July 10, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 115 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E893]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         IMPORTANCE OF SUSTAINING OUR SHIPPING INDUSTRIAL BASE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. ROBERT J. WITTMAN

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 10, 2019

  Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight the ongoing 
challenges facing our domestic industrial base, specifically the 
shipbuilding industry, and I want to urge my colleagues to consider the 
tough realities facing our nation and its ability to produce ships for 
both military missions and commercial applications in the future.
  One of the key points of contention between Republicans and Democrats 
on the NDAA concerns the authorization level or topline for this 
legislation in Fiscal Year 2020. I want to highlight the state of the 
shipbuilding industrial base as a case study for an increased top-line.
  We currently have 290 deployable battle force ships in our Navy, with 
a plan to get us to 355 ships as soon as possible. This was codified by 
the SHIPS Act that I sponsored in 2017 with Sen. Wicker which was 
included in that year's National Defense Authorization Act.
  Consider that, over time, our national capacity to build ships has 
continued to decline and the remaining shipyards and suppliers are 
increasingly at risk. We have lost dozens of shipyards and tens of 
thousands of suppliers over the last 15 years, which makes it even more 
compelling that we do all we can to support the shipyards and suppliers 
that remain.
  In 2018, in response to a Presidential Executive Order, the 
Department of Defense submitted a report entitled ``Assessing and 
Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply 
Chain Resiliency of the United States''.
  Quoting from the report, ``The shipbuilding industrial base is a 
national asset and absolutely vital to America's ability to build and 
sustain the Naval fleet. The Navy is focused on improving the health of 
the industrial base to meet its requirement of a 355 ship fleet with a 
long range plan anchored by industrial stability. The analysis 
performed in response to the Executive Order identified five underlying 
risks: dependency on single/sole source suppliers, capacity shortfalls, 
lack of competition, lack of workforce skills, and unstable demand.''
  So you can see, Madam Speaker, that there are clearly significant 
challenges facing our Navy and our nation's ability to produce warships 
in the future. Single/sole source suppliers, capacity shortfalls, loss 
of competition, lack of workforce skills and unpredictable demand are 
all hampering our nation's ability to build its future fleet. This is 
not a new issue but I'm afraid that the problems confronting our 
industrial base are only getting worse.
  So what has Congress done and what should be done going forward?
  We have made significant investments throughout our Navy's future 
fleet, including funds for our aircraft carrier fleet and a single 
contract awarded earlier this year for procurement of both CVN 80 and 
CVN 81, the 3rd and 4th Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers. I'm 
proud to have led the effort in this House to provide the necessary 
authorization for this contract to be awarded--this contract will save 
$4 billion compared to buying these ships individually and sends 
exactly the right message to all involved that we are serious about 
building more ships in this country.
  We have provided consistent funding and support for our nation's 
submarine programs, and 2019 marks the 9th consecutive year that 2 
Virginia-class Submarines have been procured via the annual 
authorization/appropriations process. The legislation we are 
considering today authorizes a 3rd Virginia-class Submarine to be 
procured in fiscal year 2020 as we have heard on numerous occasions 
about the attack submarine force structure shortfall facing our Navy. 
In 2028 for example, there is a forecast level of 42 attack submarines 
against a stated requirement for 66 submarines.
  On the Columbia ballistic missile submarine program, Congress has 
been steadfast in its support of the Department of Defense's No. 1 
acquisition priority. Partly as a result, next year when our nation 
procures the first boat in the Columbia class it will have the highest 
percentage of design completed for a first of class ship in recent 
memory.
  Congress has provided multiple years of Supplier Development funding 
for our nuclear shipbuilding programs with additional planned 
investment. I look forward to hearing from the Navy about these 
investments and how they will be helping to shore up certain parts of 
our nuclear shipbuilding industrial base.
  Congress has also been extremely supportive for amphibious warships, 
with congressional authorization and funding underway since Fiscal Year 
2013 to enable our Navy to move between the San Antonio Flight I and 
the San Antonio Flight II class of LPDs. In fact, Congress has led the 
Navy with successive authorization and appropriation of LPD 28, LPD 29, 
and LPD 30 since Fiscal Year 2015 alone. In Fiscal Year 2019, both the 
LHA program and the LPD Flight II program received $350 million in 
advance procurement toward the construction of LHA 9 and LPD 31, 
respectively. Unfortunately, our amphibious force remains below the 
stated requirement of 38 ships and the Pentagon and Navy have not moved 
out with the timely execution of these FY 19 funds, critical for our 
supplier base. This bill takes a step in the right direction and 
authorizes LPD-31 and the incremental funding to support this critical 
asset. Congress has done its job and now it's time for the Department 
of Defense and the Department of the Navy to do their job and get these 
funds on contract. Our shipbuilding industrial base is ready, the 
shipyards are ready--it's time to get going and move out.
  On surface combatants, Congress has been extraordinarily supportive 
of the Navy's DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class Destroyer program with 2 
successive Multiyear Procurements executed since the program restarted 
almost a decade ago. The DDG 51 program, unfortunately, experienced a 
program lapse of several years as Navy stopped, then restarted 
production after a several year hiatus--the supplier base atrophied and 
went elsewhere, causing the government to work and reconstitute our 
nation's ability to build Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. The program 
has returned to some level of stability today, and these multiyear 
procurements have saved taxpayers billions of dollars when compared to 
annually procuring 1-2 ships each year. As a result, the Navy is now 
requesting procurement of up to 3 DDG 51 class ships in a given fiscal 
year--these ships are the workhorses of our fleet and they are needed 
worldwide.
  Next year, the Navy will award a contract for design and construction 
of a next-generation Frigate. This ship is critical to the future fleet 
but it is also essential for the health and sustainment of our fragile 
domestic industrial base. I applaud the Navy's acquisition approach 
which included a significant period for concept design and refinement 
to be followed by a robust competition detail design and construction 
for this next class of warship. I want the best ship with the best 
value to be our next Frigate, but I also want the Pentagon to recognize 
that it must take a holistic approach to shipbuilding and its 
stewardship of the shipbuilding industrial base. We saw the problems 
created by Navy stopping and starting DDG 51 production and I am 
mindful of not making the same mistake twice with this upcoming 
acquisition. Our industrial base is fragile--decisions made on one 
program will have cascading effects on multiple programs underway 
within Navy shipbuilding.
  In closing, Madam Speaker, Congress continues to exercise its 
constitutional mandate to provide and maintain a Navy. There have been 
a series of congressional investments made over the last several years 
which demonstrates our commitment to building a robust future fleet. I 
call on the Pentagon and Navy leadership to recognize this commitment 
and make future decisions consistent with our goal of a larger more 
lethal Navy with a robust and viable industrial base.

                          ____________________