Transcripts For CSPAN Navy Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request 20150314

The forests. Over the last few years, we have prioritized the readiness of our forces. These are the forces you can count on for an immediate response. These are the forces that help the evacuations of americans and south sudan, yemen. These forces train the iraqi army and protect our embassy in baghdad. These are the marines in the pacific. I can assure you that your deployed marines are well trained, well bred, and wellequipped. We have had to make tough choices to face sequestration and reduce budgets. In order to maintain the readiness of our deployed forces, we have not sufficiently invested in our infrastructure is a statement, and quality of life programs. As a result, approximately half of our deployed units, those that you depend on for onset on for seen situations have resulted in shortfalls. This has resulted indianas is a loss of american allies. Over time, modernization will be needed at higher costs. In areas we are unable to innovate and a dock for tomorrows threats. It will eventually a road erode our advantage. The town just today provide context for my message. We can meet requirements with the president s budget, but there are no margins. It will exacerbate our challenges for today. It will also result in fewer active duty marines. Perhaps more concerning, it will result in fewer marines and sailors teeing deployed to immediately respond to crises involving american citizens or interests. As we saw in the wake of benghazi, the American People expect us to respond to the crisis today. And closing, my sentiment is that funding below the president s budget level will require a new strategy. Thank you once again for the opportunity and for your leadership in addressing todays fiscal challenges. I look forward to your questions. General greenert it is my honor to represent our active sailors, the civilians and their families, especially the 41,000 sailors around the world today. It is my pleasure to testify this morning. Chairman your navy core team are united in fulfilling their mandate to be there when it matters, ready to respond to crisis. To that point, recent events exemplify the importance of presence. Last august, a strike group relocated to the arabian gulf in less than 30 hours, immediately began flying and 454 days, that was the only option to project power against isis. The destroyer arrived within the black sea within one week after russia invaded crimea. And that are vessels were among the first to search the java sea. We have been where it matters when it matters. As i testified before, the sequestration of 2013 degraded our ra readiness, and we have not yet recovered. They have generated maintenance that blocks, and compelled us to lessen deployments. Since 2013, our deployments have been eight to 11 months. It has degraded readiness to respond to pigeon sees contingencies. For example, groups are supposed to be ready to respond within 30 days of a crisis. However, today, on average, we have been able to keep one Carrier Strike group in this posture. We are at one third of the requirement. Assuming the best case of an on time adequate, and stable budget and no major contingencies, we may be able to recover from the accumulated backlog by 2018 for our strike groups and by 20240 our amphibious groups. That is just we have been forced to slow modernization. Our war fighting advantages have been decline in several areas, notably in submarine warfare air to air words where warfare. We have been compelled to accept significant risks into key missions. Ive provided to you at hand out that summarizes where the navy stands with some missions, and where we stand in relation to those missions under the two budgets, the president s budget. The first i risk is the ability to win at sea. The second shot risk is to project power, despite challenges. Chairman, when i say risk, i mean that our platforms, our people, and our systems will arrive late to the fight. They will arrive with insufficient ordinance, and be without combat systems and networks that are required. They will be in on weekly inadequately prepared to fight. This means more People Killed and less ability to defend allies in the future. Theis represents the absolute minimum. To bring them maybe into balance, we focused the bill on the capability and then deliver that can capability at whatever capacity we can afford. Once again, we will defer upgrades. Mr. Chairman, todays world is more complex, more uncertain and more turbulent. Our adversaries of modernizing and expanding capabilities. It is vital that we have an adequate and predictable budget to remain an effective navy. I think you and i think this committee for what they have done with us. I look forward to work with congress to find solutions to make sure our navy requires capability to equip our forces. Senator mccain i would like to thank the witnesses. Very moving remarks. Do you share the concern for sequestration, and as admiral reed pointed out, significant amount of time to recover from the current fx of sequestration . General dunford i certainly do. We will sail he reduce the capacity of marines. Senator mccain i believe you are asked by senator king, does this sequestration put the lives of the men and women who are serving in uniform at greater risk . Secretary greenert absolutely. When marines are called, they will go. They will either go at s shortfall without training which would absolutely put lives at risk. Secretary greenert this is about the future navy. Our benchmark is 2020. If we do not modernize, we will not be ready. Senator mccain is it affecting morale and retention . Generall greenert it is. People are angry by sequestration and the threat of more. Secresenator mccain and deployments are longer . General greenert deployment for seven months. They are actually home for less than 14 months before they deploy. That continues. Senator mccain is that a factor on reimbursement . General greenert it will be over time. It does have an impact on two things. I have an impact on training across the range of operations. It also has an impact on the amount of time that marines are able to spend with her family. Senator mccain secretary, we have had conversations on the cost of Aircraft Carriers. I can that it will be around 12 billion, each, is that correct . Secretary malbus we are under the cap. Senator mccain i hope, given new technology and are owned and a lot of other aspects of warfare, including a 35 capabilities, that we will be looking at alternatives as well to the latest class of Aircraft Carriers. Is that correct . Senator malbus it is. As you and i discussed everything is getting smaller and faster, with the possible exception of military. Senator mccain im not quite clear on why isnt it true that the major cost overruns were due to advances, or new technology in launching of electromagnetic launching systems and advanced weapon elevators. Are those still a greater risk on the cost problem . Secretary malbus you actually correct that those are some of the reasons for the cost overruns. We are in agreement that that way the fort was built was not the way to be built. Too much new technology was trying to be forced in. That technology was not mature. Today, it is 80 percent complete. Launching gear is where it should be. It is moving along. The risk of any more cost overruns, as you pointed out, we have had stable costs for the last three years or more. It goes down every day. There are still some risks in the testing of those that we have not used before. Senator mccain could you give a brief update on the progress of the past 35 f35. Commander dunford we have a good number of air cost laid out to bring it to service. Admiral dunford the avionics, this the model itself, is good. We still have a way to go for the software. Right now, we are on track for an ioc of late fiscal year 2019. My concern is that this software is able to integrate all the systems. This aircraft has to sit in the air wing. So far, so good. We have to keep really close watch on it. Senator reed thank you. Your responses about the real and dramatic effects on the lives of the men and women who serve our i think another strong indication of the need for collective ad bipartisan action to end sequestration. Thank you, gentlemen. Mr. Secretary, and admiral green, last year the Defense Authorization bill, in section 10 22, created dcbased find which was created to help you from the department of defense level two build the replacement submarines. Can i just both of you, how do you intend to use this fund . In general, your plans for the replacements. Secretary, if you want to begin. Secretary malbus we very much appreciate the establishment of this fund. We have been talking for some time of when we begin to build the replacement glass and 2021, if it is a pure navy bill, it will devastate some part of the navy either shipbuilding or readiness, or something. Because of the high cost and because we do not recapitalize very often. If you look back in history there is presicedent for making this a National Program because it is the most survivable leg, or having navy ships to accommodate it. The 41 for freedom in the late 50s or 60s, and the ohio class in the late 70s through 92 both times, and Navy Shipbuilding was increased pretty dramatically to accommodate these submarines. To show you the affect from 7680, navy ship building doubled to accommodate the navy class. The fleet still declined