WASHINGTON — The US Marine Corps' top general told lawmakers that the service's modernization account is "lower than it has been historically," and at 9 percent of his total budget, it is "one of my greatest concerns."
In testimony before at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Tuesday, Gen. Joseph Dunford defended the service's procurement strategy for the Amphibious Combat Vehicle, discussed potential ammunition shortfall downrange and the possibility of upgrading individual weapons. Dunford fretted his modernization account had fallen below an optimal 12 percent of the service's budget.
"That is actually is one of my greatest concerns," Dunford said, in response to a question from Sen. Jodi Ernst, R-Iowa. "Today, I think we're doing a pretty good job resetting our capabilities to the fight we had yesterday, but I'm not satisfied we're investing in capabilities we need for the fight tomorrow."
With top Navy officials who testified, Dunford lamented budget instability and sequestration cuts as the Marine Corps juggles a strategic pivot to the Pacific, its presence — albeit diminished — in Afghanistan and the burgeoning fight against the Islamic State group.
The Marine Corps has two 25-man teams in Anbar province to train Iraqi forces, troops protecting the US Embassy in Baghdad and V-22 Osprey recovery aircraft on stand-by to support anti-Islamic State airstrikes, "so that if something did happen, we would be in a position to recover aircraft and personnel," Dunford said.
Asked about potential ammunition shortfalls there, Dunford said supplies would be at risk in a "major contingency," specifically the FGM-148 Javelin Anti-tank Missile and the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System. However, the plan is to replenish stocks from elsewhere in the arsenal.
"There's been a decision to try to balance risk," Dunford said. "We'll always ensure our units that are forward-deployed have the wherewithal to accomplish the mission, so what we may end up doing is taking risk at home station against a major contingency."
Ernst asked Dunford about modernization as a means of giving troops an edge, particularly in light of militants plundering M-16s and M-4s from Iraqi weapon stocks.
"That puts us on an equal playing level with our adversaries on the ground," she said of the thefts. "Is it possible as we look at modernizing our ships and aviation platforms — within a budget, is there room to advance individual weapons systems that put us at a technological advantage?"
"I agree with your point, but it's not just the weapon, it's the Marine behind the weapon: It's still not a fair fight even if he has the same weapons system we do," Dunford said. "To your point about increased investment in these areas, that is one of the sacrifices we made. To make sure our Marines who are forward-deployed have what we need, we had to take a risk in our capability development."
Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I.hode Island, questioned the Marine Corps' strategy for one of its key acquisitions priorities, the Amphibious Combat Vehicle. Calling it an "interesting and tortured path" from the canceled Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) to an ACV that Marines consider off-the-shelf, Reed asked Dunford, "What are you trying to accomplish by this?"
The Marine Corps, Dunford said, sought in vain to develop a platform to replace its 40-year-old Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAV) that could balance protection and ship-to-shore self-deploying capability at the right price.
"The reason we are where we are is we simply couldn't reconcile those three things — the cost, the capability and the protection required against the current threat," Dunford said.
The EFV effort had spent $3 billion in developmental funding before it was canceled in 2011 over poor reliability in operational testing and cost overruns.
The program has since taken a phased approach to the vehicle that would travel from ship to shore via connector and may at some point in the future pursue a high-speed vehicle that could self-deploy from a ship. The first-phase vehicle would be "optimized for ground protection and mobility ashore," Dunford said.
"Although we have asked for a vehicle that just provides adequate ground mobility and not necessarily a self-deploying vehicle, all of the individuals in the competitive process have a vehicle that may get pretty close to the second phase," Dunford said.
Speaking with reporters afterward, Dunford said the biggest difference between phases one and two of the ACV's development will be the ability to self-deploy from a ship. There are 200 in the first phase of procurements, dubbed 1.1, and 400 in the next, called 1.2, but industry's offerings appear to bridgeing the two.
"My assessment from being out there is that industry is leaning into our requirements for 1.2 even as they try to deliver 1.1, and I think they're getting pretty close," Dunford said. "It's very possible that 1.1 and 1.2 could merge together."
The Marine Corps plans to release a request for proposals for the ACV 1.1 this month. It's envisioned as an eight-wheeled vehicle priced at $4 million to $7.5 million each. Transported offshore by connector, it would weigh 58,000 to 63,000 pounds, carry 10 troops and three crew, and be equipped with an MK-19 grenade launcher or M2 heavy machine gun.
It would have to travel at least 3 nautical miles, negotiate waves of up to two feet, travel at a speed of 5 to 6 knots in calm waters and, on land, keep up with an M1A1 Abrams tank.
Proposals are due in April, according to the Marine Corps' schedule. The acquisition office plans to award two engineering and manufacturing development contracts of 16 systems each in November 2016, and in 2018, down-select and go to full production.
SAIC and partner ST Kinetics will offer a version of the Terrex vehicle, originally made in Singapore; Lockheed Martin is partnering with Finnish company Patria to modify its Havoc vehicle; General Dynamics Land Systems is offering a vehicle from its light armored vehicle III family; and BAE Systems' likely offering is based on the Iveco Super AV, according to a Congressional Research Service report.
The president's fiscal 2016 budget request contains $219 million for the program, and the effort was funded at $105.7 million in 2015.
Email: jgould@defensenews.com
Twitter: @reporterjoe
Joe Gould was the senior Pentagon reporter for Defense News, covering the intersection of national security policy, politics and the defense industry. He had previously served as Congress reporter.
