Senate Armed Services Committee Holds Nomination Hearing

Below is a transcript of the remarks as delivered:

JACK REED:

Good morning. The committee meets today to consider the nomination of Admiral Lisa Franchetti to be the next Chief of Naval Operations. Admiral, congratulations on your nomination. I would like to thank your husband Jim and your daughter Isabel for their many years of support for your service to the nation.

Admiral, you bring a wealth of experience and expertise to this position. You have served in leadership roles at every level throughout the Navy, both ashore and at sea and with postings around the globe. As a current vice chief, you have an important perspective on the key challenges for the Navy. Your understanding of the Joint Force and the Navy's ever expanding role within it will be critical.

If confirmed, you would also be the first woman to serve as CNO and on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and I am glad we've reached this moment. The Navy faces a dangerous and evolving global security environment. Certainly, threats from Russia, Iran, North Korea, and violent extremist groups remain persistent and the Navy has an important role to play in addressing them.

But the clear pacing challenge for our naval forces is China. In the Indo-Pacific and in the seas and ports around the world, the United States Navy will continue to be the first line of deterrence and defense against China's expanding global ambitions. Key to the Navy's success will be a fully developed fleet.

In its most recent budget request, the Navy requested nine new ships including several submarines, destroyers, frigates, and logistics vessels. At the same time, the Navy proposed retiring a number of ships before the end of their service lives, including several littoral combat ships and dock landing ships.

I understand the Navy made the difficult choice to retire some of these ships now to free up more resources in the future. But it seems that this plan would take us in the opposite direction of the Navy's goal for a larger fleet, particularly with regard to the amphibious force structure. Admiral, I'd like to know how you plan to balance these competing demands as well as your views on the Navy's 30 year shipbuilding plan.

Readiness is also a challenge for the service. Naval forces continue to maintain a high operations tempo across all areas and demand is overwhelming for attack submarines, cruisers, destroyers, and strike fighters. As a result, deferred ship maintenance, reduced steaming, and flying hours and canceled training and deployments have created serious readiness problems within the Navy.

I am concerned that the Navy will not be able to maintain a larger fleet of ships when it is struggling to maintain its current force. Admiral, I would ask again for your views on these challenges. I would note the United States greatest comparative disadvantage -- excuse me, greatest comparative advantage over China is our global network of allies and partners.

The recent agreement between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States to collaborate on nuclear submarine production through the AUKUS partnership is a meaningful step forward. Successful implementation of this plan will require responsible oversight and a stable industrial base. Admiral, I hope you will share also your views on what we have in terms of the capacity to produce now and in the future and how we can provide the budget and resources to match the demands.

Finally, your highest priority must be ensuring the readiness of your sailors to perform their missions. If confirmed, you will be expected to support a culture of leadership, trust, and teamwork throughout the force with no tolerance for behavior that erodes that culture. Admiral, I would ask that you share again your thoughts on this responsibility.

I'm confident that you have the skills and experience to provide the nation's sailors, their families, and Navy civilian employees with the leadership they deserve. Thank you again for your continued willingness to serve and I look forward to your testimony. And let me now recognize the Ranking Member, Senator Wicker.

ROGER WICKER:

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Admiral, for being here and certainly a welcome to your family. It's good that they were able to -- to be with us today. Your nomination comes at a pivotal point for our Navy. The National Defense Strategy rightly identifies China as our pacing threat as the Chair just said.

But as China grows its fleet to historic levels, our naval forces continue to shrink and our readiness levels decline. As the Chairman just said, when you add the numbers up, it amounts to our fleet going in the wrong direction. A recent memo from the Office of Naval Intelligence suggests that China's shipbuilding capacity is more than 230 times larger than our own.

I can hardly believe I'm speaking these words. 230 times larger in shipbuilding capacity. These are not comforting thoughts when we consider the growing number of general and flag officers who warn that China could be capable of invading -- invading Taiwan in the next two to four years. While China builds its maritime strength, American command of the seas is increasingly at risk.

And you and I have discussed this in our private meeting. So far we've not made progress toward the statutory goal of 355 ships that I proposed and that was signed into law six years ago. Of course, we now know that we're being told by the experts in our Department of Defense, both civilian and flag officers, that that number is frankly more than 355 ships.

Additionally, surface ship maintenance delays and cost overruns are so routine that they're factored into our planning timetables. There are even some ships like the USS Vicksburg that have been in repair and modernization for seven years. It's as if the Navy never really means to get the Vicksburg back in action.

Chairman Reed is -- is exactly right about the competing demands that we face. I particularly am pleased that he mentioned attack submarines and the need for littoral combat ships. The story of our attack submarines is this. A recent press report revealed that over a third -- one third of the Navy's attack submarines are unavailable as they enter repair cycles.

That's a third of our attack submarines. We should be producing somewhere between 2.3 and 2.5 attack submarines a year to fulfill our own requirements as we implement AUKUS. Instead, we're down to building 1.2 attack submarines per year as compared to the required 2.3 to 2.5. And the -- the path back toward two per year is based on hopes and wishes.

The crisis is nothing short of historic as we are unprepared for strategic surprise from China. As our Pacific Fleet, we are as -- as unprepared as our fleet was for the Japanese attack on the eve of Pearl Harbor in 1941. We need to act and let me say this, Admiral. I cherish our Constitution and our long standing principle that goes back to George Washington.

The uniformed military, which the Chairman and I were both members of, are answerable to the civilian elected leadership of this country. And that says it should be. It's one of the shining examples. But also the Constitution gives the power of the purse to the Congress. And we sit here under the Constitution able to make the decisions about purchasing power.

The power of the purse does not rest in the Office of Management and Budget in the White House. And so there's a competing interest there. And I -- I take this opportunity of your hearing today to remind my colleagues also that it is we who have the responsibility to find you the money you need to get you the Navy that will protect us and keep us at peace.

Admiral Franchetti, you served as Vice Chief of Naval Operations and as commander of the Sixth Fleet. I think you -- your experiences make you deeply qualified and -- and deeply familiar with the problems our Navy faces. You also know how damaging delays are. So in addition to the questions that the Chair mentioned, I'd appreciate your thoughts today on a way forward, especially for our submarines as we move into the AUKUS agreement as well as your commitment to work with this committee on the vital issue of ship maintenance.

Our second challenge the Navy faces is fielding new technical solutions at what former Secretary of Defense Mattis called the speed of relevance, in other words, within and -- within a time window. Speedily enough that it keeps us ahead of our adversaries. The speed of -- of relevance. Industry and naval research have made major breakthroughs in unmanned warfare, additive manufacturing, and maritime minds [ph] in only the past few years.

