Transcripts For CSPAN3 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20240622

Cyber espionage. The hack of opm is the latest example. Do the chinese steal our Naval Technology and apply it to their navy, and as a corollary to that, are you aware of any evidence concerning china stealing u. S. Civil Nuclear Technology and diverting it to its nuclear navy . Sir, im not personally aware of any instances of another nation stealing our Nuclear Technology and applying to their navy, including china. That may be happening, im not briefed on any intelligence that would implicate that. I think its wellunderstood that there is Cyber Espionage that occurs. We have concerns from time to time about our cleared defense contractors for example in their Cyber Security. I think Frank Kendall and at l is working hard to tighten that up as best we k. I was reflecting on this earlier we talk about Nuclear Matters. As a sort of graduate of the Navy Nuclear Propulsion program. One of the things that has intrigue said me intrigued me over the years, the element of Human Performance that program inculcates into its people is applicable to protecting ourselves in the cyber world. And were investigating how we can go about inculcating some of those principles in our work force so we can stop or at least minimize the amount of Cyber Espionage we experience. For any of our witnesses, do you have any suggestion,s of steps we should take to insure china cant take our intelligent and update their Navy Nuclear Reactor technology . I think youre reefingferring to the china, one two three provision. We want to make sure that any agreement that we have in this regard is not used to allow them to have a quieter plant, for example. But as of this point, i know of no chinese espionage that is looking is trying to specifically on this aspect of it. But i defer to secretary on the china one two three if there is anything on there. Thank you, mr. Forbes. Our judgment is that the agreement protects our interests and it also provides opportunity for our industry to have markets that are very significant for the United States. And allow us to advance the kinds of safety and performance standards that we want to see other countries adopt in their Civil Nuclear programs. Thank you. Thank you all for your service and for being here. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield back. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman i want to thank our witnesses for your testimony today. Admiral, as the chairman noted this may be your last appearance before the committee. I just want to thank you for your service to our nation. Youve made great contributions to our men and women in uniform and our National Security. And our nation isgreatly in your debt. Madam secretary if i could start the question with you. In the category of Good Better Best given the fact our adversaries are modernizing their nuclear programs, how do you assess our program is the Refurbishment Program adequate enough . Is it best . Or would we be serving our nation better by designing a new Nuclear Warhead with all the modern safety features and surety features we could build in given how far technology has advanced or are we is best doing what were doing in just refurbishing . Thank you, mr. Lynchman. We together with the department of defense through the Nuclear Weapons council set the requirements for modernization of our stockpile. And it is our judgment that what we have committed to doing in the three plus two strategy for modernization insures we will retain the deterrent capability we need to defend the United States and the allies and partners around the world. Were confident in this work. We believe the requirements that are presented in the three plus two strategy will enable us to deter any adversary. It enables us to reduce the stockpile in a way that makes it safer and more secure. And, therefore, we judge that this is the right strategy Going Forward and are working very hard to implement it. Thank you. I also would like to ask its a question about nonproliferation programs. Can you describe the technology designed to prevent additional states and activists from requiring Nuclear Materials . Thank you for giving me the opportunity to answer that question. The radiation portal monitors are part of what we have previously called a second line of defense program. And that is a critical part of our efforts to insure that the movement of material across borders does not go undetected. As we know the most important part of a country or a groups ability to build a Nuclear Weapon is getting access to that material. And so what we want toods do is insure we have Detection Capabilities in vulnerable places to allow us to know in real time when somebody may be moving so it can be interdicted and secured against acquisition by those who would do us harm. Secretary or madam secretary, how would you characterize the Cyber Security measures in place to protect Nuclear Enterprise and how resilient are our systems . The threat of cyber attack on all our systems we take very seriously sir. Obviously on Nuclear Issues we take that the most serious. Its some of the as we said its the most Important Mission we have. We are doing a wide variety of reviews on all of our systems all of our plat forms. We have concerned about our cyber vulnerabilities everywhere. We continue to really look at it closely. Right now i would judge it to be satisfactory. I think we need to continue to Pay Attention to that. Something im concerned about in particular. Thank you, secretary. Admiral winnefeld does the new start treaty remain in the u. S. National interest then i had some other follow up questions if time allows. Yes, sir. We believe this new start treaty does remain inside our national interests. We monitor continuously other nation and their behavior. We believe that russia is adhering to the new start treaty as far as we can tell. The principal value to me is our ability to verify what it is were doing. Wed love to have complete transparency but we believe the verification measures are adequate for us to have a better understanding of what theyre doing. We believe the new start treaty is still in our interest. Thank you. To all witnesses on the issue of verification how important are verification detection to detect cheating . 2014 defense Science Board concluded much work remains to be done on verification and Detection Technologies. And interagency cooperation. Do you agree and what gaps remain . That one you may have to do for the record. If yall dont mind, supplying that answer for the record, well try to keep moving with our limited time and some more votes coming up. But i appreciate the gentleman. Mr. Turner . Thank you mr. Chairman. As we look back over the recent events that have been happening with russia, there is no good news. Things keep getting worse. We have dangerous and aggressive Nuclear Threats and exercises directed against the United States. Nato allies and its neighbors. We have putin himself conducting Nuclear Weapons exercises. Imagine if our president conducted a Nuclear Weapons exercise what International Criticism they would be. They defy that criticism. And go to the next step of adopting openly discussed doctrine that russia intends to use Nuclear Weapons early in a conflict to deescalate and get the United States to back down, which is just inconceivable in my mind that someone would think the use of Nuclear Weapons is a deescalation because our doctrine is it is an escalation. Russia continues to violent the inf treaty as well as other arms control obligations. Without a response from the u. S. And the inf treaty. Not to mention the invasion and occupation and annexation of crimea. So admiral, what message would you want to send to the American Public and our allies and in contrast directly to putin about the dangerous path that russia is taking . Thank you for the question. You made a fairly kngood message for yourself. Its very important that the russians understand that far from being deesclatory. First use of weapons in a conflict like that risks escalation. They should consult chaos theory that its almost impossible to predict what the outcome would be of such a use of Nuclear Weapons. They need to understand were not falling for this trap. We are determined to protect and defend our allies within the commitments weve made to the nato alliance. And we will do that. And bluster and threats of Nuclear Weapons as deputy secretary work said in his Opening Statement are destined to fail. We will not let that deter us. I appreciate the strong words. When you look at russias actions, hybrid warfare, aggressive behavior occupying crimea. Threatening nations with military action if they participate in nato or Missile Defense deployment and then with the buzzing of ship and aircrafts in the approaching and aggressive manner, both our nato allies, what do you believe the risks are of conflict in europe with russia and with russias docktric docktric doctrine of Nuclear Weapons as deesclatory, what do you see of the resk of a conflict escalating to a Nuclear Exchange . I want to defer to an intelligence person. In my nonintelligence role the risk is certainly not smaller than it used to be based on all the rhetoric and all the actions that president putin and russia have taken. I do think they understand that we have a red line there. I do think they understand we have considerable capability to frustrate any moves that he might make in europe. And at the end of the day i believe that they will take that very seriously. We cant let down our guard in that regard in any way, shape or form. Thats why were investing more. Our very capable commander of the european command who also happened to be secular is very active in reassuring our allies and taking the right steps we believe to make sure that reassurance is backed with actual capability. I appreciate that. I think in the rhetoric from russia hybrid warfare that is undertaken, its aggressiveness, threats to neighbors, its deployment of new and threatening systems, and in the exercises that its undertaking, they need to hear those words from the United States that our military is strong and that we view our obligations to our allies as absolute. Thank you, admiral. Mr. Courtney. Thank you mr. Chairman and to the winstnesses. I want to focus on your comments on the Ohio Replacement Program which, again, you say all the right things about the fact theres going to be this short relatively short period of costs that is going to capsize the normal levels of the ship building account. Somebodys been on c power for the last eight years. Weve had that testimony over and over again. And there are many times i sympathize with the administration talking about sequestration. Thats our job to fix that. In this case i would like to observe what we have done on this side in terms of ohio is actually set up a mechanism to try and provide a positive solution to the problem. And so we set up the account last year. This year were talking about activating the account and empowering the navy through incremental, you know, purchasing authority multiyear purchasing authority to give them to tools to deal with this very challenging cost issue. Which everybody, again says the right things, that its the highest priority for our nation. Al if we dont do it t werewere going to drain the other forces. This morning general dun ford spent a large portion orphhis remarks that we need to