Brian Bradley
NS&D Monitor
5/22/2015
In contrast to their colleagues on the House Armed Services Committee, House appropriators have proposed blocking funding from being transferred into the Sea-Based Deterrent Fund in their version of the FY 2016 defense appropriations bill, reported out of subcommittee this week. The fund is seen as a potential source of money for the Ohio-class Replacement (OR). While the House-approved version of the FY 2016 National Defense Authorization Act would authorize the transfer of up to $1.39 billion from Navy accounts to the standalone Sea-Based Deterrent Fund, the House version of the defense spending bill would prevent such transfers.
The Navy has programmed $5 billion for research and development and another $5 billion for advanced procurement over the Future Years’ Defense Program for OR, and the Navy plans to procure 12 of the subs at a total cost of $139 billion, buying the first one in 2021 and submerging the first unit in 2031.
Submarine Commander Warns of Potential Impacts of Sequestration
Meanwhile, a top Navy official warned last week that that sequestration could disrupt the schedule and procurement of the Ohio-class Replacement (OR). “To sustain our strategic deterrent, we have to stay on the path that we’re on right now,” Vice Adm. Michael Connor, commander of U.S. Submarine Forces, said during a May 14 event at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “We can’t afford these bumps in the road through things like sequestration or other budget battles here. We need to have a predictable future for our industry partners, so they can acquire the materials and the workforce, the long-term commitment that is shipbuilding. That’s how it has to happen. We can help them do things like block purchases of submarines so they and their suppliers can work for the future, but we can’t do same-year programs with one-year uncertainty in funding.”
While the Navy has marked OR as its No. 1 priority, it is unclear how competing Pentagon demands would interact with future capped budgets, and how that interplay would impact the schedule and quantity of submarines procured. "The Ohio Replacement ballistic missile submarine is the Navy’s top priority in any fiscal scenario and our FY 2016 budget continues to lay the necessary foundation required to commence construction in FY 2021,” Navy spokesperson Lt. Rob Myers told NS&D Monitor. “Navy leadership has clearly articulated that sequestration impacts our ability to train our people, maintain our force and invest in the future. While I won’t speak to pending legislation or pre-decisional future budget submissions, what I can tell you is that we will keep working with Congress to fund Navy priorities."
‘Let’s Just Be Honest’
Connor told NS&D Monitor after the CSIS event that he thinks people impose “artificial limits” on the shipbuilding account, even though budgets tend to “ebb and flow.” “We should look at, ‘What do we have to do? How does it fit in the overall priorities scheme?’” he said “If the shipbuilding account itself needs to grow by $5 billion a year for 10 years or whatever, then so be it. We ought to understand that.” Connor used a homeowner analogy to shed light on OR procurement. “It’s just like in your household finances, when you have to get a new air conditioner for your house or something like that, you pay what it costs, you don’t worry about, ‘Well, my heating and air conditioning recapitalization fund, I wasn’t planning to spend that.’…Let’s just be honest about the fact that we need it, we’ve reduced the cost all that we can, here’s the bill, let’s pay it.”
Russia ‘On the Cusp’
The United States is in the fourth year of the research and development phase for the Ohio-class Replacement, while Russia debuted its third of 10 planned Borei-class SSBNs in December. Connor noted Russia’s growing prioritization of SSBNs, underscoring that the country is “on the cusp” of fielding a continuous at-sea strategic deterrent, “something they fell off of for many years.” He said during last week’s CSIS event, “I think we’re going to see part of that [Borei]-class show up in the Northwest Pacific pretty soon,” adding, “So that’s an area that they’ve been pretty slow for a long time out there, but they’re coming back.”
While Russia and the United States are reducing their nuclear stockpiles through the New START treaty, both countries are modernizing their nuclear-weapon platforms. U.S. military officials have underscored that no Cold War-style arms race is occurring—and have pointed to U.S. modernization as the best way to ensure a safe, secure and reliable nuclear deterrent. For Russia’s part, officials have not indicated the country’s nuclear modernization is a response to any U.S. nuclear recapitalization programs. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said during a speech this week that while concerns exist about global advancements in undersea technology, today, “We own the undersea domain,” adding that the United States is working to maintain that dominance.
On the sidelines of the CSIS event, Connor gave NS&D Monitor a rare glimpse into the Ohio-class Replacement’s technical side, noting that the submarine’s stealth is multifaceted and will be on par with current capabilities. “We say that it’s as quiet relative to its threat as the Ohio was, relative to its threat,” he said. “So in other words, even to stay where you were, you had to get quieter.”
