potential adversaries. These capabilities, critical during Large-Scale 

Combat Operations, are also crucial in defending the homeland. 

The Army Reserve is both a component and a command. Flexible and adaptable, 

the Army Reserve provides the Army, combatant commanders, and the nation with 

‘‘forces to rapidly surge and provide follow-on forces, thereby mitigating force structure reductions and impacts from prolonged operations.’’ On any given day, more 

than 10,000 Army Reserve soldiers are mobilized or deployed in support of combatant commands worldwide. Thousands more participate in deployment training or 

annual Joint exercises that strengthen our alliances and partnerships, contributing 

to integrated deterrence and campaigning. And on average, the Army Reserve supports the mobilization and deployment of more than 10,000 soldiers and civilians 

from force generation installations annually. 

The Joint Force cannot deploy, fight, and win without the Army Reserve. The 

Army provides the bulk of sustainment forces to the joint fight, and the majority 

of these capabilities reside in the Army Reserve. Citizen Soldiers maintain specialized skills required to support Large Scale Combat Operations—including theateropening and theater-level sustainment—as well as civilian-acquired skills, training, 

and certifications that are costly to maintain on active duty, such as medical, cyber, 

legal, engineering, and port operations. 

BY THE NUMBERS

The Army Reserve has an FY23 authorized strength of 177,000 soldiers, includes 

11,000 civilians, and is present in all 50 states and five U.S. territories. Fiscally efficient, the Army Reserve supports the needs of the Total Force, with just 15% of the 

component serving as fulltime support. 

Making up nearly 20% of the Total Army’s personnel, the Army Reserve provides 

critical units and capabilities—nearly half of its maneuver support, and a quarter 

of its force mobilization capacity—at a cost of just 5% of the total Army Operation 

and Maintenance budget. 

More than 50% of the Army’s quartermaster and medical formations, over 80% 

of its civil affairs, legal, psychological operations, and religious units, and over 40% 

of its chemical and transportation forces reside in the Army Reserve. Some critical 

enabling capabilities include petroleum distribution, water purification, and railroad 

operations. 

The Army Reserve maintains five installations and an Army Support Activity: 

Fort Hunter Liggett and Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, California; Fort 

McCoy, Wisconsin; Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico; Devens Reserve Forces Training 

Area, Massachusetts; and Army Support Activity—Fort Dix, New Jersey. Addition-
259 

ally, with 742 Army Reserve facilities, the Army Reserve’s dispersed footprint is in 

every corner of the country, enabling the U.S. to project combat power and creating 

an added layer of resiliency. 

Each year, Army Reserve facilities support upwards of 335,000 servicemembers 

from every Department of Defense (DoD) branch—partnering with Federal, state, 

and local agencies for joint training missions—with ranges, maneuver areas, urban 

assault, military transport aircraft-capable landing sites, transient barracks, and 

dining facilities. 

RECRUITING AND RETENTION

Preserving the all-volunteer force is vital to our national security interests. In an 

extremely challenging recruiting environment, sustaining the resources required to 

recruit and retain soldiers is critical to the Army Reserve’s ability to generate the 

readiness required to deploy trained, capable, combat-ready, and lethal soldiers. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2022, the Army Reserve recruited 9,400 new soldiers, falling 

short of our mission. To close the gap, commanders, and staff are maximizing every 

potential source of high-quality accessions and working to minimize preventable attrition. 

Recruiting and retention investments include $164.4 million in incentives, and approximately 3,000 full-time soldiers directly supporting Army Reserve recruiting and 

retention activities. 

In 2022, the Army Reserve achieved 107% of the Army Reserve Active Component 

to Reserve Component (AC2RC) mission by retaining more than 4,000 active component service members. This program continues to perform strongly in FY 2023. 

The Army Reserve Private Public Partnership Office (P3O) is contacting 

transitioning active component members about the AC2RC program by linking 

transitioning active duty servicemembers to civilian career pathways through continued service in the Army Reserve. This initiative—currently being implemented 

at the soon to be Fort Liberty, currently known as Fort Bragg, Fort Stewart, Fort 

Cavazos, Fort Bliss, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and Schofield Barracks—allows the 

nation to retain valuable talent while providing transitioning service members with 

civilian career opportunities. 

P3O is also working with U.S. Army Recruiting Command to link new Army Reserve recruits with an employment specialist to explore their civilian career options. 

In order to connect with the public—and future soldiers—we recently introduced 

a new branding strategy, including a new logo and public outreach program to better reflect today’s citizen-soldier—the selfless professional who balances the responsibilities of both nation and family, uniform and civilian workplace. 

SOLDIERS AND FAMILIES

Citizen Soldiers are invaluable to our nation’s defense, bringing civilian-acquired 

skills and experiences to the Army Reserve, and personifying the Army’s values in 

their local communities. The Army Reserve is a highly educated, experienced and 

diverse force, which provides operational flexibility and strategic depth. 

African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans comprise over half of the Army Reserve force. Women comprise more than 25% of all 

Army Reserve soldiers and 22% of general officers. 

Thirty-three percent of all Army Reserve soldiers hold a bachelor’s degree or higher. In the officer ranks, 32% hold master’s degrees and 13% hold doctorates. Soldiers 

in the enlisted ranks are also pursuing higher education. More than 13% hold bachelor’s degrees, and nearly 4% have a master’s or doctoral degree—benefiting employers and the nation. 

The Army Reserve relies heavily on the support of families and communities, as 

well as the persistent willingness of employers to share their best talent. From family-focused programs to quality-of-life initiatives and employer partnerships, the 

Army Reserve’s focus on caring for soldiers and families is at the core of our shared 

Army values—and crucial to the readiness and health of the force as we strive towards improved work-life integration between Army Reserve requirements, civilian 

career responsibilities, and family. 

Army Reserve family programs continue to provide our geographically dispersed 

soldiers and families across more than 1,200 communities with a clear path to command and community resources, assistance, and referrals for every aspect of military life, including Military Onesource, childcare, food assistance, and behavioral 

health resources. 

The Army Reserve recruits and retains our soldiers where they live and work. 

Providing civilian employers with advance notification of military commitments and 
260 

treating them as partners in national security demonstrates that everyone has a 

role in serving the American people. 

To support work-life integration, P3O links eligible team members to immediate 

and long-term employment opportunities. This year, P3O partnered with more than 

150 businesses across career fields such as engineering, healthcare, finance, cyber 

security, and logistics. Through these connections, 730 soldiers, spouses, and family 

members were hired—an 86% placement rate. 

Through quality-of-life initiatives such as travel and lodging expenses, health, and 

childcare programs, we continually improve how we care for our soldiers. From 

training management to a focus on culture and work-life integration, the Army Reserve’s People First approach makes the Total Force stronger. The Army Reserve 

focuses on supporting all aspects of a soldier’s life: families, civilian employment, 

and educational goals, integrated with a rewarding uniformed experience that delivers the training, confidence, and leadership skills that employers seek. 

ADDRESSING HARMFUL BEHAVIORS

The Army Reserve is evaluating programs and activities surrounding harmful behaviors to determine the effectiveness of existing efforts—taking a scientific, databased approach to decreasing risk factors and increasing protective factors. 

The development and implementation of an Integrated Prevention Advisory Group 

will allow a collaborative look at primary prevention activities, including policies, 

programs, and practices that aim to prevent harmful behaviors—sexual harassment 

and assault, as well as suicidal behavior and ideations will be particularly examined. 

SEXUAL HARASSMENT/ASSAULT RESPONSE AND PREVENTION (SHARP)

The Army Reserve Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) 

program continues to provide staff assistance to every major subordinate command’s 

program. Based on the results of an internal analysis—in coordination with Army’s 

People First Task Force and the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault 

in the Military recommendations as approved by the Secretary of Defense—the 

Army Reserve is executing a SHARP Fusion Directorate pilot. 

The 99th Readiness Division’s SHARP Fusion Directorate’s victim-centered program is showing improvements in the ability of Sexual Assault Response Coordinators, and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response victim advocates, in coordination 

with law enforcement, to create a flexible and responsive system which streamlines 

what can be a complex process—from making a report through case resolution and 

long-term recovery. Established as a year-long program in July 2022, this virtual 

alternative reporting process is tailored to the Army Reserve’s geographically dispersed force, leveraging technology to connect victims with providers throughout a 

13-state region. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION

Suicide remains one of the Army’s most complex challenges, and prevention requires a comprehensive approach. In 2022, the Army Reserve experienced a slight 

decrease in suicides—however, one suicide is one too many. Our suicide incident reports reveal soldiers are demonstrating increased confidence in leaders and actively 

seeking help. The Army Reserve supported nearly 500 soldiers needing help and 

intervention through the support of unit leadership, Chaplain Corps, Suicide Prevention Program Managers, Army Reserve Psychological Health Program, and Military OneSource. An increased number—82%—of soldiers are seeking help on their 

own initiative. Likewise, an increased number of leaders are recognizing changes in 

behavior and engaging in intervention. 

Families are on the front line of defense against suicide. The Army Reserve now 

offers family members free virtual suicide prevention training to help them build 

the skills to provide support and dispel any stigma about seeking care. 

Virtual command team suicide prevention training assists commanders in building prevention programs that empower soldiers and leaders at all levels to identify 

and address high-risk behavior early on. Soldiers—down to the squad-leader level— 

are empowered to escort any soldier in crisis to immediate life-saving care. 

TRAINING

With the statutory minimum of 39 days a year to meet individual and collective 

readiness requirements, the Army Reserve focuses on tough, realistic training done 

safely to generate the readiness required to support operations home and abroad. 
261 

Added emphasis on individual and collective training opportunities enhances unit 

readiness and allows soldiers to improve their individual skills. 

Optimizing the time to shape, grow, and retain the future force through effective 

and efficient training and maintenance management allows soldiers to build proficiency in their mission-essential tasks and deepen their technical skills—giving 

them a sense of purpose and fueling their passions. 

By removing redundant administrative tasks and concentrating on creating the 

kinds of relevant experiences citizen soldiers will want to bring back to their communities, the Army Reserve is changing its culture—and helping to bridge the 

knowledge divide between the military and the American public. As soldiers learn, 

train, and grow, employers and members of more than 1,200 communities stand to 

benefit from their accumulated knowledge, leadership, and technical expertise. 

READINESS

The Army Reserve is present in 20 time zones and on five continents around the 

world—around the clock. This presence makes a difference every day, in communities across America, and around the world. It also expands relationships with allies and partners and serves as a critical deterrent against our near-peer adversaries. 

An example of this integral role can be seen across Europe and in the Indo-Pacific—the DoD’s priority theater—where the Army Reserve’s regional forces span 

Hawaii, Alaska, America Samoa, Saipan, Guam, and 12 additional countries. 

More than 7,000 soldiers and 43 units enable early-entry theater-opening and 

sustainment of Joint operations across vast distances, strengthening our partnerships, enhancing interoperability, and increasing collective readiness. Combined 

with additional staff augmentation and operational support from 13 commands on 

the mainland, they deliver functional support to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, U.S. 

Forces Korea, U.S. Forces Japan, and U.S. Army Pacific. 

The Army Reserve strengthens logistics and sustainment to support of the Joint 

Force in the Indo-Pacific and Europe, enhancing the Army’s readiness in the regions. Our contested logistics capabilities ensure freedom of action and prolonged 

endurance for our combatant commanders, extending operational reach to the vital 

points of conflict. 

The Army Reserve also supports Operation Pathways, a series of key international exercises, including Pacific Sentry and Talisman Saber in Australia, 

Garuda Shield in Indonesia, and Salaknib in the Philippines. These exercises help 

deter aggression, build joint readiness and interoperability, and increase the confidence of our allies and partners across the Indo-Pacific. 

Twenty-three units and more than 1,000 Army Reserve soldiers are also supporting NATO missions in the U.S. European Command area of operations with a 

broad spectrum of capabilities, including cyber, intelligence, logistics, transportation 

and civil affairs. 

Since the onset of war in Ukraine, the Army Reserve supplied more than 100 

pieces of equipment, including armored personnel carriers, cargo trucks, and mine 

countermeasure equipment under Presidential Drawdown Authority directives. 

SUSTAINED FUNDING IS ESSENTIAL FOR CONTINUED NATO SUPPORT. 

Army Reserve units regularly participate in realistic collective training events to 

prepare for Large-Scale Combat Operations in a multi-domain environment. In FY 

2022, 2,600 soldiers rotated through the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, 

California, and more than 1,500 participated in collective training at the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, Louisiana, honing the skills needed for future 

multi-domain operations. 

DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES

With soldiers and equipment strategically postured throughout the country, the 

Army Reserve flexes critical assets to support Homeland Defense and Defense Support of Civil Authorities—such as ‘‘Heavy Lift’’ helicopters search and rescue, supply, medical, civil affairs, and engineer capabilities. 

Army Reserve Emergency Preparedness Liaison Officers (EPLOs) stand ready to 

support state and local authorities in times of natural and man-made disasters. 

Over the past 5 years, more than 2,500 Army Reserve soldiers supported incident 

response. 

Recently, 23 EPLOs deployed to provide critical connectivity as Federal and military officials reached out to communities in need during Hurricanes Ida, Fiona, Ian, 

and Tropical Storm Nicole. EPLOs have also supported winter storm response in the 

western United States. 
262 

Army Reserve aviation assets are among those called to provide key capabilities 

needed for disaster response. UH–60 Blackhawk crews assisted in fire-fighting operations in central Texas, while CH–47 Chinook aircrews also assisted civilian first 

responders in conducting search and rescue operations on Mount Rainier, Washington. 

MODERNIZATION/FACILITIES/SHAPING TOMORROW

The Army Reserve is evolving to meet the challenges of our time—preparing not 

only for the future of Large-Scale Combat Operations, but also for the increasingly 

complex needs of the Joint warfighter in a multi-domain operational environment 

by balancing mission-critical capabilities across the force spectrum. 

To meet the evolving needs of the Army and the nation, we will simultaneously 

focus on recruiting the next generation of Citizen Soldiers while ensuring that the 

current force is Ready Now. Building on this, the Army Reserve will concentrate on 

increasing interoperability through targeted modernization efforts and capability development, ensuring seamless support to the Joint Force throughout the conflict 

continuum. 

The Army Reserve is modernizing its facilities and serving as a sustainability 

leader in energy and water resilience, environmental compliance, solid waste management, vehicle electrification, and long-term sustainability planning. 

As part of the ‘‘Defense Innovation Unit Electric Vehicle Support Equipment’’ 

pilot, the Army Reserve is also implementing a climate resiliency process, which includes recommendations on prioritizing projects that increase the resilience of buildings and natural infrastructure. 

Soldiers assigned to the 75th Innovation Command are employed in a wide range 

of career fields, bringing critical job experience and skill sets to accelerate innovations and technologies. Areas of expertise include artificial intelligence, autonomy, 

and robotics, block-chain, cyber, medical, synthetic biology, and space. As the Army 

moves toward multi-domain operations, Army Reserve soldiers will play a critical 

role in linking the private sector into the defense enterprise. 

Professional skills in areas like defensive cyber operations provide valuable capabilities. The Army Reserve provided 25% of the Total Army’s Cyber Protection 

Teams aligned to the U.S. Cyber Command’s Cyber Mission Force. Our soldiers conduct defensive cyberspace operations in support of the Army, Combatant Commands, the DoD, and Interagency operations worldwide. 

The Army Reserve is preparing to conduct home-station defense cyberspace operations in support of Exercise Defender Europe 23—designed to support mission 

partners and assist in real-world exercises. 

As the Army Reserve looks to the future, leveraging National Guard and Reserve 

Equipment Account funding is a key component of our modernization strategy. This 

enables the Army Reserve to fill mission-critical shortages that improve overall 

readiness and interoperability. 

CONCLUSION

In an era of strategic competition, the Army needs forces capable of defeating adversaries, responding to crises, and preparing for the future. To accomplish these 

goals, the U.S. needs a dedicated Federal reserve force that is ready today and prepared to shape the world of tomorrow. That force is the United States Army Reserve. 

To deliver cutting-edge capabilities at home and abroad, America needs a modernized, powerful, and resilient Federal reserve force of highly skilled men and women. 

From force structure optimization to equipment modernization and operational realignments, it will take the unique strengths and capabilities of each of the Army’s 

components to ensure we are on a sustainable, strategic path. 

The Army Reserve is grateful for the Congressional support of our Citizen Soldiers, civilians, and their families, along with resources that positively impact the 

readiness and modernization efforts to ensure our adversaries cannot out-range or 

outpace us on the traditional battlefields or in the new frontiers of space and cyberspace. 

As always, we are Ready Now! Shaping tomorrow...

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General Daniels. Next, we have Admiral Mustin. 
263 

STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL JOHN B. MUSTIN, CHIEF OF NAVY RESERVE 

Admiral MUSTIN. Good morning, Chair Tester, Ranking Member 

Collins, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is my 

distinct honor to report to you today alongside my peers Reserve 

service chiefs and General Hokanson on the status and the vision 

of America’s Navy Reserve. 

I would like to begin by recognizing my wife Kim, whose steadfast support for 30 years exemplifies the unsung sacrifices typical 

of our military spouses. And I would also like to thank Navy Reserve Force Master Chief Tracy Hunt for his tireless efforts in support of our enlisted Reserve Sailors. 

Additionally, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation 

for my colleague and friend, Lieutenant General Dave Bellon for 

his exemplary multi-decade career of service in uniform. We are 

going to miss you, General. Fair wind, shipmate. 

Finally, I call the committee’s attention to the 103,000 Sailors, 

the 450 civilians, the families who sustain them, and the thousands 

of employers who value and enable the worldwide service of our 

citizens Sailors. 

All are essential to the success of our Reserve force. For more 

than a century, the Navy Reserve has reliably responded when 

needed in times of peace, in times of war. In the recent past, the 

Navy Reserve provided the rapid activation of nearly 9,000 Sailors 

in response to the coronavirus 19 pandemic and surged nearly 500 

Sailors on equally short notice to support the ongoing security crisis in Europe. 

Most recently, they were instrumental to the execution of noncombatant evacuation operations in Sudan, rapidly removing American citizens from harm’s way. These activations highlight the flexibility, readiness, and value our citizens Sailors bring to the fight, 

and yet these contributions merely hint at the demands expected 

of the Navy Reserve in a conflict with a great power maritime competitor. 

The Navy Reserve is rapidly transforming to deliver a peerless 

force designed, trained, and ready to fight confidently and boldly in 

sustained multi-domain high end warfare. To this end, the singular 

priority of our Navy Reserve is simple, warfighting readiness. 

Modernizing Reserve equipment, training systems, and mobilization processes is critical to delivering this readiness and a mandate 

to ensure the readiness and availability of the critical response 

team our service component and Combatant Commanders depend 

upon. 

To ensure our Sailors are ready to activate and serve on day one 

of any conflict, the Reserve force must maintain parity with our active counterparts and operate relevant, modern equipment. 

To this end, procurement of the modern C–130 Juliet aircraft 

variant to replace legacy C–130 airframes is the Navy Reserve’s 

number one equipment priority. In the past year, Navy Reserve 

fleet logistics squadrons flew 26,000 hours, moved 96,000 passengers, and 19 million pounds of cargo at a cost avoidance of $1 

billion over alternative methods. 

However, with an average age exceeding 3 decades, the current 

C–130 fleet is unable to meet sustained fleet logistics requirements 
264 

due to obsolescence issues. In conflict, the strain on supply chain 

will be an Achilles heel to contested logistics requirements and operations. 

The KC–130 Juliet is a more capable, modern airframe that delivers increased capacity supported by cost savings from parts, commonality, fuel efficiency, and reduced lifecycle costs, resulting in a 

reduction of $1,000 per flight hour. In addition to equipment modernization, we are leveraging technology advancements to improve 

and modernize access to work and training, and to bring the Navy 

Reserve into the 21st century. 

These comprehensive transformative improvements include hardware and software upgrades, the creation of digital workflows, and 

the implementation of policies and processes that harness our 

greatest assets, the minds, talents, ideas, and civilian skills of our 

Reserve Sailors. 

In concert with these efforts are adaptive mobilization process, 

demonstrated during our response to the COVID pandemic and 

multiple mass mobilization exercises, will leverage the Navy Reserve’s nationally distributed infrastructure to locally mobilize 

50,000 Sailors in only 30 days, rapidly, accurately, and at scale. 

Our Reserve Sailors are central and vital to our Navy’s enduring 

warfighting advantage, so we are investing in the personal and 

professional development of every Sailor. We are committed to recruiting and retaining the very best of our society, and we are 

equally committed to maintaining a culture of excellence, eliminating disruptive behaviors, ensuring Sailor wellness, and fostering 

a diverse, inclusive culture. 

Doing so is about warfighting readiness, and doing so enhances 

the asymmetric advantage generated by our lead winning team. I 

am grateful for the committee’s support of the Navy Reserve. Our 

efforts are made possible by the timely delivery of a fiscal year 

2024 appropriations bill. 

That provides predictability to our Sailors, their families, their 

employers, and most importantly, to our global Combatant Commanders. Chair Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of this committee, I remain humbled every day 

by the commitment and contribution of our citizen Sailors, our 

dedicated civilians, and the supportive families and employers that 

collectively are your Navy Reserve. 

Thank you for your continued support and your attention today, 

and I look forward to your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL JOHN B. MUSTIN

Chair Tester, Ranking Member Collins, distinguished members of the Committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding the contribution of the 

Navy Reserve to national defense, both as it stands today and as we prepare for 

the threats of tomorrow. On behalf of Navy Reserve Sailors, civilians and their families, thank you for your continued leadership and support as we optimize the 

warfighting readiness of your Navy Reserve Force for strategic competition. 

In 2020, the Navy Reserve began a transformation to improve and modernize the 

way we organize, man, train, equip, and mobilize to generate the combat power and 

critical strategic depth the Navy requires to prevail in conflict. We have embraced 

the imperative to redesign the Reserve Force—structurally, procedurally, and operationally—to align with strategic priorities calibrated for a competitive security environment. With a singular focus on generating warfighting readiness, this 

generational transformation will provide the most capable force possible to our 
265 

Navy’s Numbered Fleets and deliver integrated all-domain naval power to the Joint 

Force in competition, crisis, and conflict. 

Throughout its rich 108-year history, the Navy Reserve has proven to be an elite 

fighting force—a deep well of strategic depth from which our great nation has 

drawn time and again to prevail in competition, crisis and conflict. The talent our 

Navy Reserve Sailors bring to bear provides an unequivocal asymmetric advantage. 

As we transform the organization, training, and mobilization processes of the force, 

we have not lost sight of our collective responsibility to recruit and retain our nation’s precious talent. I remain in awe of the dedication and professionalism of Navy 

Reserve Sailors, civilians and the families that support them. They provide the foundation that underwrites more than a century of successful contribution to the Navy 

and our Joint Force, and the reason I gaze optimistically to the future. 

Timely, predictable and relevant funding from Congress is critical for the Navy 

Reserve to meet mission requirements and, as always, we are grateful for your continued support and enduring interest. Keeping the Reserve Personnel Navy account 

funded at President’s Budget levels enables the Reserve force to deliver trained Sailors ready to fight and win in the early stages of conflict as readily as they are to 

sustain combat operations. The National Guard and Reserves Equipment Account 

(NGREA) affords the Navy Reserve agility in rapidly acquiring and implementing 

equipment solutions that fill mission-critical shortages and generate readiness. Continued Congressional support will ensure the Navy Reserve provides relevant, modern capability and capacity, keeping parity with active duty service members in 

training, facilities and equipment, and a resilient surge force today and into the future. 

DESIGN THE FORCE: CAPABILITIES

For the two decades following the unprovoked attacks of 9/11, and during our 

global fight against violent extremism, the Navy Reserve provided operational support in land-based combat environments. The recent strategic shift to address peer 

adversaries in the maritime domain has forced an evolution to address the ready 

force the Navy Reserve must deliver. With the resurgence of a global pacing challenge, generating warfighting readiness requires a force design process focused on 

modernization and accelerated delivery of relevant, current capabilities. 

Multi-domain warfighting capability and capacity relevance remains an imperative guiding principle in the modernized Reserve Force. As such, we are investing 

heavily in capabilities that directly align with winning future wars, including Maritime Operations Centers, contested logistics, surge maintenance, integrated fires, 

and Naval Special Warfare. New technologies and capabilities in space, cyber, imagery analysis, battle damage assessment and repair, autonomous and un-crewed 

platforms, artificial intelligence, machine learning, data analytics and additive manufacturing represent growth areas that capitalize on the unique skills and experiences of Reserve Sailors and the civilians that enable the Reserve Force. 

The Navy Reserve delivers these modern capabilities through three employment 

models: readiness units that augment active Navy units with trained, warfightingready Reserve Sailors, individual Sailors with unique skills that enhance the Total 

Force, and stand-alone operational units that supplement active component capabilities. The Navy Reserve’s operational units require investments in modern equipment to ensure strategic depth in logistics, aviation, security, medical, special warfare as well as investments in critical capabilities. 

Navy Unique Fleet Essential Airlift (C–130J) 

The Chief of Naval Operations’ Navigation Plan identified Distributed Maritime 

Operations (DMO) as one of the Navy’s key operating concepts necessary to prevail 

in conflict. In Navigation Plan 2022, the CNO emphasizes resilient logistics in contested environments as a critical Force Design Imperative and directs recapitalization of the C–130 fleet, a reserve-only capability, by 2030. The C/KC–130T aircraft 

are the Navy’s only long-range aerial logistics platform capable of transporting bulk 

cargo, such as boats, diver recompression chambers, submarine masts, and all modules of the F–35 engine. Operated entirely by the Navy Reserve, Navy Unique Fleet 

Essential Airlift (NUFEA) consists of 27 C/KC–130T and 17 C–40A aircraft that 

comprise the Navy’s organic intra-theater air logistics capability. 

Last year, NUFEA aircraft transported 96,105 passengers and 18.8 million 

pounds of cargo for the Navy and the Department of Defense. This capability saved 

the Department $1.14 billion in expenditures relative to alternative means of transportation. Despite their demonstrated necessity and value, the C–130T’s age, lack 

of available parts due to obsolescence, and increasing cost of flight hour, drive a 

growing gap between Fleet’s demand for this mission and the Navy’s capability to 

fulfill it. Compared to the legacy ‘‘T’’ model, the more efficient and reliable ‘‘J’’ model 
266 

incurs a cost saving of approximately $1,000 per flight hour. The essential mission 

these aircraft provide make recapitalization of the C–130T to the KC–130J the Navy 

Reserve’s number one equipment priority. 

Adversary 

The aviation adversary mission ensures readiness for the Navy’s carrier-based 

tactical aircraft and develops Navy pilots’ air-to-air combat skill. The Navy Reserve’s Tactical Support Wing (TSW) maintains 29 F–5N/F and 2 F–5N+/F+ aircraft 

that replicate low-to-mid level threats. The Navy Reserve is modernizing the F–5N/ 

F avionics suite to improve safety of flight and resolve obsolescence limitations. Further upgrades will improve the range of the aircraft and generate more accurate 

threat replication. The current fleet of F–5s will reach the end of their service life 

by the early 2030s; however, eleven upgraded F–5s purchased in FY20 will come 

into service over the next 3 years to ensure adversary capability does not lapse prior 

to fielding a replacement aircraft. 

In April the Navy Reserve received twelve F–16C aircraft that provide dissimilar 

aircraft training and high-end adversary support to the fleet. These aircraft have 

sufficient airframe hours remaining to sustain adversary missions through 2035. 

Ongoing efforts to upgrade F–5 and F–16 aircraft, together with investments in 

Live-Virtual-Constructive technology, will increase the fidelity of modern threat replication and keep Reserve adversary training relevant to the fleet until follow-on 

platforms become available. 

Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance (P–8A) 

The P–8A aircraft is the nation’s only full-spectrum, broad-area Anti-Submarine 

Warfare platform. Additionally, it provides armed Anti-Surface Warfare and 

networked Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance capability. The Navy Reserve’s Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aviation (MPRA) squadrons mirror the 

active component units and integrate seamlessly into the Global Force Management 

(GFM) deployment cycle. The Navy Reserve is in the process of transitioning from 

the P–3C to the P–8A. VP–62 received their first two P–8A in February and March 

of 2023 with their third aircraft scheduled for delivery in July. VP–69 began the 

transition process to the P–8A in April 2023, with the first aircraft scheduled for 

delivery in August 2023. Transitioning to the P–8A sustains the joint forces military 

advantage over our pacing threat by providing worldwide, continuous deployed presence to deter adversaries and provide robust support of maritime operations. Hangers to support the new aircraft in the two squadrons are late to need and are the 

number one and two military construction priorities for the Navy Reserve. The recapitalization of Reserve MPRA ensures equipment parity with active units to deliver operational resiliency and strategic depth to the Joint Force. I am grateful for 

your support. 

TRAIN THE FORCE: READINESS

The singular focus of the Navy Reserve’s transformation is to generate and deliver 

warfighting readiness. As such, each Reserve Sailor’s peacetime training and active 

duty service must translate directly to readiness in their programmed warfighting 

billet. We are ensuring that training resources, and the policies that support them, 

provide Reserve Sailors the ‘‘reps and sets’’ they need to excel, on day one, in their 

wartime roles in a maritime fight. 

For the first time, the Navy Reserve issued explicit Force Generation Guidance, 

released in December of last year, establishing a force-wide process to define and 

validate training requirements and to assess force-wide status. Most importantly, 

the guidance ensures that every Sailor is familiar with their unique training plan, 

tailored to their mobilization billet. Automated systems document individual training requirements and allow Commanding Officers of Reserve Readiness Units to 

evaluate and report the status of each Sailor’s training, specific to their unique mobilization billet. Accurate, relevant information gives Sailors and their leadership 

actionable tools to manage their warfighting readiness effectively and optimizes 

training investments to enable ‘‘plug-and-play’’ integration with active-duty forces. 

Billet-Based Activation—activating individual Sailors and Reserve Units of Action 

to their programmed maritime assignments—represents an important inflection for 

the Navy Reserve in our transformation from a legacy force providing Individual 

Augmentees mobilized for land-based conflict against non-state, violent extremism. 

In the future, when necessary, we will activate units of action rather than individuals to meet reserve-appropriate requirements. 

Individual Sailors will train and activate into roles that align to their wartime 

billet and their specific experience and qualifications. This effort is in-line with the 

Secretary of the Navy’s updated policy for sourcing active and reserve Sailors to fill 
267 

current requirements. The Secretary’s policy directs the DoN to apply the Total 

Force to source ongoing global requirements, and to continue developing permanent 

manpower solutions in lieu of individual augmentees. Billet-Based Activation provides reserve Sailors practical experience, while preserving strategic depth for the 

new reality of multi-domain warfare in competition, crisis and conflict with peer and 

near-peer adversaries. 

MOBILIZE THE FORCE: CAPACITY

A Reserve Force designed and trained to fight and win must be ready and capable 

of mobilizing rapidly, and at scale, to provide the strategic depth necessary to sustain multi-domain combat operations. We will deliver on the imperative to mass mobilize the entire Reserve Force within 30 days when called upon. 

Adaptive Mobilization 

Our legacy approach to mobilization, in which individual Reserve Sailors were 

processed through a single, centralized facility to receive specialized training over 

the course of several months, did not meet the demand of a complex, dynamic security environment. To enable the readiness and deliver the Reserve Force to the fight 

immediately, we developed Adaptive Mobilization (AM) processes tailored to each 

billet, and distributed mobilization pathways to bring mobilization-ready Sailors 

into their active duty warfighting role efficiently and at scale. 

Using the AM model, six regional Readiness and Mobilization Commands 

(REDCOMs) and their subordinated Navy Reserve Centers (NRCs) support distribution of current and future activations by mobilizing the entire Selected Reserve population—roughly 50,000 Sailors—within 30 days of the demand signal. This model 

capitalizes on Training and Administration of the Reserve (TAR) staffs, located at 

the REDCOMS, NRCs and within Fleet units, and leverages the nationally distributed infrastructure unique to Reserve Forces to execute the AM model across globally distributed regions. The Navy Reserve has intentionally and frequently exercised these processes through force-wide mobilization exercises that stress-test our 

capabilities and drive future improvements. 

Navy Reserve Center Optimization 

The 115 Navy Reserve Centers spanning the United States, Puerto Rico and 

Guam make up a critical support network for Reserve Sailors across the world. In 

Fiscal Year 2020, the Navy Reserve began a crucial effort to optimize this network 

by strategically closing small, off- installation NRCs in order to realign TAR staff 

personnel to fill vacancies at under-staffed NRCs and REDCOMs. The Navy Reserve 

benefits by optimizing essential manpower to train and administer Reserve Sailors 

and to implement Adaptive Mobilization. NRCs outside of military installations 

incur force protection and security risks that ‘‘on-installation’’ NRCs do not. 

Evaluating these ‘‘off-installation sites’’ for closure reduces risk to the Force and 

curtails the expense and mobilization impact of Armed Watch Stander programs. 

The effort, which aligns with SECNAV’s 10-year infrastructure reset direction to divest the Navy’s facility footprint by 10%, reduces the Navy Reserve facility footprint 

by 10.3%. 

Administration and Management of the Individual Ready Reserve 

The Navy Reserve is comprised of 54,607 Selective Reserve (SELRES) Sailors, 

9,966 TAR Sailors and 39,214 Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) members, totaling 

over 103,787 Sailors. The IRR is a critical component of the Navy Reserve, enabling 

additional surge capacity for the Navy Reserve Force at a significantly reduced cost. 

IRR Sailors also maintain many of the primary benefits associated with military 

service, such as access to the military exchange, commissary and Morale Welfare 

and Recreation facilities, Space-Available travel, Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP) and Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) services. In 

order to leverage the potential of this population as a relevant source of strategic 

capacity, we have defined critical skills for the IRR, shifting the focus from the landbased fight against violent extremists and Individual Augmentee roles to those focused on the maritime domain. We are deliberately exercising the IRR muster process via the application of a new technology solution to refine and improve the experience. Engaging with our IRR Sailors through proactive musters has also proved 

an effective means of recruiting experienced personnel by tapping into a desire to 

affiliate with the Selective Reserve. 

DEVELOP THE FORCE: SAILORS

Navy Reserve Sailors and civilians provide the asymmetric advantage that allows 

the Navy Reserve Force to provide world-class warfighting readiness to the Fleet; 
268 

as such, they remain my primary focus in the transformation of Reserve design, 

train, mobilize, and develop initiatives. These efforts support the professional, military, and personal growth of our Sailors, with special emphasis also on minimizing 

administrative distractions, enhancing talent management, and improving quality of 

life. The Navy Reserve has promoted particular efforts to improve mental health, 

resiliency and suicide awareness. We are focused on fortifying a culture of dignity 

and respect that exemplify our Navy’s core values of honor, courage and commitment. 

Recruiting and Retention 

We are competing for talent within a discriminating labor force under rapidly 

evolving economic conditions. The labor market in the United States is the tightest 

in recent memory, with more job openings than people to fill them. However, the 

turmoil and uncertainty of the last few years have shown that many Americans are 

more likely than ever to pursue work for organizations that provide purpose to their 

lives and align with their deeper values. We believe the Navy Reserve is the employer of choice for those seeking challenge, purpose, and personal growth within 

a cohesive community of diverse and motivated individuals. To reach our goals, we 

are at General Quarters to spread this message to talented Americans who are 

eager to serve. 

Reserve component recruiting and retention includes parallel efforts to access new 

Sailors as well as those with prior service. The Prior Service Mission is unique and 

critical to manning the Reserve force: in order to ensure we can fill critical gaps, 

the Navy Reserve must maintain a deep reservoir of talent, which requires active 

duty Sailors to affiliate with the Navy Reserve prior to leaving active Navy service. 