deal with this. We had a surface hearing last year. Same thing. The conversation just always migrates to this issue. And so there were two high profile profile amendments on the floor of the house others on a bipartisan basis led the charge to protect this upgrade of the fund. 321111, 74 in the House Democratic caucus. People are starting to get to the point where we, your comments are we need to think about this. Were past that, very frankly. Were ready to act. And what im asking you is if you dont like the Sea Based Deterrence Fund fine. But come back to us with something. You just get the impression that the budget planners at the pentagon and the administration are just spectators here in terms of us trying to come up with a fix to this that will avoid all of the negative fallout, which again you described very powerfully here this morning. I was just wondering if you could share what your thoughts in terms of our work that were doing on this. In terms of whether at some point youre prepared to embrace it and help us advance what i think is a solution. That has precedent in the past in terms of the sea lift fund and ground based Missile Defense. Thank you sir. This is our number one mission. Were going to pay for it no matter what. In the past, congress has added money for strategic modernization during periods of these times. We hope that is going to happen again. We very much appreciate the theory of the case behind the fund. We believe there is going to have to be Something Like that to help us through. As i said up until this time, it has been theoretical. In 2021 the first ohio replacement we paid for. If we paid it in that single year it would be a 7 billion add to the navy. They average only about 16 billion in their entire account. It would be destructive to the navy to have to fit that in within their top line. So its we want to work with you and we are anxious to work t how to do this. But i just wanted to foot stomp something that the vice chairman said. Its one thing saying that we would eat it within a fixed top line, its that would cause enormous disrupgztion to our program not just in the navy but across all of our services. Were anxious to work with you, sir. We need to do it. Well, id like to tease out a little bit from you. What weve done is created a mechanism within the budget process, again giving, i think the incremental authority, you know all the tools that we know worked with virginia and carriers and i hope at some point, you know the powers that be will spit it out here in terms of whether or not theyre willing to use this fund. Which, obviously, the huge vote in Congress Shows that were ready. And in fact were moving forward. And we hope that the administration is going to help us solve this problem. I yield back. Thank you. Mr. Rogers. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I thank all the witnesses and admiral, thank you for your service. Congratulations on your retirement. Upcoming retirement. Two weeks ago this Committee Received a state departments second straight compline nonCompliance Report about russias violation of the imf treaty. For many years prior to this two years reports wed had evidence of their noncompliance. Its against that backdrop i want to ask this, the committee learned december the joint staff was conducting an assessment of possible military responses to russias noncompliance. And my understanding is that those that assessment you briefed us on that assessment by the way, in march. We appreciate that. Its my understanding that chairman dempsey has forwarded proposed responses to the president. Admiral, do you have a timeframe that you can suggest to us that you will get some direction from the white house as to military response to russias continued voilgzs . I dont have a specific time line for you. I know its something interagency policy committees are looking at consulting with allies on. I dont think that we want to necessarily rush into a definitive move because we would like to bring russia back into this treaty. There is no question we have options at hand that i cant really discuss in an unclassified hearing. Those options are available for use. Some of them are expensive. None of them contribute to rzs russia. They need to understand that. Were not rushing into anything. This has been going on for years. Its the last two years the administration has recognized it. Hes played us along and were just letting him. I dont understand why it continues to go on. I know youre not the president and you cant tell him what to do. But we need to be making some decisions and doing something proactively. Which leads me to my next question, im really worried about, you know, secretary work talked about the provocative statements. I think you made a reference to it that the Russian Military leadership has made toward our nato allies. Trying to jar their resolve. And im worried about them fracturing nato. I guess my question is, what is the u. S. Doing to alert our nato allies to the seriousness of russias violation and threat they pose. And what are we doing to reassure them well be there and everythings going to be okay . Sir weve had very close consultationwise our nato partners on the nature of the russia violation of the treaty. Theyre wellaware of the fact of the and that were we still remain deeply committed to our article v obligations with nato. Secretary carter is over there today. With the nato ministerial. Im sure hes discussing this with them both in the major forums and also on his pull a asides he has. The nato leadership there of the various partners and of the nato command structure are very well aware of this and very well aware we are determined to not permit the violation of the inf treaty to create a greater threat to nato than currently existed. Ive been there twice to Eastern Europe in the last six months most recently with a committee chairman. Theyre very concerned about our resolve. Do you believe we are being muscular enough in our military posture in the region to reassure them . I would challenge their concerns about our resolve. We are trying to help buttress their resolve. We are one of the very few nations in nato that has met the 2 investment obligation of gdp. Secretary carter is over there encouraging the rest of them. In fact, thats quite a topic of discussion right now in brussels in terms of getting the rest of the alliance to reach its commitment of 2 of gdp funding for defense. So we are reassuring them. They should be well aware of our Firm Commitment based on what weve done lately with the european reassurance initiative. Thank thankfully with the support of congress and all the actions weve been taking. They see that as very inadequate. We met with the leaders of four countries, and they see that as a rib lifted support. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. I take this in a little different direction than my questions will go to secretary randall. And the deal with the new pitt facilities. If you could explain the rationale behind the need for 850 to 808 the cost associated with that and then the discussion of the need lets go there and then another question after that. Thank you. Ill begin by noting that in the questions that have recently been asked, for example by chairman rogers, we understand the need for a fully responsive Nuclear Infrastructure given the dynamic threat environment that we face. And one aspect of that approved by the Nuclear Weapons council is the plutonium strategy which requires us to meet certain targets in terms of production of plutonium pitts over the coming decades. That strategy will enable us to move out of an old facility built in 1952 and produce up to 30 plutonium pits per year by 2026 which will be necessary to insure we can continue our Life Extension Program and construct and operate additional capabilities to produce up to 50 to 80 pits. And the cost . To utilize those pits squmpt. And that costs i will have to come back to you with an answer for the record. It seems to me you would want to know that at the outset. There seems to be some shortage of money for all of this, so whats the cost . As you have heard we face very significant budgetary challenges on this fronts. The requirement for investment to enable us to have a responsive infrastructure is significance. Has the committee considered revamping, updating the existing facility . We did consider that in the scrutiny that the secretary and i and the National Nuclear Security Administration leadership has applied to the planning for major Infrastructure Projects has been significant. What we have done is set up a process for examining the kinds of buildings that we need to build to recapitalize that infrastructure to insure we do it in the most effective way from a taxpayer perspective. It seems to me that the starting point of this is somebody decided you need a capacity 50 now its 80 if i heard you correctly. You backed from there to a facility to accomplish that. Youve not told me why you need 50 to 80 new pits a year. Thank you for seeking clarification on this. The objective is to give us the flexibility to produce additional plutonium why do we need the flexibility . We cannot predict the threat environment we will face as a nation 10, 20 30 years from now. We need to make sure we have the infrastructure necessary should the president of the future need to pursue the modernization of our Nuclear Capabilities in light of those threats. Someday we might want it and therefore were going to build it now and we dont have the money to do so. We cant snap our fingers and produce the infrastructure and the human talent required what is the capacity of the current pit it is much lower. It is what number . I will have to get back to you. Its somewhere between 10 and 20. Thats one shift today. Multiple shifts upgrade of the existing facility could produce far more than the 10 or so today. Check it out. And get back to me, please. I promise to do that. Thank you. I think im out of time. Theres a whole series of other questions having to do with the moxfacility and specifically on the september report. Is it online . Is it moving forward . And can we expect to see it in september . Would you like to get back to you for the record on that . No, id like an answer now. You ought to know. Im sorry i thought you said you were out of time. May we continue . 