Suvayan. And the uss john mccain sailors. Were very grateful that today, we have ms. Rachel echols with us, we send you our deepest simp sympathie sympathies. And i want to especially recognize, we have with us the committee chairman, chairman thornberry. The leader of efforts to mitigate the military Readiness Challenges. And i thank him for being here today. I also want to send a warm welcome to congresswoman elizabeth estes. And full Committee Members have had an opportunity to ask questions. Is there an objection . As we begin todays unkplaclassd hearing, i have no doubt that our navy remains the most powerful in the world. But these recent tragic events only reinforce our committees concern about the challenges the navy faces. Im especially concerned about the shortfalls in the structure and whether the tempo of a reduced 277ship navy may have contributed to these events. I also believe that the first responsibility of the National Government is to provide for the National Security for our citizens to do for us what we cant do for ourselves. And that is especially true of our sailors, soldiers, airmen, and marines. Its our responsibility to continue to better understand the readiness situation and underlying problems of the u. S. Navy, and correcting any deficiencies and shortfalls. We now ask the Senior Leaders of the u. S. Navy and Government Accountability office to advise us on the underlying problems and how to recover from these tragic events. This afternoon, were honored to have with us admiral bill moran, rear admiral robert boxall, and mr. John pendleton, the director of the structure issues of the u. S. Accountability office. I will now turn to the congresswoman for any remarks she may have. Thank you for agreeing to convene this hearing on navy readiness, particularly with the seventh Fleet Operations in the indopacific region. We recently returned from japan, and saw the damage to the uss fitzgerald firsthand. Thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. I appreciated our meeting earlier this week, and i look forward to continuing our discussion. Mr. Pendleton, thank you as well for your time and work on this subject, as it is critical in our mission on this committee. The recent mishaps resulted not only in significant damage to the vessels, but also the tragic, tragic loss of life of 17 american sailors. Earlier in the year, we saw two additional mishaps, avoidable, as i understand it, also involving surface ships assign todassigned to the seventh fleet. And investigations are still ongoing, with reviews of surface Fleet Operations, im interested to learn in the initial findings and foundational challenges that need to be reversed. Specifically, i am interested to hear what steps may be taken to ensure appropriate time is allocated for crew training and ship maintenance. And how the chain of command will be held accountable to ensure Navy Standards are being met. In addition to the training and maintenance time, i will be interested to hear how the navy is investing in developing and utilizing next generation Training Systems to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of this time. This committee and the navys leadership owe it to our sailors to learn from these incidents and take appropriate actions. Points have been raised about how the Forward Deployed forces model has stressed existing resources, and highlighted gaps and deficiencies in the manning of our vessels, the training of sailors, and maintenance of our fleet. Understanding that a balance needs to be struck, and a review is under way, let me note i believe that maintaining a forward presence is critical in that region. The navy is able to rapidly react to contingencies with forward operations. The navys deployment of significant capabilities overseas didnt occur noeoverni. So, im concerned that the request for resources and the strateg strategic finally, ill conclude by stating that todays hearing, and the navys ongoing investigations and reviews should be viewed as just the starting point. I hope well have a continuous dialogue on the Lessons Learned and specific actions that need to be taken to ensure the readiness of the surface fleet. I want to thank you and the witnesses, and i look forward to the discussion. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. Well turn to the gentleman from virginia and the chairman of the Sub Committee for any remarks. Thank you. I want to thank you all for attending our hearing on this tremendously important issue. I want to thank chairman wilson for offering to hold this hearing today. Its of essence that we get to the bottom of this in the interest of our nation. I believe we may arrive at some conclusions that require the joint efforts of both of our subcommittees, and i look forward to expeditiously resolving these issues. Before i proceed, i also want to recognize our special guest in the audience today. Ms. Rachel echols. Her son timothy lost his life onboard the uss mccain just a few weeks ago. Thank you for being here with us today, and for the enormous sacrifice that you and your family have made for this country. Were here today yes. [ applause ] we are here today to ensure that the navy and Congress Learn from these tragedies and make the necessary changes. I want you to be assured that your sons life, given on behalf of this nation, was not in vain. Its important to note that even in a benign environment, we send our sailors into precarious and oftentimes deadly situation. Our nation asks much of our Service Members, and they never fail to deliver. I hope that todays hearing provides some positive steps forward to ensure our sailors are provided the best training and ships to sustain their daily lives. And in time of war, prevail over our enemy. I think we can all agree our nation failed these 17 sailors and their families with these tragic collisions. Last week, i led a delegation to visit the seventh fleet commander, vice admiral sawyer in japan. I was encouraged at their zeal, even in the face of these events. Nevertheless, i want to assess