With this in mind, the Navy established the Navy Recruiting Reserve Command 

(NRRC), charged with retaining Sailors transitioning from active duty for continued 

service in the Reserve Component. The new NRRC can focus on the prior-service 

Reserve mission in today’s competitive job market. To improve this process, NRRC 

has established Prior Service Detachments in the five continental fleet concentration 

areas and at two locations outside the continental United States. These detachments are staffed with reserve benefits advisors whose sole purpose is to act as an 

extension of the Career Transition Office and to educate Sailors on the transition 

process and the benefits and opportunities available in the Navy Reserve. 

We are also aggressively activating accession and retention levers by promoting 

Active Component to Selected Reserve (AC2SELRES) opportunities during Transition Assistance Program classes and required career development sessions. Additionally, we are expanding bonus opportunities, including implementation of a TAR 

selected re-enlistment bonus for selected rates, extending High Year Tenure exception to policy to allow more flexibility in the process for service members, executing 

a High Year Tenure Plus program that automatically approves continuation of 

SELRES Sailors through 30 September 2024, extending Tuition Assistance Programs to SELRES Sailors and implementing SELRES exit surveys to identify additional issues or potential policy changes that could support the recruiting and retention mission. The Navy has also updated the Military Service Obligation construct 

by creating mandatory SELRES service for eligible Sailors identified as fitting a 

specific need within the Reserve Force. 

The Navy Reserve is projected to miss New Accession Training goals by 973 Sailors and to finish approximately 3,000 Sailors short of the FY23 10,330 recruiting 

goal. To address end strength shortfalls, the Navy and Navy Reserve are collaboratively embracing innovative digital advertising methods to identify candidates for 

high-demand fields such as Special Warfare, aircrew, Information Technology, and 

healthcare specialties. Digital advertising is especially critical since the Navy Reserve derives 40.2% of all new contracts from marketing and advertising leads. 

Navy Personnel and Pay Modernization 

Legacy pay and personnel systems continue to challenge and frustrate our reserve 

sailors and their families. The Navy is undertaking an Enterprise personnel and 

pay transformation to modernize and streamline the processes that govern activation and deactivation of Reserve Sailors, their career management, their pay, and 

the service and support they receive and deserve throughout their career. The Navy 

is modernizing the MyNavy HR Enterprise, to include Manpower, Personnel, Training and Education systems, to improve performance, achieve Active Component/Reserve Component permeability, increase productivity, achieve auditability and generate cost efficiencies in all aspects of personnel readiness for all Navy sailors and 

their families. The centerpiece of this transformation is the Navy Personnel and Pay 

(NP2) system, which will enable a single, integrated personnel and pay system that 

allows Reserve Sailors to seamlessly transition on and off active duty, without a dis-
269 

ruption in pay. This capability will accelerate Adaptive Mobilization and provide the 

efficiency required to mobilize rapidly and at scale. While modernization efforts 

have been delayed, the Navy Reserve is pressing forward with initiatives integrating 

antiquated systems that decrease timelines and mitigate shortfalls in operating capacity to support sailors and their families. 

Culture of Excellence 

As we transform the Reserve Force for strategic competition, Sailors form the 

foundation of our readiness and remain our most important customers. As such, we 

remain focused on strengthening an inclusive and diverse culture that is intolerant 

of sexual harassment and assault, and that provides comprehensive support to Sailors, civilians and their families. We are optimizing the warfighting readiness of the 

Reserve Force by empowering Sailors, promoting organizational trust and transparency, and ensuring inclusion and connectedness among every member of the Reserve Force. 

The Navy Reserve is an exponentially more effective warfighting-ready force when 

it capitalizes on the diverse backgrounds, experiences, perspectives and talents of 

those who serve. With this as our guiding principle, the Navy Reserve is committed 

to fielding a force as diverse as the country and harnessing the asymmetric advantage of our Sailors to accelerate our warfighting advantage. In aggregate, the diversity of the Reserve Force has increased across all categories over the previous fiveyear period. We must continue to foster inclusion and equity in order to harness the 

diverse and unique capabilities of our Sailors. 

Suicide Prevention 

The well-being of Reserve Sailors, civilians and their families is an imperative for 

a healthy, whole force. We continue efforts to decrease barriers to mental health 

treatments, including the negative beliefs about help-seeking, and ensure appropriate services are available to all service members and their families. The Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP), a Reserve program, provides counselors, 

coordinators and resources 24/7/365. In FY22, PHOP completed a total of 506 Reserve Center on-site visits and 29 virtual visits, a 25% increase from FY21. Additionally, they received 3,377 Navy Reserve referrals. Electronic behavioral health 

screenings are available to every Sailor and family member for immediate access to 

PHOP services, while Resiliency Check-ins provide screening and referrals as necessary. Reserve Sailors, civilians and their families are critical to our warfighting 

readiness and remain our most important asset and, as such, the importance of 

their health, wellness and safety underscores all of our efforts. 

CONCLUSION

We are transforming the Navy Reserve and delivering ready units of action and 

augmentation manpower to support Navy warfighting throughout the spectrum of 

conflict. To remain ahead of our pacing threats in the coming decades, we must continue to transform our force with urgency, to face the challenges of today while preparing for the war of tomorrow. My unambiguous focus remains warfighting readiness. Strategic and tactical guidance supports this singular goal, with the enduring 

foundation of professional, empowered, proficient Sailors at the core. We have made 

great strides in modernizing how we man, train, equip and mobilize the force. But 

we still have much to do. Our Navy is stronger as a result of the Navy Reserve’s 

contribution to the fight. As it has for well over a century, America’s Navy Reserve 

remains ‘‘Ready Now.’’ 

On behalf of the men and women of the United States Navy Reserve, thank you 

for your steadfast support of Navy Reserve Sailors, civilians, families, and employers. Today, we face a new era with new challenges. With your continued support, 

we will lead the transformation of our Navy Reserve to address the current and future global environment with speed and agility. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Admiral. Next up, we have General 

Bellon, Commander of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve. General. 

STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL DAVID G. BELLON, COMMANDER, MARINE FORCES RESERVE 

General BELLON. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, 

and distinguished members of the subcommittee, it is great to be 

here with you today to share a conversation, a public conversation 

with Forward Sergeant Major Carlos Ruiz and Command Master 
270 

Chief Mike Mussett who are sitting behind me about your Marine 

Corps Reserve. 

Congress has been a great partner to us as a service as we have 

been in the middle of this historic inflection point to evolve the Marine Corps in order to meet the threats that we have been directed 

to meet, and hopefully my comments today will provide a little 

extra context about what the Marine Corps Reserve has done to 

meet those demands. Time, time is what I want to emphasize. 

This is a time sensitive task that we have been given by you and 

by the Department of Defense and by the Combatant Commanders 

to evolve quickly in order to first deter, and then if necessary, meet 

threats. So, what have we done about that? What have we actually 

done in the last year to meet that need with your help? 

I want to talk about a couple of things specifically. I will talk 

first a little bit about a vignette. I mean, the lens through which 

we see the world, we focus on the Marines first, right, the all-volunteer force effort. We believe in our hearts that we are tasked 

with winning our Nation’s battles and we win our Nation’s battles 

with Marines and Sailors. We don’t man equipment. We equip Marines and Sailors. 

So, as we looked deep into the threat and deep into our tasking, 

and what we acknowledge is we have this amazing human capital 

that joined us because they want to serve. They chose us because 

they thought it was going to be a harder task. It was going to be 

more difficult than other choices. 

And what they are asking us to do is to make their service 

worthwhile, to honor them with the most difficult tasks, and then 

to arm and equip them to achieve those tasks. So, to that end, we 

have formed what we call the Marine Innovation Unit. It was an 

acknowledgment that this population that we all enjoy had this 

unique combined experience and education. They have their military service, and they have their civilian occupation and education. 

And if we bound them together, they could do amazing things, 

if we didn’t pay attention to military occupational specialties and 

ranks, and instead to a desire to serve and their human capital. 

This Marine Innovation Unit accelerated an opportunity for us to 

transition legacy capacity and capability, and you gave us the tools 

to do it. 

By using degree of funds from fiscal year 2022 and 2023, we 

were able to take 400 Marines who were facing a sundowning scenario with legacy equipment, and instead buy a littoral craft capability, a maneuver capability that allowed them to not only have 

a new mission set, but more importantly reinvigorated them. 

And here is the lesson I learned from that. By placing a littoral 

craft in both Tampa, Florida, and Galveston, Texas, we went from 

a scenario where our re-enlistment rates in those two companies 

because they perceived that their service was undervalued, to some 

of the highest in my component. 

They were simply looking for a signal from us collectively that 

their service is meaningful and that the task we were going to give 

them would be meaningful. And so, with your help and with the 

help of your staffs in particular, we got great guidance from you, 

and we moved at the speed of relevance, and enabled and empowered these volunteers to continue service in a way that is inspiring. 
271 

So, the future, what do I believe the future is. The other thing 

we did was we combined the authorities that you have given us by 

combining the commands of Marine Forces Reserve and Marine 

Forces South—Southern Command. So, we accomplished two tasks 

at once. We raised the capabilities and readiness of our Marine 

Forces in the Reserves, and also provide capabilities and capacities 

to a significantly under-resourced Combatant Command. 

And I believe the American people want us to do that, and your 

Marines and Sailors love it. I am excited about the future. The 

quality of the Marines that we have are phenomenal. The environment for recruiting is going to be difficult, and the American people 

and our forces are waiting for us to show that service is meaningful, and they can trust us as institutions, and today is all about 

that. 

So, I appreciate the opportunity and I look forward to your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL DAVID G. BELLON

Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the 

Subcommittee, it is my privilege to testify on behalf of the Commandant of the Marine Corps and provide an overview on the current state of the Marine Corps Reserve and an insight into our vision for the future. 

Your Marine Corps Reserve has always been ready, relevant, and responsive for 

the Nation, and to maintain that status we must innovate and evolve to meet the 

threats of both today and tomorrow. As part of the Marine Corps’ effort to modernize our force and our warfighting capabilities through Force Design, the Marine 

Corps Reserve has embraced several unique initiatives to drive innovation on multiple fronts. The establishment of the Marine Innovation Unit (MIU) aboard Stewart 

Air National Guard Base in New York is a shining example of how your Marine 

Corps Reserve is leading from the front in this area. The MIU harnesses an untouched talent pool of Reserve Component Marines with unique skill sets from diverse backgrounds. MIU, in partnership with the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, postures the Marine Corps to accelerate the adoption of advanced capabilities, 

and transform Naval Service capacity for technology while retaining and investing 

in Total Force human capital. In addition to the MIU, and in collaboration with the 

Defense Innovation Unit, the Marine Corps Reserve has been exploring a unique opportunity to identify and purchase dual-use commercially available small craft for 

littoral operations. These craft will allow the Marine Corps to leverage Reserve 

Component Assault Amphibian Battalion units and their littoral warfighting expertise to support Service-level experimentation and learning in littoral areas of operations. Continuous refining of how to compete and fight against a peer adversary 

is key to retaining the talent and service of these maritime-oriented Marines, and 

it is key to our evolution. 

Just as we innovate and evolve, the Marine Corps Reserve remains dedicated to 

connecting with and contributing to the communities in which they reside, forming 

a critical link between the Marine Corps and our communities across the Nation. 

In 2022 we celebrated the 75th Anniversary of the Marine Corps Reserve Toys for 

Tots program. For 75 years Marines and their families have given back to their local 

towns and neighborhoods through their participation in this program; uniting local 

communities in a common cause to help less fortunate children through annual toy 

collections and distribution campaigns. Every year, no matter the clime or place, the 

Marine Corps Reserve is on the forefront of this initiative to support communities 

and families across the Nation. 

I am deeply impressed by the professionalism, competence, and dedication of our 

Reserve Marines and Sailors. Like their Active Component counterparts, they serve 

selflessly to protect our great Nation. I am inspired by the way they balance family 

responsibilities, civilian careers, and military service with humility and a sense of 

pride and dedication that is consistent with the great sacrifices of Marines from 

every generation. As a warfighting organization, the key to our success has been 

and will continue to be individual Marines and their families. Your support of the 

National Guard and Reserves, down to the individual Marine Reservist, ensures we 

have the resources and funding to fight and win our Nation’s battles. 
272 

A TOTAL FORCE

Throughout the past year, the Marine Corps Reserve continued global deployments supporting Combatant Commander requirements by providing multifaceted 

forces focused on combat operations, crisis prevention, crisis response, and theater 

security cooperation. In addition to the Active Component Marines already deployed, 

2022 saw an additional 1,847 Reserve Marines activated and mobilized to support 

22 operational requirements across six geographic Combatant Commands. The Marine Corps Reserve continues to meet the demand for use as an Operational Reserve; however, challenges to our readiness and ability to meet strategic requirements remain. 

In FY23, the Marine Corps Reserve has already activated more than 83 Marines 

in support of four Combatant Commands and is forecasting the activation and mobilization of 589 additional Reserve Marines to support 21 separate formations. These 

operations significantly increase the Reserve Component’s readiness and interoperability with the Active Component, Joint Forces, allies, and coalition partners. Planning is currently underway for increased activations and deployments across the 

globe that integrate Reserve forces with the Active Component commencing in FY24 

and stretching across the Future Years Defense Program in support of high-priority 

Combatant Command requirements. 

Throughout 2022, the Marine Corps Reserve continued to provide direct support 

to Operation ALLIES WELCOME with more than 1,100 Reserve Marines. Upon the 

successful completion of Operation ALLIES WELCOME, 103 Reserve Marines volunteered to extend their mobilization and deploy to Kosovo for Operation ALLIES 

WELCOME–KOSOVO located aboard Camp Bondsteel. The ability to augment this 

humanitarian aid mission with volunteers from the Reserve force speaks volumes 

to the dedication, professionalism, and compassion of our Reserve Marines. The Marine Corps’ continued employment of the Reserve Component as a supplemental 

force has enabled the Active Component to focus its effort on global crisis response 

and contingency operations. 

In addition to participating in operational requirements, the Marine Corps Reserve conducts a wide array of combat related training exercises across the globe. 

The purpose of these exercises is to improve the Marine Corps Reserve’s combat 

readiness, international relations, and interoperability between allied nations and 

partners. In FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve led or participated in 59 military exercises across 16 countries, contributing 10,599 Reserve Marines. In FY23, the Marine 

Corps Reserve is forecasted to participate in 49 exercises globally, with a total force 

of 9,887 Reserve Marines. We expect the overall number of exercises and engagements to increase in the coming year as planners from the Marine Corps Reserve 

continue to attend exercise-planning events. 

The Marine Corps Reserve continues to participate in the Department of Defense 

(DoD) Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) Program, which provides joint/military 

training in the United States and its territories to increase deployment and unit 

readiness. The IRT program simultaneously provides key services such as 

healthcare, construction, transportation, and cybersecurity with lasting benefits for 

our American communities. In 2022, the Marine Corps Reserve participated in nine 

exercises under the IRT Program, with two of those exercises involving both Active 

and Reserve forces. Our participating units were able to train to mission essential 

tasks involving both horizontal and vertical construction, logistical support, communications, and medical care while making tangible, meaningful impacts in communities located in Alaska, Indiana, Ohio, Texas, and Hawaii. With your continued 

support of these efforts, we look to expand our footprint in this program; to include 

airlift, construction, medical, and cybersecurity efforts. 

In addition to participating in operational requirements throughout the world, the 

Marine Corps Reserve supports the Total Force by dutifully executing the sensitive 

and crucial mission of providing casualty assistance to the families of our fallen Marines. There is no responsibility we treat with higher regard than this solemn mission. Inspector-Instructor (I–I) and Reserve Site Support staffs are geographically 

positioned to accomplish the vast majority of Marine Corps casualty assistance calls 

and are trained to provide compassionate and thorough assistance to families. Indeed, most Marine Corps casualty notifications and follow-on assistance calls to the 

next of kin are made by our Reserve Marines. 

During FY22, I–I and Reserve Site Support staffs supported 247 of the 298 active 

casualty calls performed by the Marine Corps. The professionalism and compassion 

of our Casualty Assistance Calls Officers (CACOs) continues well beyond the initial 

notification. We ensure that our CACOs are well trained, equipped, and supported 

by all levels of command through a combination of in-person and online training. 

Once assigned, the CACO serves as the family’s central point of contact and coordi-
273 

nates with funeral homes, government agencies, and other organizations as needed. 

They assist family members with planning the return and final resting place of 

their Marine and ensure the filing of appropriate documents so that families receive 

all entitled benefits. In many cases, our CACOs provide a long-lasting bridge between the Marine Corps and the grieving family. 

The Marine Corps Reserve also performs the solemn mission of military funeral 

honors, and our Reserve units take pride in performing many of these services for 

our fallen Marines and their families. Marine Corps funeral honors are dedicated 

to ensuring all Marines who have served honorably receive the appropriate honors. 

It is a final salute to their life and the final demonstration of our country’s gratitude 

to those who, in times of war and peace, have faithfully defended our Nation. Marine Corps Reserve units performed 22,819 military funeral honors in 2022, 93% of 

the total funeral services provided by the Marine Corps. 

PERSONNEL

Our Marines, Sailors, and civilian Marines are the foundation of all that we do. 

The resources we dedicate to sustaining and developing this foundation directly contribute to the success of our Service and the Marine Corps Reserve. The vast majority of the Marine Corps Selected Reserve’s authorized end strength of 33,000 falls 

under Marine Forces Reserve. The Selected Reserve is composed of Marines in four 

categories: Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR) Units, Active Reserve (AR), Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs), and service members in Initial Active-Duty 

Training (IADTs). Embedded with these Marines are 1,502 Active and Reserve Component Sailors who serve critical roles in the operational, medical, dental, and spiritual readiness of our Reserve Force. The success of the Marine Corps Reserve 

would not be possible without the support of these Sailors and U.S. Navy programs. 

In addition to the Marines and Sailors of the Selected Reserve, the Marine Corps 

Reserve administratively manages approximately 64,500 Marines who serve in the 

Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). The Marine Corps Reserve continues to monitor 

the activation viability of these IRR Marines with muster events at multiple locations across the country. The events also provide the opportunity to address administrative issues, conduct mental health and post- deployment assessments, review 

Reserve obligations and new opportunities, and meet with Marine Corps prior-service recruiters. During the past year the Marine Corps Reserve conducted 24 muster 

events in which 4,626 IRR Marines attended. In addition to the in-person muster 

events, the Marine Corps Reserve contacted and screened 47,711 IRR Marines. 

The Marine Corps Reserve strives to attract and retain the most qualified Marines capable of fulfilling our leadership and operational needs. Marines approaching the end of their current contracts, whether Active or Reserve Component, receive counseling on the tangible and intangible benefits of remaining affiliated with 

the Selected Reserve. We educate each transitioning Active Component Marine on 

opportunities for continued service in the Marine Corps Reserve through the Marine 

Corps’ transition assistance and educational outreach programs. 

As the Marine Corps modernizes our forces to ensure we are postured to confront 

future potential adversaries, we are making every effort to retain those Marines 

who are affected by Force Design initiatives. During 2022, the Marine Corps Reserve deployed a series of Personnel Transition Teams (PTTs) to every Reserve unit 

where the Commandant’s Force Design program had a direct impact on Marines 

and their ability to continue serving; this also included those units who were affected by the Marine Forces Reserve Site Optimization program. These PTTs were 

specifically designed to ensure each Marine was provided information, education, 

and one-on- one career counseling concerning available incentives, career opportunities, and continued service options. We successfully retained more than 64% of all 

Reserve Marines assigned to those site locations through voluntary reassignment to 

another Marine Reserve unit, while an additional 14% of those Marines chose to 

transfer to another Service to continue their military careers. Survey responses 

show that 83% of the Reserve Marines felt they had been provided with the information and support needed to make an informed decision, while 90% of the Reserve 

Marines felt their best interests were kept in mind. 

Recruiting and retaining high-quality Marines is essential to the Marine Corps’ 

role as the Nation’s force-in-readiness. Although the Marine Corps Reserve has recruited and trained Marines safely in the face of the global pandemic, the challenges 

with recruiting in a COVID–19 environment have persisted into the past fiscal year. 

The Marine Corps Reserve still enjoys high affiliation from non-prior service recruiting and accomplished its recruiting goals in FY22. The Marine Corps Reserve is 

thankful for and greatly appreciates the retention programs supported by Congress 

and the DoD, which include inactive duty travel reimbursement and multiple bonus 
274 

programs. These programs are essential to ensure we continue to meet authorized 

end strength and retain our most talented Marines. Your continued support of these 

critical programs has helped preserve our overall personnel end strength at 84.6% 

of the total requirement and maintain a grade and Military Occupational Specialty 

match rate of 72.3%. Our personnel readiness not only reflects the health of the 

force, but it directly contributes to our overall operational readiness. We fully expect 

to meet or exceed our Selected Marine Corps Reserve retention goals this year. Continued use of available incentive programs is critical to optimally match individuals 

to our requirements, maintain individual and unit-level readiness, address shortfalls 

in our staff non-commissioned officers’ ranks, and fully rebuild readiness from previous force structure changes. 

EQUIPMENT

Every Marine Corps Reserve unit is manned, trained, and equipped to standards 

that facilitate seamless integration and employment of forces to meet the requirements of both the Service and Geographic Combatant Commanders. Marine Corps 

Reserve units, along with their personnel and equipment, continue to be in high demand due to their high interoperability with their Active Component counterparts. 

The Marine Corps Reserve is designed to be equipped at near parity with its active component counterpart due to the Total Force approach to equipment fielding. 

However, the high demand for Reserve units and the resulting high operational 

tempo places stress on the Marine Corps Reserve’s ability to maintain equipment 

and replenish deficiencies. Inadequate or delayed fielding coupled with delays in appropriation of funds disrupts our ability to program long-term activities and challenges our efforts to improve current and future readiness. One of the greatest ongoing concerns has been our Individual Combat Clothing and Equipment (ICCE) deficiencies. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY23 provided a line-item appropriation specifically providing the Marine Corps Reserve the ability to place 

ICCE procurements at levels which will meet current materiel Table of Equipment 

allowance requirements. Currently, ongoing enterprise-wide contracting and manufacturing delays have impeded the replenishment of unserviceable items. In the 

event of a large-scale wartime mobilization, to include any sizable call-up of the 

IRR, ICCE deficiencies may become a Service-level risk. 

The Marine Corps Reserve continues to mitigate risk and ensure maintenance 

readiness through Training Allowances (TA), Operation and Maintenance Marine 

Corps Reserve (OMMCR) funds, and third-party logistics. First, we refine a unit’s 

TA, which is that portion of a unit’s full Table of Equipment (TE) located at Reserve 

Training Centers (RTCs). Our goal is to balance the amount of equipment necessary 

to conduct training with the amount of equipment that can be maintained within 

personnel, facility, and fiscal constraints. Second, we leverage OMMCR funds to employ mobile maintenance support teams that augment our limite nicmaintenance capacity in the Marine Corps Reserve. Third, we utilize a Service-managed thirdparty logistics provider to repair secondary components that cannot be repaired organically due to limited intermediate maintenance capacity. Congressional support 

for Reserve funding is paramount to our continued success in sustaining our equipment and maintenance readiness. 

The Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) and Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) 

will provide the Reserve Component with the latest generation of combat equipment. The Marine Corps Reserve began receiving its allocation of 2,628 JLTVs in 

3rd quarter FY21; to date, we have received only four vehicles. An additional eight 

specialty vehicles for the artillery community are scheduled for fielding in FY23/24. 

All Marine Corps Reserve ACV deliveries are currently scheduled for FY27. Final 

ACV Full Operational Capability (FOC) quantities and timelines will be determined 

pending future Service-level Force Design 2030 assessments. 

TRAINING

The Marine Corps Reserve participates in a number of training exercises in the 

United States and abroad each year to improve combat readiness and enhance our 

ability to rapidly activate and integrate with the Active Component. The Reserve 

Force’s ability to participate in and conduct training, drill weekends, and annual 

training periods have resumed to a steady state following the global pandemic. Local 

commanders continue to demonstrate initiative and creativity in conducting meaningful training for the Reserve Marines at each opportunity. Virtual training continues to allow for an increase in individual skills, but the focus of effort is to conduct in-person unit training at the company and battalion levels. 

The dual-hatted Marine Forces Reserve and Marine Forces South command structure has resulted in efficiencies by enabling Reserve Marines to meet Geographic 
275 

Combatant Command requirements while simultaneously providing realistic multinational training for our Reserve formations. During FY22, Marine Corps Reserve 

Forces participated in the annual Service-level Integrated Training Exercise (ITX) 

at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California. ITX 

provides an opportunity for units to perform realistic, coordinated, live-fire training 

to meet Marine Air Ground Task Force mission essential tasks. In addition to the 

tactical training, ITX also serves as a rehearsal exercise in the activation and mobilization processes. The Reserve Force that forms at Twentynine Palms for training, 

receives orders to muster and move personnel from 77 different units located at 58 

disaggregated Home Training Centers. Additionally, units plan for and coordinate 

the transportation of equipment to arrive simultaneously with the units in 

Twentynine Palms. These actions replicate similar tasks the units would be required to perform should there be a wartime activation and Reserve Force mobilization. 4,237 Marines participated in ITX across the span of 20 training days this 

year. This realistic training aids in improving combat readiness for all exercise 

forces and enhances efficiency in Total Force integration to enable more rapid activation response times at the battalion and squadron levels. 

The Marine Corps Reserve continues to focus on operational readiness within the 

Marine Air Ground Task Force and the Joint operational environment. Using joint 

aviation assets from the Marine Corps, Air Force, Air National Guard and Army 

National Guard, the Marine Corps Reserve conducted Tactical Air Control Party 

training to sustain Joint Terminal Air Controller (JTAC) qualifications at Smoky 

Hill Bombing Range in Salina, Kansas. This training benefitted the other Services 

by enabling more than 45 fixed and rotary wing aviation platforms to achieve mission essential training in close air support while certifying Reserve Marine JTACs. 

Resident Professional Military Education (PME) courses regained momentum in 

FY22 as seat capacity returned to 1,091 Reserve Component seats. In addition, the 

Marine Corps Reserve continues to leverage distance education and virtual learning 

to maximize PME training opportunities. 

The Marine Corps Reserve uses training simulators wherever and whenever possible to preserve fiscal and materiel resources. Marine Corps Reserve units employ 

Indoor Simulated Marksmanship Trainers (ISMTs) to maintain combat marksmanship skills and to maximize the use of their most precious resource, time. The 

ISMTs enable onsite training and eliminate long distance travel to remote DoD 

training locations. The use of this and other simulations systems, as well as increased online training, enabled the force to complete mission essential tasks and 

required DoD and Service-level annual training. 

FACILITIES

The Marine Corps Reserve occupies facilities in 47 states, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. These facilities include 28 sites that are 

owned and maintained by the Marine Corps Reserve. The other 130 Reserve Training Centers, in which the status is ‘‘Tenant,’’ are owned and maintained by other 

Services. Although some sites are located onboard major DoD installations, most Reserve Training Centers are located within civilian communities, ranging from residential neighborhoods to industrial and commercial districts. With a continuous effort to improve the maintenance and security of all our facilities, our main goal is 

to ensure the safety of our Marines and Sailors by facilitating effective readiness 

training and efficient activation and mobilization locations. 

Traditionally, the Marine Corps Reserve has committed 100% of the facilities 

budget to support the sustainment and maintenance of existing infrastructure and 

day-to-day operating costs. Because of this investment and commitment, we have 

been able to improve the overall readiness of our facilities’ inventory. Moreover, 

through the comprehensive utilization of the Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, 

and Modernization (FSRM) program, we have also retained and maximized inadequate facilities that were deemed vital to support the Marine Corps Reserve’s mission. Currently, we are working to identify major FSRM projects for future funding. 

In conjunction with our maximization efforts, we also sought out cost and funding 

savings in the divestiture of facilities and demolition of excess footprint. In the last 

2 years, the Marine Corps Reserve has divested, or is in the process of divesting, 

from 19 sites at a savings of approximately $200k–$300k savings per site. 

As we capitalize the utilization of the Military Construction, Navy Reserve 

(MCNR) program, our focus is on providing construction for new and enduring capabilities, as well as recapitalization of our aging facilities. The construction projects 

enabled by the annual authorization and appropriation of MCNR funding are a significant factor in advancing our facilities support mission, especially as we optimize 

our force laydown throughout the Nation. Continued support for our MCNR pro-
276 

gram requests is essential for the planning and execution to modernize our capabilities and, when needed, the ability to divest from failing infrastructure or facilities 

that no longer meet the mission. 

The combined effects of our targeted site consolidations, FSRM, and MCNR Programs have steadily reduced the number of inadequate or substandard Reserve 

Training Centers and enabled improved support to the Reserve units and personnel. 

However, as our infrastructure ages, the operating costs have steadily increased and 

will continue to increase as the Marine Corps modernizes to meet the requirements 

of the National Defense Strategy. The continued support of our annual funding request for our facilities program will enable us to improve the overall physical infrastructure that reinforces the operational readiness of our units and personnel. 

The safety of our Marines, Sailors, and their families is of utmost importance; 

therefore, we are actively engaged in ongoing efforts to improve the overall force 

protection at all our sites. We take pride in working with our Service partners and 

the National Guard to improve our sites where joint occupation is optimal. Throughout the last 10 years, numerous force protection assessments have been conducted 

at our facilities and security-engineering reports have been generated to assist in 

developing designs that mitigate protection concerns, specifically within the realm 

of physical security. These assessments identify requirements and serve to prioritize 

enhancements, which ultimately improve the overall facility security for our Marines, Sailors, and their families. While we are funded for the Installation Physical 

Security of our owned sites, at Reserve Training Centers where we are considered 

‘‘tenants,’’ we are reliant on the other Services to fund the physical security requirements. However, to ensure the Physical Security requirements for these units, the 

Marine Corps Reserve often funds security projects that should be funded by the 

host command. As a direct result, the Marine Corps Reserve plans to submit a 

budgetary increase in the future years to ensure our projects are funded to the required levels. 

HEALTH SERVICES

The Marine Corps Reserve Health Services Support (HSS) system prioritizes the 

health and wellness of our Reserve Marines and Sailors. We improve medical readiness through a robust Individual Medical Readiness Program within the Marine 

Corps Reserve and by accurate monitoring, identification, and supervision of unitlevel actions necessary to attain readiness goals. Additionally, our Health Services 

personnel participate in Force Readiness Activation Assessment Program inspections and audits which provide oversight at the individual unit, as well as the ability to monitor readiness and adherence to policy. 

The Reserve Health Readiness Program (RHRP) has greatly increased overall 

medical and dental readiness throughout the force. This program uses contracted civilian medical and dental providers to work with units that do not have organic 

medical or dental support personnel or are remote from, or not supported by, a nearby Military Treatment Facility (MTF). During FY22, the RHRP performed 11,237 

Periodic Health Assessments (PHAs), 54 Onsite Post-Deployment Heath Re-Assessments (PDHRAs), 17,465 audiological examinations, and 8,600 dental examinations. 

The Marine Corps Reserve HSS’s priority is to achieve the DoD’s goal of a 90% 

medically ready force. While national, regional, state, and local restrictions on travel 

and group activities due to COVID–19 affected scheduling and availability of both 

organic unit and RHRP readiness events over the course of several months, FY22 

individual medical and dental readiness rates were nevertheless 91% and 89%, respectively. Marine Corps Reserve units rely heavily on RHRP to maintain our medical and dental readiness, and continued support of this program is imperative for 

maintaining overall readiness. 

As a result of the overlapping Marine Forces Reserve/Marine Forces South relationship, MARFORRES/MARFORSOUTH HSS coordinates with Headquarters Marine Corps and Navy Medicine to align with Force Design 2030. This relationship 

provides unique opportunities to achieve Mission Essential Tasks (METs) and 

Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs) to address prioritized expeditionary medical 

support capabilities, including Prolonged Casualty Care, Multi-modal Patient Transportation and Patient Movement, and Scalable Force Packages for support to Expeditionary Advanced Based Operations (EABO) and Littoral Operations in a Contested Environment (LOCE). 

In partnership with USSOUTHCOM, the Marine Corps Reserve has aligned with 

Service components to advance the USSOUTHCOM Global Health Engagement 

strategy. Opportunities to foster relationships with Partner Nations throughout 

Central and South America and the Caribbean could not have come at a more fortuitous time. In an environment where instability, post-pandemic restrictions, and ma-
277 

lign near-peer influence may impact access, the Marine Corps Reserve is initiating 

smart, innovative, and cost-effective medical capability concepts in partnership with 

the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab that include the Tactical Scalable Surgical System (TS3) and Virtual Reality training to demonstrate constant U.S. presence and 

support to our partners in the USSOUTHCOM region. A fully developed suite of collaborations in the Global Health and Medical Education spaces further demonstrate 

how the Marine Corps Reserve and other Service components will continue to be the 

partner of choice in the region, as well as a vehicle to preparation for operations 

throughout the world. 

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

The Marine Corps Reserve executes a multifaceted behavioral health program 

that includes Combat Operational Stress Control Capability, DoN’s Deployment 

Health Program, Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP), and collaboration 

with the National Guard Bureau and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), as 

well as targeted initiatives for Suicide Prevention Capability, Substance Abuse Prevention, and Family Advocacy Programs. The Combat Operational Stress Control 

(COSC) capability provides essential knowledge, skills, and tools to assist commanders with improving mission readiness, force preservation, and improving the 

long-term health of Marines and their families. The COSC is comprised of two 

trainings: Operational Stress Control and Readiness (OSCAR) and Deployment 

Cycle Training (DCT). 

OSCAR builds teams of selected Marines and unit leaders along with medical and 

religious personnel to work together as sensors for the commanders by identifying 

small changes in personnel behavior. OSCAR teams help to enable a bias for action 

within the command and link individuals to appropriate resources. The DCT is conducted across every rank and is delivered to service members at the appropriate 

point in the deployment cycle. The combination of these programs helps to prevent, 

identify, and effectively manage combat and operational stress, whether deployed or 

in garrison. Each of these tools supports the unit commanders in building unit 

strength, resiliency, and readiness, as well as keeping Marines and Sailors in the 

fight. 

The Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery supports behavioral health through 

various independent and contracted programs such as Post-Deployment Health Reassessment/Mental Health Assessment (PDHRA/MHA) and PHOP. The PDHRA 

Program is intended to focus specifically on identifying issues that emerge after our 

Marines and Sailors have returned home from deployment. The MHA is conducted 

at multiple intervals throughout the deployment cycle, annually with a Marine or 

Sailor’s physical health assessment (PHA), and during the Separation Health Assessment (SHA). The MHA serves as a screening for any mental health concerns 

including but not limited to depression, alcohol misuse, and post-traumatic stress 

syndrome symptoms. PHOP secures behavioral health screenings, psychological 

treatment referrals, and essential follow-up treatment to ensure our service members’ behavioral health needs are met. In FY22 PHOP connected with 9,129 Marine 

Corps Reservists; an estimated 13% of those connections resulted in intensive case 

management. Through their outreach services, PHOP addresses general behavioral 

health needs, post-deployment concerns and crisis-related interventions by providing 

our Marines and Sailors access to local resources through a network of contracted 

behavioral health programs. Internally, PHOP and Marine Corps Reserve’s Force 

Chaplains regularly exchange contact rosters to multiply networking effectiveness. 

These programs remain critical to maintaining a resilient force by providing pathways for Marines, Sailors, and families to seek behavioral health assistance. 

