Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told lawmakers Wednesday he eventually will give them a clearer picture of what the next Pentagon budget would look like with “sequestration” cuts factored in, but doesn’t expect to craft a revamped budget proposal.

Hagel faced Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) members frustrated that the Pentagon’s fiscal year 2014 budget request does not account for the $52 billion in sequestration reductions from October 2013 through September 2014, which are required under current law.

President Barack Obama’s overall FY ‘14 budget calls for stopping sequestration through steps that Republicans have balked at, including increased taxes. The Obama administration plan would replace the $500 billion in decade-long Pentagon sequestration cuts, which started March 1, with $150 billion in other defense reductions that would fall mainly in later years.

SASC Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and senior member John McCain (R-Ariz.) were among the senators who plead with Hagel Wednesday to give them a clearer picture of that the FY ’14 budget would look like if it was closer to $475 billion–the post-sequestration amount.

“If you will let us know what you know (about) what the impact would be of the $52 billion reduction to the budget you submitted, it will help us, I believe, avoid that (reduction),” Levin said, following a testy exchange between McCain and Hagel on the matter.

McCain argued Congress should know what initiatives have to be undertaken to cut Pentagon spending if Congress and the White House cannot agree on a plan to end sequestration, and the current law–which includes sequestration–continues.

Hagel said he agrees, and will work closely with the congressional defense committees. Still, he said Pentagon officials are not “talking about sending up a (new) budget” if it becomes clear sequestration cannot be avoided.

He pointed to how the Pentagon plans to send a “significant package of reprogramming requests” to Congress to shift around funding in its coffers. The Pentagon needs the approval of the four congressional defense committees to reprogram monies.

“It’s one thing to have a reprogramming request, it’s another thing to submit a budget, an overall budget that reflects the realities of the law as it is today,” McCain argued.

Hagel said Pentagon officials are considering other budgeting maneuvers that could help them factor in sequestration cuts, if Congress and the White House cannot reach a deal to stop them.

“For example, supplemental appropriation, is that something that’s within the realm of what’s going to be required?” Hagel said. “We don’t know. We’re trying to determine (that) now.”

He sought to assure the SASC that he Pentagon is “dealing with the reality” of sequestration.

Much more will be known about the Pentagon’s options for budgeting under sequestration after a Strategic Choices and Management Review is completed at the end of May, Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale said. That review, led by Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, is reexamining the 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance in light of current budget uncertainty.

Hagel said Carter briefs him on the ongoing review every Friday.

Still, McCain said the Pentagon needs to share more insight with Congress into a FY ’14 budget that is $52 billion smaller than the Pentagon proposed.

“You need to inform Congress, and work with Congress, so that we can also explain to our constituents the realities of…what would happen if the Budget Control Act,” the law that started sequestration, is not changed, McCain said.

Hagel struck an optimistic tone that Congress could find a way to spare the Pentagon from the brunt of the sequestration cuts. He noted that the non-binding budget resolutions the Republican House and Democratic Senate passed last month both call for setting defense spending near what the Pentagon’s FY ’14 budget proposes.

Hagel said that if sequestration is in place early next year, the Pentagon will factor those cuts into its FY ’15 budget proposal.

“The law of the land is the law of the land,” he said.