Congress Should Reassess Attack Boat Program As Mission Days Dwindle

By RICK BARNARD
Editor in Chief

Pentagon officials worried about the size and missions of the attack boat fleet are making the case for an increase in production to more than one attack submarine per year.

The demand for the attack boats is up, the size of the fleet has declined, and large numbers of the Los Angeles-class nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) will be idled for months over the next several years for maintenance. Also, the Navy will decommission large numbers of the Los Angeles boats beginning in about 2010, as they reach the end of their service lives. Increasing the production rate of replacement submarines to two annually would help fill these gaps and save the taxpayers substantial amounts on each submarine built, experts say.

Demand for the attack boats, the nation's original stealth weapon, has risen sharply in recent years. Requests for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions by the sub fleet nearly doubled in the 1990s. As the fleet continues to shrink, "the demand for submarines continues to increase," especially since 9/11, according to Adm. Frank L. Bowman, director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. A 1999 study by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff concludes that the number of intelligence missions assigned to the attack boats will continue upward.
The first of the Navy's 62 nuclear-powered Los Angeles-class subs was commissioned in 1976. Beginning in 1995, however, the service sent 11 older Los Angeles SSNs to the bone yard. Meanwhile, two Seawolf-class subs have joined the fleet and the Navy uses one remaining Sturgeon SSN for special operations. That brings the current fleet to 54 submarines. The Navy will need 76 SSNs by 2025, according to the JCS study.

Still to come is a huge increase in scheduled maintenance of the Los Angeles boats. Each year, several will be idled for 14 to 28 months for overhauls, extended maintenance, and refueling intended to lengthen their useful lives. This year, eight attack boats are in the yards. In 2007, 10 boats will be out of action, according to the Naval Sea Systems Command. All told, a third of the SSN fleet is scheduled for extended maintenance over the next several years.

The smaller fleet and the rising numbers of SSNs sitting in the yards means fewer boats available for sea duty. Rear Adm. William R. Klemm, chief of logistics and maintenance for the Naval Sea Systems Command, said it is "a fair statement" that the SSN fleet will experience a substantial reduction in sea days in the years ahead. The Navy had anticipated the heavy maintenance schedule, said Klemm. But "there were to be a heck of a lot more boats" in the fleet than there are now.

To offset that reduction, the Naval Sea Systems Command has created a "submarine factory" to turn the attack boats around quickly, and the Navy is basing three attack boats in Guam, which is closer to "likely theaters of operations" and will mean an increase in sea days, said the Congressional Budget Office.

Bowman says these are important steps but not a complete remedy to the shortfall. "The most important issue I see with our submarine fleet today, put simply: We do not have enough of them."

He notes that many of the Los Angeles-class boats built in the 1980s will soon reach the end of their service lives. Beginning next decade, the Navy will decommission three to four annually.

The last of the Seawolf class, the SSN Jimmy Carter, is to join the fleet in 2004. A new class of subs, the SSN 774 (Virginia) class, is being built. Current plans call for the construction of one Virginia-class attack boat per year through 2006, and two per year in 2007 through 2009. The Navy is struggling to contain rapidly rising costs of the program, which would comprise a total of 30 boats.

There are many reasons for the cost increases. However, "the practice of buying submarines one at a time will not achieve the submarine numbers we need for the future and is not a cost-effective way to buy anything, including submarines," Bowman says.

Increasing production rates is a proven cost-reduction tactic. The related but separate step of buying several subs under one contract would save more.

Increasing the rate of production would mean a substantial front-end cost for materials and other pre-production items, according to John J. Young Jr., assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development, and acquisition. The question before the Navy ­ and Congress ­ is whether a hefty down payment now would be worth the benefits in the years ahead. *