Access to reliable behavioral healthcare is a barrier to many Reservists and their 

families. However, memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with the National 

Guard Bureau, and the Department of Veteran’s Affairs have greatly increased the 

resources available to Reservists and their families. Marines, Sailors, and their families can now utilize more than 400 additional resource sites through the National 

Guard Bureau’s Family Assistance Centers, and 383 veteran centers (83 of them 

mobile) through the VA. Veteran centers are able to provide psychological assessments, counseling, and additional treatment options. 

Signs of operational and combat stress may manifest long after a service member 

returns home from deployment. This delayed onset of symptoms presents unique 

challenges to Reserve Marines and Sailors who may be detached from vital medical 

care and the daily support network inherent in active-duty Marine Corps units. Encouraging Marines to recognize and communicate mental health challenges is a pervasive issue facing our commanders. The Marine Corps Reserve addresses the stigma associated with mental healthcare through key programs such as the Yellow 
278 

Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) and COSC. We market all our behavioral 

health initiatives and programs through our Marine Corps Reserve website, our 

smart phone mobile application (app), and during key Marine Corps forums 

throughout the year. 

The Marine Corps Reserve smart phone mobile app, USMC Reserve Connect, is 

tailored to Marine Reservists and family members. This Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) approved app is an enterprise-wide, mobile app that serves as 

a gateway to public content on government websites. The app delivers portable, 

timely, and relevant information to Marines, Sailors, and their families and reduces 

reliance on traditional computers to access career and personal resources. The app 

is customizable, enabling units to provide Reserve Marines and Sailors with relevant, unit-specific information. The app includes a mobile Common Access Card 

(CAC) portal that allows Marines to pair their devices with a mobile CAC reader 

to access some CAC-secured sites. USMC Reserve Connect increases engagement, 

communication, and connectedness through greater access to career, lifestyle, and 

behavioral health resources. The app is free to the public and is available for 

download in most mobile app stores. 

The Marine Corps Substance Abuse Program educates Marines and Sailors on 

substance misuse and how it may impact relationships, coping mechanisms, thinking patterns, and risk awareness. The Substance Abuse Program provides tools to 

promote the safety and total fitness of Marines, Sailors, and their families to sustain 

and improve personal readiness and unit performance. The Marine Corps Reserve 

relies profoundly on its Drug Demand Reduction Program that uses random urinalysis testing to deter the use of illicit drugs and misuse of prescription drugs. Each 

Reserve unit conducts monthly drug testing to screen Reserve Marines and Sailors 

for drugs as well as breathalyzer testing to screen for alcohol use while in a duty 

status. In FY22, with the decrease in COVID–19 restrictions and bases returning 

to Health Protection Condition Alpha (HPCON A), units have reintegrated the Alcohol Screening Program into their monthly testing requirements. In response to this, 

the Substance Abuse Program has increased education and training for Alcohol 

Screening Program Coordinators. 

Additionally, the Substance Abuse Program staff provides quarterly on-demand 

education and awareness training on the dangers of abusing prescription drugs, information on the proper disposal of unused and outdated medications, and annual 

supervisor-level training that increase leaders’ awareness of the dangers of abusing 

prescription drugs. In FY22, the Substance Abuse Program continued the use of 

Prime for Life in our educational efforts. This 4.5-hour training is designed for Substance Abuse Control Officers and their unit leaders to explore how biology and 

choices affect an individual’s risk of alcohol and substance dependence, with emphasis focused on values and goals. 

The Marine Corps Reserve recognizes there are a myriad of factors contributing 

to suicide-related events. Risk factors can include depression, social isolation, impulsive or aggressive tendencies, and substance misuse and abuse. Common precipitating stressors are consistent with the previous year and include relationship, 

legal, and financial challenges, as well as disciplinary problems. Commanders employ a coordinated and effective suicide prevention methodology that allows for the 

identification of stressors and application of mitigation measures to prevent and address conditions that lead to suicidal behaviors within their units. Force Preservation Councils are conducted monthly to optimize the potential of all Active and Reserve Marines and Sailors. Through engaged leadership and consultation with subject matter experts, unit leaders identify potential risk factors and apply holistic 

risk management courses of action in order to improve individual and unit readiness. 

The Marine Corps’ Unit Marine Awareness and Prevention Integrated Training 

(UMAPIT) educates every Marine on the basics of suicide prevention, assists with 

normalizing life changes, and emphasizes the need to seek help with the aim of decreasing the negative stigma around behavioral health. UMAPIT is a tiered initiative designed to improve the total fitness of Marines, help foster mission readiness, 

and increase the chance for early intervention. This training incorporates evidenceinformed practices and raises awareness about common risk factors and warning 

signs associated with a range of behavioral health issues such as substance abuse, 

suicide, family maltreatment, and combat operational stress before such issues become unmanageable. The Marine Corps culture toward encouraging Marines to seek 

help continues. This culture shift aids in reducing barriers to care and the fear of 

reprisal for seeking help. Lastly, all Marines are taught to recognize suicide warning 

signs and to seek appropriate resources for themselves and others to ensure that 

no Marine is left behind. 
279 

Care Management Teams focus on supporting Reserve Marines and Sailors 

through the Department of Veterans Affairs Transition Care Management Program. 

The Reserve Marines and Sailors are provided with a Care Manager who oversees 

the referrals, follow-on care, and individual healthcare needs of the Reserve member. The Marine Intercept Program (MIP) is an evidence-informed, targeted intervention for service members serving on active duty or activated Reservists who have 

had an identified suicide ideation or suicide attempt. MIP includes a series of telephonic contacts in which a counselor assesses the Marine for risk, encourages the 

use of a safety plan, and identifies and addresses barriers to services or resources. 

These services are also provided to our Reserve Marines and Sailors through PHOP. 

Our Reserve Marines and Sailors have proven their strength in navigating challenging issues such as frequent moves, deployments, and separations from loved 

ones. To help with these challenges, our Marines, Sailors, and family members can 

access behavioral health programs at Marine Corps installations through Marine 

Corps Community Services (MCCS) while on active-duty orders. Additionally, we 

continue to support Military OneSource which provides confidential, non-medical 

counseling, resources, and support to service members and their families anywhere 

in the world. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

Sexual assault is a corrosive problem across the Department of Defense with damaging impacts to the victims and their families, friends, communities, and the organizations they serve. Each case of sexual assault causes harm to unit cohesion, morale, unit and individual readiness, and the reputation of the Service as a whole. 

Recruitment, retention, and most importantly the health and wellbeing of our men 

and women in uniform also suffer. For the Marine Corps Reserve, improving the 

health and safety of our service members by fostering a culture of dignity and respect are top priorities as they are key to reducing and ultimately eliminating sexual assault within our ranks. The Marine Corps Reserve has a robust Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program that provides training, advocacy, 

guidance, and supportive services across our geographically dispersed force. Our 

current SAPR Program is comprised of seven full-time professional employee positions developed to ensure the efficacy of the program and provide both prevention 

and response services. In addition to the force-level Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC), each Major Subordinate Command (MSC) within the Marine Corps 

Reserve has a full-time civilian SARC who serves as a special staff officer and subject matter expert to their Commanding General. The SARCs manage each MSC’s 

SAPR Program from Marine Forces Reserve headquarters in New Orleans, Louisiana, along with two professional civilian SAPR Victim Advocates (VAs) who are 

available to travel throughout the country to provide in-person advocacy services, 

training, and unit-specific program guidance to Marines, Sailors, and their families. 

The Marine Corps Reserve’s SAPR personnel work diligently to provide prompt and 

effective victim response, outreach, and sexual assault prevention by approaching 

these efforts as a team. The SARCs and SAPR VAs work together to ensure there 

is never a gap in coverage, regardless of the MSC or location. Leaders at every level 

and anyone in need of support services have access to a SAPR staff member for program guidance. To strengthen both prevention and response efforts, the Marine 

Corps Reserve will be adding more full-time civilian SAPR personnel across the 

Force in a phased hiring plan based on the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military (IRC)’s recommendations adopted by the Secretary of Defense. The additional SARCs will be advisors to our Regimental and Battalion Commanders, and professional full-time civilian Victim Advocates will further support 

our leadership at every level and the Marines and Sailors across the country. The 

SAPR staff historically have trained up to 160 service members to become new victim advocates each year during week-long courses held quarterly in New Orleans. 

We will continue to reinforce our SAPR program with collateral duty Victim Advocates in operational and deployed as well as geographically isolated environments 

as we establish a larger full-time civilian staff in alignment with the IRC recommendations approved by the Secretary of Defense. SAPR personnel respond to 

Marines, Sailors, and adult dependents who request support services related to a 

report of sexual assault. The SARCs and VAs screen for potential safety issues, develop individualized safety plans, and offer advocacy services and referrals in the 

military and civilian sectors. A nationwide database of resources is maintained in 

order to effectively support Reserve Component members who may not have access 

to military providers. 

The Marine Corps Reserve operates a dedicated Sexual Assault Support Line that 

is staffed by the professional SAPR team 24/7. The Marine Corps Reserve also ac-
280 

tively publicizes the DoD Safe Helpline, an additional resource that offers crisis support services for members of the DoD community. The DoD Safe Helpline is available 24/7 worldwide with telephonic, secure chat, and web-based resources and can 

be used anonymously for confidential support. 

The Marine Corps Reserve’s prevention strategy is holistic and integrated with 

other programs aimed toward eradicating sexual assault and interpersonal violence, 

such as the Equal Opportunity Program, Safety, Spiritual Readiness Initiatives, 

PHOP, Total Force Fitness initiatives, and Behavioral Health. Leaders at every 

level are encouraged to actively engage with Marines and Sailors to create a positive 

environment free from attitudes and harmful behaviors that are incompatible with 

our core values. Each year, all Marines and Sailors receive SAPR training that covers reporting options, available resources, and prevention techniques. New course 

material focusing on the prevention of interpersonal violence is in development and 

additional efforts toward fostering a healthy command climate are being highlighted. Along with overall education about the SAPR Program, these periods of instruction give individual Marines and Sailors an opportunity to interact with their 

local Command SAPR representatives, thereby helping to generate trust in the program and confidence that the prevention of sexual assault is a priority for leadership. 

MILITARY EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

A key component to mission readiness is a healthy command climate, devoid of 

unlawful discriminatory practices and unacceptable behaviors that are collectively 

referred to as Prohibited Activities and Conduct (PAC). These harmful behaviors 

may include bullying, dissident and protest activity, harassment, hazing, prohibited 

discrimination, sexual harassment, and wrongful distribution of an intimate image. 

The Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) Program is enforced throughout the Marine 

Corps Reserve to eliminate such behaviors and foster a culture of dignity and respect, regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including pregnancy), 

gender identity, or sexual orientation. The MEO Program is staffed by fully trained, 

Active Component Marines who possess the 0147 (Equal Opportunity Advisor) Military Occupational Specialty. These billets include a force-level Equal Opportunity 

Advisor (EOA) and three additional EOAs at the MSC levels. Currently the MEO 

program is undergoing a restructuring to increase the number of personnel to support the Marine Corps Reserve’s unique structure and geographical dispersion. The 

Marine Corps Reserve EOAs work cohesively as trusted agents to ensure seamless 

coverage by providing sound program advice to commanders and assistance to members across the force. EOAs are also assisted in program implementation by unitlevel Equal Opportunity Representatives (EOR), a collateral duty maintained by 

Staff Noncommissioned Officers and higher at every O5 and O6 level command. Additional EORs are utilized at geographically dispersed subordinate units throughout 

the force for additional program implementation at the lowest level. 

Both EOAs and EORs provide training to all Reserve Component members in preventing, identifying, and reporting PAC. Additional guidance is provided to ensure 

members understand the benefits of a healthy command climate and the adverse 

impact that PAC has on individual members, units, and the Service. EOAs and 

EORs are responsible for monitoring and advising commanders on command climate 

issues to include those identified in their Defense Organizational Climate Survey 

(DEOCS) results. During FY22, Marine Corps Reserve units were in full compliance 

with the Secretary of Defense-directed DEOCS requirements, including all followon corrective action plans. In addition to MEO resources, commands utilize the 

SAPR and behavioral health programs for a holistic approach to maintaining 

healthy command climates. Both EOAs and EORs work cohesively to ensure formal 

PAC complaints are addressed in a timely manner and in accordance with the applicable references. During FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve resolved 36 unique cases 

through the complaint resolution process. Throughout this process, commanders ensured complainants were protected against all forms of retaliation, maltreatment, 

ostracism, and reprisal. 

QUALITY OF LIFE

The Marine Corps Reserve is committed to ensuring quality of life programs are 

designed to effectively assist all Reserve Marines, Sailors, and their families, whether they are deployed or on the home front. The Marine Corps Reserve is geographically dispersed throughout the country and often stationed away from most traditional brick-and-mortar resources available at major bases and stations. Therefore, 

we strive to provide awareness of and access to the diverse support programs available for their benefit. Face-to-face and virtual learning opportunities are available 
281 

along with toll-free telephone and Internet resources. The ability to access the comprehensive set of MCCS programs, which support operational readiness, warfighting 

capabilities, and quality of life can have a profoundly positive effect on the wellbeing of our Marines and their families. MCCS programming includes Exceptional 

Family Member Program (EFMP), School Liaison Program, personal and professional development, fitness and recreation, readiness and deployment support, family team building, and prevention. MCCS is an accessible and responsive resource 

that provides continual and lasting support to Marines and their families throughout their entire service or affiliation with the Marine Corps. The Unit, Personal, and 

Family Readiness Program is supported by civilian Deployment Readiness Coordinators and Uniformed Readiness Coordinators who implement a commander’s family 

readiness vision and provide a vital link to Marines, Sailors, and their families to 

ensure a constant state of family readiness. 

MCCS programs are flexible, constantly adjusting to meet the needs of our geographically dispersed Reserve Marines and their families. The training programs 

provided to our commanders, Family Readiness Command Teams, and Marines and 

their families help to produce a ready and resilient force equipped to achieve success. The Marine Corps Family Team Building (MCFTB) Program enhances readiness and resiliency through non-clinical preventative education, professional training, and community-building support to Marines, Sailors, and their families 

throughout the wide array of mission, life, and career events. During FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve conducted 183 training events in which 4,848 Marines, Sailors, 

and family members received essential information to assist them throughout the 

deployment cycle. These events helped them prepare for and flourish during deployments and achieve a positive post-deployment reintegration experience. 

A Reserve Marine’s quality of life and resiliency runs deeper than mental and 

physical wellness. The Marine ethos includes an impressive resolve forged in the 

spirit and able to perceive that which is greater than self. This connection with the 

transcendent inspires Marines to be their best and is undergirded by 167 chaplains 

and Religious Program Specialists who deliver religious ministry support and care 

to all Marines and Sailors, regardless of religious affiliation. Beyond equipment, 

training, and technical skill, it is the strength of spirit that enables our Marines 

and Sailors to accomplish the mission with honor, to overcome adversity, and to sacrificially serve with meaning and purpose. Religious Ministry Teams (RMT) comprised of uniformed chaplains and Religious Program Specialists, help to increase 

the readiness of Marines, Sailors, and their families by preparing them for the rigors of military life, including the demands of military operations. The Marine Corps 

Reserve has chaplains embedded in 39 Marine Corps Reserve units across the country and nine Religious Ministry Support Units directly supporting the Active Component. Through personal presence, these RMT’s cultivate trust with leadership in 

carrying out the competencies of provision, facilitation, care, and advisement. 

Chaplain Religious Enrichment Development Operations (CREDO) is a programmatic means to increase the spiritual readiness and resilience of service members and other authorized persons as part of the Department of Navy’s Strategic 

Plan for Religious Ministry. Operating within the Command Religious Program 

(CRP), CREDO provides transformational retreats and workshops, including the 

Marriage Enrichment Retreat (MER), the Personal Resiliency Retreat (PRR), and 

Suicide Intervention Workshops such as Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Training (ASIST). The MER initiatives equip Marines, Sailors, and their families with 

practical relationship and communication tools that strengthen marriages and individual resiliency on the home front and during mobilizations. The PRR helps Marines and Sailors set personal goals, make healthy decisions, develop coping skills 

for stress, and live their lives with greater purpose and satisfaction. During FY22, 

chaplains invested in 145 couples through 10 MERs and in 578 individuals participating in 31 retreats and workshops focused on resiliency and team building in the 

context of leadership and human dynamics. 

In an ongoing effort to reduce death by suicide and suicidal events, the CREDO 

Program offers ASIST, Suicide Alertness for Everyone (safeTALK), and START 

training to Marines and their families. These are evidence-based skill trainings for 

intervention in suicidal events to prevent death and increase prevention until care 

is available. Chaplains trained a total of 71 people in five workshops including three 

in remote locations. Participants in these programs self-reported an 83% increase 

in their likelihood to intervene to help a person having thoughts of suicide. 

The Marine Corps emphasizes the importance of readiness for Marines and family 

members in many areas of life. The Marine Corps Personal and Professional Development Programs provide training and educational resources to increase awareness 

and build skills for individual and family development. These programs enhance the 

quality of life for our military community by promoting self-reliance and self-suffi-
282 

ciency, as well as continuing the tradition of ‘‘taking care of our own.’’ The Marine 

Corps Personal and Professional Development Programs include transition readiness, personal financial management, voluntary education, and information and referral. 

The Marine Corps’ Transition Readiness Program (TRP) is a comprehensive program that helps Marines, and their families develop and attain effective post-transition employment, educational, and entrepreneurship goals. It provides the tools and 

resources needed to comply with DoD directed Career Readiness Standards (CRS). 

Transition Readiness is a process that occurs across the Marine for Life Cycle; it 

is not an event that occurs at a single point in time, but rather takes place throughout a Marine’s career. The Marine for Life Network helps to link our Marines to 

employment, education, and community resources in their hometown areas to support their future goals. The Transition Readiness Seminar (TRS) is a week-long program required by Title 10 for all Active and Reserve Component Marines and Sailors who have served a minimum of 180 consecutive days on active duty. Marines 

are encouraged to attend TRS at the closest military installation to their location 

regardless of affiliation. For geographically dispersed Marines, many of whom are 

not located near a military installation, a virtual course is available to meet the requirement. In FY22, the Marine Corps Reserve transition staff assisted 800 geographically dispersed Marines with pre-separation counseling and capstone completion. 

Additionally, Marines may take advantage of the DoD partnership with 

Tutor.com, which offers our Marines, Sailors, and their dependents access to 24/7, 

no-cost, live tutoring services for grades K–12 and college students. Our Marines are 

also provided with remote access to language courses through Mango Languages, 

which supports more than 70 languages, including English as a Second Language. 

Peterson’s Online Academic Skills Course helps Marines and Sailors build math and 

verbal skills to excel on the job, pass exams, and advance their careers and education. 

Marines with a solid understanding of their personal financial situation and 

sound financial management practices are better prepared to meet the needs of the 

nation. The Personal Financial Management Program (PFMP) provides personal financial education, training, counseling, information, and referral as the number-one 

source for unbiased financial information to Marines and their families. The PFMP 

utilizes Financial Education Action Points to increase the knowledge and improve 

the financial practices of Marines at predetermined milestones within their career, 

such as promotion, permanent change of station, marriage, birth of a child, and others. The PFMP is available to all Marines and their families free of charge and on 

a variety of platforms (in-person, hybrid, and virtual). 

The Marine Corps’ Semper Fit Program coordinates with our bases and stations 

to provide fitness education activities that promote physical and mental readiness 

and develops positive self-esteem and healthy lifestyles. Additionally, the High-Intensity Tactical Training (HITT) Program focuses on physical resiliency, combat 

readiness, and injury prevention. The HITT Program provides hands-on, sciencebased strength and conditioning courses and online physical fitness tools to include 

instruction on injury prevention, nutrition, and weight management. Life Athlete 

Readiness and Resilience programs provide opportunities for life skill development, 

social health, community connectedness, and stress management. Programs include 

recreational aquatics, outdoor recreation equipment checkout, community centers, 

community-wide activities, competitive events, parks, trails, picnic areas, youth 

sports, and other recreational programs. 

The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) is a DoD-wide effort to promote 

the well-being of National Guard and Reserve members, their families, and communities by connecting them with resources throughout the deployment cycle. The 

YRRP is an enduring and invaluable part of our efforts to build resiliency. Since 

its inception in 2010, we have conducted more than 971 training events for more 

than 58,348 Marines, Sailors, and family members. In FY22, we conducted 27 virtual events connecting more than 1,795 participants with local resources before, during, and after deployments. 

The Marine Corps Reserve is a dedicated advocate for flexible quality of life programs and services that evolve and adapt to the changing needs of our Marines, 

Sailors, and their families. The combined effect of these programs and services is 

critical to the readiness and retention of our Reserve Marines, Sailors, and their 

families. 
283 

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

The Marine Corps ensures the availability of full spectrum care to all wounded, 

ill, or injured (WII) Active and Reserve Service members through the Marine Corps’ 

Wounded Warrior Regiment (WWR). Due to the unique nature of how Reserve Marines are activated and mobilized, they often encounter unique challenges to 

healthcare when WII. The Marine Corps has sought to address these challenges 

through the establishment of a WWR Liaison Officer whose sole purpose is to provide subject matter expertise in WII policies and procedures, coordination between 

Reserve leadership and WWR staff, and guidance and training to Reserve units 

throughout the recovery care continuum. 

The WWR staff includes the Reserve Medical Entitlements Determination 

(RMED) Section, which maintains specific oversight of all Reservists requiring medical care for service-incurred and duty-limiting medical conditions. During this past 

year, RMED solidified professional relationships with key personnel at Defense 

Health Agency-Great Lakes in order to streamline the process for Reserve Marines 

injured in the line of duty to access medical healthcare benefits. This close working 

relationship resulted in the publication of a coordinated Marine Corps Administrative Message providing detailed guidance and instructions to Reserve units in order 

to reduce the time between an injury occurring and a Reserve Marine receiving 

treatment. We believe that arming Reserve units with this knowledge results in improved access to medical healthcare, which will greatly aid in an injured Marine’s 

recovery timeline and have a positive impact to overall personnel readiness throughout the Marine Corps Reserve. 

In addition to the oversight of medical care, RMED administers the Incapacitation 

Pay Program for the Reserve Component. Qualification for Incapacitation Pay is determined based upon the member being physically disabled as a result of their service-connected injury and the member demonstrating a loss of civilian earned income 

from non-military employment or self-employment as a result of that injury. During 

Fiscal Year 2022, the RMED section processed 323 Incapacitation Pay requests for 

payments totaling $272,274. 

Reserve Marines facing complex care and recovery needs have access to WWR’s 

network of 45 Recovery Care Coordinators who provide one-on-one transition support and resource identification for WII Reservists and families who often live long 

distances from military installations. 

The WWR also has medical advocates on the regimental staff who are available 

to assist Reserve, Active, retired, and veteran Marines in need of medical care coordination and advocacy. This support is called the District Injured Support Coordinators (DISC) program which is provided by WWR Reserve Staff Non-Commissioned 

Officers who are activated each year through Active Duty for Operational Support 

(ADOS) funding. The DISCs are dispersed throughout the country and assist in performing face to face meetings as part of their care and case management processes. 

The DISCs are the WWR Commanding Officer’s representatives in the field with the 

mission to facilitate care and case management to personnel with highly complex 

needs and the successful transition of post-9/11 WII Marines from the Active or Reserve Component to veteran status. 

The DISCs also provide direct support to more than 1,500 Marines currently on 

the Temporary Disabled Retired List (TDRL) to assist them in meeting all their requirements prior to the Department of the Navy’s final determination of their disability. The DISC mission is accomplished by providing needs-based support and 

problem resolution, to include non-medical case management to post-9/11 WII veterans and their families to ensure the Marine Corps keeps faith with all Marines. 

Due to the reduction of ADOS funding, WWR reduced the DISC manning to minimal viable capability in FY23. Much of the support to the recently separated WII 

Marines and those on the TDRL has shifted to fully remote. 

The Marine Corps will not forget the sacrifices our Reserve Marines made for this 

great Nation, and we will continue to work with WWR to establish resources and 

improve programs that address the unique and ongoing needs of our Reserve service 

members and their families. 

FORCE DESIGN

The Marine Corps Reserve, operating as both a strategic and operational Reserve, 

is a critical part of the Total Force Marine Corps. As the Marine Corps transitions 

toward Naval Campaigning in response to Strategic competition, the Reserve Component continues to be an integral element of the planning effort. The Marine Corps’ 

force design process is strategy- driven, threat informed, and concept based. Force 

development is then achieved through deliberate experimentation, wargaming, integrating planning teams, and analysis to provide valuable data in our Campaign of 
284 

Learning to identify what is effective. The Marine Corps Reserve provides support 

to this force design effort, while remaining a vital global contributor in meeting 

Combatant Command requirements. 

Although the Active Component forces have been able to rapidly modernize under 

the direction of the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and the Commandant, the Reserve Component has yet to mature as quickly due to resource limitations. Currently, the deactivations of 4th Tank Battalion, bridging units, VMU–4, and VMGR– 

542 have been the only divestment requirements for the Reserve Component. The 

requirement to divest in Tanks and the associated bridging assets was a total force 

initiative, while the divestment in VMU and VMGR were specific to the Reserve 

Component. With each unit deactivation, whether a Marine is contractually obligated to serve or is no longer obligated, Personnel Transition Teams (PTTs) travel 

to those locations to meet with each individual Marine in order to assist them in 

finding opportunities for continued service. As changes to the Reserve Component 

alter the physical location of Reserve units across the country, we will continue to 

actively analyze their efficacy to ensure that any and all unit relocations are analyzed in detail and driven by relevant qualitative and quantitative factors. 

The Reserve Component remains nested with all Service-related initiatives supporting Force Design. As the Active Component evolves, so too will the Reserve 

Component while also remaining ready and relevant to maintain its position as a 

vital contributor in support of Combatant Command requirements. Additionally, the 

Reserve Component, alongside Active Component planners, specifically 2nd Marine 

Expeditionary Force, are working to design and mature the concept of Service Retained Forces in support of global crisis and contingency operations. The Service Retained Force concept provides an opportunity for the Reserve Component to remain 

relevant and ready and provides a clear role for Reserve Marines in the future force 

under Force Design. This will include potential adjustments to the current capabilities and platforms within the Reserve Component that will ultimately serve to make 

a more lethal and capable Reserve Force. Opportunities for Marine Corps Special 

Operations Command integration are also being explored in relation to the Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance, and Targeting (ISRT) focus area from the 

MCWL Littoral Maneuver Experimentation Plan. 

INNOVATION AND EXPERIMENTATION

The establishment of Littoral Craft Companies (LCC) is a comprehensive initiative producing strong linkages across several Marine Corps Reserve Lines of Effort 

(LOEs). The establishment supports numerous key objectives including Site Optimization, Talent Management, New Platforms and Technologies Integration, Experimentation and Wargaming Support as well as Service component integration in a 

way that effectively aligns broad aspects of the Marine Corps Reserve’s strategic vision. 

The LCC initiative emerged in response to a 2020 Service-level decision directing 

the divestment of C (Galveston, TX) and D (Tampa, FL) Companies, 4th Assault 

Amphibian Battalion (AA Bn) in FY25 and FY24 respectively. Preserving the talent 

and facilities at these two key coastal sites became imperative. Recruiting and retention at both Tampa and Galveston are consistently well above average comparable to the rest of the force at a time when the Marine Corps Reserve Component is recovering from COVID–19 and other end-strength challenges. In addition, 

both sites offer exceptional littoral training venues and wide-ranging opportunities 

for Joint and Interagency maritime partnerships within the Gulf-coast region. 

Transitioning C and D Cos 4th AA Bn into LCCs presents an ideal Talent Management and Site Optimization solution to the problem, with the bonus of integrating new Platforms and Technology in the form of littoral craft. In partnership 

with the Defense Innovation Unit, the Marine Corps Reserve is pursuing a rapid 

acquisition of dual-use commercially available vessels through an Area of Interest 

solicitation to Industry. This highly flexible process offers direct access to vendors 

capable of producing state of the art littoral craft to the Marine Corps Reserve on 

an aggressive delivery timeline. 

The Marine Innovation Unit and other staffs across the reserve component are 

coordinating closely with Service-level capability developers and the Marine Corps 

Warfighting Lab (MCWL) to posture the LCCs for support to live force experimentation in response to Service-level littoral maneuver, mobility, and tactical 

sustainment-oriented learning demands. Exploration is already underway in key 

focus areas to include ‘‘Training and Training Sustainment’’ and ‘‘Littoral Maneuver 

Craft Characteristics.’’ Support to Experimentation is expected to rapidly increase 

once the LCCs are formally established allowing the Marine Corps Reserve to contribute significantly to the ultimate Total Force capability solution(s). 
285 

Initial planning efforts have begun for LCC participation during bi-lateral and 

multilateral exercises as well as waterborne Theater Security Cooperation activities 

in the U.S. Southern Command and other Global Combatant Command Areas of Responsibility once initial operational capability is achieved. Opportunities for Marine 

Corps Special Operations Command integration are also being explored especially 

in relation to the ‘‘Surveillance and Reconnaissance’’ and ‘‘Kinetic and Non-Kinetic 

Fires and Effects’’ focus areas from the MCWL Littoral Maneuver Experimentation 

Plan. This represents yet another clear example of how the LCC initiative links the 

Marine Corps Reserve Infrastructure, Human Terrain/Talent Management, Capabilities and Capacity and Utilization/Employment LOEs in an extraordinarily cohesive manner with potential wide-ranging, operational benefits for the Total Force 

Marine Corps. 

TALENT MANAGEMENT

Earning victory in the increasingly complex and multi-domain warfighting realm 

of the future requires Marines to achieve and maintain an advanced level of technical, intellectual, and physical capability, and to operate comfortably in distributed 

and ambiguous environments. The Marine Corps of the future will require significantly more low-density/high-demand skillsets that are difficult to achieve and retain, particularly if we continue to rely so heavily on the Active Component. To 

achieve Service objectives, the Marine Corps is leveraging the Reserve Component 

to attract and retain diverse personnel with unique talent and skill, while also providing a path to service more compatible for Reserve Marines who choose to maintain a civilian career in conjunction with military duty. The Marine Corps Reserve 

is aligned with service goals to mature the force through the introduction of new 

initiatives to increase career flexibility and further develop talent in the Reserve 

Component. Initiatives such as the Direct Affiliation Program (DAP) provide unique 

opportunities for departing Active Component Marines with valuable skills to continue their service in the Reserve Component and provide a vital advantage to increasing reserve unit personnel readiness. Additionally, the Marine Corps Reserve 

promotes a variety of talent management initiatives, to include the Diversity Aimed 

Officer Program (DAOP) which targets historically underrepresented populations 

and provides them an opportunity to visualize and pursue their career path as a 

Marine Corps Officer through educational events, hands on experience, and senior 

leader mentorship. In the summer of FY23 we will host our third annual DAOP 

event, comprised of Marines chosen through a highly competitive process. 

As the Active Component Marine Corps develops and implements new talent 

management and diversity objectives, policies and programs, the Marine Corps Reserve offers the Service many unique opportunities to attract, recruit, identify, 

incentivize, and retain the most talented individuals across the Total Force. The 

Marine Corps Reserve has already begun to integrate with Active Component teams 

at Headquarters Marine Corps, Manpower and Reserve Affairs and Marine Corps 

Recruiting Command to ensure the Reserve Component is seamlessly integrated 

into all Service-level talent management efforts. Soon, a sample Reserve Component 

officer billet will be included in the initial release and testing for the Marine Corps’ 

Talent Management and Engagement Platform (TMEP). When this platform reaches 

full operational capability, TMEP will greatly enhance talent management, leadership development, as well as enhance diversity, inclusion, and equity throughout the 

Reserve Component. Moving forward, the Marine Corps Reserve will continue to develop innovative policies, pathways, and tools designed to capture, catalogue, and 

maintain visibility of our diverse pool of talent and ensure these Marines have a 

path for future service. 

CONCLUSION

As the operational environment changes, your Marine Corps Reserve will continue 

to innovate and evolve in order to meet future challenges and deter the pacing 

threats as prescribed in the National Defense Strategy. Through efforts such as the 

MIU and the acquisition of dual-use small littoral craft, we are constantly shaping 

and refining that evolution. As we are evolving our force, we are continuing to keep 

faith with and remain true to the communities that have supported us with programs such as Toys for Tots. The key to our success has been and will continue to 

be individual Marines, Sailors, and their families. Your Reserve Marines will continue to answer their ‘‘irrational call to serve’’ and, with your continued support, we 

will remain ready. Semper Fidelis! 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General. Next up, we have General 

Healy, Chief Air Force Reserve. 
286 

STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY, CHIEF OF 

AIR FORCE RESERVE 

General HEALY. Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and 

distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the 

70,000 men and women of the Air Force Reserve, it is an honor for 

me to be here today with my senior enlisted advisor, Chief Master 

Sergeant Israel Nun ̃ ez. 

As a Commander, I am continually amazed by the accomplishments of our Reserve Airmen as they meet every challenge put 

forth in front of them on behalf of our Nation. This year marks the 

75th anniversary of the Air Force Reserve, and during that time 

we provided the Nation with an operational capability, strategic 

depth, and surge capacity across every core mission set of the 

United States Air Force. 

As a largely part time force, we provide a ready now, accessible 

force that is both mission effective and cost efficient. As our nearpeer threat increases, we are committed to the Secretary of the Air 

Force’s operational imperatives, the Chief of Staff’s vision of accelerate, change, or lose, and the Chief of Space Operations’ three 

lines of effort. 

When I took command of the Air Force Reserve almost a year 

ago, I issued a task order with my two priorities of ready now and 

transforming for the future. In the past year, we have got to prove 

that ready now force through our ability to rapidly surge and provide experienced Reserve Airmen to Combatant Commands and the 

Joint Force. 

Reservists provided critical support to our NATO allies and our 

European partners, and performed everything from intelligence 

analysis and cybersecurity, to airlift and air superiority missions, 

to aircraft maintenance and force protection. The U.S. Air Force 

and the U.S. Space Force would not be able to support Ukraine and 

deter Russian aggression without Reserve citizen Airmen. 

To optimize our performance as part of the total force, the Air 

Force Reserve must transform for the future. That transformation 

requires the Air Force Reserve be proportionately and concurrently 

modernized with the regular component. Maintaining equipment 

parity with the regular component ensures our ability to match 

pacing threats. 

Legacy aircraft divestment without recapitalization and delayed 

modernization adds substantial risk to the ability to sustain combat credible air superiority and strategic storage capacity in the future. We are grateful to Congress for the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account. 

NGREA enables us to modernize, sustain our capability, and replace obsolete equipment when recapitalization by the active component is not feasible. Our most important weapon system is our 

Airmen. We are focused on ensuring that Reserve citizen Airmen 

receive the support they need. 

This includes providing mental health resources, investment in 

resilience initiatives, offering social support through yellow ribbon 

reintegration programs, implementing recommendations from the 

Independent Commission on Sexual Assault, and policy changes to 

remove barriers from service. 
287 

Over the past 75 years, the Air Force Reserve has provided conduct proven readiness. We are confident the Air Force Reserve will 

remain prepared to defend our great Nation now and in the future. 

Thank you for your continued support of the Air Force Reserve, 

its citizen Airmen, and their families. I look forward to answering 

your questions. 

[The statement follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE RESERVE

The Air Force Reserve is a combat-ready force, with a Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 end 

strength of 70,000 Reserve Airmen, stationed at over 60 locations throughout the 

United States, and serving globally in air, space, and cyberspace. As a cost-efficient 

and mission-effective force, the Air Force Reserve provides the Nation with operational capability, strategic depth, and surge capacity, both overseas and here at 

home. The Air Force Reserve’s wide-ranging operational capability serves the diverse needs of every Combatant Commander, whose requirements are as varied as 

the geographic and functional areas they support. 

