Four House Armed Services Committee (HASC) members wrote the White House Office of Management and Budget supporting the cost and stability benefits of incremental funding for Virginia-class submarines.
In a Statement of Administration Policy, OMB recently “strongly” opposed incremental funding in the House-passed National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 4310).
Republicans Robert Wittman (Va)., and Randy Forbes (R-Va.) and Democrats Joe Courtney (Conn.) and James Langevin (R.I.) said they believe “a carefully crafted, thoughtfully planned, and limited use of incremental funding authority in the next multi-year procurement block for the Virginia-class Submarine can yield both important savings and maintain a stable production rate for this program.”
Virginia-class submarines are built by General Dynamics’ [GD] Electric Boat in Connecticut, and Huntington Ingalls Industries [HHI] in Newport News, Va. Wittman, Forbes and Langevin also are members of the HASC Seapower and Projection panel.
The members wrote: “Under an incremental funding approach, the funding already planned for the purchase of nine submarines over the course of the 2014-2018 period could be allocated on a cash flow basis, providing flexibility and downstream savings needed to fund a tenth boat in that block.”
The president’s fiscal year 2013 budget request includes multiyear procurement authority to purchase Virginia-class subs from FY ’14-’18. The effort is estimated to save 14 percent–some $4.5 billion over the five-year period.
Moving the production of one sub concerned members, who wrote in an April 8 letter to OMB’s Acting Director Jeffrey Zients that a “budget-driven decision will exacerbate the shortfall in required submarine force levels.”
To stave off the shortfall, they wrote, “we believe the most effective way to address the urgent need to restore the second 2014 boat and leverage limited dollars available is to allow the use of incremental funding on this effective program.”
Bipartisan support in the House and Senate did restore that second submarine to 2014, thus maintaining a stable production rate, the letter said. Additionally, the House and Senate versions of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act and the House-passed defense appropriations bill and the committee-passed Senate version include increased advanced procurement funding to buy long-lead items supporting a two-submarine building 2014.
Members want OMB to consider that current policy provides full funding for a submarine minus advanced procurement funds for long-lead materials in the year of procurement, but much of the money is idle for several years as the boat is built.
While members wrote they understood the need for “caution” in using an incremental funding approach, they believe the program demonstrated an “unmatched record of construction and cost performance and is being touted as the model for major acquisition programs.”
They also said they understand the concern that incremental funding commits future leaders and Congresses to a specific course of action. But they point out that the government already uses a multi-year procurement approach by which the Navy commits to purchase multiple subs over multiple years.