Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chair, I would like to point out that there have been multiple studies done on this. In 2014, the Department of Defense and the Department of the Navy pointed out the negative…
Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chair, I would like to point out that there have been multiple studies done on this.
In 2014, the Department of Defense and the Department of the Navy pointed out the negative impacts that low-enriched uranium would have on the capability of the Navy.
In 2016, another report, and I remind the folks here in the Chamber that this report was specific about saying the negative impacts that low-enriched uranium will have on the capability of our United States Navy.
In 2018, letters from both the Director of Naval Reactors, Admiral Caldwell, and from the Secretary of the Navy, Richard Spencer, all stated the negative impact that low-enriched uranium would have on the capability of the Navy.
We look, too, at the dollars that are being proposed to offset this. The $20 million reduction in the National Nuclear Security Administration would reduce salaries in that area by 15 percent.
According to NNSA, this reduction would likely require a reduction in force to achieve this staffing level. They will let people go if this money is transferred to another study, a study that has been done multiple times in the past with the same outcomes, that this would have a harmful effect on the National Nuclear Security Administration.
They also say that the amendment would negate recently implemented improvements in oversight and accountability and slow down the execution of critical nuclear security and safety programs.
It would also affect weapons modernization and nuclear nonproliferation efforts. The same thing the gentleman from Rhode Island said that this bill is meant to address, it actually takes money away from the efforts that NNSA is putting forward.
It also would inhibit physical security, cybersecurity, and environmental remediation programs.
Not only has this study been done multiple times, but it would take money away from the critical elements that are being proposed that this study would seek to find out. Again, the conclusions have already been reached. The impact of LEU on the Nation's naval capability has already been identified.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I remind the gentleman from Rhode Island that this is the National Defense Authorization Act. It is not another appropriations bill. This is specific to the use of these dollars here for these purposes specifically.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Luria).
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, in conclusion, I want to point to the 2016 report that assessed that additional refuelings would increase Navy fleet operating costs by several billion dollars a year.
Mr. Chair, as we are looking to rebuild the Navy, that means ships that will not get built. That will mean less operating capability. That will mean ships that need to be at dock for longer periods of time for maintenance and for refueling.
A larger submarine reactor core, which is what DOD says would be needed for LEU, requires a larger submarine, and it makes those submarines less capable and less efficient.
It also requires massive redesigns, so it interrupts existing submarine construction programs.
All of those things have significant impacts on the capability of the Navy.
Take the Virginia-class submarine reactor, which operates on a 33- year ship expectancy. That would cut that by one-third, which means it would have to come back and be refueled again.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to my amendment, No. 403, involving the Cable Ship Program.
I know that there have been some issues pointed out concerning coastal commerce, and I look forward to working through those issues as the bill gets to conference.
Mr. Chair, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).