With over 80 percent of our Reserve Airmen serving part-time, this combat-tested 

experience is retained in a cost-efficient force, available whenever the Nation calls. 

Further, the Nation benefits from the intrinsic value gained by a member’s civilian 

experience in a variety of career fields, from pilots and nurses to teachers and cyberspace professionals. 

The Air Force Reserve directly supports the United States and neighboring countries with special capabilities, including aerial firefighting, aerial spray, and weather reconnaissance, better known as the ‘‘Hurricane Hunters.’’ The Air Force Reserve’s relationship with other Federal agencies, including the National Weather 

Service and U.S. Forest Service, demonstrates how Federal, military, and civilian 

organizations can work together to support the entire Nation. 

The Air Force Reserve is a proven part of the Total Force. We are committed to 

the Secretary of the Air Force’s Operational Imperatives, the Chief of Staff’s vision 

of Accelerate Change or Lose, and the Chief of Space Operations’ three Lines of Effort. The Air Force Reserve is critical to the Department of the Air Force’s (DAF) 

effort to address the four National Defense Strategy (NDS) priorities: defending the 

homeland, deterring strategic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient 

joint force. We execute the full spectrum of DAF missions, providing strategic depth 

and maintaining an operational readiness to deter our adversaries, defend the 

United States and our allies, and respond to any contingency—at a fraction of the 

cost of the Regular Component of the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force. 

AIR FORCE RESERVE FISCAL YEAR 2024 POSTURE STATEMENT

Total Force operations require Total Force investments. The Joint Force faces a 

complex battlespace across multiple domains. The Regular Component of the U.S. 

Air Force and U.S. Space Force are working to fulfill the NDS priority of building 

a resilient joint force and defense ecosystem. The Air Force Reserve meets these 

challenges as part of the Total Force. Our mission capabilities rest on one single 

foundation—our people. Our Reserve Airmen must be able to work side by side with 

their Regular Component partners in the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force. 

To do that, we must train and equip our Reserve Airmen in a manner that is proportional and concurrent with the Regular Component. This will ensure the Air 

Force Reserve remains a credible operational and viable strategic reserve that can 

provide a surge capacity in a crisis or contingency. 

With Congress’ support, we were able to improve our readiness. Upon taking command of the Air Force Reserve, I issued a Task Order that emphasized two priorities: Ready Now and Transforming for the Future. The order empowers Reserve 

Airmen to own their individual readiness and establishes accountability across the 

entire command to become the force the Nation needs. The approval of our FY 2024 

budget request will enable us to continue building readiness while also transforming 

for the future. 

This year marks the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Air Force Reserve, and I am 

proud to say we have responded to every U.S. conflict and contingency since 1948. 

It has not been easy. The Air Force Reserve first mobilized to halt aggression on 

the Korean Peninsula in 1950, without a mobilization plan. Despite this challenge, 

Reserve Airmen brought combat air power to support United Nations Forces. Today, 
288 

Reserve Airmen remain ready, such as when an Air Force Reserve C–17 and its 

crew supported earthquake relief operations in Turkey and Syria by transporting 28 

tons of cargo, 76 personnel, and 6 search and rescue dogs within 10 hours of notification on February 6, 2023. 

During the last year, we accelerated the readiness of our nuclear deterrence forces 

and continued our focus on ensuring preparedness against pacing threats. We modernized key weapon systems and closed the gap on critical staffing shortfalls. We 

increased our organizational effectiveness and improved our ability to provide excellent care for our Reserve Airmen and their families while also working to bolster 

individual and organizational resilience. 

My intent is to prioritize every dollar spent on initiatives that optimize readiness. 

We will hold ourselves accountable from planning to execution of a comprehensive 

and effective strategy to build a ready force and transform the organization. By employing data analytics coupled with new tools and processes, we are making timely 

and informed programmatic decisions. We are implementing policy reform that facilitates modernization and reduces administrative requirements. The result is an 

agile and judicious execution of financial resources. Continuing resolutions hamper 

Total Force readiness and degrade our ability to sustain progress. 

While we continue to prioritize readiness, we still face challenges. Like the Regular Component of the U.S. Air Force, in FY 2022 the Air Force Reserve did not 

meet its end strength and in FY 2023, we are projected to fall short of end strength 

again. The FY 2024 budget request includes funding that will allow the Air Force 

Reserve to offer bonuses to help recruit and retain personnel. The budget will also 

provide funds to bring Airmen on status for additional training to support readiness. 

This is dual purposed as readiness training also improves an Airmen’s experience, 

providing our members a sense of purpose and thereby improving retention. 

The Air Force Reserve will support the DAF as it makes hard choices in Airpower 

and Spacepower modernization to keep pace with our strategic competitors. This is 

critical to address the four NDS priorities, which depend upon effective command 

and control capabilities that are survivable in the threat environment of today and 

tomorrow. The Air Force Reserve must be a part of that decisionmaking process 

since concurrent fielding, recapitalization, and divestment of airframes, systems, 

and equipment is essential to our ability to integrate effectively with the Regular 

Component and support the Geographic and Functional Combatant Commands. We 

conduct operations in every DAF core function and support both DAF services: the 

U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force. For the Air Force Reserve to remain a 

viable contributor to joint operations, the Total Force must maintain equipment parity and interoperability. The FY 2024 budget continues to integrate Air Force Reserve capabilities with the Joint Force. 

Reserve Airmen and their families are the foundation of our readiness, operational capabilities, and organizational success. Our Airmen’s diverse talent and 

depth of experience are a force multiplier. Their dedication to our mission is second 

to none. We owe our Airmen stability and predictability. The Air Force Force Generation (AFFORGEN) model will increase predictability and lessen Reserve Airmen’s time away from family and the financial burdens they may incur being away 

from their civilian occupations. 

Our FY 2024 budget request supports our continuing efforts to implement the 

NDS by making deliberate and impactful investments in readiness. The Air Force 

Reserve value proposition is simple: we are a cost- effective strategic force that is 

experienced and accessible. We will use budgeted funds to ensure the Air Force Reserve has the capabilities and training required to generate combat power for the 

future security environment. We also will ensure readiness to answer our Nation’s 

call, as we’ve done over the past seventy-five years. With the requested Congressional support, we will continue to organize, train, and equip our Reserve Airmen 

to remain a ready force to defend our Nation and its interests. 

AIR FORCE RESERVE’S ROLE IN DEFENDING THE NATION

The Air Force Reserve is codified in law to provide trained and qualified personnel 

available for active duty in time of war, national emergency, or in response to a crisis or contingency. Recognizing that joint warfighters need air and space power, the 

DAF plays a critical role in defending the homeland, deterring strategic attacks, deterring aggression, and building a resilient joint force. The accessibility of the Air 

Force Reserve is critical to ensuring the DAF has a surge capacity to meet joint 

warfighter requirements. Because operational demands fluctuate, the Regular Component cannot be staffed to meet peak operational demands and is therefore rightsized for steady-state operations. The Air Force Reserve provides the strategic depth 

and operational support the DAF needs to meet these demands. This requires Re-
289 

serve Airmen to be organized, trained, and equipped in line with the Regular Component to be a ready, resilient, and combat-credible force in reserve. We are transforming for the future to become the Air Force Reserve the Nation needs. 

Our President’s Budget (PB) request for FY 2024 enables the Air Force Reserve 

to be an operational and ready part-time force with a strategic surge capability. The 

PB allows us to invest in readiness and continue supporting every DAF core function. As the Regular Component divests legacy systems and brings new weapon systems online, the Air Force Reserve is following suit. The Secretary of the Air Force 

and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force concurred with the recommendation from the 

National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force report published on January 

30, 2014, which stated that as the Air Force acquires new equipment, force integration plans should adhere to the principle of proportional and concurrent fielding 

across the components. 

When mobilized, our Reserve Airmen provide full-time support to the Joint Force. 

In addition to our daily contributions to global operations, we provide rapid surge 

capability and strategic depth for national defense. In FY 2022, 3,299 Reserve Airmen deployed to support taskings. In FY 2023, over 2,500 Reserve Airmen are projected to deploy. This support is critical to the Regular Component by burden-sharing deployment requirements and providing the expertise of Reserve Airmen to 

Combatant Commands and the Joint Force. For example, since February 2022, 

1,849 Reserve Airmen have supported U.S. Air Forces Europe and the United States 

European Command by serving 145,313 days on active duty orders. These Reservists have performed everything from intelligence analysis and force protection to aircraft maintenance and reconnaissance flights to deter Russian aggression. 

Force Structure 

With 80 percent of Air Force Reserve members serving part-time, most Reservists 

serve alongside our Regular Component counterparts in association constructs. Approximately two-thirds of the Air Force’s associations are with the Air Force Reserve. Integrating through associations delivers significant taxpayer value, both in 

cost savings and improved mission effectiveness, by sharing aircraft, equipment, and 

facilities with the Regular Component. Our part-time force brings a wealth of 

knowledge and expertise from their civilian careers to their military service. This 

strengthens our capabilities, enables the integration of commercial best practices, 

and facilitates beneficial partnerships with industry and other institutions. This can 

be seen in organizational initiatives known as ‘‘Bullpens’’ that leverage Individual 

Mobilization Augmentees who have critical high demand low density skills that are 

lacking in the Regular Component. These Bullpens are critical to supporting the 

Secretary of the Air Force’s Operational Imperatives and a great example is the 

bullpen being established to study Hypersonics. The Hypersonic Bullpen has 13 Reserve Airmen who are experts from industry and academia. There is also a China 

Bullpen with Reservists who have expertise spanning several disciplines including 

language, internal politics, and strategy. 

Classic Associations 

Unit associations between geographically collocated Regular Component and Reserve Component units exemplify Total Force Integration. In this construct, equipment resources are officially assigned to the lead unit but are shared between the 

lead and associate unit. Associations further enhance our interoperability and give 

the Regular Component access to the experience of the more seasoned Reserve force. 

This ensures parity in equipment and training, while providing cost savings and 

readiness benefits to both components. There are 79 associations between the Reserve and the Regular Components which span nearly every major mission set. The 

Reserve Airmen of the 477th Fighter Group at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, 

for example, include some of the most experienced F–22 pilots and maintainers. The 

pilots average over 1,200 flight hours in the F–22 alone, compared to their Regular 

Component counterparts’ 400 hours. Every pilot is mission commander and instructor pilot qualified, providing vital operational and instructional capacity to the associate unit. As the F–22 costs $80,000 an hour to operate, the cumulative F–22 flying 

experience of the Reserve pilots has a replacement value of $1.1 billion. Our Reserve 

maintainers provide a stable base of deep experience to mentor maintainers across 

the Total Force. 

AFFORGEN 

The DAF established AFFORGEN to enable force presentation to meet Combatant 

Command requirements in a sustainable, predictable manner while ensuring operational preparedness and required readiness. AFFORGEN is an evolution and maturation of the Air Expeditionary Forces model that balances risk between Combatant 

Command requirements, Air Force readiness, and modernization, by deploying pre- 
290 

identified units who have trained together. Since 2015 the Air Force Reserve has 

executed a form of AFFORGEN through Reserve Component Periods (RCPs). In FY 

2024, AFFORGEN will meet initial operational capability, and the Air Force Reserve will provide 671 personnel to the initial Expeditionary Air Base Sourcing rotations and another 548 personnel for Supplemental Expeditionary Air Base Sourcing 

rotations totaling 1,219 Reserve personnel. These Reserve Airmen will include Logisticians, Security Forces, Administration Personnel, Civil Engineers, Aerial Porters, and Communications troops. The Air Force Reserve will also provide additional 

Airmen to augment gaps in the Regular Component AFFORGEN manning. 

The AFFOGREN model will provide Reserve Airmen with predictable deployment 

cycles. This predictability enables Combatant Commanders and the DAF to preplan 

and budget for the utilization of Air Force Reserve forces that is consistent with 

Congressional intent and Title 10 USC Section 12304b. It also enables Reserve Airmen, their families, and their employers to prepare for the demands of defending 

our Nation. 

Core Functions 

Our ability to meet current taskings and to supply strategic reserve staffing are 

predicated on equipment parity and our readiness. The Air Force Reserve provides 

daily operational support to the Joint Force, while maintaining a ready and accessible strategic force during major conflict or surge operations and unforeseen events, 

such as national disasters and contingencies. As an operational Reserve, we must 

maintain our readiness to support present-day missions while aligning our capabilities to meet the requirements of the NDS. We remain ready to employ traditional 

capabilities, while continuing to modernize our equipment to deter and defeat pacing threats. 

Air Superiority 

Preserving the advantage in strategic competition requires generating combat 

power in contested environments. Maintaining equipment parity with the Regular 

Component ensures our ability to match pacing threats. Legacy aircraft divestiture 

without recapitalization and delayed modernization programs add substantial risk 

to the ability to sustain combat-credible air superiority and strategic surge capacity 

in the future. 

The Air Force Reserve provides vital experience to the DAF’s 5th Generation 

fighter capabilities. The Air Force Reserve’s first unit-equipped F–35 wing at Naval 

Air Station (NAS) Joint Reserve Base (JRB) Fort Worth, Texas will begin the conversion from F–16s to F–35s in FY 2024. We currently execute F–35 combat operations through our Classic Association at Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah. We conduct F–35 formal training at Luke AFB, Arizona and Eglin AFB, Florida through 

Classic Associations. We also perform operational test and weapons instructor 

course missions at Nellis AFB, Nevada through a Classic Association. The experience of our Reserve pilots and maintainers in all aspects of 5th Generation fighter 

operations reduces costs, improves the experience of the Total Force, and improves 

the Regular Component. This is critical to meet the challenge from our pacing 

threat in a future fight. 

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) 

Our ISR enterprise is optimized to provide strategic depth and operational surge 

capacity in traditional and emerging mission sets. Currently the ISR enterprise supports missions in Targeting, Special Operations, Distributed Common Ground Station (DCGS), Signals Intelligence, Human Intelligence, Geospatial Intelligence, 

Measurement and Signatures Intelligence, Acquisition Intelligence, Combat Air 

Force support, Mobility Air Force support, Cyber, Space, and Combat Operations 

Squadrons (COSs). We continue to develop capabilities in areas to support the Joint 

Force while ensuring current mission sets provide decision advantage against pacing 

threats. 

There are 4,400 ISR Reserve Airmen supporting every Air Force Major Command 

and all Functional and Geographic Combatant Command Intelligence Directorates. 

We are exploring mission growth with Air Combat Command and 16th Air Force 

to determine the way forward for the Air Force Reserve ISR Enterprise to be involved in synchronizing and integrating Information Warfare efforts into daily operations. There are also plans in place to have steady state Air Force Reserve ISR 

units available to the Global Force Mission Allocation Plan for the Regular Component to have additional access to our capabilities. 

Rapid Global Mobility 

Global power projection through Rapid Global Mobility hinges on a robust airlift 

enterprise and the extended range provided by a modern aerial refueling fleet. The 
291 

Air Force Reserve enables combat delivery through our strategic and tactical airlift 

fleets. We provide 65 percent of the total aircrews and 100 percent of student aircrew training capabilities for the C–5. The Air Force Reserve also provides 31 percent of aircrews for the C–17. Air Force Reserve’s C–5 and C–130H fleets continue 

to face sustainment challenges due to aging aircraft, diminishing vendors, and increased part costs. Each of our mobility platforms require continued investment in 

modernization to ensure survivability in contested environments. 

The Air Force Reserve air refueling fleet consists of seven unit equipped wings. 

In 2022, the 916th Air Refueling Wing, a Reserve unit stationed at Seymour Johnson AFB completed the conversion to the KC–46 and took possession of its twelfth 

and final aircraft. 

Nuclear Deterrence Operations 

Nuclear capability is foundational to national security. Our Nuclear Deterrence 

Operations assets include nuclear strike, air refueling, and nuclear command, control, and communications capabilities (NC3). To modernize our capabilities and 

maintain Total Force interoperability, we will equip all seven of our NC3 capable 

command posts with the new primary strategic communication system, the Global 

Aircrew Strategic Network Terminal, which will be fielded to units in FY 2024. This 

system will replace legacy terminals that are based on 1990s technology. The Air 

Force Reserve is also standing up the MH–139 Field Training Unit at Maxwell AFB 

as part of the 908th Airlift Wing mission conversion. It is postured to begin training 

in FY 2026. The MH–139 will enable increased Intercontinental Cruise Missile 

(ICBM) security. 

Command and Control (C2) 

Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) is the Department of Defense’s 

top modernization priority. The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) is 

the Air Force’s primary contribution to JADC2 as it provides the situational awareness and decision support tools to close hundreds of kill chains on relevant timelines 

in all domains—air, land, maritime, space, and cyber—while operating in a highly 

contested environment. 

To assure strategic depth, the Air Force Reserve must maintain equipment parity 

to achieve enterprise mission optimization as the DAF fields new capabilities. This 

includes ensuring legacy platforms are equipped with ABMS capabilities to guarantee interoperability and lethality. The Air Force Reserve also provides non-material support for ABMS initiatives with C2 manpower. Investment in digital infrastructure and applications, along with modern air and space communication platforms, provides the foundation of C2 with the speed, adaptability, and resilience 

needed to achieve these objectives. 

Cyberspace Operations 

Integrating cyber capabilities enhances our ability to generate combat power but 

exposes us to new threats, as digital technology is both pervasive and inexpensive. 

The Air Force Reserve is exploring continued growth in cyber mission sets to 

counter persistent threat actors. We continue to posture our forces to better align 

with United States Cyber Command and Air Force Cyber requirements. 

Special Operations Forces and Personnel Recovery 

The Air Force Reserve has one wing dedicated to personnel recovery and another 

multi-mission special operations wing. Both wings operate in low-density, high-demand environments. As the Regular Component fields new platforms and realigns 

missions, we will continue to provide support across the spectrum of these no-fail 

missions. It is critical that Air Force Reserve units associated with Special Operations Forces and Personnel Recovery be proportionally recapitalized and concurrently fielded in the future. 

Space Superiority 

The establishment of the U.S. Space Force underscored the criticality of space operations to our national security. This point has been amplified by recent space 

weapons tests by our strategic competitors. The Air Force Reserve is a major contributor to space operations with 1,400 space operators in the Air Force Reserve. 

These personnel executed 26 percent of daily space missions directly supporting 

United States Space Command taskings. The Air Force Reserve will continue to provide focused support to the Space Force. 

Equipment and Infrastructure 

Credible strategic depth requires concurrent fielding of systems for Active and Reserve Components. Effective support to the Joint Force demands continuous up-
292 

grades to legacy platforms to assure interoperability and combat effectiveness. 

Rapid technological advancement and the wide proliferation of digital technology 

have increased the tempo of strategic competition. These forces drive the need for 

continuous equipment modernization and equipment parity with the Active Component. 

The Air Force Reserve must also be able to divest its obsolete legacy platforms. 

Deliberate divestment avoids gaps in critical capabilities and frees up resources for 

investment in capabilities to match pacing threats. Asynchronous airframe divestment can cause significant per platform sustainment cost growth due to diminishing 

vendors for spare parts. Further, it can also drive increased training costs as we 

are unable to hire qualified Regular Component members for obsolete legacy platforms. 

Weapon System Modernization and Sustainment 

Fully funding the Air Force Reserve FY 2024 Weapon System Sustainment (WSS) 

request is essential to bridging the concurrent fielding gap and maintaining parity 

with the Regular Component. As new systems are brought online to enhance the 

DAF’s combat capabilities, both the Regular and Reserve components will continue 

to rely on proven platforms in our inventory. Aircraft modernization and system upgrades will provide capabilities needed for strategic competition by ensuring survivability in contested environments. A balanced portfolio of new and legacy platforms 

will achieve adequate wartime readiness. The WSS budget increase to $186.8 million in FY 2024 will balance the portfolio. In addition to modernization, many of our 

airframes require upgrades, repairs, and component replacements to maintain airworthiness and extend service life. For example, to achieve adequate wartime readiness the FY 2024 budget provides increases in B–52, C–5M, C–130H, and WC–130J 

aircraft. 

Infrastructure and Facilities 

Maintaining and modernizing our infrastructure and facilities is critical to readiness, force protection, and ensuring a safe work environment for our Reserve Airmen. Military Construction (MILCON) appropriations fund new facilities and major 

infrastructure projects. The Facility Sustainment, Repair, and Modernization 

(FSRM) funds included in our Operations and Maintenance (O&M) appropriation 

are used to repair and modernize existing facilities and to extend the service life 

of existing infrastructure. While we work diligently to maximize use of existing facilities at our nine host installations and fifty-seven partner locations, we still have 

$1.077 billion in MILCON projects and $1 billion in validated FSRM projects in 

backlog. We are grateful to Congress for providing an additional $49.3 million in 

MILCON funding and $10 million in FSRM funding for FY 2023, for our most urgent projects. 

During FY 2022, the Air Force Reserve utilized FSRM funding to make ongoing 

investments in airfield pavement sustainment and repair. FSRM funds are used to 

repair and modernize existing facilities to accommodate new missions such as the 

KC–135 Conversion at Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station (ARS), New York, F–35 

bed-down at NAS JRB Fort Worth and KC–46 bed-down at March ARB. The Air 

Force Reserve FY 2024 MILCON funding request includes plans to replace a facility 

from 1942 at NAS JRB Fort Worth with a modern warehouse and three separate 

projects that will enable on-time delivery of KC–46 aircraft at March ARB. Finally, 

our Aerial Port Facility MILCON project request will replace an existing undersized 

facility at Andersen AFB, Guam and move port operations onto the flightline—enabling effective operations at a critical base in the Pacific. 

AIR FORCE RESERVE’S ROLE IN TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE

Taking care of our Reserve Airmen and their families is critical. It begins the moment a member joins the Air Force Reserve and continues throughout their career. 

The Air Force Reserve does everything possible to support our Airmen as they balance their military career, civilian obligations, and family responsibilities. This 

assures the Air Force Reserve retains talented Airmen who can leverage diverse experience from their military service and civilian lives. The FY 2024 budget provides 

the support our Reserve Airmen need to be successful. This support includes suicide 

prevention through investments in resilience, social support through the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program, working to implement the recommendations from the 

Independent Review Commission (IRC) on Sexual Assault, and removing significant 

barriers to service through expansion of childcare programs. 
293 

Recruiting and Retention 

Like the Regular Component of the Air Force, the Air Force Reserve did not meet 

its recruiting goal in FY 2022. The Air Force Reserve missed the Congressional 

mandated end-strength requirement of 70,300 by 2,252 personnel. The projections 

for FY 2023 indicate the Air Force Reserve will fall short of the Congressional endstrength of 70,000. 

The recruiting environment continues to present significant challenges based on 

multiple factors to include a reduced propensity to serve, competitive civilian compensation and difficulty in medically clearing recruits. Along with the Chief of Staff 

of the Air Force and collective Total Force team, we have identified accession policies that limit our ability to recruit young adults to serve in the military. Three important changes include: revising the tattoo policy to allow for limited hand and 

neck tattoos; adjusting body fat standards to align with the other Services (increasing to 26% for males and 36% for females for accessions); and allowing members 

to join without a driver’s license. The Air Force Reserve human capital strategy 

calls for 70% prior service (PS) and 30% non-prior service (NPS) recruiting mix but 

currently we are challenged on both fronts. The accession model is built on the expectation that there will be sufficient prior-service members leaving active duty who 

will affiliate with the Air Force Reserve. The Air Force Reserve strives to affiliate 

ready trained airmen. However, current trends indicate increased reliance on NPS 

recruits which increases training costs and dilutes unit experience. We are 

proactively increasing our targeted outreach efforts to connect with potential recruits, specifically focusing on members of the Regular Component. By expanding 

our reach, we aim to effectively communicate the benefits and opportunities available in the Air Force Reserve. The Air Force Reserve is also executing a plan of action to mitigate recruiting challenges with Reserve Component Affiliation Incentive 

Bonuses and a deliberate on-boarding process to increase recruiting production. 

Increasing retention provides cost savings by decreasing training requirements. 

We are presently targeting retention through bonuses and special salary rates. A 

single $15,000 retention bonus results in a cost avoidance of roughly $45,000 in 

training funds and prevents an approximate three-year readiness gap, which occurs 

while a replacement is trained. In FY 2022, $24–27 million was spent in reenlistment bonuses and Air Force Reserve primary retention tools. In FY 2023, the Air 

Force Reserve offered a $10,000 bonus for enlisted members to fill vacant positions 

and a $5,000 bonus for fully qualified members to fill an authorized overage. To address shortfalls in pilot manning, the Air Force Reserve has utilized an Aviation 

Bonus Program to stabilize both full-time and part-time manning. 

Pilot Staffing 

The Air Force Reserve provides a mechanism to retain talent by providing continued service options for members who separate from active duty. The DAF understands the importance of retaining experienced talent from both a cost-effectiveness 

and capacity perspective. During FY 2022, the Air Force Reserve had an 81 percent 

overall pilot staffing. This is a marked decline from FY 2021 when we experienced 

a high of 94 percent overall pilot staffing. Full-time pilot assigned manning decreased slightly from 990 at the beginning of FY 2022 to 981 at the beginning of 

FY 2023. During Calendar Year 2022, there was an unprecedented hiring effort by 

civilian airlines. This hiring has made full-time retention a challenge. For ART aviators, we offer recruitment, relocation, and retention incentives, which can equal up 

to 25 percent of annual base pay, and special salary rates which can equal up to 

30 percent of annual base pay. 

In FY 2022, we offered aviation bonuses up to $35,000 for priority units at critical 

manning levels. Each of these measures has been implemented to retain significant 

investments in well-qualified pilots. While the overall Aviation Bonus Program cost 

increased from $3 million in FY 2017 to $31 million in FY 2022, this contributes 

to a cost avoidance of $10 billion in replacing the over 3,600 pilots in the Air Force 

Reserve. 

Training 

Thanks to the FY 2023 increase in the Reserve Personnel Appropriation (RPA) 

budget, we were able to address the cost of training for NPS recruits. RPA execution 

for FY 2023 is showing a marked improvement as January’s execution numbers 

were 29 percent, compared to the 22 percent 3-year average. The FY 2024 request 

was increased by $13 million due to a 5.2 percent military pay raise, a 2.4 percent 

non-pay inflation adjustment, and 4.2 percent Basic Allowance for Housing increase. 

To make a meaningful contribution to the DAF core functions, the Air Force Reserve maintains a focus on being Ready Now which requires the Air Force Reserve 

to have the capability to train Reserve Airmen. The FY 2024 budget provides the 
294 

Air Force Reserve the funds and flight hours to train our Airmen. The budget also 

allows the Air Force Reserve to work closely with Combatant Commands and gain 

joint experience in training events. 

Accelerated Mission Readiness Training (AMRT) is crucial to developing technically proficient Airmen to provide a qualified force to Combatant Commanders. In 

FY 2023, nearly 46 percent of the enlisted personnel and 38 percent of the officers 

in the Air Force Reserve were NPS. This places a significant strain on readiness 

thresholds. Emerging threats and evolving requirements of building Multi-Capable 

Airmen requires a technically proficient force that cannot be achieved through Unit 

Training Assemblies and Annual Tour days alone. Without AMRT funds to accelerate training, the average NPS Reservist would need two-three years to become 

minimally proficient on mission requirements. With decreasing numbers of fully 

qualified members transferring from the Regular Component to the Reserve, there 

is an increased training burden upon the command. Without continued funding, the 

Air Force Reserve can expect to see a 20% decrease in qualified, deployable airmen, 

and an increase in excessive training times across all career fields. 

The Yellow Ribbon Program 

The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program is a vital resource for providing preand post-deployment education on mental health resources for Reservists and their 

families. Historically, the feedback for these events has been overwhelmingly positive, with 97 percent of attendees finding the events beneficial. After 2 years of disruption due to COVID–19, we have returned to in-person events which resulted in 

increased participation rates. The rising costs of travel and venue expenses has resulted in the Yellow Ribbon Program not being able to meet all attendance requests. 

Childcare 

Access to reliable and quality childcare is crucial to the retention of service members in the Air Force Reserve, as it directly alleviates a major stressor for those balancing service and family responsibilities, enhancing their ability to focus on their 

duties and increasing the likelihood of continued service. The Air Force Reserve has 

worked to ensure that childcare is available during training periods at no cost to 

parents 

through the Home Community Care (HCC) program. Many of our Airmen have 

gaps in childcare due to being single parents or dual military couples. Airmen who 

do not have another adult to provide childcare during training periods are eligible 

for the program. The HCC program addresses gaps in coverage at host locations 

without Child Development Centers and at Regular Component host facilities without weekend childcare options. Currently, the HCC is available at 41 Air Force Reserve locations, and we are working to recruit more providers by zip code. This program is vital to retention, as 50 percent of Reservists cite family and work/life balance issues as their reason for separating during exit surveys. 

Suicide Prevention 

We remain firmly resolved to preventing suicide across our workforce. Our suicide 

prevention efforts are along four lines of effort: building connections, detecting risk, 

promoting protective environments, and developing resilient Airmen and families. 

We have placed Violence Prevention Integrators (VPIs) at each of our nine host base 

locations and NAS JRB Fort Worth, who are keenly focused on preventing interpersonal and self-directed violence. 

In FY 2021, we completed the process of providing full-time Religious Support 

Teams (RSTs) consisting of a chaplain and chaplain’s assistant at each of our nine 

host installations and NAS JRB Fort Worth. These RSTs fill a previously identified 

gap in care for Airmen and their families by providing spiritual support and liaising 

with helping agencies. In FY 2022, there was an increase from 757 to 1,571 counseling sessions provided per year, as well as an increase in religious services provided per year from 2,500 to over 7,000. In FY 2021, we hired 20 full-time First 

Sergeants to work directly with Airmen and their families to navigate support agencies. We anticipate being able to place full-time First Sergeants at each of our wing 

and wing- equivalent organizations by FY 2024. 

Mental Health 

Access to Mental Healthcare is a challenge facing our Nation. The Air Force Reserve promotes mental health through early intervention, identifying and supporting members at elevated risk and managing crisis response. While traditional 

reservists are not eligible for active duty benefits, there are reserve specific resources available to them. This includes 37 mental health providers in the Director 

of Psychological Health (DPH) Program, who have been embedded throughout the 

Reserve Wings to advise leadership. DPHs provide non-clinical services to reservists 
295 

and their families during unit training assemblies or during the week to include 

training and education, consultations, and referrals, needs assessments, suicide prevention, resiliency building, crisis intervention and command advisement on psychological and mental health issues. Reserve Airmen can also access the Military Family Life Consultants, who are licensed contract counselors that work outside of Military Treatment Facilities to provide anonymous and confidential assistance to all 

military members in problem solving issues resulting from deployment, reunions, reintegration, and/or other times of change. Finally, there is the AFRC Psychological 

Health Advocacy Program that provides psychological health referral services to Reserve Airmen and their families through telephone calls or site visits. 

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 

We are working diligently with our Total Force partners to aggressively implement all the accepted recommendations from the Secretary of Defense’s IRC on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment. We are working to recruit, retain, and develop 

our full-time prevention workforce to ensure our prevention footprint is optimized 

to meet the unique needs of Reservists. We will also continue increasing efforts to 

educate our force on prevention and local area resources for survivors. Based on the 

IRC’s recommendations, our VPIs will focus on sexual assault prevention, allowing 

Sexual Assault Response Coordinators to focus exclusively on supporting survivors. 

COVID–19 Vaccination Noncompliance 

The FY 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was enacted requiring 

the Secretary of Defense to rescind the mandate that members of the Armed Forces 

must be vaccinated against COVID–19. I immediately issued a memorandum that 

stated COVID–19 Vaccination Status was not a barrier to service in the Air Force 

Reserve. Prior to the FY 2023 NDAA’s enactment, the Air Force Reserve did not 

separate members for COVID–19 vaccination noncompliance, but rather utilized Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) reassignment actions. 547 members were consequently reassigned to the IRR for noncompliance with the vaccine requirements 

and this approach allows for a streamlined process for those members to return to 

duty. 

Stability for Members 

Our Reserve Airmen and their families need stability and predictability. Exit surveys suggest the high operations tempo and the demands of maintaining a work/ 

life balance are the top reasons for leaving the Air Force Reserve. Without deliberate and planned deployments and training, Reservists are unable to adequately 

prepare their families and notify their civilian employers. The Air Force Reserve is 

working to provide members stability and predictability. This is done via AMRT 

funding which allows Reserve Units to offer predictable training timelines. 

AFFORGEN offers Reserve Airmen predictable deployment cycles. These efforts aid 

our Reserve Airmen when preparing for deployments and guarantees Air Force Reserve support to the DAF and Combatant Commands. 

AIR FORCE’S ROLE IN SUCCEEDING THROUGH TEAMWORK

Teamwork for the Air Force Reserve begins within the DAF, where the Air Force 

Reserve provides an experienced and accessible surge capacity to the Regular Component of the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Space Force. We work to maintain a 

Ready Now posture that can support almost every core function in the DAF. Maintaining this readiness and teamwork with the Regular Component and the Joint 

Force requires consistent training. 

The Air Force Reserve is implementing training to develop Multi-Capable Airmen 

proficient in sustaining operations, hardening air bases, and recovering air bases 

following attack. The FY 2024 budget provides funds for training, ensuring our Reserve Airmen are Ready Now to support the Regular Component as well as the 

Joint Force. At several Air Reserve bases, we have developed organic training centers that provide Reserve Airmen the chance to train in Agile Combat Support 

(ACS) and Agile Combat Employment (ACE) requirements and hone their expeditionary skillsets. These centers also support the Regular Component, the Joint 

Force, Federal, and local agencies. At Westover ARB, Massachusetts, the Dogpatch 

Expeditionary Training Area was revitalized to offer an expeditionary airfield, as 

well as a drop zone and tactical vehicle training route. At Youngstown ARS, Ohio, 

we identified a training need for Security Forces Reserve Airmen. 

This base established a site that provides a venue for Reserve Defenders to build 

proficiency and lethality through a 180-hour program of realistic training that simulates combat situations and prepares Security Forces members to deal with stress 

under fire. The training also prepares participants for ACE and ACS missions. The 
296 

site has been so successful that we are partnering with U.S. Army Reserve and U.S. 

Marine Corps Reserve to use the area for joint force training events. Civilian and 

Federal law enforcement have also used the Youngstown site for training. Finally, 

at Grissom ARB, Indiana, we developed bivouac sites to better rehearse ACS and 

ACE events and conduct deployment exercises. Thanks to funding from Congress, 

we can provide our Reserve Airmen the facilities to conduct realistic training while 

also working with the Regular Component, joint partners, Federal, and local agencies. 

In addition to supporting the Regular Component in the DAF and global military 

operations, the Air Force Reserve expands it teamwork by partnering with and supporting multiple Federal and civil organizations. We routinely participate in humanitarian aid, disaster relief, and scientific research efforts. The Air Force Reserve provides direct support to civil authorities through the execution of Modular Aerial 

Spray System (MASS), Modular Airborne Firefighting System (MAFFS), and Weather Reconnaissance missions which utilize specially modified C–130 aircraft. 

Modular Aerial Spray System 

The 910th Airlift Wing’s 757th Airlift Squadron (AS) from Youngstown ARS operates the Department of Defense’s only aerial spray capability. In FY 2022, the 757 

AS conducted 11 MASS missions treating 165,018 acres and applying 51,939 gallons 

of product. These missions control insect populations, eliminate undesired and 

invasive vegetation, and disperse oil spills in large bodies of water. 

In FY 2022, acceptance testing of the first Electronic Modular Aerial Spray System (EMASS) was completed. It represents a decade-long acquisition project to insure the sustainability of the Aerial Spray program. EMASS provides additional capacity and more accurate calibration for precise application of products when compared to our aging legacy MASS. 