by 40 percent because it was something not enough to do both. Admiral greenert i think it is a great start. I think we need to pursue clarity of intent from the congress. What i mean is the legal ramifications of these sources of funding. Is it just other Navy Appropriations or do we mean the whole department of defense could contribute to the fund . In my view, that would be great. Senator reed in my view, it would be great too. We will try to produce clarification for you. General dunford, i talked about the fighting vehicle program. This has been interesting. The expedition was canceled. We have had several different dons, now we are into this new combat vehicle which is described as not developmental. I seriously, your comments on what you see as the challenge, what are you trying to accomplish by this how do you avoid the fate of the preceding vehicles which we spent money on but could never deliver . General dunford we have been working for some time to replace the 40yearold vehicle. Until a few years ago we were trying to reconcile be protection required by todays threat, the cost we could afford, and the ship to shore capability. It turned out we could not reconcile those three, so a decision was made to break the program into thirds. The need to address ground vehicles. That vehicle would be moved from ship to shore in a connector. The second phase would be to get our vehicles to add Decision Point to pursue self deploying highspeed vehicles, if at that time we can reconcile the vehicle, or continue to make improvements to the second phase, which is a vehicle with capabilities. We simply could not reconcile those three things, the cost the capability, and the requirement against the current threat. Senator reed you are focusing first on a vehicle to get a short distance and then fight on land with all the protections we have seen against ieds and those things. That is the first phase . General dunford absolutely right. The first vehicle is optimized for ground protection. Senator reed the second phase will be a completely different vehicle . General dunford no, sir. I was at a center to look at the state of the vehicles. I think in most cases, although we have asked for a vehicle that provides adequate capability, all of the individuals right now there are competitive in the process have a vehicle that make it close to the second phase that we require. Senator reed thank you very much. Finally, mr. Secretary, the director of operations has raised some concerns about the survivability. Also, the ones that have been modified. Have you specifically established survivability requirements for the modified are those requirements much different than the initial requirements . General dunford the small capability, we did look at that. Things like hardening the area around the magazine, various combat systems cnl it has been pointed out that the best way to survive is to not get hit. We have upped capabilitys of the ship. It is a very fast ship to keep that. It is important to keep in mind that this is a Small Service combatant. The new upgraded ones they are not destroyers or cruisers. Have a different role to play. The survivability of a Small Surface combatant, particularly with upgrades, meets our fleet requirements. It meets requirements we have set. Senator reed thank you. Senator inhofe thank you. About one year ago, they would like adding 400 or so in the 2015 budget. I dont remember. What is the current inventory . If we were to get how many more with that represent when you said 4400 . Is it like 2000 now . Admiral greenert i have to get you the number. Senator inhofe if we are projecting, including at the time as we had in this budget, 200 to be bought, then all of a sudden, at least to me, the program was terminated. Ive just wondering what has happened that caused that not to be a necessary component, as it was considered to be before. Admiral greenert we had to take some chances. Im not happy about it at all. I think i have expressed it. We felt the combat expenditure we have watched it very closely when i sayy combat, we think we have enough for the model number. We are taking risks. Send it inator inhofe you would prefer not to. Admiral greenert it is not a good picture. Senator inhofe senator reed talked about the of 35. Just to elaborate more, that would replace the asf18s, correct . General dunford replacing aircraft that are three years old. Senator inhofe you looked at the mission of all these and you are satisfied that they will be met with these changes and getting rid of the older the f35 will be capable. General dunford this does not just replace. There are fundamentally different capabilities. It will do everything that those three aircraft will do, but also, in terms of information, it will do much more. Senator inhofe you talked about the pilots. We will have a pilot shortage. You talk to the air force and the problems theyre having. Are your problems and look to that . Admiral greenert they are. Theyre flying so much. Working up to go to deployment some say theyve cant even get a will done. Then we shut down. They look at the tarmac, there is a plain they would love to fly, but we dont have the funding. They say, what is this . Senator inhofe that is what was talks about. What is the cost of training versus retention. As i understand, the 10 years of Retention Bonus was around 250,000. That was in the air force. Is that comparable to the navy . Admiral greenert it is comparable. Senator inhofe i training will be Something Like 71 million. We look at the economics. It is obviously far better if we can retain these people, rather than go through training. Have you thought of anything specifically that will help you in that respect . Admiral greenert we want to optimize what we call our training plan. You hit the know on the head. It is getting the flying done more consistently, through us. Keep them, if you will, busy and proficient, so they feel like they have a part and a predictable future out there instead of a cycling process. Senator inhofe that is the message i get, the competition with airlines. It is a supply and demand thing. Admiral greenert senator excuse me, a consistent budget will help us do that. Consistency is the key. Senator inhofe absolutely. General dunford you said, funding below the president s budget will require a new strategy. You have answered a couple of questions about the specifics. Overall, what would a new strategy look like . General dunford well i really meant is on a daytoday basis, we would not have marines to mee are allies part of the strategy. Tthen, we would have fewer forces than would be required to meet a major continuity. In my mind, from the marine corps perspective, drives a need for a new strategy. It is a capacity issue as well as readiness issue. Senator inhofe my time has expired, but if you would like to expand for the record, please do. Senator mccain manchin i will take a different twist. There is no one from West Virginia who has my first meetings in the Armed Service committee, we had a joint chief of staff, and the question was asked, what is the greatest threat that the United States faces. I thought i would hear the terror that we are facing. He said, he didnt hesitate, he said the finances of our country. With that being said, people back home in West Virginia want us to be responsible. They asked a question, they said we hear the our military, our department of defense will spend more than the next seven or eight countries combined. How come we cant do it more efficiently or effectively . If money is the problem, we have to make sure we have the money to do it. Are we using the money wisely. Through procurement, were using audits. Try to figure out why everyone has a different platform. Everything seems to be siloed does you will rather than be integrated. I dont know if you have a comment or answer to that. It is hard to go back home and explain i think the request is going to 6 billion this year. I think just from the navy yours has gone from 149 billion to 145 billion. I know you say if sequestering kicks in it has the connotation to it because of how is administered. I know is hard for you to make comments. Secretary, is there ways that we can do it more effectively and efficiently . Why cant we do to untie your hands to let you do more . May be to have the ability to do more with what you have. Secretary malbus first, you acidly correct. We, as the military have to be efficient, effective, use the taxpayers mone very efficiently. My father was the cheapest humany that god ever put on this earth. I and his son. Am his son. Were using the tools that this congress and the committee have given us. I will show you a chart. Here is what we have to do to buy anything. You cant read it, i cant either from here. It is spaghetti. It is elaborate what you have to go through. You can help us by taking out some of those things. By making us focus on what is important and that is the outcome. We are also looking at things like contracts. The navy spent about 40 billion dollars a year on contracts. Until a couple of years ago, we could not track that money from the time you appropriate and authorize it until he got to the contract. We can today. We are saving today, 10 per year. 4 billion per year on contracts. We can do better than that. Those are hard things. Those are not easy things. The last thing is theres really for parts to the department of defense. Five parts. For services. Three departments. Army, navy, air force. But