If we have any hope of shoring up our eroding deterrence in the Western Pacific, it will take the rapid integration of these capabilities at scale in the next two years or so. So again, Admiral Franchetti, I'd like to hear from you about how the Navy plans to achieve this integration at -- at the speed of relevance.

The Navy has always been our first line of defense, keeping the peace by deterring war and protecting the national interest. This goes as far back as our founding. Admiral Franchetti, I know that you agree with these sentiments and I'm hopeful they'll keep them in mind as you stand for this important position.

I look forward to your testimony and hearing more about your vision for our Navy's future. Your tenure can be a turning point in our national defense and I hope it is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

JACK REED:

Thank you very much, Senator Wicker. Admiral, your remarks please.

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Thank you. Chairman Reed, Ranking Member Wicker, distinguished members of this committee, it is my privilege to appear before you today. I am humbled to have been nominated to serve as the 33rd Chief of Naval Operations and I want to thank each of you for your steadfast support to our sailors, our Navy, civilians, and all of our Navy families.

That support ensures that we have what we need to be ready every day to stand the watch around the world in support of our great nation. I have long understood that no one can reach this level of leadership on their own. And this morning, I just want to take a minute to recognize my family who makes my service possible.

My husband Jim, a former sailor himself and the chief operating officer of our family, and our daughter Isabel, a senior at Jackson Reed High School, who tells me that despite seven moves, two tours overseas, and two deployments, she wouldn't change a thing. I am grateful for their support and proud of their service to our Navy and to our Navy families.

They, along with my sister Meg, brother Lawrence, Uncle Lynn, Aunt Sue, Aunt Carmen, and my mother in law Mary, who are watching today and my parents who are here in spirit make everything possible. In 1981 as a journalism major at Northwestern, the Navy was the farthest thing from my mind, but a chance meeting with some Naval ROTC students during my freshman orientation week changed the course of my life forever.

They told me I could get free textbooks, $100 a month, and possibly a scholarship. I signed up on the spot. And while I joined for free college and a chance to see the world, I stayed for the mission and for the people. Like Isobel, I wouldn't change a thing either. It has been the honor of my lifetime to command at every level of our Navy.

From a destroyer, a destroyer squadron, two carrier strike groups to a numbered fleet and a NATO striking and support force. And if confirmed, I will continue to bring my fleet warfighting lens to bear in everything I do. For the past 247 years, our Navy has stood the watch. We operate forward with the Marine Corps to do whatever it takes to preserve the peace, prepare for war, and win decisively if called.

We do this consistent with the priorities set forth in the National Defense Strategy and with an ironclad commitment to integrated deterrence. Right now, the USS Gerald R Ford, the most advanced warship ever built, is deployed with its strike group in the Mediterranean Sea to support NATO and deter Russia.

The USS Bataan Amphibious Readiness Group with the 26 Marine Expeditionary Unit embarked is in the Arabian Gulf as part of the US effort to deter Iran from disrupting the flow of commerce in the region. Just last week, the USS Ralph Johnson sailed through the Taiwan Strait on a routine mission to exercise freedom of navigation and demonstrate our commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific.

And in the last month, the Navy has supported search and rescue operations following the devastating fires in Maui and has provided assets to help deliver aid to those affected by a volcanic eruption in Papua New Guinea. If confirmed, I will act with urgency and purpose to ensure that we continue to deliver the Navy the nation needs.

LISA FRANCHETTI:

In doing so, I will focus on the following areas. First, sharpen our warfighting edge. The threat is real, the pace is accelerating, and it is our duty to excel in all domain combat as part of the joint force and alongside our allies and partners. Second, strengthen our Navy team. Our sailors and civilians are our competitive advantage and we need to continue to provide them the tools, the training, the education, and the support they need to be the best team for our country.

And third, fortify the foundation. A Navy that is aligned and resourced to ensure warfighting wholeness is essential to maintaining the peace and winning decisively if called. I am proud to be a United States sailor and I am inspired every day by the words of our sailors creed which states, I represent the fighting spirit of the Navy and those who have gone before me to defend freedom and democracy around the world.

I proudly serve my country's Navy combat team with honor, courage and commitment. Thank you and I look forward to your questions.

JACK REED:

Thank you very much, Admiral. I have a series of standard questions for nominees. You please respond appropriately. Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations governing conflicts of interest?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Have you assumed any duties or taking any actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the confirmation process?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

No, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Exercising our legislative and oversight responsibility makes it important that this committee, its subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, and other information from the executive branch on a timely basis. Do you agree, if confirmed, to appear and testify before this committee when requested?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Do you agree when asked before this committee to give your personal views, even if your views differ from the administration?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Do you agree to provide records, documents, and electronic communications in a timely manner when requested by this committee, its subcommittees, or other appropriate committees of Congress and to consult with the requester regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in providing such records?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Will you ensure that your staff complies with deadlines established by this committee for the production of reports, records, and other information including timely responding to hearing questions for the record?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

While you co -- you -- will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefings in response to Congressional request?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Will those witnesses and briefers be protected from reprisal for the testimony or briefings?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Chairman.

JACK REED:

Well, thank you very much, Admiral. And your outstanding service, I think, predicts an outstanding tenure as the Chairman of Joint Chiefs -- excuse me, it was the CNO. [laughter] I'm a little confused. Your biography reveals that you've served on three destroyers including having commanded the USS Ross. You also served under Destroyer Tender and an oiler earlier in your career.

Subsequently, you were a destroyer squadron commander, a carrier strike group commander, the Commander of the United States Sixth Fleet. You have had a great deal of time at sea and how do you believe this sea duty has prepared you for your responsibilities as CNO?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Chairman, as I said, it really has been the honor of my lifetime to have this opportunity to command and lead. Through all of those commands, I've had the opportunity to build great war fighting combat teams. I've seen firsthand our sailors in action and I've had the opportunity to see the resources that they need to be able to do their job.

I've had the chance to serve in every fleet in our Navy operating in the Pacific, operating all around South America, operating in the Atlantic, up in the high north, in the -- in the Mediterranean, and in the Middle East. And between my operational experience and my time working in force development, design, and strategy and policy, I think this really fills out my capability and my experience to be able to serve as the CNO if confirmed.