22 seconds. As you know, both the senate and the house have asked us to do additional review of the costs of the mox facility. We are going to conduct a red team review with the director of our Oak Ridge National lab to evaluate the aerospace findings and other findings about the costed of this facility to determine the best way forward. Thats due in september . Yes. I will take for the record, the costs. I will get them to you, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to discuss the open skies treaty. We had a hearing not too long ago called world wide threats. It was on february third. Lieutenant general stuart the director of the Defense Intelligence agency was asked about the open skies treaty. The general said this he said the open skies construct was designed for a different era. I am very concerned about how it is applied today and id love to talk about it in a closed hearing. We had the chairman of my subcommittee, mr. Rogers, send a request for information to admiral hany commander of u. S. Strat stratcom. And his letter came back and said i agree with Lieutenant Colonel stuart in his assertion the open skies construct was designed for a different era. Russias application today has gone beyond the original intent of the treaty. He says the United States in concert with our allies continue to address these concerns. He says i am concerned the treaty has become a critical component of russias intelligence collection capability directed at the United States. In addition to overflying military installations, russias open skies flights can over fly and collect on dod and National Critical infrastructure. Deputy secretary work, are you aware that the most recent Compliance Report from the department of state indicates russia is not in compliance with this treaty . I am, sir. And this is something that wed really like to talk about in a closed hearing. But we are concerned about what russias doing. As well as all of their other intelligence activities that are focused on our nuclear mission. Do you have any reason to believe the russians are using the treaty for reasons beyond what it was ratified for . We are concerned on the way they are operating as admiral hany said. We think theyre going beyond the oerblriginal intent of the treaty. We continue to look at this very, very closely. So the russians have requested that we continue this treaty and that they are able to use even more advanced censors. Do you believe it is prudent to exceed to russian proposals to fly censors over the United States. Thats in discussion inside the department. Would you say you dont have an opinion at this point. Not until we look at all of the different aspects. Okay. This is an issue that is going to continue to be of high interest. I know, to me and of course to the chairman of the Strategic Forces subcommittee, mr. Rogers, whose committee im honored to serve on i also for you deputy secretary work, is russia modernizing its Nuclear Forces to include developing and deploying news types of submarine launch Ballistic Missiles . Yes, they are undergoing as the vice chairman said a wide ranging modernization of its entire Nuclear Force. Is china modernizing . Yes, they are modernizing boat the boat the warheads as well as rogue mobile missiles. Are we as the United States modernizing to include new types of slbms . Our plan is to replace the minuteman three to replace our Trident Force to replace our bombers with a Long Range Bomber and to replace our air launch Cruise Missile with a long we are maintaining our current Strategic Deterrent while they are creating new and more advanced Strategic Deterrent capabilities, would you agree with that . Its just on their time line. The russian time line. Their system started to age out before ours. Theyre in the midst of their modernization cycle. Our cycle is coming up in the 2020s and early 2030s. Remember they are advancing beyond where they currently are and we are staying stagnant is that correct . I understand were modernizing what we have r. But were not creating any new technologies. Again, theyre replacing old systems with new systems, that is correct, congressman. But theyre staying within the new start in our estimation. So theyre not increasing the size of their force. Ive just got a few seconds left. I heard you earlier, you mentioned that there was well take it offline. Well ask questions later. Thank you mr. Chairman, i yield back. Appreciate it. The gentleman wishes to ask submit questions in writing, of course im sure the witnesses Ranking Member . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I apologize being absent earlier. I had a physical this morning that went on and on. I wanted to be here to thank admiral winnefeld for his service. General dempsey we have made numerous last hearings with him. If this is your last hearing i want to thank you for your service. Following up on the last point there, russia may be modernizing, but Nuclear Weapon is a Nuclear Weapon. Its powerful. We have, you know, 4,800 and some odd of them. And you know, submarine based icm based bomber based. Its not like the russians are building something that gives them some new technical advantage. Correct . I think the only exception to that that would concern me is the greater shift towards mobile missiles and their icbm force. The submarine Ballistic Missile force is not as good as ours. Their bomber leg is not as good as ours. I think the mobile missiles is an upgrade. The eventually of the mobile thing is that you would be hard for us to hit it in a first strike. But with 4,800 Nuclear Weapons we could hit them hard even if we couldnt hit the mobile Nuclear Missiles correct . They are not invulnerable, yes, sir. The larger point and we get bogged down in the moderernization debate. I think the most important debate is what is our deterrence strategy. Because, look if it comes to it, a, bad all bad no matter what. B, we got plenty of fire power. Under just about any scenario youre going to see to basically destroy the planet in combination, with whatever the russians do. Now, we have to make sure that we maintain upgrade systems that are failing falling offline and all that. I understand all of that. I think obsessing over, you know, oh, my gosh, theyre a little bit more mobile its a Nuclear Weapon. Which i forget the number, but its like thousands of times more powerful than either of the bombs we jobbeddropped in japan. Its a significant deterrence. I think the larger more difficult question is what is our deterrence policy, and how well do we understand that within the pentagon . And, you know, we had deterrence policy during the cold war, which was basically we felt that the soviets had us out manned in europe conventionally. So part of our deterrence policy was you go too far in western europe and well nuke you. And it worked. I mean they went into to hungary, they pushed the envelope a little bit. What is our policy on when we would do first use . What if they go into a nato country . I would also answer that question and i would suggest that communication between us and the russians and us and the chinese, the russians being far more important, whatever our differences may be on a wide range of other subjects, a robust communication to make sure the differences dont lead to us destroying the planet. Is something that i think should be a huge part of our deterrence strategy. Thats why i dont have a problem, even with the differences we have with china that we do a joint do some joint military exercises. You know we work with russia on afghanistan. We worked with russia doing the p 5 1 discussions with iran. I think it should be a huge part of our deterrence policy. What is our deterrence policy in terms of use of Nuclear Weapon and what is our understanding of russias deterrence policy . Well right now our policy is to achieve Nuclear Parity with russia. That is established under the new start treaty. We do not assess china as trying to achieve party with either us. The primary role of our Nuclear Forces is to deter an attack on the continental United States, our allies and our partners. We state very clearly that the u. S. Of Nuclear Weapons will cross an esclatory red line. We do not make explicit what our reactions would be. But we do say that we have the full force of our Nuclear Arsenal behind us to respond as needed and as the president directs. So our policy is to deter an attack on the United States and try to reduce the role of Nuclear Weapons in our normal National Security strategy around the world. Because russia now has the conventional disadvantage that we at least perceived ourselves to have during portions of the cold war. So one of the concerns is that if they feel that theyre conventionally outgon gunned they may go the nuclear route and we communicate to them. That is part of our deterrence strategy. If you use a nuke against anybody, than you got one coming back at you. Its a very important point sir. Whenever youre conventional and your Nuclear Deterrence capabilities get out of whack. You tend to rely on one or the other. The russians believed that we have a significant conventional force advantage. Therefore, they rely on their Nuclear Weapons as a deterrent. What we are concerned about is the way they explain their escluatory posture. That is problematic and something i agree with you that we need to be constantly talking with the leaders of russia to say we do not want this to lead to a miscalculation. Okay. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you to our witnesses for your thoughtful remarks today. My question is related i want to turn to north korea and iran. North korea is continuing to grow a small arsenal of nuclear and advanced missiles. Recently it claimed it has test ad ed a new type from a submarine. Then you have irans proliferation of Nuclear Weapons capability. As were on the precipice of a potential deal with the obama administration, which would allow iranian production of nuclear fuel to continue, these are real threats we have today. It is my belief that we need all possible capabilities available to deter and protect our own National Security and our allies. Just this week, admiral hany reaffirmed his commitment to strong deterrence against potential threats to north korea. Im wondering when some of our most strategic Weapons Systems are ageing, what do you think this says about our priorities . Well we believe, as we have said over and over that Nuclear Deterrence is our number one mission. We take it very seriously. We believe that we do have a Strong Nuclear deterrent. The our force today is we believe, the best Nuclear Force on the planet. Period. The modernization recycle that is coming up in the 20s is something we need to face together to make sure it stays at that point. We are confident we can stay ahead of the capabilities of the north koreaens. As the president said we are committed to preventing them from acquiring a Nuclear Weapon. Thank you, my next question, i wanted to ask about the president s decision to reject alerting the u. S. Icbm forces. President obamas Nuclear Employment guidance rejects the notion of alerting forces while continuing to examine options to reduce the rule of launch under attack in u. S. Planning. Can you explain why the president made the decision . Its simple. That when everyone dealerts the race to alerts it becomes esclatory and provides incentives for another side to try to preempt. It was decided a dealert posture would actually raise the possibility of a miscalculation and we decided against that. Are there any other comments from the other witnesses . I would just say there is an awful lot of folklore out there regarding the alert piece of this. That is puts our Nuclear Weapons on a hair trigger. And the fact of the matter is that theyre not on a hair trigger. The system is designed such that there is exquisite control over the employment of a Nuclear Weapon. The president is the only person that can authorize that. It is not possible to launch one unless he does that. You cant have a rogue actor down there somewhere in a silo launching a weapon. The benefits of dealerting in terms of preventing an accidental launch are very small. Where the drawbacks that deputy Security Work pointed out are substantial. We do open ocean targeting of our Ballistic Missiles. We have dealerted our bombers. We believe we have taken the prudent steps to make sure that we are deemphasizing a hair trigger response as the vice chairman said. We thought dealerting icbms would cause more problems than it would solve. Thank you very much. I yield