FY2013 AC&I Budget Request

Posted on March 22, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Thanks to fiercehomelandsecurity.com, we have a summary of the FY2013 budget request for the Coast Guard. They also provide a link to the full budget justification.

I would like to focus on the AC&I portion and compare and contrast it with the FY 2012 appropriation which we talked about here.

Total AC&I funds go down from $1,463,968,000 to $1,192,309,000, a drop of almost 18%.

In the out years (FY 2014, 2015 and 2016) the AC&I budget is projected to rise above the FY2012 level.

A number of programs are zeroed out in FY 2013, either because they are cancelled, are on hold, or because they are complete. These include “In-service Vessel Sustainment,” Response Boat-Medium, HH-60 conversion projects, Long Range Surveillance Aircraft (C-130H/J), Rescue 21, Inter-agency Operations Centers (IOCs).

AC&I for vessels went up from $642M to $879.5M, but last year did not fund an NSC as this one does. As has been reported the seven and eighth NSC have been removed from the out-year budgets.

The breakdown for “vessels” (cutters, small boats and related equipment) looks like this:

………………………………………………….FY2012………..FY2013

Total for Vessels ……………………………….$642M……….$879.5M

Survey and Design – Vessels & Boats ….$6M ………….$2.5M (175 ft WLM begins)
In Service Vessel Sustainment (ISVS) ….$14M…………..(Restarts FY2014)
Response Boat – Medium (RB-M) ……$110M…………. (Complete)
National Security Cutter (NSC) …………$77M………….$683M
Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) …..………$25M……………$30M
Fast Response Cutter (FRC) …….……$358M………….$139M
Cutter Boats ………………………………$5M…………….$4M
MEC Sustainment ……………………….$47M…………..$13M
Heavy Icebreaker …………………………………………….$8M

Icebreakers:

There is a total of $770M identified for a new icebreaker in FY 2014, 2015, and 2017. Total acquisition cost “TBD.”

“The survey and design phase (for the new icebreaker) would last from the second quarter of fiscal 2013 through the fourth quarter of fiscal 2016, according to the justification.”

Offshore Patrol Vessels:

The $30M is to fund competitive design efforts by up to three short-listed competing ship building organizations. This is expected to be a two step, three year design process beginning after the end of FY 2012, followed by a presumably three to four year construction process to hopefully deliver the first OPC before the end of calender year 2019. Surprisingly the out-years appear to provide for OPC construction at the rate of only one ship per year. Only $360M per year in FY2015 (first ship), 2016, and 2017. If we continue to build OPCs at only one per year it will take until 2043 to build the 25 projected by which time the newest 270 will be 53 years old. 2045 if we build two extra to replace the cancelled NSCs. (That would be truly ridiculous.) Stretching out the production run will inevitably lead to higher unit costs in contrast to the multi-year production contracts the Navy used for the Littoral Combat Ships (two five year contracts with options for up to 10 ships each).

Fast Response Cutters

The cutters are being built at a rate of four per year. Last years budget included funds for six. FY 2013 request funds number 19 and 20, and will keep the line going. FY 2014, 2015, and 2016 go back up to a $360M/year level.

AC&I for aircraft dropped from $354.4M to $74.5M.

Out years are all higher than FY 2012, as purchases of HC-144s are projected to go back up from $43M in FY 2013 to $220M/year for the succeeding three years and a total of $470M is projected for C-130s 2014-2016. Some notes of interest below:

“The LRS program continues efforts to extend the operating life and enhance the capability of the HC-130H fleet by replacing key component Center Wing Boxes (CWBs) and adding new capability (avionics-A1U), permanently defers the second avionics upgrade (A2U), and reduces the scope of the mission systems upgrade in favor of C-130J production. Consolidation of the C-130H and C-130J PPAs into one new LRS Project enables greater flexibility toward achieving an 11H/11J fleet configuration, which is expected to result in increased mission effectiveness and minimizes lifecycle cost. The eventual goal is to transition to an all C-130J fleet by the mid-2020s, when it will no longer be practical or affordable to keep the C-130H in service.”

“The Coast Guard intends to leverage FY 2012 funding initially intended for the H-60 Radar Sensor System for sustainment segments now underway, including life-limiting component recapitalization and replacement of obsolete components. These revised plans will focus resources on sustaining existing capacity and capability.”

Finally:

AC&I for “Shore, Military Housing and Aids to Navigation dropped from approximately $200.7M to 69.4M.

If we could get the Air Force’s nearly new C-27Js in lieu of HC-144s as has been discussed, it might allow us to build a second OPC each year.

(Note most of the cost breakdown information is found on page CG-AC&I-12)

High Latitude Region Mission Analysis Study–Summary of Summary

Posted on March 17, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Thanks to the Coast Guard and http://www.fiercehomelandsecurity.co m, we have a summary of the”High Latitude Region Mission Analysis,” that was given to Congress last year. You can get see it in the form of a pfd here.

Bottom line:

The Coast Guard requires three heavy and three medium icebreakers to fulfill its statutory missions.
Naval Operations Concept 2010 (NOC 2010) included a requirement for a year-round continuous heavy icebreaker presence in both the Arctic and Antarctic. The Coast Guard would require six heavy and four medium icebreakers to fulfill its statutory missions and maintain that continuous presence, if they are all conventionally manned and based in the US.
Using multiple crewing and basing two heavy icebreakers in the southern hemisphere (presumably Australia or New Zealand) both statutory and NOC requirements could be met by four heavy and two medium icebreakers.

