Hearing

Panel I: Shoreside Asset Management in the U.S. Coast Guard

Rear Admiral Nathan Moore, Assistant Commandant for Engineering and Logistics, United States Coast Guard | Written Testimony
Nathan Anderson, Acting Director, Homeland Security and Justice, Government Accountability Office | Written Testimony

Panel II: Designing for Coastal Risk

Rear Admiral Ann C. Phillips, USN (Ret), Special Assistant to the Governor for Coastal Adaptation and Protection, Office of the Governor, Commonwealth of Virginia | Written Testimony
Dr. Daniel Cox, CH2M Hill Professor in Civil Engineering, Oregon State University | Written Testimony
Sean B. Hecht, Co-Executive Director, Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, University of California at Los Angeles School of Law | Written Testimony

Opening remarks, as prepared, of Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Ranking Member Sam Graves (R-MO) and Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Ranking Member Bob Gibbs (R-OH):

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Ranking Member Sam Graves (R-MO):

As a farmer and a Member whose district is bounded by both the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, I understand the power of water both as a necessity and as a sometimes destructive force.  In the Midwest we must be prepared for river flooding, just like coastal areas must prepare for hurricanes and other large coastal storms.  Therefore, I commend the Chair for holding this hearing on the importance of building Coast Guard and port facilities in a way that can withstand the ever-increasing forces of mother nature. 

The Coast Guard has a $2.6 billion backlog of construction and maintenance projects.  I share GAO’s concern that this only represents a one-for-one replacement rather than a strategic assessment of the Coast Guard’s long-term operating needs.  The Coast Guard needs to undertake such an assessment. 

I am particularly concerned that the Coast Guard does not understand the shoreside facility needs for its new operational assets.  Recapitalizing Coast Guard aircraft and the fleet which operates more than 50 miles offshore has taken priority in Coast Guard budgets now for over 15 years.  However, we must make sure that shoreside facilities keep pace with commissioning these new assets. 

For example, a $100 million investment is needed to upgrade the hangars at Barbers Point in Hawaii to adequately protect the new C-130Js the Service is procuring.  The service life of those aircraft will be reduced, and taxpayer dollars wasted, unless the appropriate hangar space is provided.  Put simply, salty air and exposed planes don’t mix. While I am glad the Coast Guard is getting the airplanes they need to do their jobs, I think we need to be smarter about how we protect these investments.

I look forward to hearing from the witnesses about how the Coast Guard can better plan for its future shoreside facility needs, and how U.S. ports can design more resilient facilities to withstand coastal storms and flooding. 

Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Ranking Member Bob Gibbs (R-OH):

As we all know, as far back as 2000, the Coast Guard was faced with its cutters and aircraft operating more than 50 miles offshore becoming obsolete.  Understandably, the Coast Guard has chosen to focus its extremely limited capital acquisition funds to the purchase of those assets. 

And there is good news on that front.  The Coast Guard just announced the homeport for its 42^nd Fast Response Cutter, and the Coast Guard has awarded a contract for construction of the 10^th and 11^thNational Security Cutters.  The Coast Guard has also acquired new medium range patrol aircraft and is recapitalizing its long-range patrol aircraft. 

Unfortunately, the single largest recapitalization contract for the Offshore Patrol Cutter is not executable, and we await the Coast Guard’s solution to that problem.

However, while the Coast Guard has made those important and significant investments, it has developed a large and growing shoreside construction and maintenance backlog, and its IT systems have aged to the point that Coast Guard operations are constrained.  

If we expect the Service to continue to effectively carry out its missions in the future, investments in these areas are crucial. 

The Coast Guard estimates its construction and deferred maintenance backlog at $2.6 billion, but this is a one-for-one replacement of assets and does not reflect a strategy for carrying out Coast Guard missions in the most efficient manner. 

Given the specific needs of the Coast Guard for coastal facilities, the Service is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of coastal storms.  Yet GAO has found that the Coast Guard does not follow the Department of Homeland Security’s Risk Management Framework.  In addition, GAO found that the Coast Guard has not identified all shoreside assets that are vulnerable to potential storm damage such as piers and runways. 

I am also interested in whether the Coast Guard has followed through on its modernization effort.  It has established the Shoreside Infrastructure Logistics Center but seems to continue to operate a highly decentralized infrastructure repair and maintenance operation out of its six civil engineering units.  

I look forward to hearing from Rear Admiral Moore about how the Coast Guard is centralizing its review and prioritization of shoreside infrastructure. 

I am also interested to know more about how the Coast Guard is preparing facilities for its new cutters and aircraft.  These new assets are larger and more sophisticated than old assets and require improved shoreside support.  I’m hopeful the planning process for those assets and their support infrastructure is well coordinated.  

Fortunately, my district does not suffer direct impacts by coastal storms, but I sympathize for my coastal colleagues.  I know Subcommittee Member Garret Graves of Louisiana has had major flood events in his district, and Congressman Weber has floods going on right now in Jefferson County, Texas.  In addition, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands were hit by Tropical Storm Karen yesterday. 

Therefore, I look forward to hearing the suggestions of witnesses on Panel II for the construction of more resilient port facilities to better withstand such coastal storms and flooding.