Modular Airborne Firefighting System 

The MAFFS is another specialty mission the Air Force Reserve supports, conducted by the 302d Airlift Wing (AW) from Peterson Space Force Base, Colorado. 

As the only Title 10 Aerial Firefighting asset available for direct tasking, the 302 

AW’s MAFFS mission supports U.S. Northern Command’s Defense Support to Civil 

Authorities (DSCA) efforts and represents 25% of MAFFS assets in the DoD. The 

Air Force Reserve’s MAFFS capability mobilized between 20 July and 29 September 

2022 and represented 28% of 929 drops, 942.6 employment hours, and over 2.5 million gallons of retardant delivered during California wildfires. The 302 AW surged 

its MAFFS assets for 31 days, between 24 August and 23 September and provided 

3 aircraft and 37.5% of total MAFFS efforts. 

Weather Reconnaissance 

The United States military has been flying into hurricanes since the Second 

World War. Today, the Air Force Reserve maintains the only operational military 

weather reconnaissance unit in the United States. The 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron (WRS) is the only DoD unit that conducts aircraft reconnaissance 

missions into severe tropical weather during hurricane season and flies winter 

storm missions off both coasts of the United States. Flying out of Keesler AFB, Mississippi, the WC–130 operations improve forecast accuracy up to 30%, enabling commanders and civil authorities to make informed, fiscally responsible decisions to protect personnel and assets during extreme weather events year-round. Mission modernization and resourcing is essential to this expanding mission set that supports 

our military and civilian population across the United States. 

In FY 2022, the 53 WRS flew 141 missions with flight hours at the third highest 

in the past eight fiscal years (1,160 hours). This included 310 hours in support of 

21 West Coast Atmospheric River requirements and 35 hours supporting East and 

Gulf Coast requirements. The Atmospheric River mission capability released 825 

dropsondes over 39 intense observation periods, resulting in a 30–75% forecast improvement across the US, translating to an additional 72 hours of lead time for decision makers. The 53 WRS also flew 815 hours of hurricane reconnaissance across 

7 storms in the Atlantic, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and East Pacific Ocean, supporting 112 lead Federal agency (LFA) requirements and safeguarding of forces 

throughout the Western hemisphere. Since the beginning of FY 2023, the 53 WRS 

flew 468 hours into four storms supporting 54 LFA requirements. 

Mission modernization and resourcing is essential to the expanding weather reconnaissance mission sets that support our military and civilian population across 

the United States. The Weapons Systems Sustainment allocated to the Air Force 

Reserve allowed for several hardware and software upgrades some of which are still 

in progress. With funding from Congress in the FY 2024 budget, the Air Force Reserve can continue supporting critical weather reconnaissance as well as aerial 
297 

spray and aerial firefighting missions, ensuring that the Air Force Reserve can defend and protect the Nation through teamwork with the Regular Component, the 

Joint Force, as well as Federal, state, and local agencies. 

SUMMARY

Our FY 2024 budget request is carefully crafted to ensure interoperability with 

the Regular Component and the Joint Force. The request will maintain Air Force 

Reserve readiness to support our allies and partners around the world. This request 

will continue weapon system modernization, positioning our force to be more capable, survivable, and lethal while also enhancing support to our Reserve Airmen and 

their families. In an era of strategic competition and increased resource constraints, 

we will continue to provide strategic depth and operational surge capacity to meet 

pacing threats in the most cost-effective manner possible. Reserve Airmen will continue to leverage their unique blend of military and civilian experience to bring outsized impact to pursuing the DAF’s Operational Imperatives. For this to occur, we 

need to take care of our Airmen and the FY 2024 PB request allows the Air Force 

Reserve to do that. With your continued support, we are confident the Air Force Reserve will remain prepared to deliver effects anytime, anywhere to fly, fight, and 

win in Air, Space, and Cyberspace. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, General. I want to thank you all for 

your statements. Appreciate it very, very much. I am going to start 

out with a story that has been well documented over the last 2 or 

3 months. 

It is about a 21-year-old Air Guardsman that posted highly classified documents on the Internet, including intel about the war in 

Ukraine. I can tell you, I don’t know anybody that can tell me why 

this person had access to this particular classified information, but 

it is troublesome, and I don’t think it gives the Air National Guard 

a particularly good look. 

So, General Hokanson, what can you tell me about the status of 

the investigation? 

General HOKANSON. Chairman, thank you for the question. With 

respect to the Airmen of the Massachusetts National Guard, the 

Secretary of the Air Force has initiated an IG (Inspector General) 

investigation, which is just about to complete, and we look forward 

to the results soon. 

Any and all recommendations they make will obviously be implemented immediately. With respect to the individual, it is an ongoing FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) investigation, and we 

look forward to the results of that investigation. 

Senator TESTER. So, I think we need to learn from the past as 

we move forward in the future. How confident are you that with 

the IG information, with the information, you know, and the people 

that you have talked to, that this kind of situation will never happen again? 

General HOKANSON. Chairman I am very confident this will 

never happen again based on what we have found. Unfortunately, 

we have been doing this for a long period of time. A lot of personnel, a lot of units are doing this. 

This one individual was an individual action and not indicative 

of the entire system. But we are looking at safeguards that we can 

put in place that would prevent any individual in the future from 

ever being able to do this. 

Senator TESTER. Ultimately, this person didn’t do it without 

somebody above him knowing what was going on. Are the people 

that allowed this to happen being held accountable to? 
298 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Chairman. They have removed some 

folks temporarily in light of the investigation. Based on the results 

of the investigation, not only active Air Force or if it applies to the 

National Guard, we will take appropriate action against those individuals. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. A couple of the presenters talked about 

the NGREA account. Just for a point of reference, Congress has appropriated $2.9 billion over the last 3 years. And by the way, this 

was a Congressional add to make sure that the Guard and Reserves have the equipment they need, modern equipment that is 

ready when you are called upon. 

And I think it is important we plan for how utilize this money 

and so that the taxpayer gets the biggest bang for the buck. At the 

end of March, basically half the money had been spent. 

As I said, I think it is important to plan, but I think your needs 

are great—I don’t think anybody would dismiss that. For all of you, 

and be as brief as possible, why does it seem, at least seem to me 

that it has taken so long to get this money out the door to actually 

get the equipment you need? Whoever wants to start can. It doesn’t 

matter. 

General HOKANSON. Chairman, on behalf of the National Guard, 

we program to get about a 99 to 100 percent execution of all our 

NGREA funding. And as you mentioned, it is absolutely critical to 

modernization and also for some of our dual use of equipment. Unfortunately, what we have found is some of the supply chain issues 

has delayed the delivery of some of those goods, but we are on 

track to spend all of that money. 

Senator TESTER. Anybody else want to comment? Go ahead. General Daniels, go ahead. 

General DANIELS. So similar to the National Guard, we take a 

very hard look at what equipping lines are open, what critical dual 

use capabilities are prioritized at the top of the list. 

Sometimes we cannot get access to that equipment in the sequence that we would like to get it, but we do monitor a lengthy 

list of requirements and make sure that we spend those funds judiciously across the 3 years that we have the funds available to us. 

Senator TESTER. Admiral. 

Admiral MUSTIN. Comment was going to be very similar in that 

with the 3-year look, we phase out the expenditures. There is pressure in a CR (Continuing Resolution) environment, however, for 

new starts or new contracts, which has delayed in some cases what 

we had intended to originally buy. So, we will probably address 

that topic at a later moment, but CRs certainly have an impact on 

us. 

Senator TESTER. General. 

General BELLON. Yes, sir. For us, the biggest delay this year was 

the fact that we wanted to reroll some of the money you had already approved and your staff, some of who are sitting here, helped 

us with that. We are going to be 100 percent committed this year. 

And as a good teammate, if there is any leftover, we will spend 

that too. 

Senator TESTER. General Healy. 

General HEALY. Sir, the same. The CR does impact our ability 

to get a start with it. But once we do get started, the money does 
299 

flow through our proportional multi-year plan of implementation. 

We plan to fully execute. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. I have got about 20 seconds left. 

General Hokanson, you talked about 25 flying missions within the 

Guard. You needed every one of them, I believe, is what you said. 

A–10s are going away and they should go away. How many missions does that impact? 

General HOKANSON. Mr. Chairman, specific to the A–10s, we 

have three squadrons, and all three would convert to a more current aircraft, either F–35, F–15EX, or one of the, what is called a 

post block F–16, our newest ones. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. So, there are plans for every A–10 mission that goes away in the Guard to replace them with another 

fighter mission? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. That is the plan that we are working with the U.S. Air Force on. And we believe through fleet leveling, and by current scheduled aircraft buys or any additionals, we 

could provide the ability to do that. 

Senator TESTER. Okay. Senator Collins. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to follow up 

on the important issue you just raised since we have heard our witnesses talk about the need to recapitalize the aircraft fleet. General 

Healy, I understand that more than three quarters of the 25 Air 

Guard fighter squadrons operate legacy F–15 fighter aircraft. 

That obviously reduces interoperability and compatibility with 

the active-duty units. The disproportionate fielding of the aircraft 

affects other units as well, such as the air refueling wing in my 

home State of Maine. 

My understanding is that the current KC–46A basing plan places 

71 percent of the new KC–46 with active units, 14 percent with Reserved units, and 15 percent with Guard units, even though the 

Guard flies almost 38 percent of all Air Force tankers. 

So, it seems disproportionate to me if only 15 percent of the new 

aircraft is going to the Guard, if the Guard is flying 38 percent of 

all Air Force tankers. Should new aircraft be fielded in a manner 

that is proportional to the Guard’s operational contributions? 

General HEALY. Ma’am, I agree 100 percent that it appears disproportionate right now. 77 percent of the Air Force Reserves fleet 

is legacy. And in the words of the Secretary of the Air Force, legacy 

is defined as does not concern the PRC (People’s Republic of China) 

in a fight. KC–135s, C–130Hs, pre-block F–16s, A–10 divestment 

are all issues and concerns for the Air Force Reserve in terms of 

proportionality. 

The National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force in 

2014 called for and recommended proportional and concurrent 

fielding of weapon systems with the Guard and Reserve in association with the active component, and we are constantly advocating 

adherence to that recommendation. 

As weapon systems are upgraded and recapitalized in the active 

component, if the Guard and Reserve, and specifically my concern, 

the Reserve are not proportionally recapitalized, we will ultimately 

lack the capacity and the capability to participate in that near-peer 

fight if we are still flying in 37-year-old aircraft, pre-block F–16s. 
300 

Whether it is the F–16s to the F–35, one for one, KC–135 to the 

KC–46, or any of the bombers for the B–21 family systems, we are 

looking to contribute and we want to be that surge capacity that 

we provided for the last 75 years. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you very much. General Hokanson, I 

want to follow up on the Chairman’s questions to you about the 

Massachusetts Air National Guard member who has been accused 

of leaking classified documents. 

What was most disturbing to me was when I learned through 

some of the court filings that there was an Air Force memorandum 

that indicated that he had been repeatedly warned. So, this was 

not a deviation that came out of the blue. 

But in fact, he had been reprimanded and he had been instructed 

to, ‘‘stop any deep dives into classified intelligence information’’ and 

focus on his job. He ‘‘had been observed taking notes on classified 

intelligence materials.’’ 

These reports are very concerning because it appears that this 

serious breach might have been prevented or stopped much sooner 

if the Airman’s Guard unit had taken greater action to restrict his 

access to classified information. 

My question is, what is the standard practice when someone has 

been reprimanded for misuse of classified information and then 

does it again? That to me shouldn’t require an IG report. That 

should be on the books now, I think. 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. I found this extremely concerning as well. Any time there is a disciplinary action, the chain 

of command should address it immediately. 

I know it is not specifically the IG investigation that is looking 

at it, but also the FBI investigation that is looking at that to determine if there was negligence within the airman’s chain of command 

at the time he was mobilized under Title 10 working for a Combatant Commander. 

And we were looking at very closely the chain of command who 

is responsible for that. And if there was negligence on their part, 

it will be addressed immediately. 

Senator COLLINS. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Shaheen. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, everyone. Thank you all for being here. As the co-chair of the National Guard Caucus, I am especially appreciative of hearing your 

concerns this morning. 

General Hokanson, I want to start with you, and I think you may 

wish to weigh in as well, General Healy, but in your opening statement, you talked about the readiness concerns, and you mentioned 

specifically the fighter squadrons. 

But I am—with the 157th Air Refueling Wing in New Hampshire 

at Pease Air Force Base, I am very concerned about the status of 

those KC–46 units, both the fact that we still don’t have all of them 

flying the way they were commissioned to fly, but also what we 

have seen at the 157th is that they have face cuts to their personnel, placing them about 5 percent below the national average. 

While I recognize that you faced constraints, and you all talked 

about that, I am very concerned that we have got these aircraft sitting in New Hampshire and I know they are being used, but it 
301 

doesn’t feel like they are being used to their full extent because of 

those personnel constraints. 

So, can you talk about how you expect to resolve some of those 

issues? And I understand you are conducting a manning study for 

the KC–46. So, when do you expect the results of that study, and 

do you have any insights into what that is going to show? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. And you bring up a great organization. In fact, I believe that refueling unit just set a world 

record for the longest continuous flight of an aerial refueling. So, 

it is a great—— 

Senator SHAHEEN. We are very proud of them. 

General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. It is a great organization. And 

when we look across the entire Air National Guard, as I am sure 

the Air Force Reserve does as well, if we have any positions that 

are in excess of our authorized end strength, we need to account 

for those. 

Now, the personnel actions were not specific to the 157th, but 

really holistically at all of our Guard units. But because you are 

the first of our KC–46 units, we are evaluating it on an annual 

basis to make sure that we have the right number of personnel in 

the right positions so that we can fully leverage the capability of 

that system. 

And so, this is a temporary measure, ma’am, to keep in touch 

with what we are authorized, but as we review this and identify 

additional capabilities, we will reallocate the manpower to fill those 

shortages. 

Senator SHAHEEN. But it has been temporary now for several 

years. 

General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. And that is, as we have mentioned before, our end strengths have reduced in some cases, and 

so we have got to look across the entire Air National Guard to 

identify where that personnel savings could come from. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And so, do you have any insights from the 

staffing study for the KC–46? Do we know what that might recommend? 

General HOKANSON. I am not aware of that right now, ma’am, 

but I can follow up with our staff on the exact specifics of that 

study. 

Senator SHAHEEN. General Healy, do you have any additions to 

that? 

General HEALY. With the Reserve KC–46 units, we are currently 

in Seymour Johnson in North Carolina, and we have seen great results in terms of coming up to speed and delivering on schedule. 

I know that the Air Force, the Air Mobility Command, is holding 

the manufacturers to task to ensure that we are releasing all the 

capabilities as fast as they are able and to recover the capabilities 

that weren’t initially produced the way they should be. 

We are very much looking forward to deliveries to March Air Reserve Base on California next, and expect by then, with the first 

aircraft delivery in 2026, we expect to see a fully capable KC–46. 

Senator SHAHEEN. How many years late? 

General HEALY [continuing]. yes, ma’am—— 

Senator SHAHEEN. I appreciate that, but I think it is a message 

to Boeing to do better in the future as well. General Daniels, you 
302 

mentioned the importance of childcare in your opening statement, 

and I think that is very critical that we think about how important 

that is. 

We have an interesting cooperative effort between the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and the Air National Guard in New Hampshire to do a joint childcare center that they would share. But can 

you speak to why that is so important to the Guard? 

General DANIELS. Yes, ma’am. My challenge is that I have got 

850 Army Reserve centers sprinkled across the United States, most 

of which are not within a 50-mile radius of a major installation. 

Therefore, they are out in communities, and historically, we have 

challenges finding weekend care. We just can’t find the providers 

that are willing to work on weekends. So, we have done a number 

of different pilot activities over the past year and that is still our 

challenge. 

We found a couple of organizations we think we are going to 

make some inroads with to help us have that weekend opportunity. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, thank you. I look forward to hearing 

more about what you have learned and seeing how this committee 

can be supportive of that. 

I am out of time, but General Hokanson, I just wanted to go to 

your first priority for how the Guard gets integrated into the Space 

Force, because I think that is a very real concern. I have asked 

General Saltzman about that issue on several occasions, and the 

ambiguous response has not been reassuring. 

So, I hope that we can continue to work with you on how that 

gets done. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Shaheen. From the beautiful Sunflower State, Senator Moran. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you, Chairman. I have always known you 

to tell the truth, at least on some occasions. Thank you, all of you, 

for being here. Thank you for your service to our Nation. I understand and appreciate the crucial role that the National Guard and 

Reserve play, our components play in our military. 

Disaster at home, around the world, you are there and a great 

asset to the well-being and National Security of our country. General Hokanson, to follow up on Senator Shaheen’s beginning conversation about the space mission. When General Saltzman was in 

front of this committee, I asked him about the creation of a Space 

National Guard. 

He testified that his best military advice supported the most 

cost-effective alternative that preserves operational capabilities. In 

your best military advice on creation of a Space National Guard, 

how would you answer that request from General Saltzman? 

General HOKANSON. Senator Moran, thank you for the question. 

And I would argue that the comments that the Chief of Space Operations made describe exactly the Air National Guard units performing the space mission. 

From my best military advice, when I look at the fact that we 

have been doing this mission for over 28 years, in some cases, we 

are the only ones that ever have done those missions. We have got 

14 units of about 1,000 people. We are about 30 percent of the 

operational squadrons today. 
303 

And to me, my greatest concern is readiness to the force. And by 

simply redesignating those Air Guard units performing the space 

mission to a Space Guard type organization, I could do that within 

the resources that I currently have in my budget, and it would simply be from one drill weekend to the next, where our Airmen would 

change their name tape from Air Force to Space Force. 

And at no time would it interrupt the capabilities they provide 

to our Nation. The personnel would stay in the same place, same 

civilian jobs, doing the same mission that they are doing every single day today. In fact, some of them are deployed right now providing that support to our Nation. 

My concern is, if we looked at reestablishing them in another component, it could cost our Nation about $1 billion. And that is 

not only to restructure and rebuild this within a different component, but then also the need to retrain those current Air Guard 

members that are performing the mission into another mission set. 

And overall, when you look at this, it is a, I think, a very easy 

decision. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. I was going to ask you about the 

cost to stand up a National Guard component, and perhaps you 

have answered that, but I would give you the chance to in a sentence to make that clear. 

General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. So, we look at the cost of about 

$640 million to re-mission what currently exists into a future type 

organization. But the concern that we have is right now the Air 

National Guard space units are the only unit equipped surge to 

war capability. 

Our Air Force Reserve counterparts that are being incorporated 

in the Space Force are primarily individual fillers, whereas the National Guard is actually manned, trained, and equipped units. 

The concern there, as well as when you look at the 28 years of 

experience that we have, to replicate that or to reconstitute it, it 

may take 7 to 10 years to get those folks through schools and 

trained, and I don’t think our Nation can afford to see that reduction in readiness over that time period. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you, sir. General Daniels, would you 

elaborate on the significance of the National Guard Reserve equipment account to the U.S. Army’s Reserves mission? 

General DANIELS. Thank you for that. It is vital to my ability to 

modernize. The Army has focused on lethality and modernizing its 

lethality elements over the last several years and looking forward 

to the 2030, 2040 future battles. 

The Army Reserve is primarily combat support and service support, and therefore our modernization efforts have lagged behind 

those of the lethality elements. And so, the NGREA account supports about 35 to 40 percent of my ability to modernize, in terms 

of raw dollar value. 

Senator MORAN. Thank you. General Hokanson, you and I have 

had a conversation. I appreciate what you told me. I have a goal 

of seeing that the STARBASE Program is expanded in Kansas. 

STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education is hugely important to the National Security and economic 

well-being of our Nation. STARBASE, which I have visited on several occasions, is very compelling in its mission and having success, 
304 

but we have parts of the State, particularly those that are the most 

rural, that are underserved or unserved, and I appreciate your willingness to work with me to see that we change that circumstance. 

And General Bellon, we appreciate your service to the Nation. I 

thank you for your testimony today but thank you for the years you 

have spent in duty to country. And all Kansans, and particularly 

those who share your alma mater, are particularly honored by that 

service. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Baldwin. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all 

of our witnesses this morning. General Hokanson, you have listed 

healthcare for the National Guard force as a command priority. 

Like you, I believe that increasing access to healthcare and dental 

care for our Guard and Reserves service members would pay dividends in readiness, especially for short notice deployments. 

Last Congress, I introduced the Health Care for Our Troops Act, 

a bill that would provide all National Guard and Reserve service 

members premium free healthcare coverage. Can you please describe the impact of this proposal, what sort of impact it would 

have on increasing the readiness of the total force? 

General HOKANSON. Thank you, Senator. And I think you hit it 

right on the head. The premium free healthcare and dental care as 

well are critically important. And having been through multiple deployments, one of the biggest things that we see addressing—to address and readiness is medical and dental readiness for our personnel to go. 

In fact, I would say that is the largest thing that impacts our 

readiness. And so having that ability so that every Guardsmen and 

reservists that is in uniform, is serving that has that ability to get 

preventative care or care when they need that, and the same with 

dental care, will ensure their medical readiness. 

And we look at the investment that we put in our individuals in 

terms of the training and the time that goes into it, and not only 

that, but their investment and their time away from their families 

and employers—to me, this is the best way to ensure that when we 

make that call, they are ready to go to answer whatever our Nation 

needs them to do. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. General Hokanson, last month, 

the F–35 aircraft started to arrive at Truax Field in Madison, Wisconsin, entrusting the Wisconsin Air National Guard with a critical 

capability for our Nation’s defense. 

I have a couple of questions about that basing. The unit supports 

a significant number of jobs. What are the economic benefits for the 

local community that we can anticipate from hosting the F–35 

fighter wing? 

General HOKANSON. So ma’am, first and foremost, just the community there that established such a fantastic unit obviously came 

out through the Air Force basing process. 

The benefits there is aerial ranges, there is gunnery ranges, 

there is aerial refueling units nearby, and there is airspace, which 

made that just a great choice. But when you look at the community 

now, you have a State-of-the-art aircraft that is going to be there 

for decades. 
305 

And the number of folks that are employees and are going to be 

there to support that unit are going to make a huge difference to 

the local community. And frankly, having been there, just the coordination between the unit and the local community makes a huge 

difference. 

Senator BALDWIN. Yes. While I am very grateful that my home 

State is making a significant contribution to National Security, I 

would say that neighbors proximate to the airport are concerned 

about the impact of increased noise in the area surrounding the 

airport. 

I helped secure resources in a previous appropriations bill to help 

us start planning for noise mitigation activities. Can you please 

elaborate on efforts the National Guard is taking to help with this 

planning and to engage the local communities that will be impacted by the noise? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. So, the key there is for us to 

work with the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and also the 

unit. And as we get the aircraft, and to identify those areas where 

we can reduce noise, and this may affect the approach patterns 

that they use or the type of approaches into the airport, also their 

departures. 

And also working with the air crews to identify the areas where 

they can reduce noise. And then also make the communities aware 

of grants or resources available to them to help reduce the noise 

locally. 

Senator BALDWIN. And are these activities well underway? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. As we get more aircraft and I 

look forward to being out there September 7th for the welcome 

ceremony. But I think as we go on, they are going to definitely 

want to be good neighbors with the community there because they 

are great supporters of that organization. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Boozman. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all 

for being here. We appreciate your service. I always enjoy getting 

to visit with you when we talk about military construction. 

And we appreciate your service, and as always, we appreciate 

your families. This is certainly a family affair, and again, all that 

you represent. General Daniels, one key element of funding for the 

Reserve component is the funded Reimbursable Authority. 

Each year, this committee authorizes this funding authority for 

military intelligence activities in support of Combatant Commands 

and defense agencies. Can you speak to the importance of this authority? 

And if you believe funded reimbursable authority should be expanded to other high demand skills such as cyber and space activities? 

General DANIELS. Yes, thank you. The funded reimbursable authority allows the Combatant Commands to use their operational 

funds to bring on and pay for reservists. It is done in a voluntary 

manner, and it allows them to have additional capacity for those 

folks who are available and willing and capable of using their civilian skill sets and their military trained skill sets to support the requirements within the Combatant Commands. 
306 

Expanding beyond intelligence to those other key technical areas 

would be of great value to the commands, and it allows the individuals to again use those civilian and military acquired skills and be 

very expert and facile in those areas. So, expansion would certainly 

be welcomed. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you very much. Duty status reform is 

an initiative that seeks to streamline and simplify the activation 

and utilization of Reserve component members. 

Efforts to consolidate this burdensome duty status system has 

gone on for almost 3 decades, which I know has been frustrating 

for our servicemembers. 

Can you all just kind of jump in, and if you would, briefly discuss 

how consolidating this system would positively impact 

servicemembers and their families and increase retention? How can 

Congress be more helpful in getting this effort? 

Again, this is something we have talked about forever, but with 

the situation that we are in now with retention and this and that, 

it is more important than ever. 

General HOKANSON. Senator, I will start out. When we look at 

the 28 different duty statuses, the ability under duty status reform 

to reduce these to about 8 really simplifies how we would mobilize 

and utilize our Guardsmen and Reservists. But the biggest thing 

that we have a concern is we just want equal pay for what we do. 

We want either Guardsmen or Reservists to be treated exactly 

the same as their active-duty counterparts if they are doing the 

same mission at the same location at any time. The last thing we 

want is two Soldiers or Airmen, or Sailors and Marines to be standing next door to each other, and one is getting a benefit that the 

other one isn’t. 

And so, this goes a long way to resolve that and really address 

some issues that have long gone neglected. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. Anybody else? 

General DANIELS. Yes, we would fully endorse being able to have 

that passed into law to help us not only to have, you know, equal 

pay and equal entitlements for those same activities, but also to remove the administrative burden of knowing which is the right pay 

status to put someone in and simplifying the entire process for everyone that is involved. That would be of great value and time savings as well. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Very good. General Bellon, as we all know, 

every service has encountered challenges with meeting their recruiting goals. What has the Marine Corps Reserve done to meet 

your specific goals and are there specific examples you can provide 

that will help this committee better understand how we can help 

all the services going forward? 

General BELLON. Well, I think, sir, for this year, I think we are 

the only one that came close to meeting the goal. But our requirement is smaller, so let me frame that, and our population we are 

recruiting a slightly different. But I don’t think we should draw 

their own conclusions. 

I would say we were successful this year, but as you know, sir, 

the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Secretary of the Navy, 

and the Assistant Commandant all have testified that the future 
307 

end strength of the Marine Corps Reserve is going to be back at 

37,000. We are at 33,000 today. 

That has to happen by the end of the decade. And as I look at 

where we are now, the trends in society, I have questions about 

how we are going to do that. So, one of the things we are doing 

is proactively looking at reestablishing capacity where the population is and will be. By that I mean some of our drill centers are 

located where the population was in the 50s, not where it is and 

will be. 

So, there are a number of things we are doing, but a big part of 

it is simply proving to the American people that service is honorable and worthwhile. And as you know, the trends are not good in 

that direction, and I don’t see that as a bad thing. Should we not 

have to prove to our citizens occasionally that the Nation is worth 

defending? Absolutely. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Right. Very good. Thank you all. Thank you, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Hoeven. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thanks. Just picking up on that, General, how 

do you do that? How do you convince them that, you know, that 

they should want to step up and serve? 

General BELLON. Well, I had a vignette earlier where I worked 

with your staff. We had a need that emerged, a very fast need for 

literal craft capability. 

At the same time, we were looking at sundowning a couple of 

units that were very healthy in Florida and Texas. And the demonstration, by working with this committee, and the staff, and Congress in General, to find the right authorities to move at the speed 

of relevance, took two units whose re-enlistment rates were going 

down because they saw no future in service, and now they are 

among the top of all of my formations. 

And all they needed was a demonstration from us that we value 

the service, and we are going to give them the tools and equipment 

they need to be ready when the Nation needs them. So that is an 

example of what we can do. 

But I also think days like this where we have open testimony, 

and we demonstrate an open conversation that we are trying to 

find ways to reestablish some of the faith and confidence we might 

have lost over the previous years. 

Senator HOEVEN. I would add a recruiting tool that I think is incredibly important and has great utility, not only for the services 

and not only for the individuals while they serve with you, but for 

their future as well, and that is the Federal tuition assistance program. And I would like each of you to weigh in on that. 

And I want to start with you, General Hokanson, because we put 

together and funded a pilot program through this committee, and 

that Air National Guard Reserve pilot program is incredibly important not only to recruit those individuals in, but to keep them. And 

there is a difference between the services, and there is a difference 

between active duty, and Guard, and Reserves. 

And I think we need to beef that thing up right now. It won’t 

only help pull people in. It will help keep them in and it will make 

them better, Soldiers, Airmen, Marines, you name it for all of you, 

and I would like to hear from each one of you on that. 
308 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. It is a great program. And 

when I visit the 54, when I always talk to our recruiters and I ask 

them, what are those things why people still come in, and education is still one of those consistent things. 

And we have been fortunate, and we look across the entire National Guard, all of them but Guam, the State helps provide tuition 

assistance so that we have that stability throughout the process. 

Unfortunately, we had to balance sometimes with the fiscal year 

and the academic year to fully utilize that funding, but any time 

we have the ability to utilize that not only for tuition assistance 

but also for tuition payback, and then also retention bonuses, will 

make a huge impact. 

Senator HOEVEN. Do you agree we should make it a priority to 

get that in place and strengthen it as a tool for recruitment and 

retention? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, sir. Education. Any benefits we can provide to them is always a benefit when it comes to recruiting. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you. And I will come back to General 

Bellon and ask the same of the others. 

General BELLON. Briefly, I want to offer this context. Less than 

1 percent volunteer. So, who are they? They have a call to service 

already. So, anything we can do to invest in them has an amazing 

return on investment. From a citizen’s perspective, they are selfmotivated. They already have a call to service. Why wouldn’t we 

invest in them? 

Senator HOEVEN. And particularly if they enlist the Marine 

Corps, right? Not easy duty. General. 

General DANIELS. So, the Army Reserve used about $25 million of tuition assistance in 2022, and then $31 million this year. And we put in a request for about $33 million next year. It is 

a growing—and its credentialing assistance is another fund that we 

use simultaneously. It is super important for our members to become more and more educated along with our—not just only our 

enlisted, but our warrants as well. 

They leverage the credentialing assistance quite a bit. So, this is 

vital for us to keep them on the cutting edge of their technical experience for their civilian careers and then to be ahead of their 

peers. So, it is super important. 

Senator HOEVEN. Admiral. 

Admiral MUSTIN. It is a winning program, and we recognize the 

impact both on recruiting, which is obvious in that we can offer 

this incentive. Secondly, we continue to, like Lieutenant General 

Daniels, to invest within the Navy Reserve for selected Reserve tuition assistance as a new program, also recognizing the benefit that 

provides to our Sailors. 

The Navy is a very technical force. That education benefits the 

individual, but it is a selfish interest on my part as well to ensure 

that our Sailors are trained and ready to perform when we need 

them. 

Senator HOEVEN. Right. I mean, I have been waiting to hear 

some of you lob that in. I mean, you are becoming so technologically sophisticated, every one of you, that they need that ongoing education to handle all the amazing systems that you have, and 

we are developing. 
309 

Admiral MUSTIN. Absolutely, Senator. I would say that in the 

past we used to say, hey, we are competing for the same resources 

to recruit against the Marine Corps, or the Air Force, or the Army. 

Now, I tell people we are competing with Amazon, Google, Meta, 

and others. It is a very technical—out there. 

Senator HOEVEN. Absolutely. General. 

General HEALY. You know, the Navy beat me to the punch on 

that one. The Air Force is absolutely a very technical field, every 

one of them—— 

Senator HOEVEN. Yes, absolutely. 

General HEALY [continuing]. And the $4,500 a year that we 

spend, and tuition assistance absolutely directly impacts our ability 

to recruit and retain. 

Senator HOEVEN. Tester and I have to get old pickup trucks because the technologies on the new one, we can’t figure out, so. 

Senator TESTER. 100 percent correct. 

Senator HOEVEN. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you 

all. Thank you for your service. Thank you, certainly on behalf of 

the State of Alaska. We certainly appreciate our Reserve and our 

National Guard servicemembers and civilians. They provide extraordinary support to us in the State and certainly to the country. 

We have got continued success that we see with innovation, readiness, training, IRT (Innovative Readiness Training), certainly 

when it comes to homeland defense, missile defense, absent key air 

refueling, combat search and rescue, strategic airlift, there is just 

so much. 

And so, we are very grateful. I am very, very proud of the Guard 

and Reserve men and women who serve us and provide such benefit. I also am thankful for the cost savings that you bring to all 

of the effort here, so. 

General Hokanson, we had an opportunity yesterday to visit 

about some of the more specific concerns that you and I had 

shared, but we have discussed previously the issue of the Space 

Force and the mission there of the Air Guards, 213th Space Warning Squadron at Clear Air Force Base. 

They have been doing extraordinary work there with the groundbased radar missile warning mission since 2006 now. We are seeing Space Force becoming more mature. That is good. But I have 

been concerned that there hasn’t really been a clearly articulated 

or perhaps an adequate plan to ensure that these Airmen and their 

mission are cared for in a way that works going forward with the 

Space Force. I fear that they may miss out on opportunities, or 

education, or equipment. 

I understand that prior to my arrival at committee here, you did 

address a question regarding Space Force to Senator Moran. I appreciate that. I don’t know if you want to add anything further to 

that in terms of your opinion on the establishment of the Space National Guard to really ensure that these Guardians are equipped 

and trained for the mission set that they clearly are in the front 

on. 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. And as clear as you mentioned, this goes back to once again the years and years of experi-
310 

ence that our Airmen have doing this mission set and just the incredible capability they provide our Nation each and every day. 

And as you mentioned, we are the only unit equipped, surged go 

to war capability that exist within the Reserve component for the 

space mission. 

And so having a clear pathway for them will not only help with 

our current recruiting, but it will also ensure that all of those years 

of experience, all the work that they have done, and frankly, the 

ability of our Guardsmen to bring—over half of them have backgrounds in technical or high tech or aerospace industries. 

They bring that knowledge base to work with them when they 

come to drill. And, you know, we rely on them to deploy around the 

globe and continue to do their mission. So, anything and everything 

we can do to retain them. 

And as I mentioned earlier, my best military advice to reduce 

any impact at all to readiness or the ability to field these unit 

would be to transfer the current Air National Guard units doing 

the space mission into a National Guard component for the Space 

Force so they can continue everything they are doing today, tomorrow. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you for just clarifying that and putting that on the record. I appreciate it. I would like to direct a 

question to you, General Healy. I think, fair to say that we are 

both pretty proud of the 477th Fighter Group, U.S. Air Force’s oldest, most experienced F–22 unit in the inventory. 

I think they have produced some pretty qualified fighter pilots. 

You had mentioned in your testimony the term concurrent and proportional fielding that allows the Air Force Reserve to incorporate 

new aircraft at the same rate and proportion as their active-duty 

components. 

How will the current—excuse me, concurrent and proportional 

fielding affect units like the 477th, especially as we are looking to 

the new airframes coming on such as the next generation air dominance and the E–7s? 

General HEALY. Thanks very much for the question, ma’am. And 

I don’t know who wants to brag more on the 477th. I have had the 

great opportunity to go twice this year up to Anchorage to visit 

them. 

Simply put, twice the F–22 fighter experience than their activeduty counterparts, three times the fighter time experience in their 

active-duty fighter time—or active-duty counterparts, makes them 

the most experienced F–22 unit in the entire Air Force, and they 

are exactly where they need to be, at the forefront of the defense 

of the country. 