JACK REED:

So you understand that noncommissioned officers really have great advice and you always listen?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

I do. In fact in my first division, which was 70 people down in engineering, I had two amazing Chief petty Officers, Chief Satriano [ph] and Chief Salvatore [ph] who taught me everything I needed to know about my equipment and my sailors and I thank them to this day.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Admiral. We've both alluded to, Senator Wicker and I, the problems with ship maintenance, trying to keep ships at sea and when too many are really waiting for overhauls or repairs. I know the Navy is pursuing a modernization of the public shipyard, which has resulted in some productivity improvements.

But how will the Navy be able to maintain a larger fleet in the future when you can't keep up with maintaining fewer than 300 ships today?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Chairman, maintenance has been a big focus of mine as the Vice Chief of Naval Operations. And my goal, if confirmed, is to make sure that we get as many players on the field all the time. And we cannot do that if we have ships that are delayed getting into maintenance or getting out of maintenance. If confirmed, I will continue to focus on really three areas.

The first is workforce development. This really is a similar challenge that our private industry faces in making sure that we bring in the talent that we need and we retain it to do the work they need to do on our ships and our submarines. The second really is to work on using data analytics to understand the flow of work through the shipyard and how we can expedite that and be most effective in getting the maintenance done.

And the third is really to make sure they have the parts and supplies they need ahead of time to be able to do that.

JACK REED:

Thank you. I think also there's an issue in, again, Senator Wicker's sort of made the case very eloquently that is a responsibility primarily of Congress, but that is to ensure that you have the capacity to do this. Do you think there has to be increased capacity?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Chairman, we have continued to make progress in decreasing our days of maintenance delay and getting the ships in and out. I'm not satisfied with that progress and I think with the workforce development being able to put additional shifts online, I'd like to work through that as we continue to see what else we would need for additional capacity.

JACK REED:

Thank you. One of the issues that is significant and growing more significant each day is congested [ph] logistics, especially in a fight in the Pacific. Quickly, in the remaining time, can you give me a sense of your approach to this issue of congested [ph] logistics?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Well, Senator, I think there's a lot of historical examples that amateurs talk tactics and professionals talk logistics. And logistics has been a key focus area of mine, especially during my time as a fleet commander where we conducted a big war game and we realized that we really needed to conduct an independent war game to get after those contested logistics challenges.

So if confirmed, I will continue to focus on better understanding the needs of our fleet to be resupplied, making sure that they can be as resilient as possible to decrease the need for contested logistics to flow. But also making sure that we have the ships and all the different capacities we need to be able to get our warfighters what they need when they need it.

JACK REED:

And the Navy plays a critical role, particularly in the Pacific, because it's not just self-sustainment of the Navy, you're the critical link to our Air Force facilities, Army and Marine Corps facilities. So again, I urge you to focus and I know you will. With that, let me recognize the Ranking Member for his questions.

ROGER WICKER:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Admiral, let me just jump right into a question about block buys for amphibious ships. The Navy has used block buys or year procurement authorities on programs like destroyers, carriers, and nuclear submarines. And yet, it has not used these authorities for amphibious ships despite Congressional support.

Strategically procuring multiple ships has the demonstrated effects of lowering cost and providing stability to the industrial base, which is very, very essential to our shipbuilding and our infrastructure. If confirmed, would you advocate for a block buy of amphibious ships?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator, our amphibious ships are a critical part of our Navy and I'm a big supporter of our Navy Marine Corps team and continuing to work with General Smith to make sure that we are meeting all the requirements of the Marine Corps. As we look to build our amphibious ships, again, we're looking for the requirements that we need to make sure that we get the best ship at the best cost.

ROGER WICKER:

Ma'am, are you -- are you going to answer the question though? Are you still going to take that under consideration? Are you not prepared to -- to commit to this committee that you would advocate for block buys and that type of ship?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

For all of our ships, I like to look at getting the best price for our ships. So I will take for consideration the best way we can use the taxpayer dollars to get the ships we need at the best price.

ROGER WICKER:

That's -- that's all you're willing to say. Let me just urge you. There's a reason why we have Congressional -- we have specific Congressional support for this. And -- and so I would hope that we can continue to have this conversation. And also with regard to the question that the Chairman asked concerning capacity, I realize you have not taken office yet and you'll be looking at things.

But do you have an opinion though as to whether the capacity can be met by what you seem to indicate would be a manpower shift rather than increased industrial spaces and repair spaces, maintenance spaces?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

You know, as I've had a chance to look at it, I really think that we've not fully maximized the throughput capacity of the shipyards that we have right now. And I'd really like to see them being able to put a second or third shift on before we continue to develop additional capacity that would potentially have the same manpower challenges.

ROGER WICKER:

OK. Well, we'll continue to work with you on that and -- and try to flesh that out. Now Admiral Franchetti, it is I hope well known that I am supportive of the AUKUS agreement, but I do believe that we should bolster our submarine industrial base to meet the AUKUS requirements, otherwise we're going the wrong direction in terms of ships.

Now the Navy, do you agree with what I said in my opening statement that a new construction cadence for attack submarines must reach between 2.3 and 2.5 ships per year in order to offset the transfers to Australia? You do agree with that, do you not?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

My understanding is we need to reach 2.2 to be able to meet those requirements as well as our commitment to continue to produce our Columbia class submarine.

ROGER WICKER:

OK. And -- and the Navy's goal is for 66 attack submarines with a floor of no less than 48. Is that correct?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

That's correct.

ROGER WICKER:

And the Navy already plans to go below the floor of 48, which is again troubling, I think, to members of this committee. AUKUS will make that shortfall even more so because we -- we would be delivering some three submarines to our allies, the Australians. Can you explain -- or do you believe that we should plan to meet the minimum requirement and how can we do so under the facts that I've just given you?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

AUKUS is a strategic opportunity for us to knit together the strong partnership we already have with Australia and the UK. And I think this will again change the adversary's decision calculus and I'm very excited about the opportunity for our Australians to have this capability. I think, if confirmed, I will continue to work with industry, with the Congress, with the administration to make sure that we continue to have oversight of the AUKUS as it goes down the optimal pathway.

And I believe that we will be able to meet and achieve all of those requirements.

ROGER WICKER:

OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator Wicker. Senator Hirono, please.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations, Admiral, on your nomination. You bring extensive and impressive experience to the post. I also want to thank your family for their obvious support of your 38 years of commitment to our country and the mission. As part of my responsibility as a member of this committee, I ask the following two initial questions.

Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

No.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

No.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

Admiral, one of the major issues that has confronted Hawaii is the spills at Red Hill resulting in a major decision to close this massive World War II facility. I have consistently called for accountability for the spills that affected an entire community, close to 100,000 people and caused over 2 billion in damages, a total that does not even include the cost for closing the facility and long term environmental cleanup.

