the February 13, 1996 update of the Congressional Research Service publication Navy Attack Submarine Programs: Issues for Congress by Mr. Ronald 0 ‘Rourke.]
The Administration’s defense budget for FY 1996 requested $1,507 million to complete funding of SSN-23, a third and final Seawolf (SSN-21) class submarine. The Administration also requested $1,160 million in research and development and advanced procurement funding for the NAS Attack Submarine (NAS or NSSN) program. The NSSN was designed to be a smaller and less expensive successor to the Seawolf design. The Administration’s plan called for allocating the contracts for building the first two NSSNs (to be procured in FY 1998 and FY 2000) the Electric Boat Corporation of Groton, Connecticut.
Congress agreed to procure SSN-23 in FY 1996, but provided only $700 million rather than $1,507 million. The remaining $807 million will have to be provided in FY 1997 or a later fiscal year.
Congress disagreed with the Administration’s plan for the NSSN program. The House National Security Committee decided that the NSSN was not affordable enough to be procured in the numbers the Navy wanted, and not capable enough to counter future Russian submarines. The Senate Armed Services Committee objected to the Administration’s plan to allocate NSSN construction contracts to Electric Boat rather than award them on the basis of competitions involving Electric Boat and the nation’s other submarine builder, Newport News Shipbuilding of Newport News, Virginia.
The two defense authorization committees merged their concerns and legislative proposals regarding the NSSN program in Section 131 of the FY 1996 defense authorization bill. Section 131 significantly restructures the Administration’s proposed NSSN program into a program for procuring four operational prototype submarines between FY 1998 and FY 2001, followed by procurement of the first of a class of next generation submarines in FY 2003.
Each operational prototype is to use advanced technologies to be more capable and more affordable than its predecessor. Electric Boat is to build the FY 1998 and FY 2000 submarines, while Newport News Shipbuilding is to build the FY 1999 and FY 2001 submarines. The Navy’s progress in implementing the operational prototype plan is to be reviewed annually by a special, bipartisan, six member panel consisting of three members from each of the two defense authorization committees.
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL
Sec. 131. Nuclear Attack Submarines
(a) Amounts Authorized. (1) Of the amount authorized by section 102 to be appropriated for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy, for fiscal year 1996-
(A) $700,000,000 is available for construction of the third vessel (designated SSN-23) in the Seawolf attack submarine class, which shall be the final vessel in that class; and
(B) $804,498,000 is available for long-lead and advance construction and procurement of components for construction of the fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 submarines (previously designated by the Navy as the New Attack Submarine), ofwhich-
(i) $704,498,000 shall be available for long-lead and advance construction and procurement for the fiscal year 1998 submarine, which shall be built by Electric Boat Division; and
(ii) $100,000,000 shall be available for long-lead and advance construction and procurement for the fiscal year 1999 submarine, which shall be built by Newport News Shipbuilding.
(2) Of the amount authorized by section201(2), $10,000,000 shall be available only for participation of Newport News Shipbuilding in the design of the submarine previously designated by the Navy as the New Attack Submarine.
(b) Competition, Report, and Budget Revision Limitations.
(1) Of the amounts specified in subsection (a)(l), not more than $200,000,000 may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Navy certifies in writing to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives that procurement of nuclear attack submarines to be constructed beginning-
(A) after fiscal year 1999, or
(B) if four submarines are procured as provided for in the plan described in subsection (c), after fiscal year 2001, will be under one or more contracts that are entered into after competition between potential competitors (as defined in subsection (k) in which the Secretary solicits competitive proposals and awards the contract or contracts on the basis of price.
(2) Of the amounts specified in subsection (a)(l), not more than $1,000,000,000 may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense, not later than March 15, 1996, accomplishes each of the following:
(A) Submits to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives in accordance with subsection (c) the plan required by that subsection for a program to produce a more capable, less expensive nuclear attack submarine than the submarine design previously designated by the navy as the New Attack Submarine.
(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, or the funding level in the President’s budget for each year after fiscal year 1996, the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall incorporate the costs of the plan required by subsection (c) in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) even if the total cost of that Program exceeds the President’s budget.
(C) Directs that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology conduct oversight over the development and improvement of the nuclear attack submarine program of the Navy. Officials of the Department of the Navy exercising management oversight of the program shall report to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology with respect to that program.
(c) Plan for Fiscal Year 1998. 1999. 2000, and 2001 Submarine.,.