there are also the department of defense, defense agencies that are all overhead. They have grown far faster than the army services. Senator manchin every time we talk about the lack of resources or money, it is always reduction of force, how effective are people on the front line. When we look at your staff, the staff keeps growing and growing even though you talk about reduction of force. It doesnt make sense why we go to the front line immediately and have a reduction of forest when the staff has made no sacrifice. Secretary malbus can i take a shot . The army and navy have not grown. From 2014two dozen 16 we have a difference of 10 civilians. We are not growing. In fact, the marines are shrinking. Staff are going down. We are doing a 20 reduction in headquarters staff. Again, it is what we call the fourth estate. The department of defense agencies, things like defense finance and accounting service. Things like defense logistics agency. Their contractors have grown excellently. Thats where the growth is coming from. It is not i will speak just for the navy, it is not in the department. Senator wicker thank you. Before we bounce to asia, before we the latest publications from russia, before isis took over so much territory is sequestration returns in october, what sort of gap will be as cuts create . And the already important tasks of defeating isis. Can you highlight to this role to this committee the role that amphibious ships will have . Admiral green one of our Top Priorities is present. My point will be that we will pursue president s. He will not see much productions. Most of the rebalance of the asiapacific are called forward station or forward forces in japan, singapore, and kuan. Those will continue to in fact increased. Our distribution around the world is we are increasing forces in the european command as we look at how we will deploy in the future, strictly based on what you said. It is not to matter, but it is there. At previous forces play an important part in what we are calling the new normal. The ability to respond quickly to defend our forces abroad, especially in our embassies. Senator wicker so, our european presence will not take a hit from sequestration. The hits will take place elsewhere. Admiral greenert if you will those hits will be in our ability to respond. Those forces forward will not be as modern. We will have to medic decreases in modernization. Senator wicker as you know, i have been worrying about afghanistan. General dempsey told a Committee Last week that there is a terrorist network that stretches from afghanistan to nigeria. We have to keep pressure on. He went on to say, i think afghanistan is and will remain an anchor point for the pressure. Do you agree with that . General dunford i do agree with that. I think afghanistan is a counterterrorism partner and is a platform by which the United States can protect its interests. Southwest asia is critical. Senator wicker am i right then to worry about our current plans to draw out forces in afghanistan . To worry that they are more of a political calculation rather than the battle on the ground. General dunford my understanding from listening to testimonies is that they are reviewing a current plan in light of the points you just made. Senator wicker i hope we do here last week before the committee, i pointed out that things are headed in the right direction in afghanistan. I dont know if the American People appreciate that. We have made great gains. Opposition leaders of what the as a stabilizing force. I hope that we are not about to throw away what progress we have made. Secretary malbus, we have been friends a long time. Remarkable testimony. Very profound statement that you had, of course you had to upgrade it a bridge it. You mentioned a statement i almost want to substitute the word costs. It seems like a files on the United States of america. You also correctly say the u. S. Marine corps has been the primary protector of the international system. We are doing it for everybody else. International prosperity is directly linked to the United States navy. Thank you to our military and our navy. We have kept the sea lanes open, you said. We have cap freedom of navigation open for anybody engaged in peaceful and legitimate trade. As the president said, we have been the anchor of global security. This is for you, but also for our friends internationally. Those listening to this. We will have to insist on more of a contribution from our international partners. We cannot we keep the lanes open for them. Our friends in europe our nato friends, our other friends in europe, are depending on exactly what youre are talking about. I would just say, we are going to have to collectively come up with a plan to convince our partners in International Security that it is in their interest to make the financial sacrifice to help as a forward all of this protection that we are giving to the world. Would you like to, on that . Secretary may thisbus first to say, we have been friends for a long time and that is why we are pursuing these partnerships. That is the message that i take two countries around the world. We cant do it by yourself. They have to bear their fair share of the burden. As part of that, to be operable with us, to exercise with us, to make sure we go into things together. One of the things, the tangible things that are happening right now is the french Aircraft Carrier is in the arabian gulf conducting airstrikes against isis. That is the sort of partnership that not only do we need, but the world needs. Senator wicker thank you. I have gone way over. I hope that i speak for my Ranking Member on seapower. Perhaps, you will give us some language to address the confusing chart. If there are suggestions that you have on ways to cut through the red tape and make recruitment Weapon Systems more easier, and hope you will get that to the senator and myself. Senator mccain he is correct he has gone way over. Senator donnelly. Senator donnelly i have taken warning of the, you just made. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your service. I want to tell you, and you artie know, you have a great team sitting here with you. Thank you for everything you have done for our country. We are extraordinary blessed to have you on command. We appreciate it. I also want to mention, i want to take a moment to recognize the superior performance of the navys nuclear forces. It has been exceptional. You have created a culture of outstanding performance. It has not gone unnoticed. As a nation, we reeally feel indebted for you having done all that. I want to ask you now about suicide prevention. It has been such a challenge for our services. It has been something we have all worked on together. What i want to talk about is physician assistants. Have a great reputation in the mission. A great reputation for ethical care medical care. To admiral, and mr. Secretary, what are your thoughts of expanding pa Psychiatric Care to fill some provider gaps that we see . Admiral greenert clearly, we can use more folks to help us with resiliency in the psychological arena. Secretary ma suicide is one of the big challenges we face, not just in the military. It is the second leading cause of death for americans 1830 years old. Senator donnelly it is a scary statistic. General, you have done a great job of embedding Mental Health practitioners. What are your thoughts on the utility of physician assistants also helping in marine corps with Psychiatric Care. Gen. Dunford i would be supportive of anything that would increase the capacity of us to deal with the resiliency of our marines and sailors and also their Mental Health. Senator donnelly as you know, in indiana we work on counterfeit part detection. How big a threat to you see that being in the years ahead . Secretary mabus it is something we have seen in the past and it could be critical in the future. It is important for us to stay on top of that, because some of the counterfeit parts that we have detected, that crane found earlier, were critical parts in the submarine, for example. You cant take chances on things like that. It is one of those capabilities that we have absolutely got to keep up and it is part of the Acquisition Strategy that we have got to have adequate oversight. I will go little that further here in that our acquisition workforce, people at crane around the country, who oversaw things like this, went down pretty considerably since 2010. We have been rebuilding the workforce to do exactly some of those very specialized skills like that. Senator donnelly the marines have played such a strong role in Anbar Province in iraq over the years. A lot of extraordinary relations were created between the marines and the sunni tribes. As we take the battle to isil, can you give me an update as to what role the marines are playing in terms of trying to cultivate those longterm relationships, because they are so critical to our success . Gen. Dunford thank you, senator. We do in fact have forces in Anbar Province today. We have a marine colonel who is the command of the task force. It is focused on supporting general austins counter isil efforts. In addition, to developing those relationships in the Anbar Province, we have marines protecting the embassy in baghdad. We also provide tactical recovery of aircraft and personnel missions. We support the strikes that go in both with carriers and the joint force aircraft. We support with the v 22, so if something did happen we would be in the position