creating gaps or we could fall below 10 operational ssbn's. to illustrate how much of a challenge the navy has accepted in this program of record, consider this. we must build the first ohio replacement ssbn's in the same amount of time it took to build the first virginia class submarine, yet the ohio replacement is 2.5 times its size. concern number four, minimizing the impact of ohio replacement on the rest of the navy. there are three ways to minimize the impact of ohio replacement on the rest of the navy, and we are pursuing all of them. first, we are making the ohio replacement as affordable as possible. the ohio replacement will have 16 tubes, not 24. we have maximized the use of previous systems. a weapon system design for the ohio, as well as virginia designed for features have been pulled into the ohio replacement. we have reached into the cost per submarine. the procurement of each ohio replacement ssbn's will cost less than 1% of one year of the dod's budget. when you consider it will carry 70% of the nations nuclear warheads preventing the major power war we talked about earlier, through the 2080's, that is a tremendous return on investment. second, we have to reduce the number of ohio replacement submarines to the minimum. we have rung out every ounce of efficiency from this program. we have gone from 41 ssbn's to 18 ssbn's to 14, and now we are heading to a force of 12 ohio replacement ssbn's. just going from 14 to 12 alone saves $40 billion in lifecycle costs. at two that the ohio life extension from 30-42 years and the fact that the ohio replacement will be designed for 42 years from the get go, we are clearly demonstrating our desire to decrease the number of submarines to the minimum. the third way to reduce the impact on the rest of the navy is ensuring we fund it in a manner that does not impact the navy's already stressed shipbuilding budget. you can read an article every day talking about the navy shipbuilding plant and the associated disco reality -- fiscal reality. i spoke earlier about the short-term churning of the 24 hour news cycle, and how it mexico difficult if not impossible to maintain perspective on the long-term nature of nuclear deterrents. if you only take a short-term view of the historic navy shipbuilding funding levels, you will lose the long-term fax of what actually -- facts of what happened during previous procurement periods. during those years were ssb n's procurement occurred, the navy's annual shipbuilding account was between $5 billion and $7 billion per year when you compare it to all other post-korean war years. my point about not taking that short-term historical perspective is you have to make sure you go back far enough to get the full history included in the conversation. you can't go back 20 years or 30 years. you can go back 40 years. you have to go back 50 years because i talked about that patrol. our force is capable of deploying to wear a matter so we can be there when it matters. without the plus during those times, the full size required to execute the rest of our naval strategy would have been jeopardized. today, we put at risk our strategic commitment to the country and to our allies if we adversely impact navy shipbuilding as a whole. i view that something that would be unacceptable. taking an even longer term view there is another threat to the long-term capability of the navy contributing to u.s. and global security. during a confirmation hearing secretary of defense carter made it clear that our nation's defense strategy is not executable under the budget level caps. the cno's recent testimony explained that two years ago in fy13 we were able to reprioritize within available resources and continued to operate. this is not a sustainable course for future budgets. with a stable budget and no major contingencies for the for seeable future, the country will recover the cno set. in 2018, that is when we would fully recovered from the fy13 events. he went on to say they would return -- though they return, we would be unable to mitigate the shortfall because prior year investment balances have been depleted during sequestration. in short the cnl said the same thing secretary carter did. a return to sequestration would require a change to our defense strategy. it is important national is more important than ever to work together to find a sustainable long-term solution to balance what we need today with the required capabilities needed in the future and do so in an affordable way. to wrap up, we must or member the vital -- we must remember the vital importance of maintaining a robust force. we are taking some risks today and are working to restore the margin needed to keep the ohio's at sea and ensure the ohio replacement shows up on time and on budget. maintaining a safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent amidst a complex global threat underscores the requirement and justifies the budgetary expense to sustain and modernize our nuclear weapons deterrent. in situations like this, we can always expect to find a relevant dose of wisdom from winston churchill. this is no exception. he said it is not enough to do our best. sometimes we must do what is required. thank you very much. [applause] i have about 20 minutes. i can take a couple of questions. i have to leave at 9:00. my pao will sit around and forward any other questions to me. [laughter] >> one thing that interests me is given the ohio replacement has a smaller missile load than the ohio, why is it the documents show it is a larger submarine? >> the question was since the ohio has larger missile tubes and the higher size of the replacement. our replacement is not larger. it is about the same size. a couple of things. our replacement has a pulserprepulser. that right there -- there is a size associated with that. the manufacturing techniques are such that we can do -- the things that will allow us to build in the same time as the virginia is part of that. there is some size associated with the way we are building it. that is a significant part of keeping the cost down and keeping the schedule down. the construction process as to that some. i would say that's probably the two biggest things that come to my mind. the bottom line is i can sure you it is the right separate from our requirement standpoint. there are certain things about construction you have to do at first. one of them is stealth. that would probably be a third thing i would ask that list. because of certain stealth requirements, we