(1) The Secretary of Defense shall, not later than March 15, 1996, develop (and submit to the committees specified in subsection (b)(2}(A)) a detailed plan for development of a program that will lead to production of a more capable, less expensive submarine than the submarine previously designated as the New Attack Submarine.
(2) As part of such plan, the Secretary shall provide for a program for the design, development, and procurement of four nuclear attack submarines to be produced during fiscal years 1998 through fiscal year 2001, the purpose of which shall be to develop and demonstrate new technologies that will result in each successive submarine of those four being a more capable and more affordable submarine than the submarine that preceded it. The program shall be structured so that-
(A) one of the four submarines is to be constructed with funds appropriated for each fiscal year from fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2001;
(B) in order to ensure flexibility for innovation, the fiscal year 1998 and the fiscal year 2000 submarines are to be constructed by the Electric Boat Division and the fiscal year 1999 and the fiscal year 2001 submarines are to be constructed by Newport News Shipbuilding;
(C) the design designated by the Navy for the submarine previously designated as the New Attack Submarine will be used as the base design by both contractors;
(D) each contractor shall be called upon to propose improvements, including design improvements, for each successive submarine as new and better technology is demonstrated and matures so that-
(i) each successive submarine is more capable and more affordable; and
(ii) the design for a future class of nuclear attack submarines will incorporate the latest, best, and most affordable technology; and
(E) the fifth and subsequent nuclear attack submarines to be built after the SSN-23 submarine shall be procured as required by subsection (b)(l).
(3) The plan under paragraph (1) shall-
(A) set forth a program to accomplish the design, development, and construction of the four submarines taking maximum advantage of a streamlined acquisition process, as provided under subsection (d);
(B) culminate in selection of a design for a next submarine for serial production not earlier than fiscal year 2003, with such submarine to be procured as required by subsection (b)(l);
(C) identify advanced technologies that are in various phases of research and development, as well as those that are commercially available off-the-shelf, that are candidates to be incorporated into the plan to design, develop, and procure the submarines;
(D) designate the fifth submarine to be procured as the lead ship in the next generation submarine class. unless the Secretary of the Navy, in consultation with the special submarine review panel described in subsection (t), determines that more submarines should be built before the design of the new class of submarines is fixed, in which case each such additional submarine shall be procured in the same manner as is required by subsection (b)(l); and
(E) identify the impact of the submarine program described in paragraph (1) on the remainder of the appropriation account known as Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. as such impact relates to-
(i) force structure levels required by the October 1993 October Department of Defense report entitled Report on the Bottom-Up Review;
(ii) force structure levels required by the 1995 report on the Surface Ship Combatant Study that was carried out for the Department of Defense; and
(iii) the funding requirements for submarine construction, as a percentage of the total ship construction account, for each fiscal year throughout the FYDP.
(4) As part of such plan, the Secretary shall provide-
(A) cost estimates and schedules for developing new technologies that may be used to make submarines more capable and more affordable; and
(B) an analysis of significant risks associated with fielding the new technologies on the schedule proposed by the Secretary and significant increased risks that are likely to be incurred by accelerating that schedule.
(d) Streamlined Acquisition Process. The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe and use streamlined acquisition policies and procedures to reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of the submarine program under this section.
(e) Annual Revisions to Plan. The Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives an annual update to the plan required to be submitted under subsection (b). Each such update shall be submitted concurrent with the President’s budget submission to Congress for each of fiscal years 1998 through 2002.
(f) Special Submarine Review Panel.
(1) The plan under subsection (c) and each annual update under subsection (e) shall be reviewed by a special bipartisan congressional panel working with the Navy. The panel shall consist of three members of the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, who shall be designated by the chairman of that committee, and three members of the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives, who shall be designated by the chairman of that committee. The members of the panel shall be briefed by the Secretary of the Navy on the status of the submarine modernization program and the status of submarine related research and development under this section.
(2) Not later than May 1 of each year, the panel shall report to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House of Representatives on the panel’s findings and recommendations regarding the progress of the Secretary in procuring a more capable, less expensive submarine. The panel may recommend any funding adjustments it believes appropriate to achieve this objective.
(g) Linkage of Fiscal Year 1998 and 1999 Submarines. Funds referred to in subsection (a)(l)(B) that are available for the fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 submarines under this section may not be expended during fiscal year 1996 for the fiscal year 1998 submarine (other than for design) unless funds are obligated or expended during such fiscal year for a contract in support of procurement of the fiscal year 1999 submarine.
