Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee Chairman Gene Taylor Naval Surface Combatant Construction Update Hearings

Seapower and Expeditionary Forces
Subcommittee Chairman Gene Taylor
Naval Surface Combatant Construction Update Hearings

July 24, 2007

"The committee will come to order. The purpose of this afternoon's hearing is to receive testimony on the progress of construction of the Navy's surface combatant fleet. Testifying today are representatives of the Department of the Navy along with independent experts from the Congressional Research Service, the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office. On behalf of the entire subcommittee I welcome the witnesses and look forward to their testimony.

"Today's first panel is composed of our independent experts in ship construction and cost analysis. They are:

• Mr. Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in National Defense, Congressional Research Service
• Dr. Michael Gilmore, Assistant Director for National Security Research, and Dr. Eric Labs, Naval Analyst, Congressional Budget Office
• Mr. Paul Francis, Government Accountability Office

The second panel is composed of representatives from the Department of the Navy:

• Vice Admiral Paul Sullivan, USN, Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command
• Ms. Allison Stiller, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Ships
• Rear Admiral Barry McCullough, USN, Director of Warfare Integration on the staff of the Chief of Naval Operations
• Mr. Dub Summerall, Executive Director for Surface Combatants, office of the Program Executive Officer, Ships

Again, I thank the witnesses and welcome them here today.

"The subcommittee has asked the witnesses to give an update on the construction status of four of our major shipbuilding programs: the Littoral Combat Ship, the San Antonio class Amphibious Assault ship, the Arleigh Burke class Destroyer, and the Gerald Ford class Aircraft Carrier.

"This subcommittee, and I believe this Congress, is committed to restoring the nation's fleet and preserving the Strike and Expeditionary Warfare capability of the Navy and Marine Corps. This is vitally important to the long term security of the country. Decisions we make today concerning the size of the fleet have effects for decades to come. We need to get this right, and we need to do it now. Only the Navy, and the Marine Corps embarked with the Expeditionary Strike Groups, have the ability to respond to crisis anywhere in the world, on very short notice, with overwhelming force in the face of an enemy, or with significant humanitarian aid, in the event of a natural disaster. This nation must maintain this capability.

"However, cost and schedule overruns on virtually every Navy shipbuilding program threaten to sabotage the goal of a 313 ship Navy envisioned by the Chief of Naval Operations. This year we have seen a total restructuring of the Littoral Combat Ship Program caused by over optimistic predictions of cost and schedule. The Marine Corps Expeditionary Fighting vehicle has likewise suffered optimistic cost and schedule performance. The Coast Guard Deepwater program has been beset by technical and performance issues.

"Everywhere the Congress turns there is another major program suffering from either poor management, technical challenges, or both. There is not an unlimited supply of funding for these programs, and right now the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle program must have the Congress' and the Departments top priority because these vehicles can save lives today.

"This hearing is important; we need to understand all the challenges facing the ship construction programs so that we can make informed decisions for the future force. I again thank our witnesses and I look forward to your insights on these important matters.

"I would now like to recognize my partner on this committee, the Honorable Roscoe Bartlett from Maryland for any comments he may wish to make."

Source