So when I focus on the accountability for these spills, I -- there are still many questions that remain. What is the Navy going to do to hold people accountable for the mishaps and years of neglect that led to these catastrophic situation at Red Hill?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator Hirono, the Navy is committed to the safe and effective defueling of Red Hill in support of the Joint Task force led by INDOPACOM and ensuring an effective stand up of the Navy Red Hill Task Force that will complete the work to completely shut down the facility. Regarding accountability, I think accountability is an incredibly important part of oversight.

The secretary of the Navy is nearing completion of his review and will brief the Congress when he is completed.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

I'm glad that you said that maintenance is a top priority for you because as the chair of the Subcommittee on Readiness that I really focused on infrastructure maintenance because that is what led to as far as I can see the kind of disasters at Red Hill. And there are other situations that have occurred relating to the Navy and the military -- military's presence in Hawaii.

You mentioned that regarding maintenance that in support of surface ship maintenance, which is really an area of concern for a number of us including the chair and the ranking member. Currently only four of 18 berths for surface ships at Pearl Harbor, for example, support maintenance. And even those four require waivers for fire protection.

You mentioned that, if I heard you correctly, that you were -- you would focus on three aspects of what we need to do to shore up our maintenance capacity, workforce development, which is a huge challenge in itself. But you also mentioned using data analytics. Can you tell me a little bit more about what you mean by using data analytics to create a better or more efficient environment for ship maintenance?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, I think what we see in some of our shipyards, you know, they need to do some process mapping to get a better understanding of if a -- if a worker shows up in the morning, how do they get their work assignment? Where do they go to get their tools, where do they go to get their parts? So having an efficient mapping will help us better understand how to design the shipyard.

As you know, through our psyop program, you know we're focused on recapitalizing our dry docks, but also we capitalizing and better laying out those facilities to make our work more efficient and this data analytics effort will enable us to do that.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

So that sounds like a very logical thing to do and I'm surprised that we're not doing it yet. Is that -- is that the situation that they are not using those kinds of tools in order to really determine how to be a lot more efficient and ship maintenance? That is currently not being utilized?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

We are using that now.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

So what? Can we do it better? Is that what you're saying?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

We need to adopt that across the entire enterprise of our public shipyards and again, this will inform our development plans as we lay out the future designs for each one of our public shipyards.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

I think psyop was a really important thing to focus on, the infrastructure and what we're doing at our public shipyards, of which we have four. Do you think that program like psyop for all infrastructure at shipyards would be a good thing?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator, one of the things I learned as the Sixth Fleet commander is to view our bases and places as aircraft carriers that don't get underway because they project power, they generate our force and we need to invest in them. And if confirmed, I'm committed to continuing our work on our 15-year infrastructure investment plan to be able to look at our facilities in that same way because we need them to project power and continue to build relationships with the communities in which they reside.

MAZIE K. HIRONO:

Just one more thing, I'm glad that you mentioned how important our partners are to our INDOPACOM area. And so AUKUS is really important and the campaigns that we're doing, particularly with Japan and South Korea, I think are really critical for theINDOPACOM AOR Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

JACK REED:

Thank you. Senator Hirona. Senator Fischer please.

DEB FISCHER:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Admiral, for providing your insight in our meeting last week. I kind of wanted to follow up on that discussion on. As we discussed the Columbia program is on a tight timeline to deliver the first submarine to the Navy in 2027. What actions is the Navy taking to ensure that we can meet this schedule given the residual workforce and the supply chain challenges that we discussed?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator Fischer, again, it was nice to meet you the other day and you know the Columbia program has been the Navy's number one priority and if confirmed, that will remain my number one priority. It's essential that we recapitalize that incredible deterrent capability that we have. As Columbia started out on an accelerated schedule.

We are no longer on the accelerated schedule, but we are meeting the contracted delivery schedule for Columbia. We are continuing to work closely with industry again, against all of those challenges that I described earlier and continuing to provide the right level of oversight. So we understand where we are.

It is an all hands on deck effort to ensure that we stay on time. Separately, we have developed a mitigation strategy to extend some of our Ohio class submarines in the event that Columbia does not deliver on time. But I am fully committed, if confirmed, to ensuring Columbia delivers on time.

DEB FISCHER:

How important do you think it is that Congress include the requested anomaly in the upcoming stopgap spending bill to allow the Navy to begin construction on the second Columbia-class submarine?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Well -- well, it's absolutely critical. We have nine ships in the budget request and we won't be able to start on four of them under a CR. So Columbia is one of them and we would essentially need an anomaly to be able to not get behind on our commitment to deliver on the strategic deterrent for our nation.

DEB FISCHER:

OK, a number of the technologies are available now and there's a lot under development, I think that are going to enhance and operation gap that we see in, I think, a number of platforms, a number of programs in trying to address the threats that we face from our adversaries. Can you explain to this committee what role you assess unmanned platforms to play in a future Navy?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Well, thank you, Senator. I think it will really take a mix of all our platforms. It's a big ecosystem of war, fighting between our conventional platforms, definitely see a future for unmanned platforms under on and above the sea in working in concert with the joint force. You know, we've had an unmanned task force in the Navy for the last two years.

If confirmed, I want to continue that work or evolve it into a disruptive capabilities office that looks beyond just unmanned, but at other capabilities that we can leverage from the defense innovation base to get after some of these challenges that we have.

DEB FISCHER:

Do you think -- do you think establishing that office is going to help the Navy be able to reach a balance in the unmanned and the manned program?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

I think through our analysis in wargaming, we're going to understand what that balance looks like. And I think this office will speed to the fleet, the things that it sees it needs to fill gaps right now, leveraging work in the replicator program and using funds that have already been allocated for this.

I think we're going to be able to get after that. We're demonstrating it now in Task Force 59 in the Middle East with many of our allies and partners there. And we've also scaled that to Fourth Fleet using maritime -- using them to do maritime domain awareness. And other missions that will be really important going forward.

DEB FISCHER:

For the first time in history, the United States will face two adversaries who appear nuclear powers and this fundamentally changes nuclear deterrence dynamics, particularly with respect to the potential use of tactical nuclear weapons. So if Russia or China believe that they can gain advantage over the United States and our allies from the threat of limited nuclear strikes, because they perceive the president is lacking a viable response option, then deterrence could fail.

And that plays right into the escalate to de-escalate strategy that they have. We've heard from a number of leaders within the military, General Milley, Admiral Grady, the STRATCOM commanders and also former Democrat and Republican officials about that capability gap. And that's why this committee and the House committee in the NDAAs that we -- we have passed here in Congress both have the sea launch cruise missile as a program of record in the NDAAs waiting for the President's signature signature now to make that law.