(h) Contracts Authorized. The Secretary of the Navy is authorized, using funds available pursuant to paragraph (l)(B) of subsection (a), to enter into contracts with Electric Boat Division and Newport News Shipbuilding, and suppliers of components, during fiscal year 1996 for-
(1) the procurement of long-lead components for the fiscal year 1998 submarine and the fiscal year 1999 submarine under this section; and
(2) advance construction of such components and other components for such submarines.
(i) Advanced Research Projects A&ency Development of Advanced Technologies.
(1) Of the amount provided in section 201(4) for the advanced Research Projects Agency, $100,000,000 is available only for development and demonstration of advanced technologies
for incorporation into the submarines constructed as part of the plan developed under subsection (c). Such advanced technologies shall include the following:
(A) Electric drive.
(B) Hydrodynamic quieting.
(C) Ship control automation.
(D) Solid-state power electronics.
(E) Wake reduction technologies.
(F) Superconductor technologies.
(G) Torpedo defense technologies.
(H) Advanced control concept.
(I) Fuel cell technologies.
(J) Propulsors.
(2) The Director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency shall implement a rapid prototype acquisition strategy for both land-based and at-sea subsystem and system demonstrations of advanced technologies under paragraph (1). Such acquisition strategy shall be developed and implemented in concert with Electric Boat Division and Newport News Shipbuilding and the Navy.
G) References to Contractors. For purposes of this section-
(1) the contractor referred to as Electric Boat Division is the Electric Boat Division of the General Dynamics Corporation; and
(2) the contractor referred to as Newport News Shipbuilding is the Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company.
(k) Potential Competitor Defined. For purposes of this section, the term potential competitor means any source to which the Secretary of the Navy has awarded, within 10 years before the date of the enactment of this Act, a contract or contracts to construct one or more nuclear attack submarines.
Sec. 132. Research for Advanced Submarine Technology
Of the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1996 for the National Defense Sealift Fund, $50,000,000 shall be available only for the Director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for advanced submarine technology activities.
Sec. 133, Cost Limitation for Seawolf Submarine Program
(a)Limitation of Costs. Except as provided in subsection
(b). the total amount obligated or expended for procurement of the SSN-21, SSN-22, and SSN-23 Seawolf class submarines may not exceed $7,223,659,000.
(b)Automatic Increase of Limitation Amount. The amount of the limitation set forth in subsection (a) is increased by the following amounts:
(I) The amounts of outfitting costs and post-delivery costs incurred for the submarines referred to in such subsection.
(2) The amounts of increases in costs attributable to economic inflation after September 30, 1995.
(3) The amounts of increases in costs attributable to compliance with changes in Federal, State, or local laws enacted after September 30, 1995.
(c)Repeal of Superseded Provision. Section 122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2682) is repealed.
The budget request reflected a policy, adopted by the Department of Defense as a consequence of its Bottom Up Review, that would cause all future nuclear submarines to be constructed by General Dynamics electric Boat Division (Electric Boat). The budget request included the following funding for submarine construction programs:
(1) $1.5 billion for SSN-23, the final increment required for full funding of this Seawolf class submarine;
(2) $704.5 million advance procurement for the first of a new class of nuclear attack submarines, designated as the new attack submarine (NAS), whose construction would begin in fiscal year 1998; and
(3) a total of $455.4 million for research, development, test, and evaluation for the NAS program.
The House report (H. Rept. 104-131) reflected the view that changes in the Navy’s plan for acquisition of nuclear attack submarines should be made to incorporate advanced technologies into these submarines’ designs. These recommendations were based on an underlying premise that the Navy’s NAS program would not provide an adequate technological advantage over foreign submarines presently under construction or in design. The House bill would:
(1) not authorize SSN-23;
(2) authorize $550.0 million for Electric Boat to design, build, and incorporate a hull section into SSN-22 to create a lengthened, expanded capability variant of the basic Seawolf design, while retaining its full weapons load;
(3) authorize $704.5 million advance procurement for the fiscal year 1998 submarine that would be built by Electric Boat;
(4) authorize $300.0 million for Electric Boat to design and build a second hull section that would be incorporated into a fiscal year 1998 submarine, and convert that submarine from the lead ship of a serial-production class, based on the current NAS design, into an additional, one-of-kind, expanded capability platform that would be derived from the current NAS design;
(S) directs that $10.0 million of the funds in the budget request for NAS detailed design work be used only for establishing and maintaining a cadre of Newport News submarine designers at Electric Boat and for transfer of all NAS design data from Electric Boat’s design data base to Newport News’;
(6) authorize $150.0 million to begin an effort at Newport News to design, develop, and build prototype versions of major submarine components that would result in a follow-on submarine design for serial production that represents a substantial improvement in affordability and capability over the current NAS design;
(7) direct the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and the national laboratories to make new technologies available to both Electric Boat and Newport News that show potential for achieving a follow-on submarine design for serial production that represents a substantial improvement over the current NAS design; and
(8) include a provision {sec. 133) that would direct the Secretary of the Navy to award, on a competitive basis, contracts for attack submarines built after the fiscal year 1998 submarine.
