U.S. Representative Michael Waltz (R-FL), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness, delivered the following opening remarks at a hearing on the military construction program and infrastructure, environment and energy programs, and facility sustainment, restoration and modernization accounts.
Rep. Waltz's remarks as prepared for delivery:
I'd like to welcome the Members of the Readiness Subcommittee to our first official hearing for the 118th Congress. I'm deeply honored to serve as the Chairman of this impactful subcommittee and lead its crucial work. I'm very pleased to have Mr. Garamendi as the subcommittee Ranking Member; I've thoroughly enjoyed working with him over the last year and am appreciative of all the great work conducted during his time as the subcommittee Chairman.
Thank you to our witnesses for their time and participation in today's hearing to discuss military construction, environmental and energy programs, as well as base and facility accounts.
As has become the trend, I wish we could be having this conversation after the release of the President's Budget, but there is no doubt plenty of issues we can discuss even without the budget figures. I welcome continued dialogue on these matters as we work through this year's NDAA process.
The Armed Services Committee will deliberate a lot this Congress on the present and future capabilities needed for great power competition and a potential Taiwan contingency. As we discuss those capabilities, we must also recognize the need for investment in new infrastructure as well as maintenance of existing infrastructure. Unfortunately, maintenance of existing facilities has been chronically neglected to pay for other priorities. This lack of investment in aging and failing infrastructure has resulted in negative impacts to readiness and retention as well as inefficient facilities that don't adequately support intended missions. I look forward to discussing the path forward with new military construction and how the services prioritize sustainment of existing infrastructure with the understanding that we must get that mix right to support both platforms and servicemembers.
Any MILCON and facility sustainment effort must also prepare our military installations at home and abroad for future challenges with better planning that focuses on resilient infrastructure investments. We have made progress to this end by requiring master plans considering these risks, and the services have begun to submit these master plans for their two most at risk installations after being required to do so in the FY22 NDAA. However, we must do more to shape the best posture for the future.
No where else is the issue of aging infrastructure more evident than our shipyards. The recent operational impacts to dry docks at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard due to seismic resiliency issues is concerning. I'd like to hear from our witnesses today what's being done to remedy this problem, mitigate risks to readiness, and use this as an impetus to look across our shipyards and invest in critical updates to ensure long term viability.
Our installations also remain largely dependent on commercial electric grids and are vulnerable to any disruptions they suffer. To protect our mission capability, we must continue to pursue solutions like islanding capabilities and generation from micro-reactors.
On the operational side, I am very concerned the Department is not as far along as we should be given the threats on the horizon. Our ability to supply energy forward and sustain operations in contested environments is paramount within today's threat environment. Contested and challenged environments are the new normal; we must posture accordingly.
Furthermore, we must ensure our installations are free from dependence on energy supplied by our adversaries. Recent NDAAs have highlighted the threat posed by our reliance on Russian energy at our EUCOM installations. The Department has begun this work, but it's paramount we develop and adhere to transition plans for every installation.
Taking care of our Solders, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, and Guardians is the utmost responsibility of all of us here in this room. Our Department of Defense leaders continuously tout "people first" strategies and ensuring that our servicemembers are the priority. But I remain skeptical of this being put into practice when we look at the status of our barracks and housing – we must provide safe barracks, housing, and infrastructure that puts our servicemembers' welfare first.
Recent NDAAs have authorized a historic level of spending for cleanup of PFAS contaminated military installations and surrounding areas. We all hope to see that momentum continued and sites move forward in the cleanup process. I'd appreciate an update on the efforts underway to replace AFFF and reduce accidental releases.
Furthermore, in last year's NDAA, we authorized $1 billion for the Red Hill Recovery Fund for cleanup and other efforts. I'd like to hear how this money is being used, what the current progress is, and what we can expect for efforts in FY23 and beyond.
We also need to prioritize making our strategic stockpiles whole, as well as reducing our reliance on adversarial nations for critical minerals and supplies. Defense Logistics Agency has identified 14 critical defense materials that are 100 percent foreign sourced and have insufficient National Defense Stockpile reserves to support defense and essential civilian requirements. Of those 14 materials, 11 are sourced from China. This is an unacceptable threat to our national security, and I look forward to working with this Subcommittee to find a solution.
This Administration's focus on climate change as a national security priority remains concerning. I'm wholly supportive of efforts to increase resiliency due to extreme weather events. But climate change policies cannot be an end in itself that ignore operational realities. The priority should be on developing and implementing capabilities to counter China; not on green initiatives that handcuff the Services and warfighters.
The ongoing war in Ukraine and an ever-growing aggressive China are a constant reminder of the importance of this work and the urgency we must recognize. Smart investments, that put the warfighter first, are crucial. We no longer have the luxury of operating within permissive environments. We must prepare for, and shift, our mindset and policies into a wartime footing for contested domains. We simply do not have the time to admire the threats we face. We must act; and we must do so quickly. Bureaucratic processes and red tape must be removed if we are to truly posture at home and abroad to counter China's malign activities.
Thank you once again to our witnesses for being here today and I look forward to your testimony.