are building a summary the has to be around until the 2080's and the ohio -- we would not be covetable with the stuff associated with the ohio and projecting that into the 2080's. there are additional things with the electric drive and other aspects of the design associated with that. it is the right submarine and has the right requirements. we will be able to do it in the same amount of time as building a virginia. that is huge. >> we currently have four assistsssgn's. where will those go? >> the question was about the four ssgn's and when they go away, where does their mission go? all four retire in three years. that is what the virginia payload module is all about. that is another big part of my portfolio. for those of you not familiar with that, you take a submarine during modulation and you cut in half and put in a plug, a suction, about 90 feet long or so the has four big tubes. it looks and smells a lot like a d5 missile tube. we have a lot of those and we already have them on ssgn's. the things we do for ssgn's and the canister that goes on them that has the tomahawks and it, can totally transport into the virginia payload module seamless. in addition, on the block three virginia classes and beyond, we just had the first block three now in the water in north dakota. though some marines up forward don't have the 12 individual vertical launch styles like blocks one into the virginia has and the 688 has. they still have 12 tomahawks but they are in the form of two 87 inch diameter tubes called the virginia payload tubes. they are not in a module. the point is we have done it on ssgn's. we are going to do it in vpm in block five of virginia and on. it all works together. all the systems are logical and the same. there is great synergy and that. -- in that. there are other things we can do with the virginia module as well. >> first of all, i would like to ask you to elaborate on the more economical construction methods. the sub ends up being larger volume. i haven't heard that before and you would think it would not be so great for stop. two, since you are about to change jobs, the common thread is giving those ohio ssbn's functioning at this unprecedented age. you have cnet from the 97 perspective. that's you have seen that from the 97 perspective. what are you worried about breaking first? >> the question was about some reconstruction techniques and readiness of the ssbn's. what do i think will break first? i don't know i can comment on that. as a submariner, you are at 300 feet with high pressure hydraulics and a nuclear reactor and nuclear weapons. there are a lot of things that you think about that you make sure all have to work together. there is no margin for error. i don't care if you are in an aircraft, spacecraft, or submerged craft. you have to worry about a lot of things, and you worry about all of them equally as anyone of them could be the end of you. i do know if i necessarily think about one particular thing. i guess some of the nonnuclear systems -- think about your 30-year-old family minivan. you probably take care of the engine and the tires and maybe even the radio but the floorboards and those can of things -- it is all the stuff. 42 years is a long time. that is the stuff i think about. all the other things that are just part of the day-to-day routine that you have to get right. construction-wise, one of the big things on the ohio replacement is our target is 83% of design completion when we get to construction. that is significantly more than we had in the virginia class. that is one of the big waves we will -- big ways we will be able to stay on schedule and stay on track and make sure we can build a summary that is 2.5 the size of the virginia in the same amount of time. anybody else? >> my question has to do with the proposals to go to 8 some marines to 12. -- submarines to 12. this would delay construction of a new boat like water years and take four out of the service early. i know admiral benedict and others have said to congress of what to do, but would you explain how this affects the stealth and operational capacity of our fleet. what it would do to stability and target coverage. i think it is a proposal out there that needs to be analyzed objectively. >> the question was again about the eight versus 10 operational issue. i totally agree with you. that's why i try to address it in my remarks. if you put the other warheads on the other submarines, now you have more eggs in those baskets granted you have the same number of warheads but the analogy does not apply. you have decreased the number of centuries cesentries needed to guard the fort because the number of ssbn's is not a function of the number of warheads. it is the number of ssbn's that is needed is about geography where you are, overflight concerns survivability. they are of no value to you if the ssbn's is sitting with more warheads on it next to the peierier. it has to be out there. you need a certain amount of structure to be out there. than the target coverage piece. that gets to be your friends are, for your potential adversaries are restrictions, where do you have to be to achieve certain target coverage. that is where the complexity is. the analysis there given a two- ocean approach, the number is 10. eight would not do it. yes, sir. >> can you speak to the expansion of other partner allied militaries and their submarine forces and what coordination exists between the u.s. navy and say australia and great britain? >> the question was about other summary forces and cooperation. from an allied perspective, we have great allies in the u.k. australians, canada, japan. the great summary forces contribute tremendously. we work with them on a daily basis. our connections with our british partners is extremely close. so close that we are building a common missile compartment for them for hire replacement. that could not be a greater example of that. from a non-friendly standpoint, potential adversaries just take a look at the countries out there that are looking at buying submarines or improving their submarines. every day, you can read in the paper about another country taking another step at doing that. it is a tremendous force multiplier. if you only had one dollar to spend, i would spend on a submarine. it allows you -- the submarine is the anti- -- force. it allows you to get under the umbrella and be there to take action at the time and place of your choosing. beatty force that unlocks the a2ad door for the rest