The Senate amendment reflected an alternate view on how to acquire nuclear attack submarines. It contained a provision (sec. 121) that would:
(1) authorize the SSN-23 at $1.5 billion, the budget request;
(2) limit the ability of the Secretary of the Navy to obligate or expend funds for SSN-23 until he restructures the NAS program to provide for:
(a) procurement of the lead NAS from Electric Boat in fiscal year 1998;
(b) procurement of the second NAS from Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock (Newport News) in fiscal year 1999; and
(c) competitive procurement of any additional NAS vessels after the second. Potential competitors for these additional vessels would be contractors that have been awarded a contract by the Secretary of the Navy for construction of nuclear attack submarines during the past 10 years;
(3) place additional limits on the total amount of funds that may be expended for SSN-23 in fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, and 1999;
(4) direct the Secretary of the Navy to solicit competitive proposals and award the contract or contracts for NAS, after the second NAS, on the basis of price;
(5) direct the Secretary of the Navy to take no action that would impair the design, engineering, construction, and maintenance competencies of either Electric Boat or Newport News to construct the NAS;
(6) direct the Secretary of the Navy to report every six months to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House the obligation and expenditure of funds for SSN-23 and the NAS;
(7) authorize $814.5 million in fiscal year 1996 for design and advance procurement of the lead and second NAS, of which $10.0 million would be available only for participation of Newport News in the NAS design, and $100.0 million would be available only for advance procurement and design of the second submarine under the NAS program;
(8) place limits on the expenditure of advance procurement funds in fiscal year 1996 for the lead NAS, unless funds are also obligated or expended for the second NAS;
(9) authorized $802.0 million in fiscal year 1997 for advance procurement of the lead and second NAS, of which $75.0 million would be available only for participation by Newport News in the design of the NAS, and $427 .0 million would be available only for advance procurement and design of the second submarine under the NAS program; and
(10) authorized $455.4 million, the budget request, for research, development, test, and evaluation for the NAS program. The conferees agree to adopt a new provision dealing with the design and procurement of future Navy attack submarines. This provision would:
(1) authorize the SSN-23 at $700.0 million;
(2) authorize $804.5 million in fiscal year 1996 for design and advance procurement of the fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 submarine (previously designated by the Navy as the NAS), of which;
(a) $704.5 million would be available only for long lead and advance construction and procurement for the fiscal year 1998 submarine, which would be built by Electric Boat; and
(b) $100.0 million would be available only for long lead and advance construction and procurement for the fiscal year 1999 submarine, which would be built by Newport News;
(3) authorize $10.0 million only for participation of Newport News in the design of the submarine previously designated by the Navy as the NAS;
(4) establish a special bipartisan congressional panel that would be briefed, at least annually, by the Secretary of the Navy on the status of the submarine modernization program and submarine-related research and development;
(5) direct the Secretary of Defense, not later than March 15, 1996, to accomplish the following:
(a) develop and submit a detailed plan for development of a program that will lead to production of more capable, less expensive submarines than the submarine previously designated as the NAS;
(b) ensure the plan includes a program for the design development, and procurement of four nuclear attack submarines that would be procured during fiscal years 1998 through 2001 with each successive submarine being more capable and more affordable;
(c) structure the program so that:
(i) one of the four submarines would be constructed with funds appropriated for each fiscal year from fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2001;
(ii) to ensure flexibility for innovation, the fiscal year 1998 and the fiscal year 2000 submarines would be constructed by Electric Boat and the fiscal year 1999 and the fiscal year 2001 submarines would be constructed by Newport News;
(iii) the design previously designated as the NAS would be used as the base design by both contractors;
(iv) each contractor would be called on to propose improvements, including design improvements, for each successive submarine so that each of them would be more capable, more affordable, and their design would lead to a design for a future class of nuclear attack submarines that would possess the latest, best, and most affordable technology; and
(v) the fifth and subsequent nuclear attack submarines, proposed for construction after SSN-23 would be procured after a competition based on price;
(d) the Secretary of Defense’s plan would also:
(i) set forth a program to accomplish the design, development, and construction of the four submarines that would take maximum advantage of a streamlined acquisition process;
(ii) culminate in selection of a design for a next submarine for serial production not earlier than fiscal year 2003 with procurement to occur after a competition based on price;
(iii) identify advanced technologies that are in various phases of research and development, as well as those that are commercially available off-the-shelf, that are candidates for incorporation into the plan to design, develop, and procure the submarines;
(iv) designate the fifth submarine procured after SSN-23 to be the lead ship in a next generation submarine class, unless the Secretary of the Navy, in consultation with the special congressional submarine review panel, determines that more submarines should be built before the design of a new class of submarines is fixed, in which case the fifth and each successive submarine would be procured after a competition based on price; and
(v) identify the impact of the submarine program on the remainder of the Navy’s shipbuilding account;
(6) impose certain limits on the amounts that can be obligated and expended on the SSN-23 and the fiscal year 1998 and 1999 submarines until:
(a) the Secretary of the Navy has certified in writing to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the House that procurement of future nuclear attack submarines, except as stipulated elsewhere in this provision, would be accomplished through a competition based on price; and
(b) the Secretary of Defense, not later than March 15, 1996, has:
(i) submitted the submarine design and procurement plan that would be required by the provision;
(ii) directed the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to incorporate the costs of the submarine design and procurement plan into the future years defense program, even if the total cost of the plan’s program exceeds the President’s budget; and
(iii) directed that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology conduct oversight of the development and improvement of the nuclear attack submarine program of the Navy and established reporting procedures to ensure that officials of the Department of the Navy, who exercise management oversight of the program, report to the Under secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology with respect to that program;
(7) direct the Secretary of Defense to use streamlined acquisition policies to reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of the submarine program;
(8) direct the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an annual update of the submarine design and procurement plan with the submission of the President’s budget for each o fiscal years 1998 through 2002;
(9) direct that funds authorized for fiscal year 1996 by this provision may not be obligated or expended during fiscal year 1996 for the fiscal year 1998 submarine unless funds are also obligated and expended during fiscal year 1996 for the fiscal year 1999 submarine;
(10) authorize the Secretary of the Navy to enter into contracts with Electric Boat and Newport News, and suppliers of components during fiscal year 1996 for:
(a) the procurement of long-lead components for the fiscal year 1998 submarine and the fiscal year 1999 submarine; and
(b) advance construction of long-lead components and other components for such submarines;
(11) authorize that, of the amount provided in section 201(4) of this Act for ARPA, that $100.0 million would be available only for development and demonstration of advanced technologies for incorporation into the submarines constructed as part of the submarine design and procurement plan specified under this provision, to include electric drive, hydrodynamic quieting, hip control automation, solid-state power electronics, wake reduction technologies, superconductor technologies, torpedo defense technologies, advanced control concepts, fuel cell technologies, and propulsors;
(12) direct that the Director of ARP A shall implement a rapid prototype acquisition strategy for both land-based and at-sea subsystem and system demonstrations of advanced technologies in concert with Electric Boat and Newport News; and
(13) define potential competitors, for the purposes of this provision, as those that have been awarded a contract by the Secretary of the Navy for construction of nuclear attack submarines during the past 10 years.
Editor’s Note: Navy News & Undersea Technology of February 12, 1996:
“Nayy Sub Advisory Board Made Public
The Navy ‘s sub advisory board met for the first time in late January. The Navy panel is one of three advising the CNO and Congress on submarine policy and technologies:
Retired V ADM Albert J. Baciocco, consultant
David V. Burke, Draper Labs
Retired V ADM Daniel L. Cooper, consultant
Retired LGEN William H. Foster, VP Westinghouse
Charles A. Fowler, consultant
L. Raymond Hettche, Penn State University
Alfred C. Malcbiodi, Electric Boat Corporation
Walter E. Morrow, MIT
Albert Narath, Lockheed Martin
James A. Tegnelia, VP Lockheed Martin
George A. Wade, Newport News Shipbuilding
Bruce Wald, consultant
Retired Air Force MGEN Jasper A. Welch, National Lab
Advisory Board
Retired RADM Robert H. Wertheim, National Lab Advisory
Board, consultant”