to cover aircraft and personnel. Sen. Mike rounds thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for your service. I would like to follow up little bit on what senator and office enholf was discussing. You were responding to the munitions question. This would be for both you and general dunford. In your judgment, are your munitions inventories sufficient to support Current Operations and the defense strategic guidance plan . Are their individual munitions whose inventories at present or projected that are insufficient . If so, what are they and what is being done to address the shortfalls . Jonathan greenert for operations today, we have sufficient munitions. In the future, our benchmark year is 2020. There is a series of missions we have to do, outlined on the card i gave you. They are effectively based upon the war plans. We have insufficient munitions in 2020, even some in the president s budget, they are air to air, surface to surface cruise missiles, some of the air to ground, as mentioned, the joint standoff weapon. The air to air has two elements, a longer and medium range. Both have shortfalls and our lightweight torpedo has a shortfall and our heavyweight torpedo we have a shortfall. A shortfall is defined as the commander believes they need all of this to win in the campaign and you have to have enough to reload. So youre not just standing around saying we won but we are , empty, if you see what i mean. That is the baseline. Gen. Dunford we have adequate ammunition for today. We have taken risk in the ammunition needed for major contingencies as we have dealt with the budget talent is. Challenges. The three major areas we have shortfalls are in the javelin systems. Those are antitank systems. The other areas, the rockets, an artillery system. A large number of other smaller areas of ammunition we are short on, those of the main areas and it has been a decision we have made as we try to balance risk. For the marine corps, as a i mentioned in my Opening Statement, we always ensure that are units that are foreign deployed have the wherewithal to accomplish the mission. What we end up doing is taking risk at home station and against a major contingency. That is exactly what we have done in the case of ammunition. Sen. Mike rounds you have pointed out the competitions in the procurement process, the complications and added costs that come with that. Are there programs that would benefit from Cost Reduction initiatives, such as multiyear procurement or block buys that do not currently have those authorities . If there are, would you care to elaborate on them . Secretary mabus thanks to this committee, in particular thanks to congress, we have multiyear authority on things like the virginia class submarines, we bought 10 submarines for the price of nine because of that multiyear. We have a multiyear on the marine osprey v 22s and it has dramatically driven down the cost. We have a multiyear on our destroyers, which have pretty dramatically driven down the cost. Anytime we can do that, we very much want to and appreciate this committee. Expanding those authorities to do that for Weapon Systems things like that, would certainly be helpful. But it is some of the things like i said in my Opening Statements, basic business concepts, getting more competition in, doing some of these longerterm things so that industry knows what we are going to buy, so they can make the investments upfront in infrastructure and job training, so they can buy things and economic order quantity so we can drive the cost down. The chart i held up just shows some of the steps that we have to go through, even if we get a multiyear, a block by, we have to go through this very convoluted process that adds no value at the end and it doesnt give us a better Weapon System. Sen. Mike rounds i yield back my nine seconds. Senator mccain very thoughtful. Senator blumenthal, you have an extra nine seconds. Sen. Richard blumenthal thank you. I want to thank you all for your Extraordinary Service to our nation. Admiral greenert, particularly my personal thanks to you for your numerous visits to connecticut and your strong advocacy of our navy strength, particularly when it comes to submarines. And i know that all of us on , this committee and the American People join me in gratitude to you. I want to ask a question about submarines. The virginia payload module, which i think is really critically important to the virginia class submarines that we are going to be procuring. As you know, the virginia payload module adds significantly to the number of tomahawks that can be prepared. I think it is 76 . It is especially important at a time when the number of boats in our fleet diminishes to a minimum, or below minimum strength. And so im wondering whether , there is the possibility that that acquisition program, i know that the virginia pay load module are going to be procured beginning in 2019, with one and then in subsequent years, one, whether that program can be accelerated so more the virginia class boats have the the bn and vpm and are able to increase their capacity to deliver that kind of attack . Jonathan greenert we are going to look at that and by april or may, we are going to be done studying that. We would like to do that. We have to look at the technical risk associated with that. If it is feasible, well give it a good try to get that done. If we go to that year, 2018, we are into a block by. We are going to have to transition that bridge, if you will, into trying to manipulate such a major part into a block buy. I do not know what it will do to the vendor. We will have to study that. Sen. Richard blumenthal what do you think is the timetable for making that determination . Jonathan greenert by may. We will be very close with your staff and make sure you that they know how it is going along. Sen. Richard blumenthal if you to keep us informed, i would appreciate that. Jonathan greenert will do. Sen. Richard blumenthal let me move to an issue that i know concerns all of you, the impact of posttraumatic stress, the care for our men and women in uniform. General dunford, i know you have been cognizant and attended to attentive to this issue. Are you satisfied that this budget has enough in the way of resources to deal with posttraumatic stress and traumatic brain injury, which as you also know is a cause of not only threat to readiness but also suicide and other effects . Gen. Dunford we consciously protected those programs as the we built the president s budget in 2016. But i would tell you, again, i it goes back to what happens with levels of sequestration. It becomes increasingly difficult to protect those kinds of programs, as well as a number of other programs as we draw out the budget even further. Sen. Richard blumenthal on that topic, secretary mabus the connectivity to the Veterans Administration on health issues, on a number of personnel related issues has been questioned and challenged in this very room by the vas officials and other members of the department of defense. I wonder whether there is more that you can see being done to better relate and transfer information that is important to disability claims, health care in the v. A. , and so forth . Secretary mabus absolutely. That is why the things we do for our wounded and injured as a we move them from active duty to the v. A. We have a goal and days of how in days of how long it takes to move someone, both navy and marine corps. Under that goal we are doing it faster. But the goal is not a quick goal. It is too long. We need to get better at that. We need to get better at having systems that talk to each other , between the dod and the v. A. It is something that we are very, very conscious of. In trying to eliminate some of the duplication in terms of disability determination that both dod and the v. A. Run, sometimes they do the same things just at different times. , sen. Joni ernst thank you mr. Chair. Gentlemen, thank you so much for being here. I appreciate your service and your willingness to testify in front of this committee. General dunford, i would like to start with you, sir. The budget that we have right now in front of us reflects a switch from landbased operations, largescale battles, back to being a quick, reactionary force for the marines. And i know that the marines are going to adapt accordingly, so they always do that very well. I do worry that our forces are going through a lot of uncertainty with financial constraints and we seem to be caught off guard by our adversaries, our enemies are capturing stockpiles of weapons, some of which are the m16s and m fours. We have been using this individual Weapon System for 50 years now. It was developed in 1964. It still remains our soldier and airmens basic rifle. That puts us that an equal that puts us at an equal playing level with our adversaries on the ground. Is it possible that while we are taking a look at advancing our ships, modernizing our ships modernizing our aviation platforms, within the budget is there room to move on advancing individual Weapon Systems that that is a technological that puts us at a technological advantage over our adversaries . Gen. Dunford thanks for that question. That is one of my greatest concerns. We know historically that the marine corps needs to invest 11 to 12 , which is fairly small, into modernization capability. This year, we are at 9 . It is lower than it has been historically. I am concerned. I think we are doing a pretty good job of resetting our capabilities