of the force. other countries see that. from a return on investment standpoint, it is a great place to spend your last dollar or your first dollar. between our friendly nations, i would say the relationship has not been stronger. it is great. yes, sir. >> i am very confident that ohio replacement will be a great technical system, but with the less numbers and your century analogy, what are the stresses the crew force will have to pick up with less ships to pick up those mission this mission? >> i am not going to deny there will be additional pressure there. i can tell you that because of the poll through with -- the pull through with a lot of the technology, that decreases -- there is no new training requirements or infrastructure in kings bay to support that weapon, that missile system. what would be associated with that kind of newness that is a good news story. that will not be there. i can tell you right now because of what we have designed in the ship, the whole overall design process, the way it is constructed, the way maintenance will be done even better than how we did in the program in ohio, we will still have the same notional 33-77 day -- the same notional at sea port that we had in ohio. that reduces the stress on the sailor. the model is essentially the same. we are working hard to make the model of ohio the same as ohio replacement. all that other stuff, the second and third and fourth order effects from training, maintenance, logistics people, the amount of medical people on the base, all those issues is the same. that is where we get savings. we have worked hard at thinking that through. thank you for that question. >> can you give us an update on how the design work is going for the ojai role placement -- the ohio replacement? have you encountered any problems and what is the next milestone for that work? >> bottom line is the design is going well. it is on track. we have not decided a submarine for a decade, especially missile submarines. there are some starting pains and whatnot, but nothing that i am concerned about. i would characterize it as on track. we recognize this whole journey is one where you either are getting better or you are getting worse. you never stand still. i talk about how the first patrol is in fy31. to be true, it is october 2030. we have plenty of push-ups to do between now and then. we are on track as the bottom line. i can probably take one more. >> i just read a paper about deterrence. it was about the potential impact of hypersonics. in the paper, it mentioned the possible roles that the boomer force might play with this new type of weapon as it relates to a sort of different kind of scenario then you would typically build them for. from a technical standpoint, it came down to conductivity. -- connectivity. if you think about the connectivity we will need with the summary force in general anything from an r&d standpoint that sticks out in your head that we probably need to focus on to get the kind of connectivity we will need to make a force flexible from a tactics standpoint? >> great question. i don't want to sit here and say tofalo says the new sovereign will look like this. have a bunch of people getting into power right now figuring that out. i could foresee an area where we do -- most submarine detections are based on periscope sightings, frankly. the shallower you are, the more susceptible you are. staying deep is key. being able to conduct para scope depth operations not at periscope depth will be a part of a futuristic design. i don't want you to say that is the answer because i want people to tell me what the answer is so i can get some smart people working on it. we are literally standing at that process right now to look at the future. would that be a buoy they goes up to the surface to do what a periscope does? it can instantaneously get a total picture and communicate and it is less susceptible to collision. all those kinds of things. that is one futuristic thing. i worry about not having eli. i don't know if there's anything new from an r&d standpoint there. the russians have elf. out of the gas to be a submarine thing. it is unjammable. lots of different people can take advantage of different services and different missions. i think about that. that's probably all i have off the top of my head. >> thank you. [applause] >> on the next washington journal, with the patriot act set to expire at midnight, we will talk to wall street journal national security reporter damien paletta. alfonso aguilar on the proposal for immigration reform. "washington journal"" begins live at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span. tonight at midnight, the patriot act expires, including provisions authorizing the nsa's bu;klk phone data collection. the senate is meeting today to pass an extension to parts of the law. president obama has called on members to renew the provisions. >> i thought this would be a good opportunity to remind everyone that on sunday at midnight a whole bunch of authorities we use in order to prevent terrorist attacks in this country expire. fortunately the house of representatives was able to put forward a piece of legislation the usa freedom act that receives overwhelming bipartisan support. what it does is not only continue authorities that currently exist and are not controversial for example the capacity of the fbi or other law enforcement agencies to use what is called a wiretap -- a probing wiretap. if we don't individual where there is probable cause, where they might be engaged in a terrorist attack but are switching from cell phones, we can move from cell phone to cell phone. not a controversial provision. those authorities would be continued. the usa freedom act also reforms the bulk data collection program that has been of significant concern and that i promised we could reform over a year and a half ago. we now have democrats and republicans in both the house and senate who think this is the right way to go. we have our law enforcement and national security teams and civil the only thing standing in the way is a handful of senators for resisting these reforms despite law enforcement saying let's go ahead and get this done. we only have a few days. it expires on sunday at midnight. i do not want us to be in a situation which, for a for -- certain situation of time, those authorities go away. suddenly we are dark. heaven for bid -- for bid we got a problem where we could have prevented a terrorist attack or handed someone who is