back. Ms. Davis . Admiral thank you very much for your service. All your contributions to our National Security. Im going to go back to my colleagues question about verification and detection. And the importance of that. He had quoted the 2014 defense Science Board which concluded much work does remain to be done on verification and Detection Technologies and enter agency cooperations. Were talking about our own country, not work ing with our allies at this time. Do you agree with that . What are those specific gaps that we need to be sure that were doing so that were picking up the problems that exist in the technology and censors, all that were using in verification . Maam, im going to have to review the dsb study. Were very confident that our verification measures for the new start treaty are quite good. And as you know, as we are dealing with iran being transparent and verifiable are the absolute two key pillars of what were trying to do. So im not certain of what the dsb said but im be happy to review it and back to you. Any other comments . Weve talked a lot about the modernizing recapitalization. I think people had different thoughts about that. I think one of the concerns, at least on the surface, would be that the nsa submits a 25 year plan for how were going to deal with these issues, yet the department of defense does not. So i think the how is the dod planning beyond 2025 . What is it were doing to think about reducing costs. We know in any situations we have costs that go far out of the realm of what initially was planned. How are we going to manage peak spending and we may see some of these programs converging as well. Where are we in that . Is that a criticism thats justified in terms of the department of defense and not doing that planning that far out . Knowing that were looking at an awfully lot of money here. Congresswoman, we have a good understanding of what we need to do over the course of the next 20 years. The highway Replacement Program starts first. Well start replacing our trident boats first. Then well come the lrso along with the bomber. In the mid 20s. And then the ground based Strategic Deterrent that the minuteman starts to age out in 2030. We have a Nuclear Capability for the f35 which is planned for a future flight. We understand the general costs of all these. We understand the how they will unfold. 20 year cost estimates are uncertain, but we can provide you with our estimates over this period. We have quite confident we understand what we have to replace, the timing we have to replace and the rough costs that will require us. Is there do you think in terms of working along the same lines of nsa that youre meeting those requirements . Maam, we have a very good discussion through the avenue of the Nuclear Weapons council with nsa. I didnt do a good job of trying to synchronize our programs. The lrso is a example of trying to make sure the Life Extension Program for the w 808 warhead would be synchronized with the introduction of that. We submit a defense plan which is a detailed program, but we plan well beyond that. The program managers, the services and the like, have very detailed understanding of how those programs propagate out through decades to include life cycle costs. Wed be happy to brief you on that if you like. Thank you very much, thank you again for your service. I had just a handful of follow ups. Mr. Secretary editorial comment. Saying something is a red line doesnt quite have the punch it once did. And i think thats part of mr. Rogers point about allies who are concerned about our rely reliability. Thats at least what we hear as we travelerse not just in Eastern Europe, but in other places. Admiral, i want to take advantage of 37 years on a question. Obviously, at one point the subject of Nuclear Deterrence received a tremendous amount of attention intellectual a tremendous amount of attention, intellectual energy, planning and then it didnt. Quite understandably, we have been focused so much on terrorism and other challenges. Now we are having to reinvent not reinvent but to develop those skills again. To put that emphasis i think, on Nuclear Deterrence. And its credibility, which is really to me the key characteristic in all of this. Id be interested in your view. Are we there, where we need to as far as especially the intellectual planning and fire power on Nuclear Deterrence . I they is an excellent question. Point well taken. The way i would approach the answer. Across the broad intellectual base of the military Senior Officers corps o5 and above, how steeped have we educated our work force in Nuclear Matters when they attend war college they get a good dose of it. They may see, hear and read particular articles on their own but id agree over the last 15 years or so particularly since we have been in the post 9 11 era that a substantial share of our intellectual bandwidth has been shifted to counterterrorism and the like. Id also say, though, in the niche that is the Nuclear Business and i have a wonderful air force officer with me who has grown up in that business they are still doing pretty well. The strategic command, air force, navy, Nuclear Deterrence community has retained its interest and focus on this particular mission. So i think we are doing okay in that stove pipe but your point is well take than we need to make sure we are emerging from this last 15 years we have been in and make sure the broader force has a robust understanding of this question. Thats a good point. Especially as the russians seem to broaden the circumstances under which at least they threaten to use Nuclear Weapons. I want to ask one other question here about this idea that a nuke is a nuke is a nuke. Im old toll remember enough to remember the 70 which a neutron bomb. It is different than the existing weapons that we have. My understanding is that a variety of actors around the world are developing new weapons in the sense that its not just replacing what they had but adding with different characteristics which gets in my mind back to the credibility issue. As you know, the argument has been that our very large Nuclear Weapons that were designed for a cold war exchange are not as credible as other weapons might be in a different strategic landscape. Would you care to comment on that . Yes, sir. Two things. One, i would say we do have a range, for lack of a better word with dialability in some of our weapons. So we have lowyield weapons we can call upon for the president to use if he sees fit. We dont have a lot of work in vastly different weapons like a neutron weapon or Something Like that. But in terms of a scale of a Nuclear Detonation we can cover that fairly well. What i worry about is the Delivery Systems. Making sure they are modern in a sense of reliable. They are not old they are incorporating new technology. I would contend that systems that we are developing now to deliver these weapons should it be necessary hopefully it wont be are very advanced. The lrsb will be a very advanced bomb. The submarine will be a quiet, capability boat. And the groundbased Strategic Deterrent will of course be better than what we have now. So we are making more than just incremental but less than, you know major changes in how we deliver these things. I also think we have the array of scaleability on our Nuclear Weapons where we need it to be. Yeah. I just think as miss davis said no in modernizing it is different replacing something with Something Different but russians are not replacing a system with the exact same system just made newer. It has different characteristics and we have to keep that in mind. Madam secretary, i want to get back to responsive infrastructure right quick. A lot of what we have under new start is a lot fewer weapons but part of the agreement was we would have a more responsive infrastructure and ability to respond quickly to ensure this deterrent remains credible. Now, you would not say that we have a responsive infrastructure today, right . I believe we do have a responsive infrastructure today, but we must make the investments that i described in my statement that i submitted as well as my opening remarks. We need to ensure that we retain the capabilities that admiral and you have had an exchange on the Delivery System side, womenly on in the weapons production side we need to retain the work force and need infrastructure to support them an thats the intellectual work force we are discussing, the people doing the work right now on stockpile stewardess and modernization are the people we need to invest in. We need to recruit the next generation of people who will do that work in the future tone sure we have that responsive infrastructure for decades to come. Id say now we have what we with need but we have put forward to you an historic budget on this front in the 2016 request to make sure we are making investments we need Going Forward to maintain that responsive infrastructure because we did suffer, unfortunately, following the new start agreement from a cutback in the kooitind of investment we anticipated in advancing that agreement. I certainly do not want to diminish the importance 0 of the budget request, the administration sent up this year. I do think it has turned things around, but i am not sure im with ya that our infrastructure is as responsive as it needs to be today because i just see too much evidence, not only are the people retiring, other people choosing other lines of work and a variety of problems some of which we kind of touched on today but others of which we havent. Mr. Chairman i think together we need to signal to people that this matters. You are doing that by virtue of holding this hearing. My colleagues and i do it by the work we do every day and i look forward working together to ensure we continue toen send that signal across our nation. I they that is an important point and maybe a good point to end on. Whether we talk about the intellectual bandwidth nuclear deterrents, or attracting the best scientists to work in our labs and plants people need to know this is the most important element of our nations security and it will continue to be and receive the investment that is deserving of that. So if there is one point i think we hopefully all agree on, it is that we need to continue to attract the best and brightest and have facilities that can meet the unexpected. Because as these machines age, there will be more unexpected. Thank you all for being here. I very much appreciate your testimony and look forward to working with you all at least for a month or longer. So thank you. The hearing is adjourned. Then hou consumers are benefitting from the agencys operations. Later, Financial Experts discuss fixed income markets and concerns over liquidity. Democratic members of the house energy and Commerce Committee held a forum on Climate Change at the u. S. Naval academy in annapolis, maryland. Speakers included Naval Academy superintendent Walter Carter and Foundation President william baker. This is an hour and 45 minutes. Let me first say im congressman frank pallone. We have some members of our committee that are here today joining us, as well as one member who joined us from maryland whos not on the committee, but we are the committee that has jurisdiction over the issue of Climate Change and we are apressurepreciative of the fact that the academy was willing to host us today for this field hearing on Climate Change at the waters edge, as we are terming it. First of all, i want to