to the fight that we had yesterday. Im not satisfied that we are investing enough in the capabilities we need to fight tomorrow. What you are suggesting modernization of things that , Weapon Systems, i would say this, i agree with the point that we need to do that but i also would make the point it is not just the weapon, it is who is behind the weapon. It is not a fair fight, even if the enemy has the same weapon that we do, it is the marine behind the weapon that makes the m16 the most effective. Your point about increased investment in these areas. It is one of the sacrifices we have made as we continue to fight todays fight and make sure our marines who are Forward Deployed have what they need. We had taken risk in our capability development. Sen. Joni ernst thank you for pointing out that it is that marine behind the Weapon System and making sure that we are training them appropriately and have the means to do that is extremely important. One thing that i would love to address to both admiral and to you as well, general, and secretary, and the statements we secretary. In the statements we have talked , a little bit about the total force that we have out there which would include not only activeduty personnel but those reserve members that are being used as operational forces. I would love to hear you elaborate a little bit about the role of the reserve members have played in backfilling for your components. Jonathan greenert i would be remiss if i did not acknowledge that this is the hundredth anniversary of the navy reserve this year. In fact, just a few days ago. Happy anniversary. We are absolutely unable to function without our navy reserve today. They have gone from sort of folks who were there for a Strategic Force in case of a big war to now part of our total force. They do our logistics, all of our logistics, a lot of our medical, they are in cyber in a huge way. As you go to unmanned and rural areas, they are the operators in remote waiting, a lot of them are integrating fully in that regard. Our highvalue units our , submarines, ships are out around the world, they are Building Partnership capacity. There are other areas were there working their way into. Very effective force, woven into the fivefiber of who we are today. Sen. Joni ernst thank you. Gen. Dunford our ability to lead the Combatant Commanders requirements on a daytoday basis and in response to a major contingency is inextricably linked to the readiness of the marine corps reserve. They are integrated into everything we do. When we look at our requirements over the next couple of years, we have a fourth generation plan that fully integrates our reserves into our ability to make forward presence requirements every day. That to us, is what we mean by using the term. A daytoday basis to meet not only routine requirements, but also the historic need for a Strategic Reserve that could respond to an unexpected major contingency. Sen. Joni ernst thank you gentlemen, thank you mr. Chair. Sen. Mazie hirono thank you and a particular aloha to admiral greenert. This being your last testimony. Secretary mabus, as you know, i am very committed to the rebalance of the asiapacific and we had a discussion about that yesterday, between you and me. It is really important that our efforts to maintain stability in the asiapacific area is important for National Security, even as there are conflicts arising in other parts of the world. As you stated in your testimony, quote, you must have the right platforms and places to ensure our friends and allies understand our commitment. Three the rebalance has to be more than rhetoric and as we discussed yesterday, i trust the navy, as it updated strategic updates its strategic lay down and dispersal plans, will ensure that future plans will reflect the rebalance in terms of equipment, personnel, and partnership opportunities. I certainly look forward to further discussions with you. Secretary mabus, you think this budget reflects our continued commitment to the rebalance with sufficient specificity . Secretary mabus senator, i do. The commitment to the rebalance is real, it is absolute, and you can begin to see the things that are already happening. Youre seeing the second deployment of an lcs to singapore and by 2017, we will have four lcs is in singapore. Lcss in singapore. The cruise will fall into the ships instead of the ships coming back home. Today, you are seeing more than a thousand marines rotationally deployed to australia. Within the next year or two, theyll go to a full nearly 2500 Marines Special purpose task forces. You are seeing the plans that we have to put our newest equipment, both ships and aircraft, in the region. We are going from about 55 of our fleet in the pacific to 60 . I think the important number is that the fleet is getting bigger. 60 of this fleet is going to be bigger than the fleet of the past. We, in this budget, specifically have the resources to carry out that, but i would echo the admiral and general, this is the minimum that we have to have in order to do not only the rebalance, but all the other missions that we are called upon to do. Sen. Mazie hirono thank you. I think i heard your response to senator donnellys question about your concern about contra counterfeited parts and they believe you said you have a concern about that. You have a concern about counterfeit parts, i heard that correct . Secretary mabus yes. Sen. Mazie hirono i was just wondering if youre aware of any technological product that can be embedded to ensure that it is not a counterfeit part . Secretary mabus im not aware of any specific chip or whatever that you could embed. But i am aware of is that our but Quality Control folks places like crane, indiana, that the senator was talking about are exceptionally good at , spotting those counterfeits. Sen. Mazie hirono im aware of a particular product that i love would love talk to further in a different context. Regarding your energy efforts, we need of sustained, longterm commitment to research and development in this area and meeting our Energy Security needs and preserving the superiority of our forces in the face of Energy Supply challenges in the 21st century are important goals. Your testimony, you highlighted that the 2009 formal energy goals for the department of the navy included using energy more efficiently and diversifying our sources of power. Certainly, i agree with your efforts. Could you give us an update, briefly, on the 2009 formal energy goals and how does the president s budget support these energy goals . Secretary mabus i would be happy to. The biggest goal was that by no later than 2020, half of our our energy will come from nonfossil fuel sources. The goal is to make us better war fighters. In terms of our bases, we will be there at the end of 2015. We are saving money by doing it. We will have a gigawatt of power into our bases from nonfossil fuel sources by the end of 2015. Afloat, we will buy no alternative fuels unless it is cost competitive with traditional feels but that seems to be the case with even with todays low oil prices. We are moving pretty aggressively to do that. We demonstrated, certified all our ships, all our aircraft on this. In terms of efficiencies, we are making Great Strides in efficiencies. The president s budget supports both the diversifying kinds of energy and also the efficiencies. Sen. Mazie hirono thank you and i appreciate the indulgence of the chair, i have gone over. Senator kelly ayotte i want to thank the chairman and all of you for your leadership to the country and our military at such an important time. I just wanted to associate myself with some of the comments that senator blumenthal made about the virginia payload module. Im very interested, if that is feasible. I look forward to looking is what you come up with inmate. I also wanted to followup admiral, in your prepared statement, you noted that the Naval Shipyards are critical in maintaining war fighter readiness for the force. I certainly agree with that. In order to have a strong attack submarine fleet, we need to ensure that those submarines are maintained properly and quickly and that they are combat ready. One thing that i wanted to ask about is making sure the facilities that we have are prepared to do that. In doing that in the most efficient way so we can save dollars and get things done sooner. Senator king shares my pride with the work done at the Portsmouth Naval shipyard. In fact, they have the workers of the shipyard have actually been producing had a schedule, head of schedule, the maintenance just recently in april of last year, dr. The uss docked the uss topeka days ahead of schedule. The workers of the Portsmouth Naval shipyard returned the uss california 14 days ahead of schedule and in september, they delivered that uss back to the fleet and had a schedule and under budget. One of the things you have brought to the attention of my office is that they are doing this with facilities that are frankly outdated in some instances. They working in structural shops that are in some cases over 100 years old. The heat, treat, forge area was recently condemned and the buildings have exceeded their useful life. The fact that they are delivering faster and under budget even with these facilities, could you imagine what they could do with more modern facilities. There is a military construction project that has been submitted for reprogramming, called p2 66 structural shops consolidation. It would address many of the problems i just