Do you agree with that assessment that this president or any president deserves to have multiple options to deal with national security situations?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yeah, I agree with the view of other senior leaders that this is a tailored options that the president should have a submarine-launched, cruise missile. Thank you.

DEB FISCHER:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator Fischer. Senator King, please.

ANGUS KING:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral, as you know, the cornerstone of our defense policy for at least 70 years has been deterrence and deterrence only works if the deterrent is credible. I am concerned, and this is to put a fine point on some of the comments that have already been made, that our -- the credibility of our deterrent is waning, particularly in light of the massive capacity increase in China and the clearly the aggressive nature of Russia at this point.

Deterrence doesn't work. Weakness is an invitation to war and I believe in spite of the efforts to improve productivity and output of our -- of our maintenance bases as well as our construction facilities, we need more capacity. Thirty percent of the naval ships, which I think you mentioned, that are not available at any given moment is absolutely unacceptable.

No business in the private sector would have 30 percent of their capital assets idle. And clearly workforce is a challenge and one of the barriers. But I would hope that you would consider a serious rethinking of capacity in terms of maintaining the size of the Navy that we need and the availability of the Navy that we need.

I think it's time for a -- a -- a hair on fire task force on this issue. We can improve productivity at those facilities. But looking at the numbers, it just doesn't seem like that will be enough. Your thoughts?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Well, Senator King, thank you again for your time the other day. I enjoyed talking with you. You know, I agree that deterrence is our number one priority and we need to be able to deter our adversaries by having a combat credible force. Our Navy is the most formidable force in the world, and if confirmed, I will continue to make sure it stays that way.

As I look at our shipbuilding industry and my objective of having more players on the field, I have to step back and think that it's not only about the number of ships we have, but it's also about the capability of those ships. It's really a mix of that along with ensuring that they have the right skills, the people with the right skills, the right manning, the right munitions and all of the support they need to be able to do their job.

And if confirmed, I will continue to look at that and ensure that we do deliver the Navy that the nation needs going forward to deter our adversaries and fight and win our nation's wars.

ANGUS KING:

And I believe that one of the challenges in increasing capacity, whether it's at existing yards, a new yard or something in between is -- is workforce and the Navy has to be thinking about as I work with people at the -- at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard or at Bath Ironworks, the quality of life at those yards, mundane things like parking, we need to attract workers and they need to be able to have a quality of life.

Whether it's something that you think of as peripheral parking, child care, those kinds of things are important in order to maintain and encourage the workforce that we need. These people are working hard. I've toured both of those yards so many times. I think if I tour BIW once more, I'm going to learn how to weld.

But these people work hard, they work efficiently, but we've got to keep them coming. All of our industrial base needs workforce today, so I hope the Navy will think about that as you're thinking more broadly than simply what's the contract going to look like.

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, as vice chief I was responsible for leading a task force to get after the quality of service starting first in our shipyards and then scaling that out to the rest of the fleet because we need to be a world class employer of choice. We're in a war for talent every day and we need to be able to attract and retain sailors.

I would expand that that we really do need a national call to service for people to support our defense industry, whether it's in small business, whether it's in big shipyards or whether it's serving the Navy, it's all service to your nation. And we need that capacity as a nation to be able to deter our adversaries.

ANGUS KING:

I agree with that and final question. The changed nature of warfare. I would urge and encourage war games, red teaming, to think about the -- the challenge of electronic warfare. We have these very sophisticated aircraft, ships, submarines all based on very sophisticated electronics. We need to think about what happens when the GPS goes off, what happens when the -- our -- our ships are blind or are vulnerable.

The other question that we need to focus upon is defense against hypersonics. We've assumed the invulnerability of our fleet, of our aircraft carriers. They're not. So, I -- I'll take -- for the record, I'd like your thoughts on, A, defense against hypersonics and, B, our preparations for electronic warfare.

Thank you, Admiral. Congratulations on your nomination.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator King. Senator Rounds, please.

MIKE ROUNDS:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral Franchetti, first of all, I want to offer my congratulations on your nomination as well, and I also want to say thank you to your family. When -- when you are deployed, they're away as well. I mean, they're -- they're separated, and that sacrifice is something that we sometimes don't recognize for the families.

So, to your husband and to your daughter, thank you for your sacrifice as she moves forward in service to our country. Admiral Franchetti, you and I talked a little bit about this, so this is not going to be a surprise for you. But I understand that the DOD NTIA study on the 3.1 to 3.45 gigahertz portion of the spectrum has been completed.

It is being reviewed at senior levels in the department and will be published later this month. I bring this up to encourage you. It is imperative that you be forthright and clear on the impact auctioning off the lower three gigahertz band of the spectrum would have on Navy capabilities that you operate in that particular one, to 3.1 to 3.45 gigahertz, and the cost, the substantial cost to develop new systems if those capabilities have to migrate someplace else, if they could even do so. Every single senior DOD official I have questioned this year has expressed concerns about sharing this portion of the spectrum with commercial interests.

In April of this year, Admiral Gilday pointed out that it would impact 188 ships, and Secretary Del Toro testified that relocating these systems would cost the Navy upwards of $250 billion and perhaps decades in the making. Can you confirm that cost estimate and how long would it take to relocate these systems?

And if the study confirms the concerns expressed by DOD thus far, what would be your advice to the president and to Congress?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator Rounds, thank you very much for your leadership on this critical issue. I am very concerned about this discussion of selling off this particular section of the spectrum. All of our AEGIS destroyers and many of our weapons systems operate in this spectrum. It -- giving away the spectrum would affect us dramatically.

We wouldn't be able to test, train, and we would hike serious risk to homeland defense if we were not able to operate these systems in the areas in which we need to operate them. I -- I would get back to you on the -- take for the record the cost to validate that. But my real concern is whether or not we could even make the changes that we would need to make ever.

And I will also look at how long it would take to make those changes. But, again, I'm not confident that we would be able to actually make the changes we would need to make to be able to use these systems to defend our nation and train our people.

MIKE ROUNDS:

What China -- do you believe that China would be happy if we were directed or -- or -- politically directed to remove our capabilities in this particular part of the spectrum? How would they view that?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

I think China will take advantage of any advantage that they see or any opportunity that they see to be able to defeat us and defeat our capabilities. And I know they're watching.

MIKE ROUNDS:

Thank you. Let me talk a little bit about what -- I -- I think Senator King hit on something that is so important, and that -- and as well as, you know, you've heard it almost right down the line here with regard to our capability to build. I want to take it one step farther and talk about our ability to actually maintain the equipment we've got.