They are the tip of that tip of the spear that Alaska provides. I 

think as we look towards the future and possible recapitalization 

from F–22s and to the possibility of next generation air dominance, 

I think that air superiority experience and 5th gen aircraft will 

translate perfectly and would be the template to go by, if we were 

to look at the current proportional servicing of and progression to 

the NGAD (Next-Generation Air Dominance) family of systems. 

Likewise, with the E7, the experience, both with the Guard in 

Alaska and the Reserves in the continuous States, allows us to provide that same degree of expertise and experience moving forward. 
311 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Yes, thank you. Mr. Chairman, I have got 

a couple more questions, but I will submit this for the record. 

Senator TESTER. Perfect. Senator Durbin. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I chair the Senate 

Judiciary committee, and I just happened to adjourn in time for me 

to make this hearing, and I am glad to be here. I would like to say 

to all the witnesses, the GAO (Government Accountability Office) 

noted last year that the Pentagon is facing the most challenging recruitment environment in 50 years. 

The Army, for example, has especially struggled to meet recruitment goals. The service missed its end strength number by 15,000 

or 25 percent in fiscal year 2022. I am glad to see this budget request increases competitive compensation and funding for recruitment marketing programs, as well as improving quality of life for 

current servicemembers. 

So, I would like to ask you if you would tell me what the impact 

has been on the Guard and Reserve with this recruiting challenge? 

General HOKANSON. Senator, I will start with the National 

Guard. So, when you look at where we are today, our recruiters, 

particularly in the Army side, have really been able to adjust to the 

current environment and we have seen a steady increase in our recruiting abilities. In fact, we have been over 100 percent the last 

3 months. 

And right now, the Army National Guard is on path to meet our 

end strength by the end of the fiscal year. In terms of the Air National Guard, we are a little bit challenging environment. We look 

at to be at about 97 percent of our authorized end strength by the 

end of the year. But we have seen very positive increases, especially over last year. 

Now, I am not declaring victory, but I am saying right now all 

the trends are very positive and we hope to continue those into the 

new year, and make sure we maintain our Army National Guard 

authorized end strength and reach our Air National Guard authorized end strength. 

Senator DURBIN. Tell me what the elements are that you think 

are most persuasive for those who are enlisting. 

General HOKANSON. Senator, thank you for the question. When 

I go across the 54, I visit with recruiters everywhere I go. Educational benefits are one of the first things they bring up. The 

other one is benefits such as healthcare. What they are finding in 

the current environment to be competitive is many companies are 

now offering benefits that they didn’t before. Medical, educational 

benefits. 

And so, the competition out there for the same individuals is getting much stronger. And then also internally, we are working with 

our own systems, and that is reducing the time it does to get—personnel to get waivers. And also addressing policies that are preventing some folks from serving. 

Senator DURBIN. Any other members of the panel have a comment? 

General BELLON. Yes, Senator, I think it is important to realize 

the math component here. The population that we are all trying to 

recruit right now is significantly smaller among Gen Z than the 
312 

millennials, so that is a fact we have to deal with. But also, the 

propensity to serve has diminished. 

And that is all about us earning the confidence of the American 

people back that service is worthwhile. There is a pretty holistic 

problem but there is a math component as well. Thank you. 

Senator DURBIN. I would like to just make a comment. I am 

about to say something that is a secret. It is not classified, but I 

am going to share it with you. We have 780,000 DACA (Deferred 

Action for Childhood Arrival) recipients, people who are protected 

under DACA, many of whom want to serve this country, where 

they grew up. 

There is an obstacle, Congress. We have not given them a pathway to citizenship. This should be a pathway. You ought to open 

up your opportunities, we should across the board in the military, 

to Dreamers and to DACA recipients who really want to serve this 

country and I think are genuine about it. 

For some reason, there has been a resistance. Perhaps it was the 

luxury of a lot of recruits, and we didn’t need others. But I would 

just tell you, I have met them. I know them. They would make 

great sacrifices for just to have this opportunity to wear the uniforms you are wearing today. 

And I hope that when you are in the highest levels of the Pentagon, that you discuss this candidly. Your predecessors have not 

always been cooperative when I have raised this issue. There is a 

resistance because these folks are, ‘‘undocumented.’’ 

They may not have been born here, but they love this country 

as much as any of us who pledge allegiance to that flag, so I hope 

you will consider that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Senator Capito. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank all of you, 

and I add my voice of thanks and gratitude to all of you for your 

service, and to your families as well. 

I wanted to ask General Hokanson, West Virginia is the home 

to some of the National Guard Special Forces capabilities, including the Special Operations Detachment Europe and the Second 

Battalion 19th Special Forces Group. 

Can you speak to the importance of the Guard’s Special Forces 

capabilities and what they contribute to the Joint Force? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. It is an incredible capability. 

When you look at the two Special Forces groups that are not in the 

active component, they are both in the Army National Guard. And 

if you go back really to the early days of 9/11, it was Guard Special 

Forces folks that were there, and they have served admirably 

around the globe ever since that time. 

For us, it is something we have worked very closely with Special 

Operations Command to make sure that we make the ability for 

those leaving active duty to come into the National Guard and then 

also to recruit those directly out of the National Guard into our formations. 

It is a critical skill set that we utilize each and every day, and 

our Combatant Commanders can never get enough of them. So, we 

are doing everything we can to recruit and retain and provide those 

bonuses and incentives to keep them in our formations. 
313 

Senator CAPITO. So, you have a transition pipeline from active 

to—for the Special Forces talents? Is that what you are saying? 

General HOKANSON. Absolutely, ma’am. 

Senator CAPITO. Yes, good. Good. I would note that in the early 

days of 9/11, when the Special Forces deployed, we lost a good West 

Virginian at the very beginning of that, and he was a Special 

Forces National Guard. 

This is kind of a technical question, and I am going to ask it, but 

I am not sure exactly what I am asking in terms of the technical 

parts of it. Accurate positioning, navigation, and timing, and GPS 

(Global Positioning System) services are essential to U.S. critical 

infrastructure and for military operations. 

So, our State is one of the States of West Virginia to participate 

as a test site for the National Guard’s National Integration of Time 

Resiliency for Operations, or called NITRO. Could you tell me a little bit about NITRO and where you see that is going, and how important that is? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, ma’am. It is a very important capability 

because it provides alternate resilient timing for GPS, and many 

of our systems operate on that. Currently, we have six States that 

have fielded it, and we are working very closely to support the 

States because this provides that capability to the States and local 

first responders in the case there is a loss of the GPS terrestrial 

signal. 

Senator CAPITO. Does this capability go through all different 

forces? I mean, would this be something that every Guard and Reserve would have a great deal of interest in? 

General HOKANSON. We are not sure of the exact fielding plan, 

ma’am. It is based on the funding that is provided. But we do have 

it in 6 States right now, and 21 others have expressed an interest. 

So, we are looking at the long-term viability of this, or if there are 

other alternate capabilities that provide the same. 

Senator CAPITO. Right. Does anybody else want to speak to that? 

Let me ask a question on cybersecurity. I am assuming that all of 

you have certain cybersecurity components. Is it growing? How important is it to you? And is there a coordinating aspect to this 

across the forces? So, I am going to start over here with General 

Bellon. 

General BELLON. I think, you know, acknowledging we are in the 

information age, it is only going to get more important. It is vital 

to everything we do. 

And I think for all of us, we are looking for a more streamlined 

way for us to get our Marines, Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen who 

have civilian expertise and qualifications, but may not have the 

military occupational specialty, to find a way to expedite their access to our systems. 

That doesn’t exist right now. It is a very Byzantine, very hamhanded approach that we have now. We need to do better than 

that. 

Senator CAPITO. Yes. General. 

General DANIELS. So, the Army Reserve is looking to expand the 

amount of our force that is cyber warriors. We are growing out a 

cyber-protection brigade, adding an additional capability. 
314 

And I meet once a quarter with the Army cyber lead, along with 

the Army National Guard director, and we coordinate activities to 

make sure that we are not hitting the, you know, training pipeline 

too heavy, too fast. We are trying to make sure that we are all in 

sync as we go forward, looking to 2030. 

Senator CAPITO. Okay. I am going to go to the Admiral next. I 

am going to skip—— 

Admiral MUSTIN. So, cyber is a growth area for the Navy Reserve. 

So, we currently have about 8,000 Sailors within our information 

warfare community, and we continue to work very closely with 

CYBERCOM, as well as our fleet cyber, which is 10th Fleet, to ensure the creation of our cyber protection teams and offensive cyber 

capability continues to mature. 

Where I see this happening most effectively is also related to our 

recruiting initiatives—— 

Senator CAPITO. Right. Absolutely. 

Admiral MUSTIN [continuing]. Because we have got some fantastic civilians that can walk in the door immediately and we can 

do direct commission. We have recently created a new cyber designator, which is a pretty significant step from a community management perspective. 

Senator CAPITO. Or out the door. I mean, once they have served 

and maybe they have decided where they want to transition, and 

they have got such an incredible skill set here. I mean, to me, that 

is a big selling point. And finally, yes—— 

General HEALY. Yes, ma’am. Absolutely a growth industry within 

the Air Force Reserve, currently getting into mission assurance, increasing in defensive and offensive cyber operations, and absolutely 

looking forward towards leveraging our civilian experience and taking that to benefit the Reserve as well. 

Senator CAPITO. Right, right. So, General Hokanson, do you want 

to wrap it up on cyber? 

General HOKANSON. Yes, Senator. Obviously we have 4,000 cyber 

professionals in the Guard. We are part of the Cyber National Mission Force and fully integrated into CYBERCOM. 

The one thing I would highlight though is we have State partnerships with 100 nations. One of their greatest requests is to help 

them with the cyber defense and network defense in their country. 

And we are finding when we look at misinformation campaigns, 

that this is absolutely critical to helping our partners and allies, 

and that is something we leverage at every opportunity. 

Senator CAPITO. Thank you all very much. 

Senator TESTER. We appreciate your testimony here today. We 

appreciate your work and making sure that our national defense is 

up to where it needs to be. General Bellon, we wish you all the best 

in the next phase of your life. 

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senators may submit additional questions. We would ask that if 

additional questions come in, that you answer them as quickly as 

you possibly can. The defense subcommittee will reconvene on 

Tuesday, June 20 at 3:30 p.m. for a classified hearing with the intelligence community. 
315 

[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but were 

submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the hearing:] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO GENERAL DANIEL R. HOKANSON

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. The National Guard and Reserve is a part-time force, but also relies 

heavily on Active Guard and Reserve. 

We understand that when Guard and Reserve personnel learn that a continuing 

resolution is on its way—especially longer-term, they stick with their civilian jobs. 

What impact does a continuing resolution have on your overall force? 

Answer. The impacts of a continuing resolution vary depending on its length. The 

longer the continuing resolution lasts, the likelihood increases that the National 

Guard will not be able to meet readiness requirements to support the Joint Force 

or support the nation’s Governors when they need us most. 

Specific impacts from a short-term continuing resolution (1–3 months) include: potential curtailment of non-statutory training such as additional training days (i.e. 

flight training), resulting in degraded readiness across the formation; degraded ability to maintain/manage real property inventory and unit stationing actions; and the 

increased likelihood of missing critical training gates at prescribed times during the 

training year cycle resulting in the inability to meet readiness milestones. 

Continuing resolutions lasting beyond 4 months significantly increase risks for the 

National Guard. Impacts include: continued pressure on soldiers and civilians from 

the impacts of inflation by not receiving a pay raise; decreased ground OPTEMPO 

and flying hours resulting in lower readiness proficiency; curtailment of readinessenhancing training exercises; reductions in depot repair of airframes, tactical 

wheeled vehicles, and weapon systems; inability to address Base Operations Support 

(BOS) shortfalls (e.g., fire and emergency services; range services), impacting operational readiness and Soldier/Family well-being; increased potential for the need to 

furlough State employees; delays in modernization of inadequately structured facilities/infrastructure and delays deficit reduction of critical facility types (readiness 

centers, maintenance facilities, and barracks); and inability to afford filling critical 

vacancies and limit bonuses/incentives which will degrade the ability to meet accessions goals and end strength. 

Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills, 

training, and schools? 

Answer. Continuing resolutions definitively impact the participation, attendance, 

and execution of schools. The uncertainty of funding degrades the capability to 

maintain fulltime staff and instructors to execute training, causes registered students to adjust commitments for attending, and has a risk to student lodging payments for courses longer than 140 days. Without the proper appropriation, there is 

a high probability for schools to cancel. 

Question. The National Guard is now in year six of the Southwest border mission 

supporting Customs and Border Protection. 

Today, there are approximately 2,500 Army Guard personnel at our Southwest 

border, with another 1,500 Active Duty troops headed down there following the 

Biden administration’s decision to end Title 42. 

This mission has never been budgeted for by DoD or the National Guard. However, we have now spent more than $1.65 billion for the southwest border mission. 

General Hokanson, if the current surge of 1,500 Active Duty troops is prolonged, 

I understand National Guard personnel may be deployed. What can you tell the 

Committee about the likelihood and feasibility of such an expanded Guard footprint 

there? 

Answer. I acknowledge the difficult task the Department of Homeland Security is 

faced with in securing the Southwest Border. However, continued National Guard 

support has created an enduring, readiness-degrading law enforcement support mission. In addition, the mission’s costly personnel tempo is having a negative impact 

on our service members, their families, employers, and impacting retention of 

servicemembers. The primary mission of the National Guard is to fight and win our 

Nation’s wars as the combat reserve of the Army and Air Force. In today’s environment, combat readiness is paramount for all National Guard formations. Anything 

that negatively impacts readiness, that can be accomplished by other responsible 

agencies or can be contracted, should be eliminated. Lastly, development of a strategic plan to offramp military support may quicken development of more cost-effective or contractual solutions to those currently being performed by the National 
316 

Guard. I continue to recommend that the border mission can be accomplished by 

other agencies. 

Question. General Hokanson, how is this mission impacting the readiness of 

Guard personnel? 

Answer. During operational employment for the Southwest Border (SWB) mission, 

National Guard unit readiness is consumed rather than built. Unit preparation, deployment, and redeployment, may overlap with training and modernization year activities, further negatively impacting a unit’s ability to build combat readiness and 

modernize on schedule. SWB units are mobilized for 400 days, resulting in nearly 

13 months with no wartime mission training. Additionally, the National Guard has 

received so many requests for support from National Guard UH–72 helicopters that 

the SWB is depleting the serviceable life of the aircraft 2.5 times faster than programmed, significantly impacting Army aviation readiness and modernization. 

Question. In the past 2 years, Congress has provided funds for thirty-two new C– 

130J aircraft specifically for the Air National Guard. 

Upgrading our airlift fleet is a top priority of mine. The Air National Guard—including the 120th Airlift Wing based in Great Falls—is in real need of capable airlift 

so that you can perform the critical missions assigned to you. 

I understand that the basing decision for these aircraft is still underway, with a 

decision slated for later this year. 

General Hokanson: What can you tell me about your priorities for the strategic 

basing process for these aircraft from the Guard’s perspective? How are you coordinating with the Active Duty Air Force to ensure your equities are addressed? 

Answer. The Air National Guard is utilizing the Air Force Strategic Basing Process for the C–130J basing decision. The Secretary of the Air Force has delegated 

the C–130J basing decision to the Director, Air National Guard and the process will 

provide a standardized, repeatable, transparent, and deliberate decision. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR BRIAN SCHATZ

Emergency Management Assistance 

Question. How would the National Guard provide technical assistance to guard 

units that are activated via Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) 

in expediting resources to states that have requested assistance but are geographically isolated, such as Hawaii? 

Answer. The National Guard uses five means to mitigate the risks associated with 

disaster assistance to geographically isolated States. First, the National Guard regularly embeds Liaison Officers (LNOs) at the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) National Response Coordination Center during declared emergencies. 

These LNOs inform FEMA of National Guard capabilities and forces available to 

support disaster response in geographically isolated States. Second, the National 

Guard may embed trained emergency management personnel with EMAC Advanced 

Teams (A-Teams) assigned to FEMA’s Regional Response Coordination Center in 

impacted regions. Guardsmen and women assigned to A-Teams ensure National 

Guard support synchronizes with the Federal response. Third, the National Guard 

uses the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) to assess 

risks, develop mitigation strategies, and develop needed capabilities for potential 

employment during disaster response. THIRA is especially valuable in synchronizing the National Guard’s responses and resources with FEMA to ensure states 

such as Hawaii enhance their resilience in disaster response. Fourth, NGB dispatches Joint Liaison Teams (JLT) to impacted states prior to or at the start of an 

emergency. These teams assist the Joint Force Headquarters with coordinating response options between the state and the National Guard Bureau. Fifth, isolated 

states may authorize their Guardsmen and women already in a state active duty 

status to support immediate responses to domestic emergencies until such time as 

either the impacts of a disaster subside or resources from National Guard units external to the impacted state arrive. The National Guard Bureau ensures states and 

territories adhere to relevant statutes and policy for the use of immediate response 

authority. 

Question. What coordination is there between the National Guard Bureau (NGB) 

and the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) when considering 

which guard units would assist another state that has requested assistance? How 

does NGB account for geographic isolation as factor when coordinating logistics? 

Answer. The National Guard Bureau (NGB) conducts annual workshops to coordinate with the 54 States and territories, FEMA, United States Indo-Pacific Command, and United States Northern Command to supporting relationships during 

emergencies through the construct of an Emergency Management Compact (EMAC). 
317 

The National Emergency Management Association (NEMA), through the National 

Coordination Group (NCG), facilitates requests to deploy an EMAC Coordination 

Team. These teams synchronize EMAC activities with Federal personnel whenever 

requested by FEMA Headquarters during an incident. 

Responding to disasters in geographic isolated locations requires a whole of government logistics response. Upon the Federal Declaration of an Emergency or Federal Disaster Declaration associated with a domestic response requiring military 

support, a Mission Assignment (MA) is generated by the FEMA field office. The Defense Coordinating Officer in this office coordinates with the state or states Emergency Managers and the National Guard liaison and decides which forces are best 

suited to fulfill the request beyond the scope of EMACs already in place and executed. All requests for support, including logistics outlined in the MA are prioritized 

in coordination with FEMA, the state, NGB, and other agencies against available 

transportation assets to move personnel and supplies into the impacted region. 

These efforts require constant coordination between agencies to ensure allocated 

transportation space is maximized and support is provided at the point of need. 

Training and Partnerships 

Question. How does the National Guard Bureau support unofficial partnerships 

between National Guard units and Taiwan’s military to improve Taiwan’s defensive 

and deterrence abilities? 

Answer. The Taiwan Relations Act requires the U.S to make available defense articles and defense services as necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient 

self-defense capacity as determined by the President and Congress. The National 

Guard has several elements working with personnel in Taiwan to increase proficiency in several areas. I would be happy to follow up with you in person to discuss 

further. 

Question. How is the National Guard Bureau tailoring more State Partnership 

Program programming towards partnerships with nations in the Indo-Pacific? 

Answer. The National Guard Bureau works very closely with the Geographic Combatant Commands (GCC) including U.S. Indo-Pacific Command to prioritize programming. Because the State Partnership Program supports GCC Theater Campaign Plans, the prioritization of programming is a function of many variables to 

include availability of Guardsmen and women to participate in the event, partner 

nation availability, and—crucially—the timing of availability of funds relative to the 

NGB and the partner nation. 

Question. Which State Partnership Programs yield the best cooperation between 

National Guard units and foreign militaries? Are these high-yield partnerships primarily focused on niches the guard excels at like cybersecurity and disaster response? 

Answer. The State Partnership Program currently has 88 partnerships with 100 

countries ranging in age from 30 years old to new ones just formed this year. Most 

of our partnerships thrive and encompass whole of government and whole of society. 

Consistently, the following partnerships stand out and yield the best access, influence, and friendships. Lithuania/PA, Senegal/VT, Jordan/CO, Uzbekistan/MS, 

Kazakhstan/AZ, Brazil/NY, Malaysia/WA, Morocco/UT, Latvia/MI, Poland/IL. These 

partnerships all share the same attributes: highly-engaged state-level staffs, strong 

partner nation commitment and involvement, exceptional Combatant Command Security Cooperation staff with clear integration into their Theater Campaign Plan 

(TCP), and a strong motivation to engage with the United States in a mutual effort 

to gain increased security for our citizens. 

High-yield partnerships are not focused on any particular niche. All partnerships 

are based on the partner nation’s desires, identified capability gaps, and the priorities of the Combatant Commander. 

National Guard Pay and Benefits Reforms 

Question. Does the National Guard Bureau support states passing plans to reimburse health insurance fees for guardsmen? 

Answer. Yes, the National Guard Bureau supports any plan that improves 

Guardsmen’s ability to receive health insurance and increase access to healthcare 

when not in a duty status. Proactively managing health through regular visits provides Guardsmen and women an opportunity to stay ahead of medical issues. 

Question. Have states that previously implemented health insurance fee reimbursement seen increases to recruiting? 

Answer. To the best of our knowledge, Maryland is the only state to enact health 

insurance reimbursement into law. The Health Care for Heroes Act of 2023 was 

passed on May 12th, 2023 and will not go into effect until July 1st, 2023. We look 
318 

forward to working with the Maryland National Guard to determine if it has a positive impact on recruiting. 

Question. How will the National Guard focus future training opportunities on indemand workforce skills, like cybersecurity and medical training, to support, recruitment, retention, and work-transfer opportunities for guardsmen? 

Answer. The National Guard offers many in-demand specialty jobs that can be leveraged to pursue a civilian career, which enhances recruiting and retention within 

the National Guard. We are implementing direct commissioning and constructive 

credit to not only allow us to meet emerging mission needs, but to reward and 

incentivize the civilian skills many of our recruits have gained. 

National Guard Cyber Capabilities 

Question. How is the National Guard using its robust cyber capabilities to partner 

with state, city, and local government to help protect systems and critical infrastructure from cyber attacks? 

Answer. National Guard cyber forces routinely leverage full scale cyber training 

exercises (i.e., Cyber Shield, Cyber Yankee, etc.) along with tabletop exercises, innovative readiness training, direct engagements, and technical assistance engagements (when requested) to partner with state, city and local governments to build 

the appropriate relationships needed to help protect systems and critical infrastructure. 

As a specific example, over the last 10 months the National Guard participated 

in the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) regionally aligned Homeland 

Defense & Critical Infrastructure tabletop exercises to improve the collaboration required to protect and defend critical infrastructure. The intent is to bring together 

state and Federal partners to: gain a shared understanding of the operational environment and understand threats and vulnerabilities to critical infrastructure (including force projection platforms and transportation nodes); consider potential Defense Support to Civil Authorities (DSCA) triggering events during a homeland defense operation; and reveal resource/capability gaps as applied to defense of the 

homeland. 

Question. What cyber capabilities does the National Guard need to further invest 

in to keep pace with growing cyber threats and what support does the guard need 

to enable this skillset? 

Answer. National Guard cyber forces need to be equipped with standard cyber 

tools and training common to all Federalized mission forces to operate effectively 

within the homeland cyber domain (i.e. operational technology, incident response). 

Question. How is the National Guard designing its cyber capabilities to assist 

CISA in protecting election infrastructure from foreign attacks? 

Answer. The National Guard Bureau (NGB) works with the Army and Air Force 

to design the required force structure to meet wartime requirements and to ensure 

the National Guard is structured to perform cyber operations as required. Like 

other types of force structure within the National Guard, the wartime capabilities 

of the cyber units allow our professionals to assist CISA and the states to protect 

the election infrastructure from foreign attacks. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN

Question. General Hokanson, can you provide an update on the importance of corrosion prevention and control for National Guard assets. Specifically, on the C–130 

aircraft? 

Answer. Aircraft corrosion prevention and control, to include C–130 aircraft, is 

critical. Corrosion contributes to increased need for both field-level and depot-level 

maintenance. Every ANG Wing adheres to strict standards of corrosion prevention 

and control through a Corrosion Prevention and Control Program detailed in Air 

Force Instruction and in Technical Orders. 

Question. How many C–130 aircrafts does the National Guard currently have in 

inventory? 

Answer. The Air National Guard has 127 C–130 aircraft in inventory, 87 C–130Hs 

and 40 C–130Js. 

Question. I understand that the Air Force is undergoing an air worthiness assessment on a new blanket liner technology, the Improved Thermal Acoustic Blanket 

(ITAB), for the C–130 that has the potential to significantly reduce corrosion to the 

airframe. Could you also provide an update on what the National Guard is doing 

on this effort specifically, as well as the importance of corrosion control for the C– 

130 in general? 
319 

Answer. Corrosion control is extremely important for the C–130 aircraft. The National Guard Bureau supports any and all efforts to better control corrosion on airframes. It is our understanding that the Air Mobility Command has the lead for 

testing a variety of acoustic blankets, and we are looking forward to their test results. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. The Alaska Air National Guard’s 168th Wing at Eielson AFB is the only 

Arctic region capable air refueling unit in the United States. Due to the extreme 

environment at Eielson AFB, the addition of four KC–135 aircraft without the addition of hangar space will put DoD objectives at risk. The current fleet of nine KC– 

135 aircraft at Eielson often see mission capable (MC) rates below 60 percent during 

the coldest months. These MC rates are largely driven by extremely limited hangar 

availability and based on historical data, scheduled and fuel maintenance alone will 

utilize the two current hangars at 85%. If additional hangars are not constructed, 

an MC rate above 50% will be difficult to achieve in the winter months. (ANG OPR) 

Do you support additional hangar space at Eielson AFB to facilitate the additional 

maintenance requirements while simultaneously providing secure alert parking? 

Answer. Yes, The National Guard Bureau has assessed current and future tanker 

aircraft hangar needs at Eielson AFB, AK. Through a Business Case Analysis conducted in 2022, we have validated a requirement for an additional covered aircraft 

maintenance spot. This would provide two covered aircraft maintenance positions as 

well as a covered fuel cell maintenance position for 3 total covered aircraft spots. 

A project to construct the additional maintenance space is in early scope development. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

Question. Last year’s omnibus included $350 million to bring 12 Gray Eagles to 

the Army National Guard, and we expect to procure additional Gray Eagles for additional Army National Guard Divisions. We need to ensure that the National 

Guard has capabilities equivalent to its active duty counterparts. 

How important will this new capability be to the National Guard? 

Answer. It is always vitally important that the Army National Guard (ARNG) has 

the same force structure, training, and equipment as the Active Army to ensure 

interoperability with the Joint Force. 

Question. When do you expect the 12 Gray Eagles procured last year to be fielded 

in the National Guard? 

Answer. The ARNG expects to field Gray Eagle in the middle of calendar year 

2027. 

Question. When would you expect the Army National Guard to have personnel 

trained to operate and maintain those 12 aircraft? 

Answer. The training seat allocations for Soldiers to be trained to operate and 

maintain the 12 Gray Eagle aircraft will be available after the unit’s force structure, 

which allocates personnel authorizations and equipment fielding, is finalized. The 

Army National Guard currently expects to field the aircraft in mid-2027, and begin 

training in 2026 or early 2027. 

Question. In the fiscal year 2022 defense appropriations bill, $15.5 million was included for the Dickinson Readiness Center. This project was fully authorized and 

appropriated for, but due to inflation and the rising costs of construction and materials, the project now carries a cost-to-complete of over $5 million. This problem isn’t 

specific to North Dakota, but is affecting National Guard projects all over the country. 

How important of a role do readiness centers play in helping the National Guard 

carry out its missions and objectives? 

Answer. Readiness Centers are vitally important to the National Guard because 

they serve as the ‘‘Home Base’’ for all National Guard Soldiers. The Readiness Centers serves as the primary Command Center for Mobilization, Disaster/Emergency 

and Contingencies, and support the unit home station. Readiness Centers are crucial to training and readiness preparation, supporting Individual and Collective 

Training, Supply distribution, Family Support, Community support, Recruiting and 

Retention. 

Question. The 817th Engineer Company is operating and training out of a substandard facility in Jamestown, North Dakota. The North Dakota Army National 

Guard has prioritized and has expected the Jamestown Readiness Center to be listed on the future years defense program (FYDP) since 2021. The unit is currently 
320 

preparing to deploy to the U.S. southern border and my concern is that without a 

new readiness center, the unit’s ability to meet readiness, recruiting and retention, 

and training objectives will be adversely affected. 

Can you take a close look at the need for the Jamestown Readiness Center and 

work to have it listed on next year’s FYDP? 

Answer. The Army National Guard uses a transparent scoring process called the 

Installations Requirement Plan to score all 54 States’ and Territories’ priorities in 

order to maximize total ARNG readiness. The North Dakota Army National Guard 

(NDARNG) has submitted the Jamestown Readiness Center project for consideration to be included in the FY30 program year. The National Guard Bureau will 

continue to work with the NDARNG to ensure their requirements are being fairly 

considered. 

Question. We need to do more to ensure Guardsmen and their families have timely access to mental healthcare services. Due to accreditation and licensing obstacles, 

only a limited number of civilian mental healthcare providers are eligible to participate in the TRICARE network. As a result, many of these providers do not have 

availability due to high workloads, leaving Guardsmen and their families waiting 

weeks, if not months, to access the mental healthcare they need and have earned. 

How are you working to address this problem? 

Answer. The National Guard has hired Psychological Health Specialists in every 

State and Wing to provide Soldiers and Airmen access to mental health assessments, psychological education, solution-focused mental health interventions, and 

referrals to community-based resources. Additionally, the National Guard Bureau 

(NGB) has developed partnerships with several national organizations focused on 

improving access to mental healthcare allowing members to access additional treatment options within their local communities (e.g., psychological evaluations, evidenced based therapy, crisis counseling, etc.). We have established and implemented 

a program to provide community-level civilian providers with no-cost training on 

military culture, treatment protocols, and other relevant topics to enhance care and 

incentivize providers to join the TRICARE network. NGB continually evaluates the 

effectiveness and feasibility of expanding best practices of State initiatives nationally. 

Question. Have you identified any solutions to increase the number of mental 

health providers participating in the TRICARE network to increase timely access 

to these important services? 

Answer. The TRICARE benefit is managed by the Defense Health Agency (DHA). 

The National Guard Bureau (NGB) is working closely with DHA leadership to address access issues for Guardsmen and women with TRICARE. More than 237,000 

National Guard members currently live outside of TRICARE Prime service areas, 

where there are little to no contract incentives to maintain robust provider networks. Future TRICARE contract modifications could address reimbursement rates 

and provide incentives to expand service, especially in more rural areas. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL JODY J. DANIELS

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. The National Guard and Reserve is a part-time force, but also relies 

heavily on Active Guard and Reserve. 

We understand that when Guard and Reserve personnel learn that a continuing 

resolution is on its way—especially longer-term, they stick with their civilian jobs. 

What impact does a continuing resolution have on your overall force? 

Answer. Budgeted annual increases for Military and Civilian personnel costs remain unfunded throughout a continuing resolution. The U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) 

will curtail the accession of Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) Soldiers and the hiring 

of Military Technicians (MILTECH) and Department of the Army Civilians (DAC) 

to restrict budget execution within prior-year, short-term funding allocations. The 

USAR’s full-time support, consisting of AGRs/MILTECHs/DACs, comprises only 14% 

of the overall force, but is responsible for providing direct support to prepare USAR 

units for their wartime mission by conducting maintenance and other operational 

support, including organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, and training 

Army Reserve Soldiers and units. Reduced full-time support will impact the planning, execution, and effectiveness of training for Troop Program Unit (TPU) Soldiers 

(part-time), resulting in lower levels of individual and unit readiness. The cumulative effect of the uncertainty and lost purchasing power associated with multiple, 

short-term continuing resolutions, results in inefficient spending, lost training opportunities, sub-optimal decisionmaking, and the decreased likelihood that the 
321 

USAR will be able to sustain the recruiting and retention momentum, having begun 

in Fiscal Year 2023, necessary to achieve our authorized end strength objective. 

Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills, 

training, and schools? 

Answer. Commanders continue to execute monthly statutory drills/training periods for Soldiers during a continuing resolution, in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 

§ 10147, but units will delay the planning/scheduling of exercises, larger training 

events, and schools necessary for professional development, functional training, and 

MOS-qualification. The Army Reserve schedules most of its large-scale exercises and 

collective training in the 3rd and 4th quarters of the fiscal year. Continuing resolutions that extend past the 1st quarter may result in the postponement, cancelation, 

or scaling back of training events and schools which leads to a decrease in individual and unit readiness. Multiple, short-term continuing resolutions that last well 

into the fiscal year preclude commanders from conducting long-range planning. 

Delays in planning/executing exercises, collective training events, and schools results in late notification to Soldiers/Families/employers as well as ineffective budget 

execution and contracting actions, which leads to decreased Soldier availability/participation and increased costs. 

The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 includes requested increases of 

∂$418 million for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR) and ∂$155 

million for Reserve Personnel, Army (RPA). The USAR would limit expenditures to 

the FY 2023 funding levels under an extended continuing resolution, which, when 

combined with continued inflationary cost increases, significantly decreases purchasing power. The USAR would be unable to fund planned Military and Civilian 

pay increases or fully execute all equipment maintenance, statutory drills/training 

periods, exercises, collective training, and schools if funded at FY 2023 levels. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO VICE ADMIRAL JOHN B. MUSTIN

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. The National Guard and Reserve is a part-time force, but also relies 

heavily on Active Guard and Reserve. 

We understand that when Guard and Reserve personnel learn that a continuing 

resolution is on its way—especially longer-term, they stick with their civilian jobs. 

What impact does a continuing resolution have on your overall force? 

Answer. A full-year continuing resolution (CR) would be a fiscally unsound way 

of funding the Department, the Navy, the Navy Reserve and government as a 

whole. It would misalign billions of dollars in resources in a manner inconsistent 

with evolving threats and the national security landscape, which would erode the 

U.S. military advantage relative to China, impede our ability to innovate and modernize, degrade readiness, and hurt our people and their families. And it would offer 

comfort to our enemies, disquiet to our allies, and unnecessary stress to our workforce. A full-year CR cedes ground we cannot afford to yield. Put simply, it puts our 

national security at risk. 

Specifically, a full-year continuing resolution will impact our ability to pay and 

grow the force. The Fiscal Year 2023 enacted amount is over $100 million less than 

the Fiscal Year 2024 Presidents Budget request for Navy Reserve MILPERS (RPN). 

An obligation authority equal to the FY 2023 level in FY 2024 is not sufficient to 

grow the force we need and conduct the necessary readiness training. This is especially challenging given the record low unemployment and recruiting challenges we 

all face. An overall shortfall in MILPERS will require a reduction in end strength, 

curtailment of PCS moves, reduction in training and elimination of most new bonus 

awards. Navy Reserve will end the year significantly below authorized end strength. 

The Navy Reserve Operation and Maintenance (OMNR) appropriation would also 

have a reduction of over $100 million to the FY2024 Presidents Budget request in 

a full-year continuing resolution. This overall shortfall in OMNR accounts will delay 

maintenance on facilities, equipment, and aircraft, and likely reduce flying hours, 

impeding our ability to maintain the required readiness in support of the National 

Defense Strategy. 

Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills, 

training and schools? 

Answer. The Navy Reserve does not anticipate negative impacts due to a full-year 

continuing resolution on drill participation and annual training. However, a fullyear continuing resolution will force a reduction of funding for schools and additional training in order to fund the basic entitlements for drills and annual training. 
322 

The lost opportunity to attend schools and conduct additional training will degrade 

readiness in the long term. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL DAVID G. BELLON

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. The National Guard and Reserve is a part-time force, but also relies 

heavily on Active Guard and Reserve. We understand that when Guard and Reserve 

personnel learn that a continuing resolution is on its way—especially longer-term, 

they stick with their civilian jobs. 

What impact does a continuing resolution have on your overall force? 

Answer. Continued budget uncertainty negatively impacts the Marine Corp’s ability to modernize and build a force that is manned, trained and equipped for the future operating environment. 