thank each of them will make an Opening Statement but i want to thank congressman John Sarbanes to me left who represents annapolis and is member of the energy and Commerce Committee and did most or all of the preparation with his staff to bring us here today. To his left is congressman paul tanko have new york who is a Ranking Member on our subcommittee on the environment and the economy and to his left is congressman Chris Van Holland, whos not on the subcommittee but in our house leadership and is from an adjoining congressional district. So thats the four of us that are up here today that are conducting the field hearing. Then of course i want to thank vice admiral carter, the superintendent for hosting us here at the academy. I had the opportunity as i mentioned to you, admiral earlier this morning of having a wonderful tour bay couple of your staff. I shouldnt admit that after 27 years in congress that i had never been to the academy before, but i couldnt take i couldnt miss the opportunity to do the tour today. It was really interesting. Thank you for hosting us and making all of the preparations. We also have the mayor of annapolis. Of course mr. Baker and dr. Ekwerzel. Yesterday the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration noaa released its report on the statement of the climate in 2014. This authority taytive report was based on contributions from 430 scientists from 58 countries, using data from around the globe. The noaa report confirmed what we already know, that manmade Climate Change is real its happening now and the evidence for it is indisputable. According to noaa and i quote, four independent data sets confirm that 2014 was the warmest year on record and that the warmth was widespread across land areas. Further more 17 of the 18 warmest years on record have occurred in the last 18 years. The noaa report also noted that sea surface temperature were at a record high and global upper ocean heat content was a record high. Global sea level was also at a record high. The arctic continued to warm and there was an aboveaverage number of tropical cyclones. So the Scientific Consensus is clear, recordsetting Climate Change continues unabated. Record surface temperatures, record ocean temperature s, record Sea Level Rise all happened in 2014. This is no coincidence. And continued from our emissions of green house gases. Noaa noted in the United States 40 of the population lives in relatively high population dense coastal areas where sea level plays a role in flood ing shore erosions and houses from storms in new jersey my home state, Hurricane Sandy hit with devastating intensity causing extensive damage and loss of life. In annapolis tidal flooding is increasing at an exponential rate and annapolis is preparing for the next extreme storm like sandy. Vice admiral carter can tell us about the efforts the academy is taking with extreme weather and flooding at its facility here. There are many who argue that the Climate Change is not happening or that it is not caused by human activity. They argue in the face of sign tichk fact. They speak only on behalf of those who want to profit from inaction. While some may find it economically advantageous to ignore Climate Change, in fact the cost of inaction fall upon all of us, and they are enormous. They range from flooding and Sea Level Rise to drought and impacts on Food Production to increases in disease and increasing security risks. And equally important when we ignore Climate Change we miss valuable opportunities to move forward toward a more economically sustainable future. One in which we are more competitive, more Energy Independent and more energy secure. We risk losing the lead on new technology and Innovative Energy solution and risk losing jobs. We need to heed the advice of the scientists of our best thinkers of our mayors and our military advisers and take action now to combat the ongoing threat of Climate Change. So again, i want to thank all the members for their participation. I look forward to the testimony of all of the witnesses and now i yield to your hometown congressman John Sarbanes. Thank you, congressman pallone. It is great to be here at the Naval Academy. I want to thank superintendent carter this is a Perfect Place to bring this to Climate Change and local communities what you are doing here to combat the affects of Climate Change. What is undertaken to address that. I do want, at the outset, want to acknowledge the tragic shooting that happened yesterday in chattanooga. That i know that you have mid shipman that go on to become part of the officer corps of marine. So this community is probably feeling that loss, particularly acutely today and our thoughts and prayers go out to the families of the victims of that shooting that occurred yesterday. I also want to thank my colleagues for being here, paul tanko who serves on the committee, congressman pallone, are focused as our whole committee is on this issue of Climate Change and chris van hold land whos a Ranking Member on the Budget Committee within the democratic caucus. From that position understands that addressing issues of Climate Change is about the values that we infuse in to the budgetary documents that we create in washington. I also want to thank the witnesses who. We will come back in a moment and introduce them i want to acknowledge there are a lot of people in the audience that care deeply about this people. Familiar faces who have worked long and hard. Not just on the broader issue of Climate Change but in particular on the issue of the fortunes of the Chesapeake Bay, which marylanders hold very dear to our hearts. Obviously there are many that are part of the solution when it comes to the Chesapeake Bay since it begins up in new york actually. And there are 17 million residents within the Chesapeake Bay. Watershed, 64000 square miles and we have a special responsibility when it comes to leadership to make sure we are protecting and preserving the Chesapeake Bay. As was made clear i think yet again by the comments of congressman pallone with respect to this recently released noaa report, the consensus from the Scientific Community is overwhelming that Climate Change is happening and that human activity is the most significant cause of that. Whatever debates were having, whatever the issue may be, its all happening inside of this larger reality of whats happening in toe planet. And every issue we grapple with, that ought to be the baseline effort that we are undertaking to address Climate Change. So all of those other things dont become irrelevant over time. Were here in annapolis today, beautiful city of annapolis. Were going to see were going to hear about the local effects of Climate Change on coastal communities. Annapolis is really on the front lines when it comes to that. Unfortunately sometimes in washington politic s take over this conversation. Its good to be able to get out of washington and out in to the communities that are grappling with this issue where you do find, i think, a real consensus that this is a priority that has to be addressed. Weve assembled a very strong panel of leaders on this issue that were going to hear from today. Theres no question this is the challenge of our generation, addressing Climate Change. And the American Public is as focused on it as our witnesses are and as we are. Theres recent polling that shows that 70 of americans favor stronger limits on the amount of carbon thats emitted by power plants, over 80 of americans think the United States should take action to address Climate Change. So the public understands this. The experts understand this. The Scientific Community understands it. I think the United States Congress Needs to catch up with that. For a time there we thought we were going to be able to put in place a super structure to address Carbon Emissions with economics being kind of a driver in that. That opportunity was missed. Stepping in to the breach has been the Environmental Protection agency, the clean power plant, other efforts they have under take on the address Carbon Emissions are really important but congress has to get back to the task of being a leader when it comes to addressing this very, very important issue. Were going to hear testimony as well today, that the lives, this notion there is a tradeoff between a Strong Economy and doing the right thing when it comes to the environment and Climate Change. In fact when you look at the Chesapeake Bay the best way we can drive the economic engine of maryland and of this region is to make sure that the bay is healthy. So theres a direct link there. Further more, if we develop Clean Power Technologies because were looking ahead to the future, and learn how to manufacture and produce those tech noj Nothing Technologies in the United States that will create a tremendous amount of jobs. We have a wonderful panel assembled here. Again, thank you superintendent for hosting us and with that ill yield back my time. Thank you, congressman sarbanes. Next we have congressman paul tanko who is a Ranking Member of our environment and sub commit teechlt good morning, everyone. It is a pleasure to join with you here at this beautiful setting. So thank you a, superintendent carter for hosting us and thank you mayor for welcoming us to this wonderful city. I had a chance to cruise around town hit the state house and visit the campus here. Wonderful, warm with feeling and beautiful, beautiful space. Thank you for all the good work that you do at the academy. Were thrilled to be working with you to appoint nominees to the various academies and its a nice partnership. To all of our witnesses thank you for being here. Mayor, we talked about the role that cities play in our resouthern jens and superintendent for the tradition that is part of the academy and the great work done to keep us a strong nation. Thank you very much. Strengths are valuable. I am proud to represent a state that is part of the watershed community of the Chesapeake Bay albeit a slight part but we love being part of that watershed and thank you for the work with that you do through the Chesapeake Foundation and doctor thank you for offering your information our way so we can move forward in an academic way. I represent a district that is the confluence of the hudson and mow hawk rivers the Capital Region of new york from saratoga to albany troy and west in to the erie canal territory. Our coastal communities are plenty and they have been impacted by Mother Nature over the last years in very significant ways. So i think that this work that were doing here today is very valuable to the outcome of public safety, economic stability and economic growth. Certainly an environmental agenda that is positive and strong and reflective of our stewardship with our partnership with the environment. I amening a engineer by background. I enjoy these technical assignments. I enjoy working with our rank of energy and commerce colleagues and im tlooel thrilled to be sitting with three colleagues who get it. They are stallworth in their efforts to make a difference on behalf of our environment and thats refreshing. As an engineer i enjoy the technical assignments of energy and commerce. My rancorship on the subcommittee, the environment and the economy and i sit on science, space and technology an im amazed constantly about the kickback when it comes to science. People reject science that ought to be advancing the best policy that embraces science and what science is