Most naval admirals that have been before us cringe because they understand that as soon as I say USS Boise, there's really no excuse for the fact that we have an attack submarine, a nuclear attack submarine, that has now been basically in drydock or been unable to dive for more years than it actually took to build it in the first place.

I think -- are you familiar with the -- with the plight of the USS Boise?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, I am, and it is unacceptable.

MIKE ROUNDS:

It's been eight years now. And it -- the reason why I bring it up is because I think it points to the fact that we do have to have a very serious discussion about our capabilities to maintain the fleet we've got, let alone expand the fleet. And there isn't anybody up here, I think, that doesn't question the need and doesn't agree with the need to actually expand the Navy based upon the near pure competition that we've got in the -- in the Pacific region.

My question for you. Isn't it about time that probably we have a really long term plan for not just building new but for maintaining? And isn't it perhaps time that -- that we have metrics established with that that we hold ourselves accountable for, and we bring in not just Congress into this discussion but the administration in terms of how we lay this out going forward?

And would you commit to coming back and laying out for us a plan with metrics so that we are accountable to one another for getting it done?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Senator Rounds. We have a 15 year maintenance plan for all of our submarines. This is designed to get after that, and it does use data analytics. More recently, we have put in charge of our operational submarine effectiveness and delivery through the site type commander, who is the operational commander for submarines, to really put an operational lens and drive performance in our maintenance availabilities to get the ships out on time.

And I'm -- I've committed to continuing, if confirmed, to work on that.

MIKE ROUNDS:

You'll share the metrics -- you'll share the metrics with us?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, if confirmed, I will. As vice chief, I will as well.

MIKE ROUNDS:

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator Rounds. Senator Kaine, please.

TIM KAINE:

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Admiral Franchetti, my congratulations to you. I believe it's the case, although correct me if I'm wrong about this, that once you and the other service chief nominees are confirmed, all of the service chiefs will have served together as vice chief and chief. And that's not happened for a very long time.

Am I right about that?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, that's correct.

TIM KAINE:

And so, that's -- that's an interesting one for my colleagues, the fact that they -- the four have already forged these working relationships. It doesn't have to start anew. And I think that will help us as we grapple with jointness and integrated defense and deterrence. I want to talk about another aspect of integrated defense and deterrence, and that's our allies, using AUKUS as the example.

I am very pro the AUKUS announcement, which is now about two years old. I'm -- I'm pro the announcement because the -- the Aussies and the UK are great partners and have demonstrated that for decades with us. But also, you -- you had an interesting phrase. You said it complicates the decision making of adversaries when we do alliances like this.

And -- and I would put AUKUS together with the advances in the quad. I would put AUKUS together with the Camp David summit that the president just had with the presidents of Korea and Japan -- South Korea and Japan. That will -- civilian leadership being closer enables the mil to mil relationship to be stronger.

And so, I think doing these kinds of alliances are really strong. I want to dig into AUKUS because Senator Wicker asked important questions, and they're questions that others are asking. We have a -- a Virginia class production right now that's about 1.2 a year. We need to get to, I think you testified, 2.2 a year to meet our own Virginia class requirements and have the ability in the 2030s to transfer three to five Virginia class subs to the Aussies.

And then as that happens and they operate them and train them, then they will be able to develop, with our assistance, their own submarine -- nuclear submarine production capacity. OK. So, how do we get from 1.2 to 2.2? It seems to me that there's three elements. The first is this body has invested $2.3 billion in the submarine industrial base from 2018 to 2023. And these are investments that are long term, that -- that are -- that, as they mature, they will help us move our production capacity forward to some degree.

That's one element. The second element is the Aussies have said that they will invest $3 billion in the US submarine industrial base. That will help us move forward in terms of closing the gap between 1.2 and 2.2. But you'd agree with me, wouldn't you, that there's no way they will make that investment absent a guarantee that there's a deliverable of Virginia class subs in the 2030s, correct?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes. And as we continue to work with our Australian partners and the British partners, you know, coming to agreements and with each nation committing that this is the way forward will be critically important, because each nation needs to have the support of the people as well as their military.

TIM KAINE:

Right. And it would be kind of a -- hard to imagine a discussion in the Aussie parliament of, you know, somebody coming and saying let's invest $3 billion in the US submarine industrial base. OK, are we getting a guarantee out of it? Well, unless they're going to get a guarantee, they're not going to make that investment.

So, we -- we need to give them a guaranteed deliverable if they're going to make that $3 billion investment. But in addition to our $2.3 billion investment, that $3 billion investment is another critical component in terms of getting us from 1.2 to 2.2 a year. Now, my -- my thought is there's probably a third element.

And that is, is there an additional delta on our shoulders that we need to invest 2.3 plus three? OK, we can do that. Is there an additional delta that we need to invest, and over what period of time, to help us get from the 1.2 to the 2.2 a year? And I -- I see the questions of Senator Wicker and -- Senator Ricketts was asking some of these questions in a Foreign Relations Committee meeting the other day.

I think I think what they're asking is for the Pentagon and the White House to kind of put down on that third criteria, OK, what's the additional delta that we might need to invest going forward? We've done 2.3. We could get three if we do the guaranteed of deliverables to the Aussies. But there's probably some additional delta, and it doesn't have to be like in this year's supplemental.

We're talking about delivery of subs in the 2030s. But I do think my colleagues would like to see what that sort of third element is, what -- what additional investment would be needed over what period of time, how would that investment be programmed. And so I would, should you be confirmed -- but this is also a message to just the Pentagon and the White House.

I hope they will present to this committee especially, OK, what is the additional investment that the US is going to need to make to get us from the 1.2 to the 2.2. I think we can do it. And I think if we do it, it will be fantastic for our integrated defense capacity. I would just hope that we might be able to have that discussion to answer some of the legit questions that I think folks are raising.

I think this offers an amazing opportunity for the United States in the Indo-Pacific, and I want to make sure that we take full advantage of that opportunity. Thank you, Admiral Franchetti.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator Kaine. Senator Ernst, please.

JONI ERNST:

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Admiral, for appearing in front of the committee today. And congratulations on your nomination, and thank you as well to Jim and Isabel. Thank you so much for your wonderful support. We do appreciate that. So, a number of members have brought up, of course, the defense industrial base and the lack of -- of capacity or ships that we have.