whether there are procedural issues that contributed. As the Committee Reviews the state of the seventh fleet, two things are painfully obvious. The readiness of the ships are severely degraded and not acceptable. The majority of ships are not ready to perform their primary warfare areas. These negative training trends clearly contributed to the lack of seamanship on these ships. As to the ships themselves, the material condition of the ships suffer as navy prioritizes deployments over maintenance and modderizati modernizati modernization. Its equally problematic that the navy intends to increase the number of Forward Deployed ships with no increase to the maintenance capacity, thereby increasing the risk to our sailors. This is a model that is not sustainable, and needs to be significantly modified. We have also learned that many of the destroyers are only supposed to be Forward Deployed for more than 7 to 10 years. We know that the uss john mccain has been deployed to japan for over 20 years. And other ships have been home ported in japan for over ten years. The ships there have been outside the continental United States for too long, and consequently, their material condition is unacceptable. I remain convinced that one of the long term fixes is to increase the overall structure, and build the navy our nation needs. A larger fleet would have less strain on each individual ship. And in the shortterm, i support the need to adequately fund training, and provide the fleet the time it needs to complete required maintenance and training. I think there are a number of contributing factors that should be explored. New training models, overall funding requirements, and the high operational tempo endured by the fleet, and the operational failures that have occ occurred, each of these areas deserves additional assessment. The Deployment Model is rife with risk, and the navy needs to offer an alternative model. I thank chairman wilson for working with us on this important issue. And i yield back the balance of my time. Thank you. And now for the gentleman from connecticut, congressman joe courtney for his remarks. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you for your testimony today. And i would also like to recognize ms. Echols today, and thank you for representing the other families. Thats an important contribution being made today. Thank you. The circumstances that bring us to todays hearing are painful and tragic. As our lead witness, admiral moran, pointed out, in the span of 65 days, 17 sailors were lost in ship collisions. These were not limited occurrences, but part of a disturbing trend of mishaps in the asia pacific region. To put that in perspective, these heartbreaking casualties are more than the number of Service Members lost in the afghan war zone in 2017. And Electronics Technician dustin from connecticut, was lost onboard the uss mccain. Were mourning the loss of these patriots, and are watching the response of congress and the navy to fix this disturbing trend. I applaud the efforts to fix this, and we expect the navy to be fully transparent as the efforts move forward. And we will convene again as many times as needed to fix this problem. And the u. S. Constitution is very clear, its Congress Duty to provide and maintain a navy, one that is well equipped and adequately manned. These incidents are a glaring particularly in the asia pacific region, and the declining readiness of these forces. They do difficult work, oftentimes not well understood by the public. And the uss mccain conducted a freedom of navigation operation. Simply put, these are not the kinds of ships and crews we can afford to lose to preventable misha mishaps. One solution is to grow the fleet to take the stress off of the ships. And we would add funding to Ship Construction and readiness. We passed it with the biggest bipartisan vote since 1988. Im sure this hearing will increase the members determination to get the best outcome possible. But today is not just about resources. Its about whether navy policies need to be realigned. As the gao has repeatedly reported, and as our Witnesses Today will discuss, a growing number of vessels are operating without the certifications requir required. And this needs to be corrected. In 2010, the navy conducted a review which outlined concerns about readiness that are relevant today, looking at the state of navy fleet readiness. Including clarifying who has the ultimate say on whether a ship is manned, trained, and equipped to the level needed to do their job before deployment. The certification process needs to be reviewed and approved by an accountable decision maker. Unfortunately, this has not been addressed in the seven years since the record came out. We expect a lot from the navy. And with good reason, our sailors are the best in the world, and it sends a powerful message. The sailors do what they need to do to keep the peace and the ocean lanes open. In return, the sailors should expect that weve done all we can to provide to tools, resources, and training they need to conduct their work and run return safely. Thank you. I yield back my time. Thank you. Admiral moran, we now turn to you for your opening remarks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I will be short. I want to be very clear that no matter the circumstances, the operating environment, or how strained our force might be, we should not and cannot have collisions at sea. Fundamental professional seamanship is the foundation for safe operations around the fleet. All of the marvelous technology, the hardware we put together on these ships, and the power of our Weapons Systems are meaningless without welltrained, skilled, patriotic, and experienced sailors who are well led. You have my promise that we will get to the bottom of these mishaps. We will leave no stone unturned. We will be accountable to you, to our sailors, and to the american public. Like you, our navy stands with ms. Rachel echols, with hearts broken. And determined to investigate all the facts, to get at the root causes, to