telling us. If not listen to Mother Nature. She may be speaking more forcefully than science itself. We need to move forward with a gresive agenda, based in academy aics and understands, as representative sarbanes just mentioned stewardship of the environment and growth of the economy do not fight each other. They go hand in hand. And great jobs come about when we understand that partnership. Before my days in congress, i served as president and ceo of the new York State Energy and development authority. We did all sorts of inknow valgs and invention as it relates to energy and the environment and i learned firsthand that great things were happening and we were growing jobs of the green type thatten able us to strengthen the foundation of our economic recovery. I also believe in accepting the notion that 97 of the Science Community said look, Climate Change is real and a human factor is very much a part of that concept. So that we can make fundamental change based on human activity. If we think carbon emission isnt a problem, wait until methane hits us. There are all sorts of efforts coming foreer ward that need to address emissions in our society. The growth in the economy that can come, the impact we can avoid, you know, the orders of prevention are difficult to sell at times. We know that, just as an act of human nature but it is important that we move forward with those preventative measure. Why, my district and all of new york primarily the metro area are hit hard by Mother Nature with super storm sandy. Before that, irene and lee ripped damage in to my district and the nomenclature of 100 year and 500 year storms were embraced every other year. Multiple times within a decade. So the nomenclature doesnt even fit. Its out moded, its outdated and we see time and time again threats to our waterfronts erosion of prime farmland, closing of businesses from very small to larger Housing Stock wrecked if not totally abandoned. And the most impacting human lives that have been lost because of these storms. So we kneadow there is a way to come back and speak to a sound agenda that grows jobs, speaks to the environment and allows us to anchor it can i use that word here, superintendent, anchors it in policy and put together, mr. Budget man resources that we need. It is my pleasure to be here today and thank you to my fellow colleagues and our panelists and for all for showing your interest in this issue. I will close by saying this, i hit the ice cream shop downtown. Im not embarrassed to say i had a cone at 10 00 a. M. An i talked to a very young man at the counter, very young man and he said what are you here for and i said we are going to the academy. For what for discussion on Climate Change and he said please do something. So maybe that young generation will push us. Whatever it takes, lets do it. Thank you. Thank you. Let me now yield to congressman Chris Van Holland who is mentioned as the Ranking Member of our committee and house membership. Thank you mr. Pallone and that ice krooelt cream cone was melting way too fast because of the Climate Change. Let me join my colleagues in thanking you superintendent carter and the witnesses for joining us this morning for this very important discussion. Superintendent carter, i want to also, as my colleagues have done, thank you for your stewardship of this Great Institution that helps train and raise men and women who are serving our country. Thank you for that. Mr. Mayor thank you for your leadership and look forward to your testimony about this very important issue in the Immediate Impact Climate Change is having right here in the city of annapolis. To mr. Baker, will baker, thank you for your incredible leadership on protecting the Chesapeake Bay. We have, as our motto here in maryland and surrounding areas, save the bay. And mr. Bakers head of the Chesapeake Bay foundation has been leading that effort here for a good long time. So thank you. And doctor, thank you for your great leadership your contributions to the scientific debate but also translating that scientific analysis in to sound public policy. Im grateful for your efforts. I want to thank the leading democrat on the energy and Commerce Committee for bringing us here. Thank you mr. Pallone for your leadership on a lot of issues but very much with respect to Climate Change. To my good friend John Sarbanes whos been a leader on a lot of issues, but we have worked so closely together on Chesapeake Bay protection, hes worked very hard to encourage young people to appreciate the Great Outdoors because the more they can appreciate their surrounding environment, the more they will understand the importance of protecting it. To john, thank you for all of your leadership. And paul whos helping new yorkers recognize that they are also part of that Chesapeake Bay watershed. One of the challenges we have had in maryland, frankly is we understand what a Precious Resource we have here in the bay. But as mr. Sarbanes indicated that bay watershed extends over multiple states, all the way up to new york and the drainage basin, you know the ratio of land mass to water is huge. Thats why it is such a challenge to make sure we continue to protect the bay. I just want to underscore a couple of points that have been raised and then add a couple of observations. Look, i wish all members of congress were at the same level of understanding of the challenge and the threat as the American People clearly are. We do continue to have science deniers in the United States congress. People who somehow can stare the evidence in the face and still put their heads in the sand. The good news is that the American Public is way ahead of the game because they recognize this is not some distant threat but its here and now. They see it in the form of these disruptive weather events that are increasing the costs to the American Public, to the citizens of the city of annapolis. They recognize that its putting lives at risk, as mr. Tonko mentioned. So they are able to see with their own eyes what the scientists are telling us that the data is indicating. And so we all know the cost of doing nothing are huge. We are going to hear testimony because of the lack of action the costs are piling up. Im especially pleased we are here at the academy because the u. S. Military has been at the forefront of trying to explain this challenge and this threat. For all of the people who deny the evidence, you know i think they should ask the u. S. Military whos charged in many ways protecting this country about this threat because the military is has said this is a threat multiplier. Climate change is a threat multiplier. It takes existing threats and intensifies them around the world and obviously piles on the costs on top of that. Rather than do nothing and allow the costs to pile up we should take action. The president has put forward his Climate Action plan. And i salute him for doing it but the president would be the first to acknowledge, like all of us in this room, that there are probably better, more efficient ways of addressing Climate Change. Including a legislative route. There have been proposals put forward on the table in the past. I put forward a cap and dividend proposal that i think would take us in the right direction. Im pleased the union of concerned scientist have been supportive of that as have other organizations but the bottom line is we have to act. Its not just a question of cost avoidance. Its actually also a question of huge economic opportunity, as my colleagues have said. By investing in a clean energy economy, not only do we avoid the costs of the damage from Climate Change and save lives, we also create huge Economic Opportunities for the country in the process. So hopefully and im sure the testimony today will number one highlight the cost were facing in the here and now and also highlight the opportunities we have as a country if we address the challenge in the right way. So thank you very much. Mr. Chairman . Im going to turn it back over again to congressman sar banes to introduce the panel and then we will have each of the Panel Members make a statement starting with the mayor on the left and then going to the right where with the doctor. Congressman. Thank you very much. Our first witness today is mayor michael panalietes. He was elected in november of 2013 as most recent mayor of annapolis. The citys first republican mayor since 1997. I mention that because as i indicated earlier, i think when we get outside of washington, were sometimes the politics can be aggressive and out where people live you find republicans and democrats working together on important issues like the ones we are going to be discussing today. The mayor is an member of the fishing and sailing hall of fame and board member on the visitors bureau, on the legislative committee for the Maryland Municipal League where he has a leadership position. He has rallied the people of annapolis around this very important issue, recognizing the threats that tidal flooding in particular are presenting to the city. There are every ever episodes every day. We were talking to the superintendent. Even today we had an event close by that punctuates what the topic is for todays hearing. Admiral carter is a native of rhode island. He graduated from the academy here in 1981. Was designated a naval flight officer in 82 and graduated from the Navy Fighter Weapons school top gun in 1985. He completed air command and Staff College course in the armed forces Staff College in 2001. He completed the navys Nuclear Power program. If i told you all of the various awards and recognitions that hes received, we wouldnt be able to hold the hearing today. Needless to say, hes excelled in everything he has attempted. I will mention this admiral carter flew 125 combat missions in support of missions in bosnia, kosovo, kuwait, and aflg, accumulate ed 6150 flight hours in f4, f14 and f18 aircraft during his career and safely completed 2016 carrier arrested landings which is the record among all active and retired u. S. Naval aviation designators. So thats quite an achievement. [ applause ] we look forward to your testimony today. Will baker is a man on a mission. He beegan his career at the Chesapeake Bay foundation as an intern. Obviously decided at that point in time he was going to take this operation over which he did. Becoming president in 1982, leading now the largest nonprofit Conservation Organization dedicated solely to pro serving and protecting and restoring the chesapeake. I want to thank him in particular for his efforts to help us spread the word on how we connect young people to the environment, promote environmental literacy across the country, and helped immensely in building a coalition behind the no child left inside act which i have been proud to author during my time in congress. We are blessed that will made the preservation of the Chesapeake Bay his life work. It has made a tremendous difference. I will say the Chesapeake Bay foundation has received many many awards but that includes the nations highest environmental honor, the 1992 president ial medal for environmental excellence in recognition of its Environmental Education program. But that in many ways is a recognition of will baker and his commitment to these issues for so many years. Were looking forward to his testimony about the effects on ecosystem of the Chesapeake Bay of Climate Change. Our last witness, dr. Brenda is a senior climate scientist with the Climate Energy