Senator Rounds brought up the USS Boise. Well, when we sat down in my office, I had a -- a different ship that I brought up. It was the USS Sioux City, and I would like to discuss that today. When we spoke, you talked about the need to drive the Navy towards becoming a more lethal force, and I absolutely agree with that.

The current threats to our national security challenge us to reevaluate the investments that we're making in our future fleet. And I'm very sensitive as well to the cost to our Navy, which is why we must ensure that the Navy buys the weapon systems and equipment that will meet the operational threats of tomorrow.

The USS Sioux City, for those that are watching, for their information, is a littoral combat ship. It was decommissioned last month after only being commissioned for five years because it was not operationally effective in the future threat environment. And Congress deserves its fair share of the blame for appropriating funds for constructing unnecessary ships.

But I believe that Navy leadership should have spoken up very aggressively in opposition to the LCS. And so, in light of this situation, Admiral, do I have your commitment to building only the most lethal Navy possible?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, you do.

JONI ERNST:

And Admiral, do I also have your commitment to ardently speak up against actions that do not support the most lethal Navy?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, you do.

JONI ERNST:

Thank you. I appreciate that, and appreciate the discussion we had the other day. I think it's incredibly important that those of us that sit here on this committee understand that, while there may be parochial interests in our home states to moving ahead and building certain types of ships, when it's not in the Navy's best interest, we should stop it, OK?

So we should not be appropriating money to programs that aren't necessary for our Navy nor not wanted by our Navy. So I appreciate the commitment there. As we're talking about again about building and our defense industrial base, on your disruptive capabilities, your office -- disruptive means upsetting the status quo.

So with that, the Navy, because of how long it takes to build ships is not traditionally disruptive. So how do you plan to work with the Defense Innovation Unit, DIU, to integrate cutting edge technology from our private sector so that we can move that into our large Navy programs?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Well, thank you, Senator Ernst, and it was a pleasure talking with you the other day.

JONI ERNST:

Thank you.

LISA FRANCHETTI:

I am very focused on, you know, getting this right mix of ships between our large conventional platforms, but integrating these defensive disruptive capabilities into the force. And we've really been using our unmanned task force to test the waters on that for the last two years. And as you've seen the results out in Fifth Fleet where we've been able to leverage the best in commercial industry to be able to bring that together with our allies and partners to provide essentially great maritime domain awareness over large bodies of water and knitting that together to have a common picture through a mesh network.

So these are the kind of capabilities that we're looking at. They've done a great job in Fifth Fleet. We've also scaled that now down into Fourth Fleet, which operates around South America, just demonstrating that in an exercise called UNITAS and again very effectively. And of course, we're looking to scale this into Seventh Fleet.

We're doing a experimentation with some of these capabilities. And if confirmed, I'm committed to really putting down the gas on the -- on the pedal to accelerate these capabilities, leveraging work with DUIX, leveraging the replicator initiative and all the funding that we can get to be able to push these through into our fleet warfighting hands.

JONI ERNST:

I appreciate that. I think we can work smarter, not necessarily harder, but definitely smarter to meet our end goals. So thank you, Mr. Chair.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator. Senator Warren, please.

ELIZABETH WARREN:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Admiral Franchetti, congratulations on your nomination. Jim, Isabel, good to have you here today. So for nine months, the Senator from Alabama has personally blocked the Senate from approving promotions for more than 300 military leaders. We are missing Navy commanders in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.

The Secretary of the Navy has said the impact of these holds is quote, playing Russian roulette with the very lives of our service members. And now with Admiral Gilday's retirement, the Navy has no confirmed Chief of Naval Operations, but the price our nation will pay for the reckless behavior of Senator Tuberville will reach far into the future.

Admiral Franchetti, the Navy, like most of the services is always competing for the best leaders of tomorrow. So how important is a pipeline like the Naval Academy for recruiting those leaders of tomorrow?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator Warren, it was a pleasure to meet you the other day. You know, as we look right now as our Navy is facing challenges all around the globe, threats from our adversaries, we want to have the right people with the right level of experience in those positions. And as the -- we continue to not have the confirmed people that we've nominated with that experience, we're going to continue to see an erosion of readiness.

As far as the Naval Academy goes, it is an amazing place. I had a chance to serve there as a battalion officer. And you know, they bring together the best and brightest talent from all across America that are willing to serve our nation and they really come out and they do a great job. So whether they serve for their original commitment or they serve for 30 years, I'm very proud of all of our midshipmen at the Naval Academy as well as our midshipmen across our other commissioning sources in OCS.

ELIZABETH WARREN:

And I take it you're saying this is a part of the leadership pipeline for the Navy.

LISA FRANCHETTI:

It is.

ELIZABETH WARREN:

So one of the people held up by Senator Tuberville is Rear Admiral Davids, who would be the first female superintendent of the Naval Academy. Seeing someone like her at the helm will inspire other people who might not otherwise pursue a career in the Navy. Senator Tuberville likes to talk about how we're in a recruiting crisis, but for the first time in 60 years, the Naval Academy started the school year without a confirmed superintendent.

And every young person at the Naval Academy, every young person who is thinking right now about applying to the academy, and every young person anywhere in the Navy must confront head on the fact that Senator Tuberville has turned both the Navy and the Naval Academy into one more political football. The Senator's actions are damaging our military's recruiting and we will be paying a price for that for decades to come.

So let me ask you about another impact from these holds. Let me ask about families. Admiral Franchetti, you -- have you heard anything about the impact of these holds on Navy families?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, I think our Navy families are dealing with a lot of uncertainty. We ask a lot of our families to move, uproot, find new schools, find new jobs for our spouses, and I have heard a lot of concerns from our families that they are having difficulty navigating that space right now.

ELIZABETH WARREN:

All right. And one last question, and this one is about the promotion system. The 300 plus holds on the top ranks has an impact on everyone who is one level down, two levels down who can't move into a spot that has been vacated. Admiral Franchetti, the Senator from Alabama is treating these holds as a minor inconvenience, but the servicers are telling me that even after the holds are lifted, the promotion system will be tangled up for months or years to come.

So what is your best estimate of how long it will take the Navy's promotion system to recover?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator, I think just at the three star level, it would take about three to four months to move all of the people around, but it will take years to recover from the promotion, if confirmed, for the promotion delays that we would see forward.

ELIZABETH WARREN:

So years to come, our military experts project China wants to be able to take Taiwan by 2027 and we'll still be trying to repair the damage inflicted by these holds. The Republicans failure to end this blockade makes it clear they don't care about our leaders, they don't care about the families who have served their country honorably for decades.