The inability to reprogram funds under CRs drastically reduces the ability of the 

Marine Corps to respond to unplanned urgent requirements or to address funding 

gaps that potentially impact our forces in high threat areas. 

There is a direct relationship between readiness and modernization. We seek to 

modernize platforms, systems and training rather than continuing to expend resources to maintain aging, less lethal systems not suited for the future operating 

environment. Although DoD has never been forced to operate under a full-year CR, 

continued budget uncertainty delays modernization efforts, resulting in reduced 

readiness and exposing our forces to greater risks on future battlefields. 

CRs drive cost increases that result in a reduction of purchasing power. Available 

funding in each incremental CR period drives the requirement to break contract actions into multiple transactions that would otherwise be done once. This incremental approach results in the Marine Corps not getting the best contract price, 

paying multiple times for contract fees, and losing time and skilled labor in redundant tasks. 

Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills, 

training and schools? 

Answer. CRs have not proven to impact participation rates in drills, training and 

schools for the Marine Corps Reserve. Participation rates have remained consistent 

and steady over the past several years with the only downturn attributed to COVID, 

however current rates have returned to pre-COVID levels. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN P. HEALY

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JON TESTER

Question. The National Guard and Reserve is a part-time force, but also relies 

heavily on Active Guard and Reserve. 

We understand that when Guard and Reserve personnel learn that a continuing 

resolution is on its way—especially longer-term, they stick with their civilian jobs. 

What impact does a continuing resolution have on your overall force? 

Answer. The operational effectiveness of the Air Force Reserve (AFR) is heavily 

reliant on a stable and predictable budget, necessary for maintaining readiness, 

driving modernization, and ensuring consistent and effective training. Continuing 

Resolutions (CRs) introduce significant instability, curtailing improvements in Total 

Force readiness and hinder our ability to make sustainable progress. 

As a predominately part-time force, our Reserve Citizen Airmen rely on predictability to help balance military commitments with their civilian careers. CRs introduce a level of unpredictability that strains this delicate balance, and when CRs extend over a long term, this unpredictability intensifies, potentially damaging the 

trust and morale our members. This can lead to considerable difficulties in recruiting and retaining personnel, thereby affecting the strength and functionality of the 

force. 

Question. How does a continuing resolution impact participation rates in drills, 

training and schools? 

Answer. Continuing resolutions (CRs) have a direct negative impact on participation rates in drills, training, and schools within the Air Force Reserve (AFR). The 

uncertainty and funding disruptions created by CRs can lead to cancellations of formal school programs, causing a ripple effect of rescheduling into limited class schedules. As a CR extends into the fiscal year, rescheduling becomes increasingly complex, resulting in lost seats and reduced future training capacity. 
323 

Furthermore, the funding delays caused by CRs significantly disrupt the careers 

of personnel on long-term formal school orders, who are only funded until the end 

of the current CR period. This causes discontinuities in pay and benefits, which can 

deter Reserve Citizen Airmen from fully committing to these educational opportunities. 

Additionally, the delays introduced by CRs negatively impact recruitment efforts, 

notably postponing Basic Military Training (BMT) attendance. This leads to lost potential recruits and delays in mission posturing, further reducing participation 

rates. 

Continuing resolutions (CRs) also lead to a notable delay in the attendance to initial skills schools and advanced courses for new recruits, a consequence that can significantly impede the readiness of the AFR. These training courses are critical to 

developing the necessary skills, qualifications, and expertise among our new accessions, equipping them to become fully integrated, capable, and deployable assets. 

Any delay in this process hampers the immediate effectiveness of these individuals 

and slows down the overall readiness rate of our force. Over time, this can create 

a backlog of untrained personnel, leading to a continuous cycle of deferred readiness, potentially compromising the AFR’s operational capacity. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LISA MURKOWSKI

Question. My understating is that the Air Force is not planning on standing up 

a reserve NGAD squadron, like they did with F–22s at the 477th Fighter Group. 

Do you have specific concerns regarding future basing and structure decisions as 

these new platforms get fielded? 

Answer. The Air Force Reserve (AFR) stands ready to defend our Nation while 

concurrently adapting for the future. We are committed to investing in a comprehensive range of systems that enable our Air Force to maintain effective deterrence and command of the skies. 

In transitioning from the F–22, we will fully support the Air Combat Command, 

capitalizing on our rich experience to integrate manned next-generation air dominance (NGAD) platforms with collaborative combat aircraft (CCA). Coupled with 

command and control, sensors, and weaponry, this approach will enhance our force’s 

lethality and performance in highly contested environments. 

Our strategy hinges on concurrent and proportional fielding and progression to 

the NGAD family of systems, and as of now, we are not aware of any approved decisions that deviate from this plan. 

As these new platforms are fielded, it will provide a tremendous opportunity to 

harness the continuity, expertise and cost-effectiveness of the AFR. By leveraging 

our strengths and actively integrating the AFR into these systems through a strategy of concurrent and proportional fielding, we will position ourselves to significantly bolster our operational efficiency, readiness and ability to defend our Nation. 

Question. The Alaska Air National Guard’s 168th Wing at Eielson AFB is the only 

Arctic region capable air refueling unit in the United States. Due to the extreme 

environment at Eielson AFB, the addition of four KC–135 aircraft without the addition of hangar space will put DoD objectives at risk. The current fleet of nine KC– 

135 aircraft at Eielson often see mission capable (MC) rates below 60 percent during 

the coldest months. These MC rates are largely driven by extremely limited hangar 

availability and based on historical data, scheduled and fuel maintenance alone will 

utilize the two current hangars at 85%. If additional hangars are not constructed, 

an MC rate above 50% will be difficult to achieve in the winter months. (ANG OPR) 

Do you support additional hangar space at Eielson AFB to facilitate the additional 

maintenance requirements while simultaneously providing secure alert parking? 

Answer. Yes, The National Guard Bureau has assessed current and future tanker 

aircraft hangar needs at Eielson AFB, AK. Through a Business Case Analysis conducted in 2022, we have validated a requirement for an additional covered aircraft 

maintenance spot. This would provide two covered aircraft maintenance positions as 

well as a covered fuel cell maintenance position for 3 total covered aircraft spots. 

A project to construct the additional maintenance space is in early scope development. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN HOEVEN

Question. We need to do more to ensure Guardsmen, Reservists, and their families 

have timely access to mental healthcare services. Due to accreditation and licensing 

obstacles, only a limited number of civilian mental healthcare providers are eligible 

to participate in the TRICARE network. As a result, many of these providers do not 
324 

have availability due to high workloads, leaving servicemembers and their families 

waiting weeks, if not months, to access the mental healthcare they need and have 

earned. 

How are you working to address this problem? 

Answer. While the Air Force Reserve (AFR) does not directly control the 

TRICARE program, we recognize the need for improved access to mental healthcare 

services for our Reserve Citizen Airmen and their families. 

We have implemented the Director of Psychological Health Program (DPH) that 

places Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSWs) within our units. We currently 

have 37 LCSWs who provide supportive services, to include, but not limited to needs 

assessment, psycho-educational skills, goal/value clarification, short term problem 

solving, enhanced mental health referral coordination, advocacy, and appropriate 

training to members of the AFR population. They provide short term supportive 

counseling (approximately 3–6 visits) and refer Reserve Airmen for appropriate complex or high-interest related treatment to military or community-based providers. 

The AFR DPH program is currently under review as we work to assess expanding 

coverage across all Reserve wings, in addition to redesigning the clinical support, 

guidance, privileging, and data/trend tracking initiatives within the program. 

Question. Have you identified any solutions to increase the number of mental 

health providers participating in the TRICARE network to increase timely access 

to these important services? 

Answer. The Air Force Reserve does not oversee the TRICARE network, which is 

managed by the Defense Health Agency (DHA). However, we are dedicated to ensuring that our members have access to necessary mental health services. To this end, 

we’ve implemented the Director of Psychological Health Program, which positions 

Licensed Clinical Social Workers directly within our units (as mentioned in the response to Question 1a above). 

Additionally, our Airmen have access to the Military Family Life Consultants, 

who provide free, short-term support to service members, their families, and survivors utilizing confidential non-medical counseling on installations worldwide. 

While we cannot directly increase the number of providers within the TRICARE network, these initiatives significantly bolster the mental health support accessible to 

our members and their families. 

DHA has reported that they continue to accept applications from eligible mental 

health providers. This policy indicates an active and sustained effort by DHA to expand the provider network. Despite the global shortage of mental health providers, 

we remain committed to improving mental health support within our capabilities for 

all Reserve Citizen Airmen. 

CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS

Senator TESTER. This committee stands in recess. 

[Whereupon, at 10:51 a.m., Thursday, June 1, the hearings were 

concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.] 
(325) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, DC. 

NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES 

[CLERK’S NOTE.—The subcommittee was unable to hold hearings 

on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and letters of those 

submitting written testimony are as follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

The American Urological Association, the premier organization for urologists 

worldwide with over 15,000 urologists across the United States, thanks Chairman 

Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and fellow members of the committee for the opportunity to provide written testimony on the health needs of our military and veterans, including bladder cancer. Our testimony will outline the importance of combatting bladder cancer to our Nation’s military and veteran population. Specifically, 

we respectfully request an $8 million line item within the Fiscal Year 2024 Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP) for bladder cancer to stabilize the field and fund groundbreaking science that can finally bend the survival 

rate of bladder cancer in the right direction. 

Bladder cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer in U.S. military 

and veteran populations, and the sixth most commonly diagnosed cancer in Americans. Additionally, it is estimated that approximately 82,290 Americans will be diagnosed with bladder cancer in 2023. While survival rates for many other cancers 

have increased, the 5-year survival rate for bladder cancer has not improved in 

more than 30 years. Congress has previously provided funding for bladder cancer 

research through the DoD’s Peer Reviewed Cancer Research Program (PRCRP). Despite the support to date for innovative and competitive bladder cancer research, 

there remains an urgent need to provide predictable investment that will improve 

the outcomes for this deadly cancer. A dedicated funding line will help attract researchers to this field by demonstrating a sustained commitment to this work. 

The American Urological Association represents the interests of urologists across 

the United States. We understand that new tools, treatments, and techniques are 

necessary to ensure that a bladder cancer diagnosis has good long-term outcomes. 

Yet time and again, research dollars go to other, higher profile cancers. Highlighting 

bladder cancer’s importance to our military community by including a line item will 

ensure that the research field can grow and that more research applications are 

funded moving forward, particularly for younger investigators who may be interested in pursuing bladder cancer research but are unsure of the field’s financial stability and the feasibility of their grant applications given extremely limited resources. The relevance to U.S. veterans is clear: many veterans were exposed to high levels 

of ‘‘rainbow herbicides,’’ including Agent Blue and Agent Orange which are both recognized as highly toxic. In the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2021, 

Congress directed the addition of bladder cancer to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs list of presumptive diseases linked to Agent Orange exposure. This addition 

came after the National Academy of Medicine included bladder cancer on its list of 

‘‘suggestive evidence of association’’ with Agent Orange exposure. Additionally, researchers are just learning that there may be a significant link between exposure 

to burn puts and bladder cancer, which must be further explored. Unfortunately, 

bladder cancer is a lagging indicator for carcinogens given it tends to impact older 
326 

1See 31 U.S.C. § § 712, 717, 3523(a) (GAO has authority to investigate each ‘‘department, 

agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government.’’). 2 Budget and Accounting Act, Pub. L. 67–13, 42 Stat. 26, June 10, 1921 (‘‘All departments and 

establishments shall furnish to the Comptroller General such information regarding the powers, 

duties, activities, organization, financial transactions, and methods of business of their respective offices as he may from time to time require of them.’’). 3 H.R. 3603, available at https://fas.org/irp/eprint/panetta-1987.pdf. 

individuals. However, we can be sure that there is likely a connection to burn pits 

based on other inhaled carcinogens being known risk factors. 

Our membership has seen first-hand what bladder cancer can do to a patient. For 

example, one bladder cancer patient is a 71-year-old veteran of the Vietnam war living in Maryland with high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Like many patients, he was unfamiliar with bladder cancer when he began to have blood in his 

urine several years ago. When told that bladder cancer was the fourth most common 

cancer among men in the United States, he and his wife were shocked. He was 

treated with intravesical BCG, the standard treatment for this type of bladder cancer. BCG is also a relatively ineffective vaccine for tuberculosis and is more than 

one hundred years old. Unfortunately, soon after treatment his cancer recurred. At 

that point, his options were either a radical cystectomy, surgery to remove his bladder necessitating urinary tract reconstruction, or a second-line therapy. With few 

FDA approved therapies available, the patient chose an experimental clinical trial 

involving intravesical gemcitabine and docetaxel therapies. He has responded well 

thus far on this second line therapy. 

The fact that the general standard of care for bladder cancer is a very old, ineffective TB vaccine should both shock and also reinforce the necessity of more research 

funding for this disease. This case highlights the critical need for more funding to 

further research and scientific understanding of bladder cancer, a disease which is 

particularly prevalent among veterans. From this one example, it is clear that there 

is a gap in patient awareness about bladder cancer and a lack of treatments available for patients who recur after BCG. We know that second-line therapies are lacking and identifying novel therapies that avoid major surgery is a prominent focus 

of research efforts. It is clear more must be done, and that our men and women in 

the armed forces will directly benefit from advancements against bladder cancer 

given its higher incidence rate among veterans than the general public. By establishing an $8 million Bladder Cancer Research Program in FY 2024, we can ensure 

that bladder cancer research and the well-being of bladder cancer patients, particularly service members and veterans, is a national priority. 

We thank you for your time and attention to this urgent health priority for our 

military and veteran population. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

Chairman Tester, Ranking Member Collins, and members of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony. 

The Government Accountability Office plays a critical role in Congressional oversight of the Executive Branch. Unfortunately, that role may be stymied when it 

comes to the Intelligence Community (‘‘IC’’). Despite the fact that, by statute, GAO 

already has the purview to conduct oversight of all Federal agencies 1 and has since 

its creation in 1921,2 the IC has, with a few exceptions, insisted that it is not subject to such audits since its inception. This effectively deprives Congress of one of 

the most effective tools in its arsenal, especially at a time when the activities of the 

IC present some of the most pressing needs for robust oversight in the Executive 

Branch. I respectfully recommend that Congress take steps to conclusively validate 

GAO’s jurisdiction in such matters. 

In response to the IC’s recalcitrance, some Members of Congress have periodically 

attempted to resolve the matter over the past few decades. For instance, then-Congressman Leon Panetta introduced a bill in 1987 called the CIA Accountability Act 

to officially clarify GAO’s authority vis-a`-vis the Central Intelligence Agency (‘‘CIA’’) 

and the IC as a whole.3 Unfortunately, it was not enacted. In 1988, GAO attempted 

to conduct an investigation ‘‘[i]n order to evaluate whether ’information about illegal 

activities by high level officials of other nations may not be adequately considered 

in U.S. foreign policy decisions,’’’ leading the National Security Council to request 

an opinion from the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel which has been 

cited ever since: 

We therefore conclude based on the nature of the GAO request that the subject of the GAO investigation is the Executive’s discharge of its constitutional 
327 

4 Investigative Authority of the General Accounting Office, 12 Op. Off. Legal Counsel 171 

(1988). 5Letter from Orszag to Feinstein of 3/15/10, available at https://fas.org/irp/news/2010/03/ 

omb031610.pdf. 6Letter from Dodaro to Feinstein of 3/18/10, available at http://www.pogoarchives.org/m/co/ 

dodaro-letter-to-intel-committees-20100318.pdf. Mr. Dodaro concluded that reaffirming GAO’s 

authority in this area ‘‘would prove beneficial both to the conduct of oversight by the intelligence 

committees and to the efficiency and effectiveness of IC operations.’’ 7 50 U.S.C. § 3308. 

8 ICD 114(D)(4)(b), available at https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICDl114.pdf. 9Legislative Branch Appropriations for 2019: Part 2, Fiscal Year 2019 Legislative Branch Appropriations Requests, Hearings before the Subcomm. on the Legislative Branch of the House 

Comm. on Appropriations, 115th Cong., 2d Sess. 310 (Apr. 25, 2018) (testimony of Comp. Gen. 

Gene Dodaro) (testifying that GAO has been able to investigate peripheral matters in the IC 

such as ‘‘a facilities area’’ and contract management in the last few years). 

foreign policy responsibilities, not its statutory responsibilities. The subject is 

thus not ‘‘a program or activity the Government carries out under existing law,’’ 

and it is beyond GAO’s authority under 31 U.S.C. § 717(b). . . . 

In addition to the infirmity in GAO’s statutory authority to pursue this investigation, we believe that GAO is specifically precluded by statute from access 

to intelligence information. In establishing by law the oversight relationship between the intelligence committees and the executive branch, Congress indicated 

that such oversight would be the exclusive means for Congress to gain access 

to confidential intelligence information in the possession of the executive 

branch. 

This intelligence oversight system has been codified at 50 U.S.C. § 413. That 

section sets forth requirements for the Director of Central Intelligence, the 

heads of all other Federal agencies involved in intelligence activities, and the 

President to inform the Congress through the intelligence committees (and in 

some circumstances the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Representatives and the majority and minority leaders of the Senate) of intelligence activities.4

Over two decades later, this fight was still underway. When an amendment to the 

FY2010 Intelligence Authorization Act (‘‘IAA’’) sought to reaffirm GAO authority, it 

prompted a veto threat in the form of a letter from Director of the Office of Management and Budget Peter Orszag,5 which Acting Comptroller General Gene Dodaro 

thoroughly refuted, demonstrating that ‘‘[n]either the language of section 413 nor 

its legislative history provides support for this position’’ and that the IC’s resistance 

‘‘has greatly impeded GAO’s work for the intelligence committees and also jeopardizes some of GAO’s work for other committees of jurisdiction, including Armed Services, Appropriations, Judiciary, and Foreign Relations, among others.’’ 6

Despite Mr. Dodaro’s testimony, the enacted law took a middle-of-the-road approach, stating that clarification was necessary but deferring to the Executive for 

that clarification, instructing the Director of National Intelligence (‘‘DNI’’) to ‘‘issue 

a written directive governing the access of the Comptroller General to information 

in the possession of an element of the intelligence community.’’ 7 The DNI, for his 

part, issued Intelligence Community Directive 114 the following year, which reluctantly admitted that GAO had some authority to investigate the IC, but adopted a 

severely restrictive interpretation of the scope of that authority: 

Information that falls within the purview of the congressional intelligence 

oversight committees generally shall not be made available to GAO to support 

a GAO audit or review of core national intelligence capabilities and activities, 

which include intelligence collection operations, intelligence analyses and analytical techniques, counterintelligence operations, and intelligence funding. IC 

elements may on a case-by-case basis provide information in response to any 

GAO requests not related to GAO audits or reviews of core national intelligence 

capabilities and activities.8

In other words, GAO can investigate anything involving the IC that the Intelligence Committees cannot, which amounts to basically nothing. Moreover, this is 

not an academic dispute: in response to a question about this matter from Congressman Yoder in 2018, Mr. Dodaro explained that this remained an ongoing controversy, although the situation is minimally better than it was before 2010: 

Mr. YODER. Do you need additional support from Congress— 

Mr. DODARO. Yes. 

Mr. YODER [continuing]. Or direction to the intel agencies to make sure they 

are aware that this is an authority you have? 

Mr. DODARO. Yes, that would be helpful.9
328 

10 Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3WU2uZMlyk. 11 Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaRnD62qun4. Mr. Dodaro’s testimony last 

year reiterated the same point, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PQWaMSJG7Y. 12That paragraph reads: 

Information that falls within the purview of the congressional intelligence oversight committees generally shall not be made available to GAO to support an audit or review of intelligence 

collection operations; covert action; intelligence capabilities related to national intelligence activities; counterintelligence operations; intelligence analysis and analytical techniques; intelligence sources and methods; or intelligence budgets or funding; (including records or expenditures made under the authority of 22 U.S.C. 2396(a)(8) or 10 U.S.C. 127, 7231 and 50 U.S.C. 

403j(b)). 13 Available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/demandprogress/documents/2023-03-17-—ARl13- 

5.pdf. 14 Available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr2701eh/pdf/BILLS-111hr2701eh.pdf. 

When Mr. Dodaro testified before the House Legislative Branch Appropriations 

subcommittee in 2019 regarding GAO’s FY2020 budget, Chairman Ryan again 

asked him about this matter, and Mr. Dodaro again remarked that GAO needs ‘‘the 

cooperation of the Intelligence Community’’ because GAO ‘‘ha[s] more difficulties 

when the request comes from non-intelligence committees,’’ concluding, ‘‘I think we 

could do more, particularly in the management area, and in the investments that 

are made, in that area, whether there’s good return on the investments in all 

cases.’’ 10 And in his testimony before that subcommittee in 2020, Mr. Dodaro testified, ‘‘It’s the same status as it was last year. Congress could work with the Intelligence Committees to provide better direction to the intelligence agencies to cooperate with us.’’ 11

In fact, however, even the involvement of the Intelligence Committees is not sufficient to overcome the IC’s reliance on ICD 114 to obstruct meaningful GAO access. 

In a meeting in 2019 with staffers from the House Legislative Branch and Defense 

Appropriations subcommittees, a member of the latter subcommittee’s staff dismissed the need for reform, arguing that IC components do not refuse GAO requests 

for information if GAO was acting pursuant to an Intelligence Committee request. 

That presumption is unfortunately false. One need only consider the example of AR 

13–5, the internal CIA regulation which implements ICD 114. This regulation directly addresses the question of how the Agency should respond to a GAO request 

for information when GAO is acting under the direction of an Intelligence Committee: 

As a general rule, if GAO makes a request on behalf of or to obtain information responsive to a tasking by an intelligence oversight committee, the [Point 

of Contact (‘‘POC’’)] will ensure that the CIA response to GAO does not contain 

information prohibited in paragraph b.(2)(c)(3) above.12 The response to GAO 

shall indicate that information responsive to the tasking, but not authorized for 

release to GAO under the provisions of ICD 114, shall be made directly available to the requesting intelligence oversight committee. The POC shall prepare 

an additional response for the intelligence oversight committee that contains information responsive to the committee request, but not authorized for GAO access.13

In other words, if GAO asks CIA for any information which would fall under the 

jurisdiction of an Intelligence Committee, CIA will simply refuse to cooperate, but 

if an Intelligence Committee tasks GAO to make the request, CIA will still refuse 

to provide the information to GAO, but instead will send the information directly 

to the relevant Intelligence Committee. In neither situation does GAO receive the 

requested information. 

GAO possesses significantly more resources and institutional expertise in certain 

kinds of Executive Branch investigations than even the most robust committee staff, 

and there is frankly no reason for this arbitrary restriction on its authority. Congress gave the Executive Branch a chance to establish reasonable limitations which 

balanced the Executive’s legitimate interests with one of the most important functions of Congress-effective oversight. Instead of crafting a reasonable policy, the DNI 

memorialized the IC’s original hardline position. 

I recommend this subcommittee include language to remove any doubt concerning 

GAO’s audit power over the IC by advancing a measure that reStates Section 335 

of the FY2010 IAA, as engrossed by the House of Representatives in February 

2010.14

Not only would taking such a measure resolve a longstanding problem, but it 

would be revenue neutral, since it would not require GAO to take on any more responsibilities than it already has; it would only open the universe of matters it may 

investigate. When one considers the fact that the number of GAO employees with 

Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (‘‘TS/SCI’’) clearances is higher 
329 

than the combined number of staffers employed by both Intelligence Committees, it 

is clear that these artificial restrictions on GAO’s authority are causing Congress 

to expend more financial and manpower resources to accomplish less oversight over 

a significant portion of the Executive Branch. In a time of crisis, when agencies 

across the Government are spending vast amounts of time, money, and resources 

to combat a once-in-a-century threat, it is more important that ever that GAO be 

able to investigate allegations of governmental waste, fraud, abuse, and violations 

of law wherever they may be found. It is time for Congress to assert its prerogatives 

to protect its oversight capabilities over all agencies. 

[This statement was submitted by Kel McClanahan, Executive Director, National 

Security Counselors.] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HALO TRUST AND MINES ADVISORY GROUP AMERICA

As the world’s largest humanitarian demining organizations, The HALO Trust 

and Mines Advisory Group (MAG) America protect lives and restore livelihoods for 

those threatened by explosive hazards. We remove and destroy landmines, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and other explosive remnants of war and help secure 

weapons that could fall into the hands of terrorist groups. For 20 years, HALO and 

MAG have partnered with the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DOD) Humanitarian 

Demining Research and Development (HD R&D) Program in more than 10 countries 

and territories. This program, implemented by the U.S. Army, specializes in developing and testing innovative technologies to detect and clear landmines, unexploded 

ordnance (UXO), and IEDs. These technologies increase the effectiveness, efficiency, 

and safety of demining operations for military and humanitarian use—saving lives 

and taxpayer money. 

The HD R&D team designs technologies to respond to technical challenges in the 

field, drawing from new commercial technology, equipment currently in use by the 

DOD, and advanced sensor technology available only through other DOD R&D programs. They then trial prototypes in real field conditions through partnerships with 

the Department of State’s (DOS) humanitarian demining programs. During field 

evaluations, operators provide feedback on the functionality and effectiveness of the 

equipment. This allows HD R&D to modify and improve the equipment and increase 

the U.S. technical capacity to respond to explosive threats. 

HD R&D produces four specific outcomes. First, the field evaluation process collects data that helps to improve demining technologies used by the U.S. Armed 

Forces and to support geographic combatant commands in achieving humanitarian 

mine action objectives. Second, successfully trialed equipment is used to train and 

equip explosive disposal units of the U.S. military as well as allied militaries. By 

equipping partner militaries to address their own explosive threats, U.S. soldiers 

are more likely to remain out of harm’s way. Third, HD R&D equipment saves civilian lives from landmines, most frequently children, and amplifies the impact of 

American assistance by increasing the amount of clearance performed on DOS 

projects without increasing costs. Fourth, the HD R&D program supports American 

jobs by utilizing American manufactured machines and products when possible in 

their equipment development process. 

The HD R&D Program has a track record of success, having performed nearly 250 

operational field evaluations in 43 countries since 1995. The program is responsible 

for developing advanced technology for the Handheld Standoff Mine Detection System (HSTAMIDS), which combines metal detection with ground penetrating radar, 

the rotary mine comb, designed to efficiently excavate low metal content anti-vehicle 

mines, and TRAXX, built to cut through hard-to-see tripwires and lift mines from 

soil. Overall, HD R&D equipment has been used to clear more than 25,300 acres 

of land, and to destroy more than 400,000 mines and UXO. 

As you know, HD R&D now receives funding from the following account: Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Army/Advanced Component Development 

& Prototypes/PE: 0603920A/Program Title: Humanitarian Demining. Due to strong 

bipartisan support, the program received $21 million in Fiscal Year 2023. However, 

the FY24 President’s Budget proposes only $9.068 million for HD R&D, which would 

represent a 57% decrease from the previous year’s appropriation. This proposed 

funding reduction would substantially curtail the ability of the HD R&D program 

to develop necessary demining equipment that would otherwise protect members of 

the Armed Forces. 

HD R&D equipment has created huge cost savings for humanitarian demining 

programs managed by the State Department through increased efficiencies. Through 

the deployment of HD R&D-developed HSTAMIDS detectors, HALO’s program in 

Zimbabwe estimates a cost savings of approximately $16 million over the last 6 
330 

years and the program was able to clear in 5 years what would have otherwise 

taken eight. The Rebel Crusher, a mobile soil sifter and rock crusher used by MAG 

in Lebanon and Iraq has allowed for mine clearance at a rate five times faster than 

with a traditional demining team. Remote-controlled Robocut machines, used to cut 

through tripwires in Ukraine, has accelerated clearance rates by an estimated 

400%. The Wirehound in Afghanistan, used to identify hard-to-detect IED components, has increased clearance by over 200% compared to traditional methods. The 

FAE Mulcher, a vegetation clearing tool being used by MAG in Cambodia, can clear 

200% more area than a single deminer using a handheld strimmer. Investing in resources for HD R&D will allow humanitarian and military deminers to eliminate 

threats far more quickly. 

Innovative technology developed by HD R&D also protects deminers. Advanced 

machines including the Mini MineWolf and the Medium MineWolf, can operate remotely to physically destroy anti-personnel (AP) and anti-tank (AT) landmines with 

no threat to demining personnel. 

This program has a long list of unfunded projects it is waiting to trial, including 

magnetic technology in Iraq. HD R&D equipment will also be essential to demining 

efforts in Ukraine, where technological advancements are already beginning to support the removal of mines and various items of unexploded ordnance in urban areas 

from the current conflict. 

We appreciate the support this subcommittee has provided for this valuable program, and urge the subcommittee to raise funding to a level of $23 million in FY24 

for HD R&D. This additional funding will improve the ability of U.S. soldiers and 

our allies’ ability to safely detect and clear landmines, UXO, and IEDs. This funding 

is especially important as new conflicts uncover new challenges in Ukraine and the 

Middle East. 

Thank you for your consideration of this request. 

[This statement was submitted by Chris Whatley, Executive Director, The HALO 

Trust and Jamie Franklin, Executive Director, Mines Advisory Group America.] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SOCIETY

On behalf of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES), we are pleased 

to provide this written testimony to the Senate subcommittee on Defense and Related Agencies for the official record. HFES urges the subcommittee to provide robust funding levels for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) at 

the Department of Defense (DOD) in the fiscal year (FY) 2024 appropriations process. Specifically, we urge the subcommittee to direct DOD to identify opportunities 

across the services to transition human performance research to defense RDT&E activities and acquisition programs to reduce cost, strengthen force protection, reduce 

the potential for re-engineering, and enhance training. 

HFES and its members believe strongly that investment in scientific research 

serves as an important driver for innovation and the economy, and for maintaining 

American global competitiveness. Accordingly, we thank the subcommittee for its 

longtime recognition of the value of scientific and engineering research, and its contribution to innovation in the U.S. 

THE VALUE OF HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SCIENCE

HFES is a multidisciplinary, professional association with over 3,500 individual 

members worldwide, including psychologists, scientists, engineers, and designers, all 

with a common interest in designing safe and effective systems and equipment that 

maximize and adapt to human capabilities. 

For over 50 years, the U.S. Federal Government has funded scientists and engineers to explore and better understand the relationship between humans, technology, and the environment. Originally stemming from urgent needs to improve the 

performance of humans using complex systems such as aircraft during World War 

II, the field of human factors and ergonomics (HF/E) works to develop safe, effective, 

and practical human use of technology. HF/E does this by developing scientific approaches for understanding this complex interface, also known as ‘‘human-systems 

integration.’’ Today, HF/E is applied to fields as diverse as transportation, architecture, environmental design, consumer products, electronics and computers, energy 

systems, medical devices, manufacturing, office automation, organizational design 

and management, aging, farming, health, sports and recreation, oil field operations, 

mining, forensics, and education. 

With increasing reliance by Federal agencies and the private sector on technologyaided decision-making, HF/E is vital to effectively achieving our National objectives. 
331 

While a large portion of HF/E research exists at the intersection of science and practice—that is, HF/E is often viewed more at the ‘‘applied’’ end of the science continuum—the field also contributes to advancing ‘‘fundamental’’ scientific understanding of the interface between human decision-making, engineering, design, technology, and the world around us. The reach of HF/E is profound, touching nearly 

all aspects of human life from the healthcare sector to the ways we travel, to the 

hand-held devices we use every day. 

HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

HFES strongly believes that Federal investments in DOD-funded research will 

have a direct and positive impact on national security, the economy, and the overall 

safety and well-being of Americans. For this, HFES supports robust funding for 

DOD RDT&E programs, including HF/E research programs across the Services to 

encourage further advancements in technology and safety, among other areas. 

With the creation of the Department of Defense Human Factors Engineering 

Technical Group (DOD HFE TAG), DOD has demonstrated the value it places on 

the inclusion of HF/E-related research and has acknowledged the benefit of interagency collaboration, as it relates to RDT&E in this field. DOD HFE TAG is comprised of technical representatives from DOD, the National Aeronautical and Space 

Association (NASA), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 

The scope of this working group is broad, making its benefits diverse. The goals 

of DOD HFE TAG are to: 

—Provide a mechanism for the timely exchange of technical information in the development and application of human factors engineering. 

—Enhance coordination among government agencies involved in HF/E technology 

research, development, and application. 

—Assist in the preparation and coordination of tri-service documents, and sponsor 

in-depth interaction, which aids in identifying HF/E technical issues and technology gaps. 

In addition, the American National Standards Institute recently approved ANSI/ 

HFES 400–2021, the Human Readiness Level Scale in System Development Process. 

This standard, created by HFES, defines the nine levels of the Human Readiness 

Level (HRL) scale and provides guidance for their application in the context of systems engineering and human systems integration processes. The HRL scale both 

complements and supplements the existing Technology Readiness Level scale to 

evaluate, track, and communicate the readiness of a technology or system for safe 

and effective human use. 

HFES strongly believes that all DOD programs developing new technologies 

should be required to report to the Department on the HRL of their systems on an 

annual basis. The HRL should be reported for each major component of new military systems, and should be used to identify deficiencies and areas where additional 

attention to human-system integration is warranted to reduce risks to program 

schedules, human safety, and effectiveness. DOD’s HRL scale should correspond to 

the requirements set forth in ANSI/HFES 400–2021. By incorporating this standard 

DOD will better understand if needed human-system integration activities have 

been conducted before deploying new national security systems and technologies. 

Continuing to prioritize HF/E research at DOD, along with incorporating the Department’s use of the HRL system would undoubtedly produce positive impacts on 

the safety and well-being of American citizens. 

CONCLUSION

Given DOD’s critical role in supporting fundamental research and development 

across defense and engineering disciplines, HFES supports robust funding levels for 

DOD RDT&E programs, especially those that specifically fund human factors 

RDT&E activities, in FY 2024 as well as improvements to the inclusion of human 

systems integration in acquisition programs. These investments fund important research studies, enabling an evidence base, methodology, and measurements for improving organizational function, performance, and design across sectors and disciplines. 

On behalf of the HFES, we would like to thank you for the opportunity to provide 

this testimony. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions 

about HFES or HF/E research. HFES truly appreciates the subcommittee’s long history of support for scientific research and innovation. 

[This statement was submitted by Carolyn Sommerich, President and Steven C. 

Kemp, CAE, Executive Director, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.] 
332 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JUMP AERO

Dear Members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, subcommittee on 

Defense, 

Emergency response times for 46 million rural Americans are twice as long as response times in urban areas. This disparity contributes to higher mortality rates in 

430,000 time-critical medical emergencies each year in rural America. Dual-use electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) technologies such as those being developed 

at Jump Aero have the potential to cut rural response times in half—helping first 

responders save an additional 100,000 lives each year in the United States. 

The U.S. Air Force’s Agility Prime program has been instrumental in catalyzing 

and accelerating the development of Jump Aero’s lifesaving eVTOL technology. The 

Agility Prime program should have the full support of all who care about improving 

emergency response outcomes for both the warfighter and rural Americans. 

Beyond Jump Aero’s particular mission, it is strategically critical that the United 

States assume a global leadership role in the emerging advanced air mobility industry. As an experienced aviation entrepreneur, I can say with certainty that funding 

the Agility Prime program is the most direct and impactful avenue to achieving the 

goal of US leadership in advanced air mobility. It will continue to help small companies like Jump Aero develop and deliver on our life-saving promise. I ask that the 

committee consider increasing funding for the Agility Prime program. 

I would be happy to make time to elaborate on any of the points above if given 

the opportunity. Thank you for your due consideration. 