program at the union of concerned scientists. She is leading ucss a climate education work aimed at strengthening support for sound u. S. Climate policies. Prior to joining ucs, she was on the faculty of the university of Arizona Department of high drolg and Water Resources with a joint apoint in the geo sciences department. Early in her career she was a hydrologist working to protect groundwater sources at the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. She holds an phd from the department of Earth Sciences at Columbia University earth observatory and conducted post Doctoral Research at laboratory in california. In other words shes an expert. Were looking forward to hearing from her today. With that i will yield back. Thank you, congressman. So well start with the mayor. Thank you. Good morning. Congressman van hollen, congressman sarbanes congressman pallone, thank you and welcome to nachls we appreciate you choosing our city to show the impacts of Climate Change on local communities and for using todays discussion to create policies for congress. It is a pleasure to work alongside vice admiral carter will baker and dr. Brenda from the union of concerned scientists. For being here. Annapolis annapolis saw the greatest increase in nuisance flooding in the last 50 years. Nuisance flooding measured average nuisance floods per day increased by 925 . From an average of four floods per year to more than 40. Of the top ten areas based on emergency increases, annapolis had the largest number of nuisance floods at 40 a year with washington, d. C. A distant second at 30. Of the to this end the city of annapolis has been meeting with local and state entities since september of 2014 to address flooding in our historic city. The city of annapolis recently presented a weather together town hall focused on protecting our important seaport. I will go off script for a second. As congressman sarbanes said you have to rally the Community Around this. We sent out postcards and typically in a City Council Meeting not many show up. One person on the budget and 140 for this town hall meeting. Something that surprised a lot of us and on the pulse of the citizens. It is a multiagency initiative the city of annapolis has to develop a plan and implement a strategy which will reduce the risk and loss of private and Public Sector properties most vulnerable to the affects of Climate Change. This is an 18month planning effort which represents an important Collaborative Partnership between the city state, federal Agencies Private and nonprofit partners. I think thats one of the things i have learned in my short time is that anything you do you need to build partnerships and relationships. Cant address flooding if we dont have help from congress, the Naval Academy and our county partners and state as well. In the preliminary survey we asked people who is responsible for reducing flood potential in the Historic District . 32 said local government, 32 put it on the state. The good news is we all have been doing work to address nuisance flooding as well as preparing for the next Hurricane Sandy and isabelle. We are currently working to develop a Cultural Resource Hazard Mitigation plain design which will be a model resiliency in response for our historic properties. Along with that, we are working on the regulatory response, the Sea Level Rise and storm surge induction. Meanwhile, we are also currently working on a Sea Level Rise Strategic Plan and designing a Cultural Resource resiliency plan. These are Major Projects the city has dedicated money towards and i want to thank the partners who have donated money to these endeavors over time. While we have completed a number of state funding documents, vulnerability assessment, indignation mitigation strategies in the east port area, theres theres more to do which means critical dollars are needed. To follow up i think a lot of people think of Sea Level Rise and Climate Change just affecting downtown. There are other areas like east fork affected, not just now but 40, 50 years down the road. Still, we all understand we have secured funding for 172,398. Still we with all understand that more money is needed. The annapolis preliminary planning an design process holds an estimated price tag of 1 million. Money for flood mitigation was our number one legislative ask in 2015 when we go to the state and ask for money and lobby we obviously ask for a lot of things and im sure that you all are familiar with local municipalities asking for money. It was our largest ask last year and will be this year as well. As we look for opportunities in 2015 we hope for an additional 45,000 for the National Center for Preservation Technology and training and in 2016 we are turning to Maryland Emergency Management Agency for funding to to adopt our mitigation plan and update the natural hazardous mitigation plan. We are seeking assistance from the Maryland Historic trust an the rockefeller 100 resiliency city organization. Part of our goal is to be a model nationwide on how cities deal with this. The city of annapolis is still considered a National Model for Cultural Resource, Hazard Mitigation planning. That is no other Historic District has attempted to develop a fullscale fema mitigation plan to address sealevel rise and tidal flooding. Given the importance of the Historic District and the waterfront, the annapolis response to sealevel rise must focus on protecting existing structures and infrastructure. Future Planning Efforts evaluate the need and option for protecting Historic Structures flood proofing to the extent feasible and preserving the hiss tore tick exterior of the building. Throughout my time in office flood mitigation has been a top priority an appreciate the administrations close work with the United States Naval Academy and the runl county executive. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and wish you much success in the future outcome and your hearings. Thank you, mayor. Admiral . Well, good morning distinguished panel and thank you for allowing us the privilege of hosting this important hearing here today. Before i make my prepared remarks, id also like to say how saddened and how much wed like to send our thoughts and prayers to our navy and marine corps family in chattanooga, tennessee after the tragic events of yesterday. Congressman sarbanes, thank you for your thoughts on that. As you all know, and you got to walk around as we call it the yard here at the Naval Academy today, this is an historic site. We started here on october 10th 1845. This year will be entering in to our 170th year of being a partner here with the city of annapolis. It started out as ten acres. Today we represent 338 acres of the upper and lower yard. Its a relatively small campus but one of which we are very proud. As congressman sarbanes mentioned this morning, if you were here early this morning you would have seen the two roads behind me where we are doing our testimony here, we are covered in two inches of water from a nuisance tide, sometimes called a king tide. This is with no rain that happened over the last two days. This is not an unusual occurrence here. You can see the remnants of it still on mcnair road behind me. This is something we deal with. Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of this committee thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of the United States Naval Academy a. Im pleased to report are solid progress with respect to flood prevention response and preparing for the effects of rising sea levels here at the Naval Academy. Before discussing the possibility affects of rising sea levels, id like to address our recent an ongoing efforts to manage the combination of heavy rain and high tides. Our constitutional agile city in dealing with conventional flooding will directly impact our success in managing more drastic short and long term climaterelated events. Simply put, we can better handal major storm or drastic Sea Level Rise if we can manage surges caused by heavy rainfall and high tides. To control sioux nuisance flooding we have several projects in various stajs of implementation. First the completed cooper road storm Water Management project uses underground reservoirs to capture storm water. It remains in the reservoirs until the water table can naturally absorb it. The cooper road project has been effective at managing storm water that once caused regular flooding and will likely serve as a model for other areas on the yard. Next we now jute liez door jambs on buildings in the flood plain. We have installed closure gates on the roads and parking lots and identified existing i exterior building walls for use as flood walls. Lastly our upcoming cyberbuilding, currently in procurement will be locate ond the corner yard where we experience nuisance flooding. For awareness, this cyberbuilding will be located just adjacent to us between our library of nimitz center. It will be a 200,000 square foot plus building. This building is going to be designed to act as a flood wall for that corner of the yard. Next id like to discuss Infrastructure Improvements we have made in the wake of trorp isabelle. In 2003, isabelle caused widespread flooding and equipment damage throughout the yard. The total cost to that for repair was 120 million. We have taken several measures to ensure that a similar event will not have the same detrimental impact. We have raised the ground floor elevations of new construction. For example, wesley brown field house was built above the flood level and acts as a flood wall. We relocated our chiller plant and moved our hvac equipment to rooftops where feasible. Raised electrical outlets on ground floors and installed valves on tunls and storm lines wrchl suitable we have identified opportunities for quote wet flood proofing unquote where we designate buildings and fields that will be allowed to flood during once in a hundred year type storms. These structures can handle flooding with minimal damage and using resources to keep them dry would not be cost effective. Perhaps most importantly, we have instituted operational protocol for equipment and chemical relocations in classrooms and labs in the event of a major storm. To prepare for future flooding major Tropical Events and rising sea levels, i recently chartered the navy sea advisory council. The council includes Sara Phillips our architect at the Naval Academy and faculties Academic Research for infrastructure implementation. A Council Member will ensure coordination across commands. The Sea Level Advisory Council will look to better project future sea level changes in the annapolis area and it fay the Naval Academys vulnerabilities. From this analysis we have prioritized these vulnerabilities and worked to define project solutions to inform our Resource Management in preventing and minimizing damaging effects of innone dags. I our midship man will be responsible for mitigating the Sea Level Rise at the academy and beyond. We offer two courses specifically designed to investigate this issue and educate it inheriters. The first is oceanography 445. Global chiemt change. It reviews the source of climate, natural and Human Factors that impact the climate. We also offer Political Science 345, environmental politics and security. This course examines the major environmental problems currently influencing u. S. Domestic and Environmental Security policies and includes weekly outside spoke speakers who present material from various perspectives