talked about and it will achieve efficiencies improve working conditions, and most importantly save money and time, which i know were all looking to do. It would result in submarines being sent back to the fleet more quickly and im confident if we are able to do this, it would allow them to do an even better job, and they are doing an incredible job right now. Im not expect you to be familiar with all of these projects at hand, but this is an important one for our shipyards and i think that it will drive cost efficiencies and results for the navy. I would like an update on where this reprogramming request sits and obviously, if you have it now, great. If you dont, if that is something you could submit to our office, as quickly as possible, i would appreciate it. Jonathan greenert i will get you complete answer, senator. Kelly ayotte i want to ask in general the importance of the Navy Civilian workforce and what we see, navy seal in and what we see secretary mabus, in terms of the civilian workforce. Many of them, as the economy improves, the competition for the types of skills that they have, that they are able to work, obviously, on such important equipment like our attack submarines, or other equipment, then were going to see more competition for their skills and want to make sure that they stay in the navy and are able to serve the navy. Can you talk to me about what the strength of the civilian workforce is and how we see recruitment Going Forward and what are the challenges we face there and any concerns you may have. Secretary mabus in terms of the public shipyards, like fort smith if you want to see the , effects of sequestration, you dont have to look any further than that. There was a hiring freeze put in place because of sequestration. As people left, they could not be replaced. There was a furlough. Some of them were exempt from it but not all. There was the government shutdown, when they could work. Could not work. Because of all those things, we have got a backlog in those public shipyards. They do great work. But they had to have enough of those artisans, enough of those people with a specific skills to skills, to do it. Again, that is a great tangible example of the not only effects immediately of sequestration but how it stretches out. Itll take us to 2018 to recover from that. The civilian workforce at large, we would not have a fleet to put to sea without those civilians. We lost 12 civilians, killed in the line of duty at the Washington Navy yard. They are in every way an integral, vital part of our navy and graincorp. Jonathan greenert there is a great article this morning on what the director the office of Personnel Management is trying to do for quick hiring. We are trying desperately to hire people into our shipyards because we need to build it up. It is hard. The gordian knot of paperwork is difficult to get through. Kelly ayotte these are incredibly talented people. Thank you. Sen. Angus king thank you, mr. Chairman. Admiral greenert, im sure you are sad this is your last hearing before this committee but you have had a long and distinguished career. Want to thank you. Secretary mabus, your dad should have met mine. I remember him watching the time go by. They wouldve had some sort of spiritual kinship. The arctic is an important area of policy, i know you have been looking at the Navy Developing a strategy. Just briefly, do you see the arctic as an emerging area of importance, of strategic importance, of National Security importance to this country . Jonathan greenert i think we need to look at it deliberately. We need to understand it. Things like iisecs, we need to do it more frequent, get industry up there to study the place, find out when it is going to melt, when are they going to be lines open, are the threats russia is increasing their military presence. How do we survive out there, our people, our ships, our aircraft . Sen. Angus king a simple example about infrastructure icebreakers, we have one heavy duty, one medium duty coast guard. The russians have 17 icebreakers in the arctic. If we are talking about innocent passage, trade, icebreakers are the highway builders, if you will. That is an area, i know it is not a naval, but that is an example of how we are really not adequately developing our Strategic Interests in that region. It strikes me that one of the issues that really is not talked about, we talked a lot about sequestration, i dont have to pile on that subject, we all agree it is a serious risk to National Security, but the industrial base, you cannot turn on and off the shipyard. One of the things that worry me, i look at charts for bad iron bath ironworks for example, in maine. If we dont have the workload, employment dropped down. Is a skilled ship older leaves builder leaves to go to some other area of the country or profession, they are gone and you cannot just turn it back on. Is that something that concerns you, secretary mabus . Secretary mabus it is something that concerns me everyday. It is one of the reasons that i said in my Opening Statement and the larger statement of the committee, that i will protect shipbuilding to the maximum extent possible, because it is not reversible. If you dont build a navy ship one year, you never build it. It is not something that money the next year can make up. It is primarily because of that industrial pace. If you lose those highly skilled workers, and their unique skills, they are not easily learned. In fact, as senator reid said, i was with the uss colorado and they recognized more than 10 people were celebrating their 40th anniversary at the shipyard. They worked there for more than 40 years. So the industrial base, if you lose it, if you lose these highquality, high skilled ship builders, you dont get them back. You see the effects today in terms of bath, or some of our other shipyards. What you see is the effects on the fleet 10 years from now, 15 years from now, 20 years from now. It is something that i have said, evidently as to turn that i used a term that nobody else has used much, but i am going to protect shipbuilding until the last dog dies. We are going to try to say that, stay there partly for the , industrial base, but also for the navy. Sen. Angus king one of the problems is the long leave time means that shortchanging were doing now is going to have the effect five years from now, 10 years now. Im member learning in drivers ed, if youre going above a certain speed, your headlights will not illuminate the wall in time for you to stop. In effect, there is a well out wall out there that we are very close to hitting. We just dont know for about 10 years because of the decisions we are making now in terms of the shortsightedness of the sequester policy. Secretary mabus we are living today with decisions made 10 years ago, 15 years ago, in the size of our fleet. The people sitting in all these chairs, 15, 20 years from now will be living with the decisions we make today. As i said in shipbuilding, they are not reversible. Sen. Angus king you ended your prepared testimony with the quote from Theodore Roosevelt about the navy as an instrument of peace. From that same speech, roosevelt said something that is extraordinarily applicable to the discussion we have been having today about readiness. He said, the veteran seamen of the warships are is of high a as high a type as can be found in any navy which rides the waters of the world. They are unsurpassed in daring and resolution and readiness and thorough knowledge of their profession. This is teddy roosevelt, a hundred years ago. To build the finest ship, the deadliest battery, and and to send it afloat with a raw crew no matter how brave they are individually, would be to ensure disaster, if a foe of average capacity were encountered. This is the payoff line, neither ships nor men can be improvised when the war has begun. General dunford, i would assume that this is all about readiness and the irresponsibility of our not solving this funding problem, so you can have your men and women ready. Gen. Dunford absolutely senator. That is what you expect from the nations readiness. When you call us we are there. , as i mentioned earlier, when you call us for the crisis, we respond today. That is what it is all about. Sen. Angus king thank you for your service. Thank you mr. Chairman. Sen. Timothy kaine thank you to all the witnesses. I add my comments about your service. Im sure that angus was joking about you being sad to be here the last time. You have been helpful and we all appreciate it very under sequester, secretary since you started talking about how cheap your dad was, i have done a lot of budgets. I have done it as a managing director of a law firm, as a mayor, as a governor. I am the only governor in history of my say, a sad accolade, that left with a smaller budget. Sequester violates every principle of good budgeting that any competent manager in the public or private sector would follow. Period. Full stop. Sequester violates every principle of good budgeting that any competent manager in the public or private sector would follow. Im proud that one of my first actions was to eliminate sequester. Acrosstheboard cuts can be done with the slide rule, it is not about the application of human judgment. Anybody terry philosophy that says we dont care about human judgment, we are displayed to do acrosstheboard cutting, is foolish. I have watched us has significant discussions on this committee where we have come to a bipartisan consensus about afghanistan. Thebased