The leaders of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) seapower panel introduced legislation that would keep the Navy from going below 31 amphibious battle force ships, as is the Marine Corps requirement.
Marine Corps officials have noted service leadership determined the “absolute requirement” for amphibious warships is 31 vessels, divided into 10 LHA/LPD larger deck amphibious assault ships and 21 San Antonio
-class LPD-type amphibious transport docks.
However, the Navy’s long-term shipbuilding plan and fiscal year 2023 budget request showed the Navy is planning to stop building the San Antonio-class Flight II LPD after LPD-32, the third vessel. The Flight II LPDs were planned to replace the 12 aging Whidbey Island/Harpers Ferry (LSD-41/49) classes.
At the same time, the Navy plans to retire 10 LSDs from three to 14 years early over the next five years, dropping the number of amphibious warships in the Navy from the present 31 to a low of 24 in FY ‘24 to save money. Under the shipbuilding plan, the Navy would not reach 31 larger amphibious ships again until 2030-31 (Defense Daily, April 27).
In this environment, Chairman of the HASC Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) and Ranking Member Rob Wittman (R-Va.) are introducing legislation to prevent the Navy from lowering below the Marine Corps’ 31 amphibious vessel limit, despite larger Navy Department plans.
“I am proud to introduce this legislation with Representative Courtney to ensure the Navy maintains no less than 31 operational amphibious battle force ships. The current path, as exhibited in the insufficient 30-Year Shipbuilding Plan, would decrease the amphibious fleet to just 25 traditional amphibious ships in the next five years, entirely undermining the ability of the Marine Corps to serve as the emergency response force our nation wants and needs, and failing to secure the flexibility and utility that the Marine Corps contributes to the Joint Force,” Wittman said in an announcement May 10.
Courtney agreed, noting the subcommittee works well across party lines on Navy issues.
“The bipartisan 2023 Defense Authorization and budget process is officially underway and addressing the Marine Corps’ force structure to ensure they’re fully outfitted to overcome tomorrow’s challenges is going to remain a top priority of our Subcommittee. Our bipartisan bill will help shape the ongoing conversation by setting a clear direction and future baseline for the Navy’s fleet of amphibious ships,” Courtney added.
Lawmakers introduced this bill following communications with Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger.
In March, Wittman and Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) sent a letter to Berger asking for an assessment of the minimum numbers of traditional amphibious force ships in the commandant’s Force Design 2030 plans.
Berger confirmed in a return letter in April what other officials had previously said, that in order to meet statutory requirements, “the Marine Corps needs no fewer than 31 traditional L-class amphibious ships (10 LHA/LHD, 21 LPDs) and, separately, 35 Light Amphibious Warships.”
In April, Lt. Gen. Karsten Heckl, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration, told the Senate Armed Services Seapower subcommittee the commandant said the Marine Corps required the same numbers.
In the letter, Berger argued that “since 2019, four Department of the Navy studies, including the ongoing Amphibious Force Requirement Study (AFRS) sponsored by the Secretary of the Navy, have examined amphibious amphibious force structure requirements, with similar results.”
“With slight variations, each found that an inventory of between 31-28 L-class ships and up to 35 LAW are necessary for naval forces to sustain consistent forward-deployed campaigning objectives and reliably react to unforeseen contingencies. However, combining these findings with readiness trends over the past 10 years and projected ship availability rates demonstrates the need for no less than 31 traditional L-class ships” to ensure the readiness and responsiveness of amphibious forces,” he continued.
This is mirrored in Heckl’s testimony from April. Heckl said the Marine Corps was not able to sortie the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) early to help the U.S. European Command and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe commander respond to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, demonstrating limitations on the current amphibious force before the Navy’s temporary amphibious ships reduction plans.
“The way we’ve typically conducted heel to toe deployments, the MEU should have been on station and available for the combatant commander tasking and it was not,” Heckl said.
The latest AFRS has not yet been released by the Navy, but in April Principal Civilian Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition Jay Stefany told the Senate Armed Services Seapower subcommittee the report was just completing and in the briefing process inside the Pentagon.
Stefany said it would be ready in the “very near term” and then it will feed into the larger Force Structure Assessment and National Defense Strategy.
Stefany also noted Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro, Berger and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday were scheduled to meet with the Senate Armed Services Committee in May and they plan to give the committee the amphibious study results “or at least talk about it, all three of them together.”
The three officials are scheduled to appear before the full Senate Armed Services Committee on May 12.