including representatives from industry, the military and the advocacy community. Mr. Chairman distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. In summary, the Naval Academy is aware of the risk of heavy rain high tides severe Tropical Weather and rising sea levels. We are studying adapting to these risks to identify, prioritize and develop Effective Solutions to future vulnerabilities. Im prepared to address any questions you may have regarding my testimony. Thank you very much. Thank you, admiral. Mr. Baker . Members of the committee and congressman van hollen thank you very much for what you do. Distinguished colleagues on the panel and in the audience, thank you. I speak today for the over 200,000 members of the Chesapeake Bay foundation our board, our staff. Chesapeake bay is getting better. But its still a system dangerously out of balance. I use the word system because science has taught us to realize that the chesapeake is a collection of the rivers and streams that feed in to it from the six states the district of columbia, 18 Million People in the watershed and of course the main stem. Fortunately, theres a plan in place to restore the chesapeake and all of the rivers and sdrooem streams. Its called the chesapeake clean water blueprint or clean water act terms the epa called it the mother of tmdls. Its a heavy lift, though. And global Climate Change will add to the burden. Were seeing the impacts now right before our eyes. Chesapeake Bay Foundation has Environmental Education centers on smith island and tan jeer island. Inhabited islands in the mid bay. Residents of smith and tangier are losing their homes. They are losing their island. Day after day, week after week with inexably losing their home. On a property in the Chesapeake Bay foundation, in just the last 25 years we have lost an entire pine forest, several dozen acres, several hundred trees to sea level, bay level rise. Ive submitted my testimony but let me summarize briefly. The impacts of Climate Change are multiple, but let me tell you about three for Chesapeake Bay. Warmer waters have a decreased capacity to hold dissolved oxygen exacerbating the bays dead zone. Temperaturesensitive species like eel grass and many others are really truly at risk. Second, the bay region is particularly vulnerability to Sea Level Rise exacerbated exacerbated by land subside dense. Approximately one foot of net Sea Level Rise in the chesapeake over the last 100 years is roughly twice the world average. Thousands of acres of environmentally critical wetlands and shorelines have been and are now further threatened with innone dags. And third, increased intensity and frequency of storms create more erosion and runoff increasing the flow of pollutant pollutants pollutants, especially nitrogen, phosphorous and sediment in to the streams, rivers and main stem of the bay. Let me give you one very specific example of how global Climate Change and bay pollution are conspiring to possibly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory of one of our greatest Success Story s. Science said that the Chesapeake Bay rockfish, striped bass were fully restored species. Well, with pollution and increasing dead zones, the bottom waters of the bay are uninhabitable all too often for rockfish. With increasing water temperatures, 75, 80 degrees and more, the upper levels of the bay are all too often uninhabitable for rockfish. So they are literally getting squeezed and therefore stressed in to a much narrower amount of the water column. To wrap up, lets instead of focusing on the problems lets focus on the solutions. Addressing Climate Change, mitigating the impacts of Climate Change and implementing the clean water blueprint are more than just two sides of the same coin. We not only need both to save the bay, but each will reinforce and add value to the other. One plus one can equal three. Thank you very much. Dr. Ekwurzel. I hope im pronouncing it correctly. Its great. Perfect. Thank you on behalf of the union of concerned scientists i really thank you Ranking Member pallone, sarbanes, tonko and congressman van hollen for the opportunity to testify here today before the panel and the panelists and the interested audience. Im a senior climate scientist at ucs. We are the nations leading sciencebased nonprofit. We have over half a million supporters who are hoping that there are changing that were talking about today. So as we all know, burning coal oil and gas are increasing the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane at unprecedented levels. It is warming the atmosphere and asid acidifying the oceans. We have the ices diminishing. We have many regions that are dealing with decreased snow pack, increasing the risk of wildfires, the list goes on. Its quite depressing, actually. But sea level is what im going to focus on today. Its really accelerated and that combined with extreme precipitation really are having an impact on severe flooding which is part of the reason why we are gathered here today in the city of annapolis. The pace and amount of Greenhouse Gas emissions really determine how much worse things get. What does this mean for maryland and the location of this hearing . Parts of maryland are already facing the risk of loss of land. Everyone who cares about maryland should care about reducing emissions. The future of key Economic Resources and cherished places like where we are right now really depends on these decisions. Today the capital, annapolis is one of the most frequently flooded cities on the east coast and as Sea Level Rise accelerates due to Climate Change the flooding will get exponentially worse. There are other communities up and down maryland and the eastern sea board that are facing similar vulnerable risks. According to a recent usc report, the highest tides that occur each year are flooding further inland causing more damage. And some places are likely to be under water in the lifetime of a typical 30year mortgage. So recent trends help explain why this is happening over the last 50 years, Sea Level Rise has risen much faster in the gulf and east coast of the United States. And i included a figure and its really quite stark. Sea level at annapolis has risen over a foot in the last century and the global rate is 8 inches. To give an idea of the accelerating Sea Level Rise. If we stay in our Current Business as usual which is the highest trajectory of emissions annapolis would likely see another 8 inches. It took that much over the last century for the globe in just 15 years from now. And just the lifetime of 30 years, we could see 17 inches here in annapolis. Instead if we embarked on a low emissions scenario, annapolis could prepare for 3 inches in 15 years and 6 inches by 30 years a little bit more manageable. Today the popular city dock, its a Gathering Place inwater front of annapolis that is central and sees around 50 times a year flooding. Annapolis is expected to experience 262 flooding events by the year 2030 and roughly over 380 by the year 2045 if we stay on this high emissions trajectory. This means that likely half the days of the year will have flooding at annapolis. Other coastal communities in maryland are similarly vulnerable. Ocean city is vulnerable. Tide flooding occurs eight times per year today. And in we continue on the high emissions path way they could have 411 per year by the year 2045. The floods would be far more extensive than the limited flooding seen today. The case for emissions reduction could not be more direct. If we limited it to a low pathway they could prepare for 42 flood events per year by 2045. Tidal floods will be more severe. Today tidal floods typically last a few hours or less. Several locations in the Chesapeake Bay area including baltimore and its floodprone inner harbor are projected to be under water for more than 875 hours per year, thats about 10 of the year by the year 2045 if we continue on the high emissions. Even when a hurricane forms naturally, conditions brought about by Climate Change are contributing to the power and destructive capacity of hurricanes in the north atlantic through more severe storm surges and more intense precipitation. The latest science suggests that hurricanes typhoons and cyclones are shifting poleward and higher lad tuesday and that means more to the north which puts mid Atlantic States more at risk. Damage can be expected to be raised as the increase of storm surges. The u. S. And the Global Community must start rapidly reducing emissions to slow the level of Sea Level Rise the future welfare of maryland, new york and other coastal communities depend on this. So what were going to do now is have questions from us and the congressman. Were going to try to limit it to five minutes from each of us. I we dont have a mike is doing this manually. Were not hightech here even though were the hightech committee. But youll be fine. I wanted to start with the admiral. But you actually answered most of my questions, admiral. I was going to issue questions about what is happening at the academy and the courses that are offered at the academy so im not going to repeat that. But can you give us an idea how much it has cost the Naval Academy to repair the damage caused by severe storms or what you estimate the cost will be for some of the things you mentioned. It is difficult to put in an exact dollar figure. I mentioned the damage from hurricane and Tropical Storm isabel. That was well over 100 million. That was actually more than just repairing the costs. It actually gave us more protection. We used some of that money to build berms and to build some of these flood doors as well as build some internal pumps. So we were able to get that money to make the Naval Academy better and safer. As you see here at the Academy Grounds the majority of the structures are over 100 years old. Many of the buildings here were built at the turn of the century by earnest flagg. There is a cost to maintaining them and making sure they can handle rising waters and major events. We do within the budget that we work within the navy have currently enough money to handle some of the upgrades we are planning for the long term. You heard me talk about the cooper road project and some of the others. I would tell you we are able to the those things within the construct of the funding that we have. But i have not gone to congress to ask for more particular moneys just as we build more structures here, the cyberbuilding that will serve as an New Academic Building but as a source of flood protection for that part of the yard. To say i have a specific number this is what we are spending on just flood protection it would be very difficult accept to say that there are moneys that come to naval facilities that support us in thateffort. All right. Thank you. Let me ask the mayor according to a special investigative report Historic Downtown annapolis experienced at least half a foot of flooding at high tide no more than four times last year. How has this increased flooding impacted local communities and businesses . What are they saying to you about this and have you heard from mayors of other coastal towns who have to deal with impacts of Climate Change. I serve on the Maryland Municipal League. A lot of the cities are close to the water. Its something that we talk about and something that the other mayors effect. And there is consensus built upon. Out of the 157 cities in the state of maryland only four have partisan elections. The other ones