strategy is a bad idea a calendarbased strategy is a bad idea. I want to put that to our budgetary reality. Were either going to be sequester based obligated to follow cap congress put in place in 2011, before we saw cyberattacks putin go into ukraine, before isis was gobbling up territory, before boko haram was slaughtering thousands upon thousands of people we are going to be sequester based and ignore every bit of reality that has occurred since august 2011, but we are going to be conditioned based in our budgeting. I would like to ask my colleagues, we have decided on afghanistan should be conditions based. I would argue that lets be just as conditions based for the funding the army and military. Lets not grab onto some bizarre, incompetent budgetary theory and elevate that over the security of the nation. That is my editorial comment. What i intend to do i want to offer some pra ise. General dunford admiral you both talked about something very important. Helping your marines and sailors transition from active life to civilian life. The transition into a civilian workforce, where only 1 of adults have served in the military, there is no natural understanding of what a gunny sergeant does, to care about the transition, which is something i think the dod has generally open up two more recently as we have had a rock and iraq and afghanistan veterans, i think you have all come along way in the last couple of years and being intentional about this and in both of your written testimonies, you talk about efforts that have been under way to get folks credentials that match civilian work skills. To help in a more significant to think in a more significant way about the transition. I have a son who was an officer in the marines. About two weeks, he called me up and said, dad, my nco just told me he is leaving in two weeks and he doesnt know how to find a job. If you wait until somebodies at the end of the time and try to canada into their heads and help them figure out how to transition in the last couple of weeks, it is not going to work. If you start on day one, itll work better and are marines will be marines for life and sailors will be sailors for life. I give you all a lot of credit for making that a priority. One question that i want to ask that might be a question for the record, it might involve classified information. Im concerned about the stability of the government of but box the keeps open sea lanes in the important parts of the world. Then stability of bahrain gives concern. Lives of the american serving and also whether that is can we have a strategic position there given the instability . For the record, i would like if you gave thoughts about what the instability issues, what threats that poses and what the navy is doing to consider how to mitigate those threats, if you could. Jonathan greenert i will take that for the record and give you a complete answer. Senator john mccain thank you. I also thank you for your dissertation on sequestration and i totally agree with that. Senator cotton. Senator cotton thank you very much for your years of distinguished service to our country and all the men and women that you represent. I was an army guy, myself. I have had many people tell me that army stands for not ready for the marines yet. There is no substitute for having an army, but there is no substitute for having a marine corps and navy that is always deployed somewhere. We are very grateful for what you will do. You have written and spoken on the concept of payloads, not platforms. Can you give a symbol version of what you mean by that . Jonathan greenert when we build a ship, it is there for 30 years at least. To put an integrated complicated system and there inside, and such a vessel, when you want to change it out you have to take the ship out of service for 18 months to two years. We cant do that anymore. We cant afford to take it out of service. The industry and technology is moving so fast, they can put together a Weapon System that can come in in a modular fashion. Deal today is to put together a platform, what i call, a platform that has the ability to support upgrades fast upgrades. The enterprise was the first Aircraft Carrier built in 1961. Its First Mission was the cuban missile crisis. Its last was in 2012 off afghanistan. A platform at several changes of payloads it applies to aircraft and ships for sure. Senator cotton how does that apply to a ground force like the marine corps or army . Im not sure that i can answer that. Senator cotton they are more capital intensive investments. Im a supporting entity for the marine corps. And i build an insidious ship, it has to be able to amphibious ship, it has to be able to expand. We fell behind in that regard, as the marines went ashore in afghanistan and iraq, we did not evolve in our ships and now were making the adjustment working together. I would also like to associate myself with the impact of sequestration. I would like to hear about the timeline that might be required to get back to full readiness in your two services. Gen. Dunford if we have a predictable, stable budget at the right level, which we believe the president s budget is minimally there, we would be back to where we need to be in 2018 for the Carrier Strike groups. Jonathan greenert sometime between 2018 and 2020. It is depends on future budgets as well. Senator cotton would you care to comment on morale . It was hard on them. It was a hit on morale. They did not understand, what is this what did i do . The families are angry. They have gotten over that. Today, they are anxious. Morale is good, it is not very good or poor. It is good. They understand that we are looking out for their basic needs. There is a great anxiety out there and if we go back to that, and not sure what is going to happen. I lived through this in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Gen. Dunford we have a very young force. I would describe the reaction as angst. I was concerned in the midgrade officers and staff look into a feature of uncertainty and would make decisions to leave the marine corps when they want them to stay. Senator cotton thank you for all the hard work. Youre always on watch. Sen. Claire mccaskill thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you for all being here. And thank you for your service to the country. As we were discussing, admiral before the hearing started, i had, as you all know, the great opportunity yesterday to embark the uss New Hampshire submarine to go out for the day to dive with the submarine. It was really an experience of a lifetime and i very much appreciated that. It was especially i was especially impressed by the dedication and professionalism by the men serving on that submarine, as on all of our submarines. Impressed by the teamwork that they all experienced as they pointed out to me that a submarine only runs if everybody works together. The cook knew as much about the ship and how is was laid out and the operations as the people in the operations room. It was very impressive. One of the things that became clear as we were discussing with folks about their experience on the New Hampshire was that general dunford can appreciate this a lot of the discussion during the wars in afghanistan and iraq, has been the toll on our fighting men and women. One of the things clear yesterday, not because anybody on the New Hampshire complained about it, but the toll that the reduction in our ships and their capacity has on the men and women who serve on those ships. Because the deployments increase just as the deployment increased during afghanistan and iraq in a way that i think is less clear to the American Public and the told that that takes. I wonder, admiral or secretary if either of you would like to speak to what that shortfall in our ship capacity, the impact that that has on the men and women who are serving on the ships. Jonathan greenert you find it very well, senator. There is a commitment, a covenant we had to providing ready forces forward around the world, where it matters, when it matters. If you have less ships to distribute, those out there will stand the watch longer. We have a phenomenon were trying to get out of, as we were just describing how long it would take to get out of to get the readiness right. When we have sequestration all of the maintenance slows down. All of the shipyards slowdown, to parade rest, as we like to say. Now, we are trying to get that back out. Many left as a result of sequestration. Somebodys out there standing watch. That is the longer deployments waiting for the other folks to get there and send training done their maintenance and training done. Secretary mabus in the early 1990s, we had about 400 ships and about 100 forward the floyd. Today Forward Deployed. Today, we have 300 ships and still 100 forward the floyd. One ofdeployed Forward Deployed. The training, then maintenance and the capability when they come back, is called optimized fleet response plan. Were doing is for the kerry is for the carious first, the strikers, our Amphibious Force next. One of the reasons i remain so committed to shipbuilding, to getting the rights number of those gray halls, so that its what you some of the stress on the sailors it will ease some of the stress on the sailors. Sen. Claire mccaskill one of the things i neglected to say that you all know is that the uss enhancer is a virginia class sub. One of the things that was exciting to hear from folks on the ship was that they always feel very good when