address determining factors, and to learn so we will become a better navy at the end of this. We have an absolute responsibility to keep sailors safe from harm in peacetime, even as they prepare for war. Even though were 20 feet apart, theres no gap between what we need to do from here on out. We look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. Now, mr. John pendleton, your opening comments. Thank you, chairman. Ranking members, thank you for having me here today to summarize the work on navy readine readiness. Unfortunately, grim circumstances do bring us together. I dont know what specifically caused the accidents. But i do know the navy is caught between unrelenting operational demand, and a limited supply of ships. The navy has been warning for some time theyre keeping a pace that is unsustainable. Our work has confirmed the difficulties, and reports have shown it. But the risk associated with the way the navy is managing the demands on it. Some of these present significant challenges in the Building Blocks of readiness, training, and manning, and maintenance. Two years ago, we published a report that said ships in japan do not have dedicated training periods, their aggressive deployment schedule gave the navy more present, but it has its cost. We were told the overseas based ships were so busy, they had to train on the margins. It was explained to me that meant they had to squeeze training in when they could. Given the concerns we recommended the navy carefully analyze the risks that were mounting. I think its important to note that the department of defense, on behalf of the navy, wrote the response and concurred with our recommendations for the most part. I want to read a short passage. We assess the navy is well aware of the increased risk, and the decision to accept these risks was ultimately based on the decision for increased presence. I fear this was a bad gamble in retrospect. We followed up and learned a couple of things that concerned us. The navy told us they planned to implement a deployment schedule with more training. As of this hearing, it has not been implemented. The second thing we learned, training certifications, this is the way the navy determines that its crews are proficient, were being allowed to expire at an alarming rate. 2015, looking just at the cruisers and destroyers, all of the certification areas, about 7 of them were expired. By late june of this year, that number was up to 37 . A more than fivefold increase. Manning has been a persistent challenge for the navy. There was a study in 2014 that indicated sailors were working well over 100 hours per week. Maintenance is taking longer and costing more due to the pace of operation. Ship deployments have often been delay. But admiral moran said theyve been keeping deployments shorter lately. And the ships have problems when they come in, and the shipyards have trouble keeping pace. At this point, the lost operational days because of the maintenance delays number in the thousands. And having two destroyers out of service due to the recent mishaps will not help. I think the navy is treading water in terms of readiness rebuilding. Gao has made 11 recommendations to help improve readiness. Do dod and the navy have concurred, but have only partially implemented one. Weve made recommendations directly relevant to reassessing the workload that sailors actually face, and using that to decide how many people to put on a crew. I should acknowledge we did all of this work because this committee requested that we do so. Thank you for your foresight, and happy to take any questions. We all appreciate your independent professionalism. I have a son serving in the u. S. Navy, and your recommendations are so important for the health and safety, and the protection of the American People. Additionally, i particularly appreciate that a report was presented on june 14th, which highlighted the issues of readiness, just four days before the fitzgerald incident. Your efforts and your organizations efforts could not be more timely, and theyre greatly appreciated by all of us. The statement you provided indicates the expired training certification certification has increased fivefold, to 37 expired in june of this year. Again, the month of the incident. Can you explain the sharp trend of the training certifications since your report . What are the gaos observations, and what is happening . We updated that information in preparation for this hearing. We have not been back out to talk to the fleet about them. We did gather that information a couple of years ago, and asked for it to be updated, and the navy provided it. When we looked at it, we saw, if you imagine, 11 ships based in japan, and then 21 or 22 certification areas. The ones that were expired, it had grown to 37 of all the little blocks. Another thing that concerned us, specific areas higher than 37 . One of them was seamanship, and some other areas as well that were sharply lower than you would hope to see. And again, i want to commend you, the analysis that you did is going to be so helpful to us. And the actions needed to address the mission challenges are real world. And its just, again, reassuring, as a member of congress, and as a parent, thank you for what youre doing. If i may, the report that you held up is a compilation report, designed to identify what we believe are the major challenges facing defense. And readiness rebuilding, we believe its one of the primary areas we need to focus on. And health care being provided to our military personnel. I urge all members of this committee to get a copy and its really very helpful. Thank you, sir. Admiral moran, the trend is so significant, i appreciate your heartfelt statement earlier. Can you help the subcommittees better understand the issues. Im trying to figure out how are most Forward Deployed ships not being held to the same standards as the rest of the fleet . Who certifies the home port in japan . The certification is done locally, starting with the Commanding Officer of the ship, who makes a request for waivers to ex