Best regards, 

Carl Dietrich 

Founder & CEO 

carl@jumpaero.com 

[This statement was submitted by Carl Dietrich, Ph.D., Founder & CEO, Jump 

Aero.] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NEUROFIBROMATOSIS NETWORK

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to the subcommittee on the 

importance of continued funding for the Department of Defense’s Peer-reviewed 

Neurofibromatosis (NF) Research Program (NFRP). NF is a terrible genetic disorder 

closely linked to many common diseases widespread among the American population. The highly successful Neurofibromatosis Research Program has shown tangible results and direct military application with broad implications for the general 

population. 

On behalf of the Neurofibromatosis (NF) Network, a national organization of NF 

advocacy groups, I speak on behalf of the 120,000 Americans who suffer from NF 

as well as the millions of Americans who suffer from diseases and conditions linked 

to NF such as cancer, brain tumors, heart disease, memory loss, bone abnormalities, 

deafness, blindness, and psychosocial disabilities, such as autism and learning disabilities. Thanks in large part to this subcommittee’s strong support, scientists have 

made enormous progress since the discovery of the NF1 gene in 1990 resulting in 

clinical trials now being undertaken by the NFRP. 

In Fiscal Year 2024, we are requesting at least $25 million for the Peer-reviewed 

Neurofibromatosis Research Program (NFRP) within the Defense Health Program, 

the same as the Fiscal Year 2023 enacted level. The NFRP is now conducting clinical trials at nation-wide clinical trials centers created by NFRP funding. These clinical trials involve drugs that have already succeeded in eliminating tumors in humans and rescuing learning deficits in mice. In addition, in March 2020, the Food 

and Drug Administration approved the first ever drug, co-developed by NIH and 

AstraZeneca, with seed money from the NFRP, for the treatment of plexiform tumors in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). Administrators of the NFRP have stated 

that the number of high-quality scientific applications justify a much larger program. For these reasons, it is imperative that we continue to invest in research if 

we are to advance toward treatments and a cure for the numerous diseases associated with NF. 

WHAT IS NEUROFIBROMATOSIS (NF)?

NF is an unpredictable genetic disorder of the nervous system that affects almost 

every organ system in the body. There are three types of NF: NF1, which is more 

common, NF2, which initially involves tumors causing deafness and balance problems, and Schwannomatosis, the hallmark of which is severe pain. NF causes tu-
333 

mors to grow along nerves including in the skin, just below the skin, and in the 

brain and spinal cord. NF is the most common neurological disorder caused by a 

single gene and affects more people than Cystic Fibrosis, hereditary Muscular Dystrophy, Huntington’s disease and Tay Sachs combined. It strikes worldwide, without 

regard to gender, race or ethnicity. Approximately 50 percent of new NF cases result 

from a spontaneous mutation in an individual’s genes and 50 percent are inherited. 

NF can cause a myriad of devastating clinical problems including nerve and brain 

tumors; disfiguring skin growths; inability to heal after bone fracture, which may 

ultimately require amputation; psychosocial disabilities, including autism and learning disabilities; unmanageable chronic pain; deafness; blindness; cardiovascular defects; vascular disease; and paralysis. NF gene mutations are also important ’drivers’ of cancers in the lungs, liver, brain and breast. 

NF’S CONNECTION TO THE MILITARY

Neurofibromatosis (NF) has become a clinical ’model’ for advancing medical research. The genetic information learned from NF holds the key to understanding a 

number of health issues that benefit the war fighter, as well as the general population, including cancer, bone fracture and repair, vascular disease, nerve regeneration, behavior and psychosocial issues, and pain. 

The Neurofibromatosis Research Program (NFRP) is providing critical research 

that directly benefits the War Fighter including: 

Bone Repair.—At least a quarter of children with NF1 have abnormal bone 

growth in any part of the skeleton. In the legs, the long bones are weak, prone to 

fracture and unable to heal properly; this can require amputation at a young age. 

Adults with NF1 can have low bone mineral density, placing them at risk of skeletal 

weakness and injury. The NFRP is a strong supporter of NF1 bone defects research 

and as a result this field has made significant progress in the past few years. Bone 

fractures sustained by the war fighter and how to repair them is of interest to the 

military. Research studies will identify new information about understanding bone 

biology and repair and will pave the way to new strategies to enhancing bone health 

and facilitating repair. 

Pain.—Severe and unmanageable pain is seen in all forms of NF, particularly in 

schwannomatosis, and significantly impacts quality of life. NF research has shown 

similarities between NF pain and phantom limb pain. NFRP funding has been critical in supporting this. Chronic pain, and how to treat it effectively, is one of the 

most poorly understood areas of medicine but has very high relevance to those in 

the military recovering from service-related injuries. NF Research in this area could 

help identify new ways to target pain effectively with the right drugs or therapies. 

Vascular Disease.—NF1 elevates the risk of vascular disease including aneurysm, 

stroke and vessel occlusive disease. NF1 predisposes patients to early cardiovascular 

disease, which is also the leading cause of death among United States Veterans. NF 

research has demonstrated that when treating affected NF mouse models with an 

antioxidant medication it reduced vessel disease. Discoveries related to cardiovascular disease in NF1 are likely to be more broadly informative, including for veterans and active-duty military personnel. 

Psychosocial and Cognitive Disabilities.—NFRP research has revealed common 

threads between NF1 learning disabilities, autism and other related disabilities. Research being done within the NF Clinical Trials Consortium, NFRP created clinical 

centers, has led to important findings and expanded research in this area. This research contributes to our broadening understanding of how brain signaling can impact on behavior and psychosocial difficulties. Members of the military returning 

from service can suffer from psychological trauma and it is not easy to understand 

how this can be effectively treated. As we learn more from the NF population about 

psychosocial function, we will be able to shed light on this area for the benefit of 

the military. 

Nerve Tumors and Repair.—Nerves are the most common location for tumor development amongpatients with NF1, NF2, and schwannomatosis. Tumor growth 

alone, or treatments for the same, commonly cause nerve injury and associated deficits. Identifying mechanisms to improve nerverepair would benefit patients with 

NF, as well as advance the science needed to better treat nerve injury common in 

warfighters. 

DOD’ CONTRIBUTION TO NF RESEARCH

While other Federal agencies support medical research, the Department of Defense (DOD) fills a special role by providing peer-reviewed funding for innovative 

and rewarding medical research through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP). CDMRP research grants are awarded to researchers in 
334 

every State in the country through a competitive two-tier review process. These 

well-executed and efficient programs, including the NFRP, demonstrate the government’s responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. 

Recognizing NF’s importance to both the military and to the general population, 

Congress has given the NF Research Program strong bipartisan support. From 

FY1996 through FY2023 funding for the NFRP has amounted to $427.85 million, 

in addition to the original $8 million appropriated in FY1992. In addition, between 

FY1996 and FY2021, 471 awards have been granted to researchers across the country. 

The CDMRP funds innovative, groundbreaking research which would not otherwise have been pursued, and has produced major advances in NF research, including conducting clinical trials in a nation-wide clinical trials infrastructure created 

by NFRP funding, development of advanced animal models, and preclinical therapeutic experimentation. Because of the enormous advances that have been made as 

a result of the NFRP, research in NF has truly become one of the great success stories in the current revolution in molecular genetics. In addition, the program has 

brought new researchers into the field of NF. However, despite this progress, Army 

officials administering the program have indicated that they could easily fund more 

applications if funding were available because of the high quality of the research 

applications received. 

In order to ensure maximum efficiency, the Army collaborates closely with other 

Federal agencies that are involved in NF research, such as the National Institutes 

of Health (NIH). Senior program staff from the National Institute of Neurological 

Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), for example, sit on the NF Research Program Integration Panel which sets the long-term vision and funding strategies for the program. This assures the highest scientific standard for research funding, efficiency 

and coordination while avoiding duplication or overlapping of research efforts. 

Thanks in large part to this subcommittee’s support, scientists have made enormous progress since the discovery of the NF1 gene. Major advances in just the past 

few years have ushered in an exciting era of clinical and translational research in 

NF with broad implications for the general population. These recent advances have 

included: 

—In March 2020 the Food and Drug Administration approved the first ever drug, 

co-developed by NIH and AstraZeneca, with seed money from the NFRP, for the 

treatment of plexiform tumors in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). 

—Phase II and Phase III clinical trials involving new drug therapies for both cancer, hearing tumors, vision tumors, bone graft and cognitive disorders. 

—Establishment of the Neurofibromatosis Clinical Trial Consortium which includes an operation center and 25 clinical sites. Allows for partnerships with 

well-established NF Centers, pooling expertise and resources, quicker turn 

arounds of scientific reviews and regulatory approvals, leveraged work with 

pharmaceutical companies all towards the common goal of new treatments and 

a cure for Neurofibromatosis. 

—Successful elimination of tumors in NF1 and NF2 mice with the same drug. 

—Development of advanced mouse models showing human symptoms. 

—Rescue of learning deficits in mice with an already existing well known drug. 

—Determination of the biochemical, molecular function of the NF genes and gene 

products. 

—Connection of NF to numerous diseases because of NF’s impact on many body 

functions. 

FISCAL YEAR 2024 REQUEST

The highly successful NF Research Program has shown tangible results and direct 

military application with broad implications for the general population. The program has now advanced to the translational and clinical research stages, which are 

the most promising, yet the most expensive direction that NF research has taken. 

Therefore, continued funding is needed to continue to build on the successes of this 

program, and to fund this promising research thereby continuing the enormous return on the taxpayers’ investment. 

We respectfully request that you include at least $25 million in the Fiscal Year 

2024 Department of Defense Appropriations bill for the Peer-reviewed 

Neurofibromatosis Research Program. With this subcommittee’s continued support, 

we will prevail. Thank you for your support. 

[This statement was submitted by Kim Bischoff, Executive Director, The 

Neurofibromatosis Network.] 
335 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE SOCIETY FOR INDUSTRIAL AND

ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

On behalf of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), we 

are pleased to provide this written testimony to the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Defense for the official record. In this testimony, SIOP urges the subcommittee to increase social science funding within the Department of Defense, including through the Minerva Research Initiative. 

CONTINUED SUPPORT FOR SOCIAL SCIENCES

SIOP encourages Congress to continue funding for social science research at the 

Department of Defense. Inquiry into social and behavioral sciences, including topics 

covered by industrial and organizational (I–O) psychology, is critical to ensuring our 

National security, allowing military and civilian officials to better understand our 

adversaries and the social and political context that influences future conflicts. I– 

O psychology is the study of human behavior in the workplace, including pressing 

national security topics such as hiring and selection of individuals suited to highrisk jobs, enabling better collaboration between service branches using team science, 

improving morale and productivity, and examining training and onboarding procedures. I–O psychology research contributes to the Department’s readiness mission 

by improving warfighter performance and providing evidence-based best practices on 

organizational structure and teaming. We therefore ask that you continue to support 

I–O psychology by providing no less than $37 million to the Minerva Research Initiative part of the Department’s Defense Wide Basic Research Initiatives program, 

a $20 million increase. 

Minerva is the Department’s premier social science program, informing topics like 

cyber defense, social impacts of autonomy, deterrence, and sociopolitical instability, 

and supporting the societal and technological objectives of the 2022 National Defense Strategy by providing a basis for integrated social sciences (religion, politics, 

social culture, and history) into DOD’s tactical and strategic operations. Leveraging 

the social sciences helps the military understand, anticipate, and prevail in the face 

of challenges defined by rapid technological change, adversaries in every operating 

domain, and a combination of conventional threats with state and non-state actors 

and individuals capable of interrupting diplomatic and political activities through 

disinformation and cyber activities. 

The knowledge created through sound social science research—the hallmark of 

the Minerva program—is critical to the Department’s development of complex military strategies that address threats and challenges across the full spectrum of military action. Minerva’s cutting-edge social science research sets the foundation for a 

better understanding of current and future conflicts and arms decision-makers with 

knowledge about the social, cultural, behavioral, and political dynamics that shape 

our global interactions. 

Thank you for the opportunity to offer SIOP’s support for DOD research. Please 

do not hesitate to contact SIOP should you have any questions. Additional information is also available at www.siop.org. 

[This statement was submitted by Dr. Mo Wang, President and Tracy L. 

Vanneman, Executive Director, Society for Industrial and Organizational 

Psychology.] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TB ALLIANCE

TB Alliance is pleased to submit this testimony to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, subcommittee on Defense for consideration in fiscal year (FY) 2024 appropriations. TB Alliance is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the discovery, 

development, and delivery of better, faster acting and affordable tuberculosis drugs 

that are available to those who need them. We submit this testimony and urge the 

subcommittee to once again include Tuberculosis (TB) in the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program’s Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program’s 

(CDMRP PRMRP) list of eligible diseases in FY 2024 as it did the previous fiscal 

year. 

As you know, the men and women in our armed forces are responsible for protecting our Nation from threats both domestic and abroad. A critical element of 

DoD’s mission is supporting infectious disease research, which it conducts at various 

facilities such as the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and the Naval Medical Research Center. Since DoD cannot programmatically fund every disease that 

could cause harm to our Nation’s military personnel, Congress fills this gap in research through the CDMRP, which presents a critical opportunity for Congress to 
336 

directly influence research funding by providing a list of approved diseases eligible 

for competitive peer reviewed grant opportunities via the PRMRP. 

TB, an airborne disease, is the second leading global infectious killer globally— 

just behind COVID–19—with about 1.6 million deaths in 2021 according to the 

World Health Organization (WHO). The global TB pandemic, including the rapid 

spread of drug-resistant TB, poses a serious global security threat. Although considered a low-incidence country, every US state continues to report TB cases each year 

and the airborne disease continues to be a significant public health issue. According 

to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), there are up to 13 million 

individuals in the U.S. with latent TB infections; a future reservoir of active TB 

cases. In 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported nearly 

8,000 cases of TB in the U.S. The cost to treat and care for a patient with TB in 

the US averages $20,000 for drug-susceptible TB, $182,000 for MDR–TB, and 

$568,000 for XDR–TB according to most recent estimates. 

TB also remains of particular concern for the Department of Defense (DoD) because of its potential impact on our armed forces. Our global military footprint 

means that American military men and women are posted in countries and regions 

that experience high rates of both active TB disease and TB infection. For instance, 

in Europe, where over 100,000 U.S. troops and dependents are stationed, there were 

nearly 164,000 cases of TB and 73,000 cases of MDR–TB in 2021. In the Western 

Pacific region, nearly 82,000 troops live amidst over 1.8 million cases of TB and 

70,000 cases of MDR–TB according to the most recent WHO estimates. Ukraine 

alone had an estimated 31,000 cases of TB and 11,000 cases of MDR–TB. With the 

war in Ukraine sadly ongoing, millions of Ukrainians are seeking refuge in NATO 

ally countries, some of whom are on TB treatment or have undiagnosed TB. Outbreaks of MDR–TB around the world could cause drug shortages, severe economic 

consequences, and possibly extensive fatalities as well as global destabilization. 

Funding research and development now can make this scenario less likely in the 

future. 

Additionally, through programs like the Pacific Pathways, thousands of US military members rotate through countries around the Pacific Rim like the Philippines 

and Thailand to strengthen our military alliances, where a combined 844,000 cases 

of TB occurred in 2021, including thousands of cases of MDR–TB. However, the 

WHO estimates that global TB numbers are actually much higher than currently 

reported due to disruptions in diagnosis stemming from the COVID–19 pandemic 

and resource diversion. 

For these reasons, more research into TB and related treatments, vaccines, and 

diagnostics is imperative if we want to avoid tragic scenarios of MDR- and XDR– 

TB outbreaks in the future. Having adequate treatments on hand in case our 

warfighters fall ill with TB is critical to our military’s mission readiness and our 

National security. Today, we are at a unique and unprecedented point in TB research due to positive advancements in key areas of development. Recently, the 

FDA approved a new drug regimen to treat XDR–TB and complicated MDR–TB— 

demonstrating that better diagnostics, a fully effective vaccine, and shorter, less 

toxic treatment regimens are the only way we will successfully eliminate TB. The 

DoD CDMRP funding has been integral in these efforts. 

We thank the subcommittee for its previous inclusion of TB in the CDMRP 

PRMRP in FY 2023. However, we urge you to build off the progress already made 

and continue to include TB in the list of eligible diseases for FY 2024. 

Respectfully. 

[This statement was submitted by Pietro Turilli, Senior Vice President, External 

Affairs, TB Alliance.] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE TRISERVICE NURSING RESEARCH PROGRAM

We are writing to ask you to consider an issue critical to military health care in 

the FY 24 NDAA budget: line-item funding in the DHP budget and an amount of 

$12 million for the TriService Nursing Research Program (TSNRP), a program that 

continues to have a positive impact on servicemembers and the health care professionals that care for them and their families. 

TSNRP has a 30-year history of providing value-added research conducted by PhD 

prepared active duty, reserve component and retired military nurses on relevant 

healthcare issues that are important to servicemembers and their families, as well 

as combat-related care not replicated elsewhere in the DHA or civilian medicine. 

TSNRP is the Nation’s first and only Federal research program that supports military nurses to conduct research on the reserve and active-duty populations and 
337 

translate that knowledge into evidence-based practices. Neither the NIH/National 

Institute of Nursing Research nor the VA fund research on this population. 

Until FY 2023, when Congress more than doubled its budget, TSNRP funding levels have remained static since 1992; in the past two decades, funding remained at 

$6M annually. TSNRP has been funded either through congressionally directed 

funding or by DOD, through use of USUHS O&M dollars that are fungible and movable to meet other needs. Though authorized in 10USC 2116, TSNRP has an uncertain future should budget cuts force the elimination of this valued research program 

as was the case in FY 2020. Without this program, there is no dedicated funding 

stream for military nurse researchers to continue the vital research that has saved 

lives and significantly improved the care of our Nation’s warfighters. It is time to 

place TSNRP in its own line item in the budget to ensure its sustainability and to 

raise the funding level so more studies by nurse researchers can be funded. We need 

your support to maintain funding for TSNRP ($12M) and create a line item for it 

in the NDAA budget for FY24 and throughout the remainder of the 24–27 FYDP. 

Military nurses have been conducting research to improve force readiness and patient care since the 1950s. With the financial support of the TSNRP in the 1990s, 

military nursing research has expanded with notable results. TSNRP also supports 

the dissertation research and translation projects of military doctoral students in 

nursing schools around the country to improve health and quality of life outcomes 

for servicemembers and their families. TSNRP requires that funded researchers provide mentorship to new researchers, ensuring knowledge and skills are passed from 

year to year and along generations of military researchers. 

SELECT TSNRP DISCOVERIES

—Home-based and field therapy with self-managed electrical stimulation devices 

relieving both knee and back pain, helping service members return to duty more 

quickly and maintain Force Readiness. 

—Specific ventilator settings result in better methods of weaning patients from 

life support. 

—CoQ10 supplements decrease brain cell injury, potentially mitigating TBI. 

—Powdered clotting agents stop hemorrhage in wounded soldiers, saving lives 

after severe blood loss from injury on the battlefield. 

—Pocket devices allowing women on the battlefield to care for personal and hygiene needs without embarrassment. 

—Certain transport litters decrease the chance of skin ulcers in wounded service 

members while in field situations and in transport to fixed military facilities. 

—Blood markers exist for genetic Vitamin D deficiency, and Vitamin D supplements in this population improves bone health, reducing stress fracture injuries 

that often occur during physically demanding military training. 

—Mental and ethical preparation and resilience training helps service members 

function better mentally and emotionally in combat, and upon returning home. 

—Complementary treatment modalities such as acupressure can be done in field 

settings. 

—Soldiers who receive their care in Soldier Centered Medical Homes recover and 

resume basic training more quickly than those who receive care in a typical 

medical clinic. 

—Better nurse staffing in military hospitals is associated with fewer medication 

errors. Burnout in military nurses is linked to low quality of patient care, job 

dissatisfaction and intent to leave the job and/or the military. Ongoing TSNRPfunded research during the pandemic will provide an update on the military 

nurse workforce. 

SELECT TSNRP OUTCOMES

—TSNRP research assisted families to cope with deployment; addressed gaps in 

care for active-duty women; ameliorated long-term effects of PTSD on family 

caregivers; improved the quality of life for burn survivors; and improved patient 

safety. 

—The TSNRP Women’s Health Research Interest Group (WHRIG) recently hosted 

the inaugural virtual Women in Combat Seminar, which provided education to 

thousands of participants globally and included topics such as operational performance, mission readiness, and health and well-being. 

—TSNRP has been the leader in evidence-based practice and implementation 

science in the military healthcare system. The program funds not only research, 

but also supports education and guidance to implement the research. It aims 

to ensure that nurses are using the most up-to-date practices to provide bene-
338 

ficiaries the best care possible on the battlefield, in transport, and in military 

facilities. 

In summary, TSNRP funded research has been responsible for enhanced injury 

resuscitation protocols, improved air-evacuation processes, increased readiness of 

warfighters through bench science research, behavioral and nutritional research, 

and widespread implementation of evidence-based practices. One need only peruse 

the funded studies to find sophisticated methodologies in a far-reaching array of research from TSNRP funded scientists. For more about TSNRP, visit the website at 

www.triservicenurse.org 

[This statement was submitted by Hon. Linda S. Schwartz, Maj. (Ret), U.S. Air 

Force; MG (Ret) Margaret C. Wilmoth, U.S. Army Reserve; BG (Ret) William Bester, 

U.S. Army; COL (Ret) Patricia A. Patrician, U.S. Army; LTC (Ret) Deborah Kenny, 

U.S. Army.] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF YOUNG MARINES

The Young Marines thank the Senate Committee on Appropriations, subcommittee on Defense for this opportunity to provide testimony in support of the 

Young Marines program. Young Marines is a 501c3 national youth program for boys 

and girls ages 8 to high school. The program focuses on leadership development, citizenship through community service, and living a healthy drug free lifestyle. This 

includes fitness programs and extensive drug demand reduction education. We are 

the largest single program with a focus on drug demand reduction education for 

youth. Over 6 thousand youth members participated in FY22 nationwide, over 200 

thousand have been members since our start in 1959. Historical data shows approximately 30% of alumni members enter military service with a similar cohort for 

teaching and first responders. 

The last few years have produced volumes of reports regarding the challenges to 

our current generation of youth. Obesity, suicide, depression, poor overall fitness, 

negative social media impacts, difficulties with personal interaction, and increased 

dangers from new and extremely deadly drugs are all contributing to one of the 

most dangerous and difficult periods for our Nation’s youngest member’s personal 

development. This is reflected in numerous current studies about their declining 

mental health and ability to be engaged members of our society and future workforce. Young Marines does not profess to be the answer for all children, but our 

unique combination of programs has proven extremely effective for its members. 

Last year we spanned over 230 locations across 40 States, the District of Columbia, and military bases in Okinawa, Japan. The Young Marines mission is supported by over 2 thousand volunteers and a paid staff of just ten, making it extremely cost effective. Program interest is strong coming out of COVID. New unit 

starts are over double the previous averages of the last 5 years and we are spreading into new areas of the country. Young Marines youth membership is also coming 

back after the difficulties of meeting during the pandemic. Pre-pandemic membership was over 8 thousand. We continue to receive the highest rating from multiple 

independent non-profit reviewing organizations. A detailed map and other program 

information can be found on our website www.youngmarines.org. 

Young Marines has experienced tremendous growth in size and capability over the last decade due in key part to an annual Congressional Grant for $4M started in 

FY10. The grant has been placed in the Defense Appropriations Bill: Title VI, Other 

Defense Programs, Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities Defense (DICD), 

Drug Demand Reduction (DDR). Young Marines did not receive grant funds for the 

last 2 years due to FY22 and FY23 Omnibus Appropriations process. The program 

is running off residual grant funds and reserves but will soon be forced to make 

hard choices on how to continue. These funds provide the structure and support to 

run the general program activities, training and education for youth and adults, and 

institutional risk management programs to ensure a sound and safe youth development program. The funds keep programs affordable to larger cohorts and support 

critical drug demand reduction education missions which are not a normal activity 

for youth programs. The drug demand reduction mission is a main pillar of the program, and Young Marines must complete required hours to advance or take part 

in unique events within the program. Furthermore, Young Marines earn additional 

credit for taking the drug demand reduction education mission to their local communities and peers. Last year we provided over 50 thousand hours of drug demand reduction educational activities in our communities even with COVID constraints, in 

recent years past we routinely provide over 100 thousand hours of drug demand 

education to local communities. Last year saw record drug overdose deaths across 

the country. Young Marines works to educate its volunteers, parents, and youth 
339 

members along with local communities of the extraordinary dangers of current 

drugs. These efforts have seen the Young Marines program win the annual Department of Defense Fulcrum Shield award for Drug Demand Education excellence 12 

times, numerous awards from the Drug Enforcement Administration, and multiple 

awards from other public organizations. 

The Young Marines program directly supports future personnel needs of the Department of Defense, National Security workforce, the Intelligence Community, Federal Government, over 7 million critical transportation jobs, and professions requiring a drug free workforce. The Young Marines program exposes youth to the value 

of service in and out of uniform. Contact at Bill.davis@youngmarines.org. 

We appreciate the consideration of the subcommittee members in supporting various FY24 requests by members of the Senate. We also appreciate the support of 

the subcommittee in reconciliation with the House of Representatives Defense Appropriations efforts in support to our program. 

[This statement was submitted by Col William P. Davis, USMC (Ret), CEO, 

Young Marines.] 

(341) 

LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND 

PREPARED STATEMENTS 

Page 

American Urological Association, Prepared Statement of the ............................. 325 

Austin, Hon. Lloyd J., III, Secretary, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 

Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 185 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 190 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 236 

Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 188 

Baldwin, Senator Tammy, U.S. Senator From Wisconsin, Questions Submitted by ..................................................................................................... 84, 177, 242 

Bellon, Lieutenant General David G., Commander, Marine Forces Reserve, 

Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 269 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 271 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 322 

Berger, General David H., Commandant of the United States Marine Corps, 

Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 30 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 32 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 86 

Boozman, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Arkansas, Questions Submitted 

by ............................................................................................................. 81, 85, 88, 181 

Brown, General Charles Q., Jr., Air Force Chief of Staff, Department of 

Defense .................................................................................................................. 95 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 99 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 136 

Capito, Senator Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator From West Virginia, Questions 

Submitted by............................................................................................. 138, 182, 247 

Collins, Senator Susan M., U.S. Senator From Maine: 

Questions Submitted by ................................................................................... 244 

Statements of ...................................................................................... 2, 92, 186, 252 

Daniels, Lieutenant General Jody J., Chief of Army Reserve, Department 

of Defense ............................................................................................................. 257 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 258 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 320 

Durbin, Senator Richard J., U.S. Senator From Illinois, Questions Submitted 

by ........................................................................................................................... 239 

Feinstein, Senator Dianne, U.S. Senator from California, Questions Submitted by ............................................................................................................... 79 

Gilday, Admiral Michael M., Chief of Naval Operations, Department of Defense ...................................................................................................................... 16 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 18 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 81 

Government Accountability Office, Prepared Statement of the ........................... 326 

Graham, Senator Lindsey, U.S. Senator From South Carolina, Questions 

Submitted by..................................................................................................... 178, 247 

HALO Trust and Mines Advisory Group America, Prepared Statement of 

The ......................................................................................................................... 329 

Healy, Lieutenant General John P., Chief of Air Force Reserve, Department 

of Defense ............................................................................................................. 286 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 287 
Page

342 

Healy, Lieutenant General John P., Chief of Air Force Reserve, Department 

of Defense—Continued 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 322 

Hoeven, Senator John, U.S. Senator From North Dakota, Question Submitted 

by....................................................................................... 136, 137, 181, 184, 319, 323 

Hokanson, General Daniel R., Chief, National Guard and Reserve, Department of Defense .................................................................................................... 251 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 254 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 315 

Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 253 

Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Prepared Statement of the ................ 330 

Jump Aero, Prepared Statement of ........................................................................ 332 

Kendall, Hon. Frank, Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Department of the 

Air Force, Department of Defense ...................................................................... 91 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 99 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 133 

Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 93 

McConville, General James C., Chief of Staff, Department of the Army, Department of Defense ............................................................................................. 148 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 149 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 183 

McCord, Hon. Michael J., Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief 

Financial Officer, Department of Defense .......................................................... 185 

Milley, General Mark A., Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Department of 

Defense .................................................................................................................. 199 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 201 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 248 

Moran, Senator Jerry, U.S. Senator From Kansas, Questions Submitted 

by................................................................................................... 80, 85, 144, 178, 183 

Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska, Questions Submitted 

by................................................................................... 79, 84, 134, 138, 244, 319, 323 

Murray, Senator Patty, U.S. Senator from Washington, Statement of ............... 53 

Mustin, Vice Admiral John B., Chief of Navy Reserve, Department of Defense ...................................................................................................................... 263 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 264 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 321 

Neurofibromatosis Network, Prepared Statement of The .................................... 332 

Saltzman, General B. Chance, Chief of Space Operations, United States Space 

Force, Department of Defense ............................................................................. 97 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 99 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 138 

Schatz, Senator Brian, U.S. Senator From Hawaii, Questions Submitted 

by ....................................................................................................................... 241, 316 

Shaheen, Senator Jeanne, U.S. Senator From New Hampshire, Questions 

Submitted by ........................................................................................................ 318 

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Prepared Statement 

of the ..................................................................................................................... 335 

TB Alliance, Prepared Statement of ...................................................................... 335 

Tester, Senator Jon, U.S. Senator From Montana: 

Opening Statements of............................................................... 1, 91, 143, 185, 251 

Questions Submitted by ........ 75, 81, 86, 133, 136, 176, 183, 236, 248, , 315, 320, 

321, 322 

Toro, Hon. Carlos Del, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Navy, 

Department of Defense ........................................................................................ 1 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 5 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 75 

Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 3 

TriService Nursing Research Program , Prepared Statement of the .................. 336 
Page

343 

Wormuth, Hon. Christine E., Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Department 

of the Army, Department of Defense .................................................................. 143 

Prepared Statement of ..................................................................................... 149 

Summary Statement of .................................................................................... 146 

Questions Submitted to .................................................................................... 176 

Young Marines, Prepared Statement of ................................................................. 338 

(345) 

SUBJECT INDEX 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

Page 

Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 132 

United States Air Force ........................................................................................... 105 

Air Force’s Role in: 

Defending the Nation ....................................................................................... 105 

Succeeding Through Teamwork ...................................................................... 108 

Taking Care of People ...................................................................................... 107 

United States Space Force ....................................................................................... 102 

Space Force’s Role in: 

Defending the Nation ....................................................................................... 103 

Succeeding Through Teamwork ...................................................................... 104 

Taking Care of People ...................................................................................... 104 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

50 Years of the All-Volunteer Force ....................................................................... 154 

Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 175 

Delivering the Army of 2030 ................................................................................... 151 

Enduring Army Priorities ....................................................................................... 149 

People Are Our Greatest Strength and First Priority .......................................... 152 

Ready to Fight and Win .......................................................................................... 149 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 75 

Amphibious Warfare Ships ..................................................................................... 40 

Building a Culture of Warfighting Excellence ...................................................... 11 

Capabilities .............................................................................................................. 26 

Capacity .................................................................................................................... 28

Childcare .................................................................................................................. 46 

Climate Change Resilience ..................................................................................... 52 

Contributions to the Joint Force, Nested in the National Defense Strategy ...... 20 

Doctrine .................................................................................................................... 48

Enhanced Infantry and Leader Training ............................................................... 49 

Facilities Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization (FSRM) ........................ 51 

Fiscal Year 2024 President’s Budget, The ............................................................. 7 

Force Design: 

and Current Operations ................................................................................... 34 

and Marine Forces Reserve ............................................................................. 42 

and Marine Special Operations Forces ........................................................... 42 
Page

346 

Force Design—Continued 

and the Ground Combat Element (GCE) ........................................................ 36 

Campaign of Learning ...................................................................................... 40 

Emerging Capabilities ...................................................................................... 37 

Experimentation in Support of Contested Logistics ...................................... 39 

Experimentation with Littoral Mobility ......................................................... 39 

Guam and H2B Visas .............................................................................................. 52 

Healthcare ................................................................................................................ 47 

Infrastructure ........................................................................................................... 51 

Installations: 

and Logistics ..................................................................................................... 51 

Assessment and Resources .............................................................................. 51 

Plan 2023 (IPLAN) ........................................................................................... 51 

Maritime Challenges to U.S. National Security, The ........................................... 19 

MILCON Priorities in Support of Force Design .................................................... 51 

Modernized Marine Corps Training Environment (Project Tripoli), The ........... 49 

Navy’s Unique Peacetime Mission ......................................................................... 19 

Posture ...................................................................................................................... 32 

Readiness .................................................................................................................. 22 

Recruiting and Retention ........................................................................................ 45 

Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) ......................................... 38 

Resources .................................................................................................................. 33 

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response .............................................................. 47 

Strengthening: 

Maritime Dominance ........................................................................................ 8 

Strategic Partnerships ..................................................................................... 13 

Substance Abuse Prevention ................................................................................... 46 

Suicide Prevention ................................................................................................... 47 

Talent Management ................................................................................................ 42 

Way-Ahead ........................................................................................................ 44 

Three Enduring Priorities Guiding the Department of the Navy ....................... 5 

Training: 

and Education ................................................................................................... 48 

Areas and Ranges ............................................................................................. 50 

U.S. Navy Priorities ................................................................................................ 22 

Warfighting Readiness ............................................................................................ 33 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE

A Total Force ............................................................................................................ 272 

Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 314 

Addressing Harmful Behaviors .............................................................................. 260 

Air Force Reserve Fiscal Year 2024 Posture Statement ...................................... 287 

Air Force Reserve’s Role in: 

Defending the Nation ....................................................................................... 288 

Taking Care of People ...................................................................................... 292 

Succeeding Through Teamwork ...................................................................... 295 

Behavioral Health .................................................................................................... 277 

By the Numbers ....................................................................................................... 258 

Defense Support of Civil Authorities ..................................................................... 261 

Design the Force: Capabilities ................................................................................ 265 

Develop the Force: Sailors ...................................................................................... 267 

Equipment ................................................................................................................ 274 

Facilities ................................................................................................................... 275 

Force Design ............................................................................................................. 283 

Health Services ........................................................................................................ 276 

Innovation and Experimentation ............................................................................ 284 

Looking to the Future ............................................................................................. 256 

Military Equal Opportunity .................................................................................... 280 

Mobilize the Force: Capacity ................................................................................... 267 

Modernization/Facilities/Shaping Tomorrow ......................................................... 262 

National: 

Defense Strategy ............................................................................................... 255 

Guard support to the NDS ............................................................................... 255 

Personnel .................................................................................................................. 273

Quality of Life .......................................................................................................... 280 

Readiness .................................................................................................................. 261
Page

347 

Ready Now! Shaping Tomorrow . . . ....................................................................... 258 

Recruiting and Retention ........................................................................................ 259 

Sexual: 

Assault Prevention and Response ................................................................... 279 

Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) ............................. 260 

Soldiers and Families .............................................................................................. 259 

Suicide Prevention ................................................................................................... 260 

Supporting our Wounded, Ill, or Injured Marines and their Families ................ 283 

Sustained funding is essential for continued NATO support. .............................. 261 

Talent Management ................................................................................................ 285 

Train the Force: Readiness ..................................................................................... 266 

Training ................................................................................................................ 260, 274 

United States Air Force Reserve ............................................................................ 287 

United States Army Reserve, The .......................................................................... 258 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

Additional Committee Questions ............................................................................ 236 

Defending the Nation .............................................................................................. 191 

Readiness and Modernization ................................................................................. 204 

Strategic Environment ............................................................................................ 202 

Succeeding Through Teamwork .............................................................................. 197 

Taking Care of Our People.................................................................................. 195, 206 

Æ