Out With the New

As budget pressure mounts for its future fleet, the Navy suspends production of a costly destroyer.

Amid growing concerns about the affordability of its shipbuilding efforts, the Navy has decided to pull the plug on one of its most expensive and ambitious modernization efforts: the DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyer.

The Navy's decision shakes up its long-standing blueprint for its future fleet of 313 ships. But it could assuage critics on Capitol Hill-particularly in the House, where lawmakers have eyed the service's shipbuilding plans with a hefty dose of skepticism.

Service officials had long planned to buy seven DDG-1000s, but now want to stop production after the first two are built at Northrop Grumman Corp.'s Ingalls Shipbuilding facility in Mississippi and General Dynamics Corp.'s Bath Iron Works in Maine.

Rather than continue with the stealthy destroyer-whose price tag the Congressional Budget Office estimates at $5 billion apiece for the first two ships-Navy brass have opted to restart production on the older but more affordable DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. According to lawmakers and congressional sources, the Navy plans to buy nine DDG-51s.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead's support for the DDG-1000 program had long been considered lackluster. Indeed, in a May 7 letter to Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Seapower Subcommittee, Roughead acknowledged that procurement costs for a single DDG-51 is significantly less than that of a DDG-1000, while the life-cycle costs for the two are similar.

But support for the DDG-1000 had remained high at the upper echelons of the Pentagon, particularly at the office of Defense acquisition chief John Young, who warned House Armed Services Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee Chairman Gene Taylor, D-Miss., in a July 2 letter that restarting production on the DDG-51s would "pose a risk to the shipbuilding budget and inject additional cost."

The destroyer debate has become illustrative of growing doubts about the affordability of the Navy's overall shipbuilding plans, particularly as defense procurement budgets begin to tighten, as expected, during the next several years.

Young was present at the July meeting during which Pentagon officials allowed the Navy to proceed with its plan. But he later stressed that the service must proceed "with an understanding that more analysis and discussion of this plan was necessary before there would be agreement on this proposal" as part of the next budget.

Concerns about ship programs could spur more focus on development and acquisition cycles to guard against cost increases and so-called requirements creep, which often drive up the price tags on these programs.

Robert Work, vice president for strategic studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, called the Navy's shipbuilding efforts a "very unsettled situation" and emphasized that Roughead is trying to balance his books. "Roughead has really been trying to figure out how he builds a future fleet on budget," he says.

In general, the Navy is trying to weigh its desired capabilities against what it can afford, says Young. "There are some cases where I could buy a less capable ship and it be more affordable and run the risk of the threat being able to match that ship," Young, who served as the Navy's assistant secretary for research, development and acquisition, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in June. "I think the Navy is trying to find that reasonable balance."

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.