It is hard to imagine a bigger propaganda win for our enemies. We need this hold to stop and we need it to stop now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

JACK REED:

Thank you very much, Senator Warren. Let me announce for the benefit of our colleagues that the 10:30 vote has begun. And let me recognize Senator Scott, please.

RICK SCOTT:

Thank you, Chairman. First of all, congratulations on your nomination. I wish you the best of luck and it's nice to see a family that is so supportive. So, you know, you get this a big job. So -- and you've got a great background to be able to do this. So let me just ask you some questions. As you know, Florida's home to probably the best Navy ships and sailors and all that stuff.

But talk to me about Philippines and the importance of the Philippines. The -- I was just did a P8 -- I just did a tour in a P8 over there with the -- actually she was -- the captain was a young lady her -- her plane was from Jacksonville and so she's from Ocala. But anyway, tell me the port -- tell the American public, the importance of the Philippines and why we should be engaged.

We're not just engaged with the Navy there, we're engaged with our Coast Guard too.

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Senator Scott, thank you very much for your support to all of our Navy team throughout Florida. I think the allies and partners are really one of our key strategic advantages for the US. We see our potential adversaries do not have those relationships. And again, I think it is a strategic strength. For the Philippines in particular, I'm very excited by the opportunities that we have with the Philippines now.

They are a critical partner, they're in a critical location, and we look forward to continuing to do exercises and build our relationship with both the Navy and the Coast Guard there because there's incredible opportunities for them.

RICK SCOTT:

Does it concern you that China is trying to infringe on the -- the Philippines' sovereignty with the -- with the different shoals?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

It concerns me that China is really trying to infringe on many people's sovereignty throughout the South China Sea, including the Philippines.

RICK SCOTT:

So the Marine Corps is the only service that met their recruitment numbers last year. This year the Navy dropped the recruitment quality standards to the minimum level -- legal level and the Navy will allow some recruits to enlist who score as low as ten on a 100 point scale on the Armed Forces qualification test.

That didn't seem to make a lot of sense. Can you talk about you know that and how it -- how you're going to deal with it?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

Yes, Senator. We are in a war for talent, but I would like to make the point that the Navy has not lowered any of our standards. We are using every available level -- lever to us that's authorized to be able to expand the pool of people that we're bringing in. So we've done a few things. We've raised the admission age to 42. And to your specific point, we have brought in more cat four -- up to 20 percent now category four recruits.

But I think when you think about the Navy, we have a wide range of skill sets where we need people with this level of skill and we need electronics technicians with this level of skill. What the bringing in the cat fours is done for us is to allow us to fill the first level. Everyone is eligible for one job at least.

And through our future sailor prep course, through the physical fitness one, we took a page from the Army on that. That's going well. And we also continue to add to the academic rigor of the folks coming in so they can advance to the higher level of skills. So we haven't lowered our standards in any way.

RICK SCOTT:

And do you think you're going to be able to meet your recruitment numbers going forward?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

So we started out the year thinking we'd be about 13,000 short. We're going to be about 7,000 short. We're doing better month by month than we were last year. And if confirmed, I will continue to make sure that we get out and talk to people all around the world so we can bring in the best talent for our Navy.

RICK SCOTT:

OK, thank you. You talked a little bit about when Senator Ernst was -- about the -- the littoral ships and I guess they're decommissioned sometimes with the life just like five years seems -- seems sort of crazy. Can you talk about the importance of these ships and how they're going to fit into the Navy in the future?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

The littoral combat ship is still a very important ship to our Navy. We have a validated need for them and the surface warfare mission, but most importantly in the mine countermeasures mission and we will be able to continue to use them for these missions.

RICK SCOTT:

Do you anticipate, you know, asking Congress to retire more of them?

LISA FRANCHETTI:

I would have to take that for the record after I have an opportunity to do analysis and I will -- I will do that.

RICK SCOTT:

Thanks. Congratulations again your nomination. Thanks.

JACK REED:

Thank you, Senator Scott. Senator Tuberville, please.

TOMMY TUBERVILLE:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. Congratulations. Good visit with you the other day. As we -- we discussed, you know, I'm -- I'm continuously talking to our -- our Joint Chiefs and -- and our leadership about -- about politics. We talked about politics. And I would hope that -- that when you take over your new role, and I'm excited for you, that keep politics out as much as I know you'll have to deal with it some.

But out of the military, as much as we possibly can. Leave it -- leave it to us, politicians, I guess. I want to ask you about we've -- we've got a -- a Vice Admiral that's -- that soon will be talking about confirming. And I just want to give you one example of -- of what I'm talking about here. I coached football for a long time.

I coached teams, put them together. And I had football players, I didn't have different races or wealth or religions and I would never would never try to divide that group and put them in certain categories to where other groups said, what are we doing? Why are we separating this? Because our military is a team.

I mean we've got to win, there's no second place in -- in war. There's the first place, but we got one rear -- Rear Admiral that -- that recently had a party on a ship for the lesbian, gay, and transgender group. Now listen, I've got gay friends. I have no problem, but we are building a team here, a team of people that's got to fight together, do things together.

I mean they had a party, cut a cake, all these things. And to me again, we're going to need everybody, men, women, everybody of -- of every association because, you know, we're a volunteer force, but we want people to love this country that will fight together when things get tough.

List of Panel Members and Witnesses
PANEL MEMBERS:

SEN. JACK REED (D-R.I.), CHAIRMAN

SEN. JEANNE SHAHEEN (D-N.H.)

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D-N.Y.)

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CONN.)

SEN. MAZIE K. HIRONO (D-HAWAII)

SEN. TIM KAINE (D-VA.)

SEN. ANGUS KING (I-MAINE)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MASS.)

SEN. GARY PETERS (D-MICH.)

SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-W.VA.)

SEN. TAMMY DUCKWORTH (D-ILL.)

SEN. JACKY ROSEN (D-NEV.)

SEN. MARK KELLY (D-ARIZ.)

SEN. ROGER WICKER (R-MISS.), RANKING MEMBER

SEN. DEB FISCHER (R-NEB.)

SEN. TOM COTTON (R-ARK.)

SEN. MIKE ROUNDS (R-S.D.)

SEN. JONI ERNST (R-IOWA)

SEN. DAN SULLIVAN (R-ALASKA)

SEN. KEVIN CRAMER (R-N.D.)

SEN. RICK SCOTT (R-FLA.)

SEN. TOMMY TUBERVILLE (R-ALA.)

SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OKLA.)

SEN. TED BUDD (R-N.C.)

SEN. ERIC SCHMITT (R-MO.)

WITNESSES:

CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS NOMINEE LISA M. FRANCHETTI