it is the Portsmouth Naval shipyard that does the work. I had to put that plug in for the portsmouth shipyard, because they do such great work. Mr. Chairman, can i ask one more question . Thank you. Last september, the departments of energy, navy, and agriculture awarded contracts to three companies to construct and commission by refineries to produce fuels to help meet transportation needs. Can you speak to why you think this is so important for the navy . Secretary mabus it makes us better war fighters. It takes fuel a way as a weapon to be used against us. All you have to is look at the headlines about crimea, you can europe, and russia using fuel is a weapon. Were trying to avoid that. It will also help us do that some of these huge price swings in the oil and gas market. Finally, im a big believer in the free market. I believe you need competition in things like fuels. We will not buy any alternative fuel unless it is absolute price competitive with traditional feels. The other two requirements we have, that it be dropin. Were not changing any engines or settings. And third that it takes no land out of food production. We are looking at secondgeneration and Third Generation biofuel production. Sen. Claire mccaskill thank you. Senator graham what is morale like in the marine corps . Gen. Dunford it is high. Senator graham it should be. I want to tell the navy and marines, better days are coming. We are going to get her act together. At her know how but we will i dont know how, but we will. We are going to somehow solve the problem we have created. Just hang in there keep your chin up and focus on the mission. General, do you believe in leaving troops behind in afghanistan if conditions required . Gen. Dunford i do. Senator graham do you believe threats are growing as i speak . I do. Senator graham when it comes to iraq and syria do you agree with me that if we take isil on, and when i say we, the u. S. And the region, that we must win . Yes senator. Senator graham how many marines were involved . To regimental combat teams in the order of 6000. The second battle about 14,000 u. S. Forces , marine and soldiers. Senator graham without that capacity, is would have been very difficult for the soon sunni tribes to prevail . We are about to fight a bigger force, how many members of our military do we have in iraq today . I dont know the exact numbers, but i think in the order of 3000. Senator graham how many are marines . Gen. Dunford about 500. Senator graham you believe that isolate since a threat us and not just the region isis is a threat to us and not just the region . Gen. Dunford agree. Senator graham do you believe that it is in our tests to make sure that they are not only degraded and destroyed but that they do not come back . I agree. Senator graham you believe the ways to have some Ground Troops to help . Right now, it is critical that we provide u. S. Support. As you know, we are waiting for general austin to make a recommendation. Senator graham do you agree with me that any marine or soldier or sailor or airman who participates would be protecting the homeland . Believe that. Senator graham is somebody died trying to do you agree with me that if we dont stop isil sooner rather than later the likelihood of another attack against this country grows . I think it growth but also i think if we dont stop them, there will be destabilization in the region. Senator graham do worry about the king of jordan . I do. Senator graham do you,. And that we get it right this time. Senator mccaskill . Senator mccaskill i sometimes neglect to say how much respect i have for all of you. That i forget to tell you. Let me do that before i get after something. Admiral greenert, i am dismayed about the leonard scandal. I am dismayed because it rips at the fabric of honor and integrity that defines our military. One of the things that i have try to do since i was allowed to join this Important Committee is to make sure we have those moments where consequences go to the very top instead of hanging out at the middle or bottom. That has sometimes occurred when theres a scandal like this. You are a secretary mabus to speak to the accountability of those at the top of the chain of command for the misconduct that occurred on their watch. Secretary mabus the Leonard Francisc Leonard Francis scandal. Senator, we will hold people accountable that violated either the law or navy ethics. I have already issued letters of century to three admirals. 13star and two to star admirals. The two two stars are going to retire and the threestar had already decided to retire. One thing that is important about the situation is that the reason this was uncovered is that we set up financial tripwires at the gdm may that they want across. So red flags were raised. Ntis investigated for three years with no leaks. During that investigation we found and ntis ages was for nursing was furnishing mr. Francis with information. They set up false information to him. It led to mr. Francis believing that the investigation had been shut down and allowed us to arrest him on american soil. He has implicated a number of naval personnel. We are on the timetable of the u. S. Attorneys office in san diego in terms of how quickly we get to these things. That has been a frustration. We have taken a long time, but i have set up a consolidated disposition authority. So someone was found to be not criminally liable we are looking at them to see if they violated navy ethics. We are stepping up ethics training for ceos, xos, people with responsibility. We have overhauled our procurement requirements and regulations in terms of husbanding these services that the gdma provided. We are monitoring that on a routine basis. One thing i want to say is that you can have all of the ethics training in the world if someone does not know it is wrong to steal or take a bribe they missed something at home what we have to do is set up a system now catch them and hold them accountable. You are right, it is of and down the chain. By the first actions, and i only took the actions to center three admirals, i have taken two more from access to classified information based on allegations. I dont know if they are correct, yet, but in order to protect the integrity of the service. Finally, senator, unique among the service, when we make a change in command, when we do something to a senior officer or co or flag officer, we announce it. We try to be completely transparent. Partly because of what we the learning effect it will have on other people. And partly because people need to know what is happening in the service. We have not seen the numbers go up, but because we announce it we tend to get more scrutiny. Senator mccaskill i appreciate that. That you have done this. I wanted you to know i am interested in how this shakes out. Theres anything i can do to prod the u. S. Attorney into doing justice in the most efficient and time specific way let me know. I dont have much time. I want to ask couple of questions that you can respond on the record for me at a later date to. I dont want to hold up senator the senator from alaska. One, obviously the electronic capability platform. As it relates to the growlers. I know you testified last week, admiral, about a shortage of two or three squadrons. Im concerned about that. I would be concerned if the amazing aircraft were not built in st. Louis, because the capability of the electronic battlefield that we face now and i would like you to respond i worry that this joint study going on now will not be completed in time for us to really evaluate whether the needs, jointly, even exceed what you have said which is two to three squadrons as a shortfall. That i need on the record. And general dunford, i would like to know how the relaying of guam is going. This is something we have worked on in this committee. And when i chaired readiness this is something we talked about. Will you get to the committee and specifically to my office, when you get to where we are with your realignment in guam and what the situation is. I would be very appreciative. I know everyone covered sequestration before i got here, but what every senator said about sequestration, me too. Senator sullivan . Senator sullivan i might get a highlight of your final question , that is one of my first questions senator mccaskill. Gentlemen, we appreciate your service and your frank testimony. General dunford, also appreciate your highlighting the bank for the buck component of the marine corpss spending, 6 of the budget 20 1 of the infantry battalions. That is something important for the American People to recognize. General questions from whitaker, and mccaskill. And redeployment. To pivot asia in particular were some of our ground forces. As part of this committees oversight responsibility i will go to the region soon to look at some of the issues in terms of what cost, training, readiness deployment capabilities, as it relates to the guam redeployment and other issues. I would like, general dunford from your perspective, what are the issues we should be thinking of when we are looking at that, and are you satisfied with how the redeployment is going . As you know, theres some concern about that. There has been a consistent concern over the years. General dunford that is one of the issues, the pacific. Breaking it down into three pieces, first, capacity. For the United States marine corps that means 22,500 marines west of the dateline. As we have drawn down the force in iraq and afghanistan we