Ranking Members Larsen, Carbajal Statements from Hearing on Coast Guard Recapitalization Efforts
Washington, D.C. — The following are opening remarks, as prepared for delivery, from Ranking Member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Rick Larsen (D-WA) and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Salud Carbajal (D-CA) during today’s hearing titled, “Recapitalization of the United States Coast Guard.”
Videos of Ranking Members Larsen’s and Carbajal’s opening statements can be found here and here.
More information on the hearing can be found here.
Ranking Member Larsen:
I’d like to start by recognizing Admiral Thomas’ service and retirement later this month. Congratulations and thank you for your service.
I also want to recognize Lieutenant Iia Carter, who is moving from the Office of Legislative Affairs and will be the Chief Officer at the Station Los Angeles. Then you’ll just have to deal with Carbajal directly instead of all of us.
Today’s hearing is an opportunity for this Committee to receive an update on the Coast Guard’s now 17-year-old recapitalization plan.
Included in this plan, and the subsequent update in 2017, is the acquisition of National Security Cutters, Fast Response Cutters, Offshore Patrol Cutters, Polar Security Cutters, Waterways Commerce Cutters and HC-130J aircraft.
Many of these acquisition programs have experienced significant delays and budgetary issues.
For instance, the Coast Guard awarded the contract for the design and construction of three Polar Security Cutters in 2019.
Now, five years later, the shipyard that won the contract has been sold, the design is only 60% complete and the Coast Guard has not determined the delivery date or the final cost for the vessels.
The Coast Guard awarded the contract for 25 Offshore Patrol Cutters in 2016, and the program is currently behind schedule and over budget. Four cutters are currently under construction, and the Service has amended the contract to move production to another shipyard after these four are delivered.
The contract to build 27 Waterways Commerce Cutters was awarded in 2022 but has been delayed due to a Small Business Administration determination. Further, the contractor has recently purchased a new shipyard to complete the construction.
These three acquisition programs are the largest currently underway in the Coast Guard, utilizing nearly all the Procurement Construction and Improvements (PC&I) account, and they have a few things in common.
They are all over budget, delayed and construction will not be completed in the shipyard that was awarded the initial contract.
Additionally, while the delivery of HC-130J aircraft has been well received by Coast Guard aviators—providing better range, speed, and technology than its predecessor—the program has stalled at 19 airframes due to a lack of funding.
This, coupled with the unplanned retirement of the C-27 fleet, creates a large gap in Coast Guard aviation capabilities.
While it is appropriate to scrutinize the Coast Guard’s decisions, we in Congress must consider our own actions and the structural impediments facing the Service. The Service is dealing with inadequate resources and an inadequate industrial base.
U.S. shipyards are having a hard time competing in the global marketplace. This is not because our yards and workers are any less capable but because foreign shipyards receive large direct subsidies. For instance, between 2010 and 2018, the Chinese government provided $132 billion dollars to their shipping and shipbuilding industry.
While I support the Small Shipyard Grant Program, the Title XI Shipbuilding Program, and the Capitol Construction Program, collectively these programs pale in comparison to the support other nations provide to their shipbuilding industries.
Government shipbuilding becomes much more costly without a robust domestic commercial shipbuilding industry.
I am pleased that Secretary Del Toro has directed the Navy to lead the newly formed Government Shipbuilder’s Council. Working with the Coast Guard, the Maritime Administration and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Council seeks to bolster the commercial shipbuilding industry.
Congress must strengthen U.S. shipyards, the merchant marine and the Jones Act to ensure commercial business for U.S. shipyards.
While I am confident the Coast Guard will complete the ongoing recapitalization effort, I am concerned that Congress and the Administration are not prepared to provide the appropriate level of resources.
Before this Subcommittee three weeks ago, the Commandant testified that the Coast Guard PC&I account would need to be funded in excess of $3 billion annually in order to adequately cover each acquisition program. Unfortunately, that number does not include the shoreside infrastructure needs, such as piers, hangars, and repair facilities, to support the new assets.
Finally, we cannot forget about the women and men who will be operating the new cutters and aircraft once they are delivered. The growing shoreside infrastructure backlog has real world consequences for the women and men of the Coast Guard.
I have visited numerous Coast Guard stations across the country and seen firsthand the unacceptable living conditions. No servicemember should be asked to live with mold or asbestos. They deserve better and Congress needs to do better.
As Congress funds the construction of assets, we need to ensure that servicemembers get the shoreside support they deserve. This includes workstations, housing, healthcare and childcare.
Thank you, Chairman Webster and Ranking Member Carbajal, for holding this hearing, and I look forward to the testimony.
Ranking Member Carbajal:
Before we get into the substance of today’s hearing, I feel compelled to express my disappointment with the newest account of the Coast Guard’s handling of Operation Fouled Anchor.
The disturbing post by the former Sexual Assault and Response Coordinator at the Coast Guard Academy details a blatant disregard for victims in an effort to protect the reputation of the Coast Guard.
If the Coast Guard wants to mend its reputation, it must commit to real transparency and real accountability—which includes the senior leadership. The Coast Guard is a great organization, but those who have dedicated their life to service deserve better.
The Coast Guard is in the midst of recapitalizing cutters, boats, airplanes, helicopters, shoreside infrastructure, and information technology. In recent years, in almost every case, these procurements have been over budget and over schedule.
While it is important to recapitalize and modernize Coast Guard assets, we must address the ongoing production issues to ensure a timely and cost-effective delivery.
The Government Accountability Office, or GAO, has reported several times that the acquisition of new Coast Guard assets routinely comes in delayed and over budget. This is a concerning trend particularly for a small and under-resourced service that is forced to rely on aging and obsolete assets to conduct its missions.
Improving the acquisition program requires investment so the Coast Guard can bolster its oversight and create internal capabilities. It also requires investing in U.S. shipbuilding to ensure we have shipyards capable of building the assets we need.
U.S. shipyards depend on contracts from the Navy and Coast Guard to support their business, but the Coast Guard is often outbid by the size and value of Navy contracts. Recently, this has forced the Coast Guard to rely on shipyards that lack experience with government contracts.
We cannot rely on the Coast Guard to subsidize the shipbuilding industry.
Time is of the essence to bring on newer cutters, shoreside infrastructure and IT systems. Not only do modern assets mean improved mission readiness, but they also mean better quality of life for our Coasties.
Servicemembers want their families to live in the best quality housing and want to work in buildings that are not falling down around them. That starts with investing more in shoreside infrastructure and eliminating the estimated $3 billion backlog.
Ultimately, servicemembers deserve to live and work in places that are not on the brink of failure. Congress and Coast Guard leadership owe it to the personnel to deliver this. I have visited countless Coast Guard stations where buildings are either damaged, outdated or completely unusable.
I have said it before and I will say it again, we must fund the Coast Guard at levels significantly higher than requested and appropriated in recent years. I welcome the Commandant’s push to be a $20 billion agency by 2030 including a need to more than double the procurement, construction and improvements account, otherwise known as PC&I.
Even GAO has recognized that the funding typically requested by the Coast Guard underestimates their needs for recapitalization by more than $800 million each year.
All signs point to the need to fund the Coast Guard at higher levels. I was heartened to see the House appropriations mark included $500 million above the budget request for the PC&I account. That is a step in the right direction, but future PC&I funding must match or exceed $3 billion per year as reflected in the Coast Guard Authorization Act and the Commandant’s recent statements.
I hope this hearing continues to shed light on the growing resource gaps and this serves as a wakeup call.
With that, I yield back.
Next Article Previous Article