How soon?:

“U.S. Sen. Mark Begich says the Coast Guard is including $860 million in its five-year budget plan for a new heavy polar icebreaker.”

Even so, we probably will not see a new icebreaker before 2020. POLAR STAR commenced a major refit in May 2010 and is expected to return to service in late 2013, with a 6- to 7-year remaining service life. The Coast Guard’s only medium icebreaker, HEALY, will remain in-service until 2030. POLAR SEA is inoperative and is expected to be decommissioned this year.

So one operational icebreaker until 2013. One heavy and one medium icebreaker 2013-2019. In 2020, POLAR SEA goes away and we are still at one heavy and one medium. Any Catastrophic failure and we are back to only one icebreaker.

If we completed one heavy or medium icebreakers a year, by 2025, the Coast Guard could have the fleet required to meet our statutory responsibilities. Since we would be building OPCs concurrently, this would require a substantial increase in AC&I funding.

A final note: It is not clear from the summary what constitutes a medium icebreaker. (Maybe it is in the full report.) HEALY is identified as “medium” and the POLAR SEA is “heavy,” even if the HEALY is actually larger. Presumably “medium” is less capable, as an icebreaker, than the POLAR class but more capable than the 140 foot icebreaking tugs. Would the MACKINAW (WLBB-30) qualify? How about the 225 foot JUNIPER class WLBs? the old WIND class breakers? the Canadian Arctic Offshore Patrol Vessels? One clue is that the projected price starts at $590M for a single ship and goes down to less than $560M each for four ships. That is about 69% the cost of a heavy icebreaker so presumably about 70% the displacement–larger than USCGC_Glacier (WAGB-4). Would there really be a point in making one or two ships of a different class, if they so close in size to the Heavy icebreakers?

China and South Korea Argue over a Submerged Rock

Posted on March 16, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Another example of a boundary dispute you would have thought would have been resolved by reference to the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea. (blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/03/13/china-south-korea-in-row-over-submerged-rock/)

“China’s State Oceanic Administration chief declared last week that it was part of China’s ‘jurisdictional waters’ and covered by its maritime patrols.

“South Korea’s President, Lee Myung-bak, said Monday that the reef ‘will fall naturally into Korean-controlled areas,’ according to the Yonhap news agency. The same day, South Korea’s Foreign Minstry questioned China’s ambassador in Seoul over the issue.”

China and South Korea have had a series of meetings to delineate where the boundary between their EEZs lies, without resolution. (more here)

The rock, 4.6 meters below the surface, has an unmanned research station on it with a helicopter landing pad. It is “located 149 kilometers southwest of Korea’s southernmost island of Marado and 247 kilometers northeast of the nearest Chinese island Tongdao.” (source)

This dispute, coming on the heals of the murder of a South Korean Coast Guardsman by a Chinese fisherman (not the first time), is not going down well in South Korea.

Draft Technical Package for the Offshore Patrol Cutter Released

Posted on March 15, 2012 by Chuck Hill

The Acquisitions Directorate (CG-9) has issued the draft technical package for the Offshore Patrol Cutter. It was announced on the Federal Business Opportunity website, March 12, 2012.

“The red-lined draft System Specification contains all of the changes that the Coast Guard incorporated as a result of industry comment. This document will be automatically distributed to those companies and individuals that received the draft OPC specification released in May 2011. The other draft documents will be available on the USCG OPC website at: http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/OPC/default.asp“

A two step Acquisition process is expected. First, three contractors will be selected to develop their preliminary designs into fully detailed contract proposals. They will compete for the final award which will include the first OPC and all documentation. It may (and probably will) also include options for follow-on ships. So far, the Coast Guard is saying they will maintain their flexibility regarding who will build follow-on ships.

On the Acquisitions directorate website, you can down load hundreds of pages of technical requirements for the contractors, but don’t expect to find updated information on the specification of the ships. As noted above, revised draft specifications were sent to companies and individuals that received the draft OPC System Specification released in May 2011. Hopefully the Acquisition Directorate will release at least some basic information in the near future.

Still going through the documents yields some useful information of more general interest. The list of Government furnished Equipment (GFE) and Government Furnished information (GFI) tells us about much of the equipment the vessels are expected to carry. (I will not list all the normal items included on every cutter.)

Armament:

Mk 48 mod 1 Gun weapon system
Mk 110, 57mm gun system
Electro Optical Site Sensor (EOSS), MK 20 MOD 0
25mm, MK 38 MOD 2
Two SSAM gun systems, (remotely operated .50 Caliber)

Sensors:

IFF, AN/UPX-29A
AN/SLQ-32B(V)2 (and Mk 53 NULKA decoy system)
Multi-Mode Radar (air as well as surface? AN/SPQ-9?)
Encrypted GPS
CBRN monitoring

Boats: 2 x 7m OTH IV (apparently no 11m boat)

Aviation:

TACAN
Visual Landing Aids (VLA)
Glide Slope Indicator (GLI)
Wave Off Light Assembly (WOLS)

The Mk48 Mod 0 (www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011gunmissile/Thursday11660_Aswegan.pdf) is apparently the system on the National Security Cutter. Perhaps, the Mk48 mod 1 is simply an improvement, but unlike some of the other components of the system, the AN/SPQ-9 radar is not called out specifically, so this system may not have a radar. It may be that the “multi-mode radar” refers to the AN/SPQ-9. Hopefully that is the case.

A quick scan through the other documents shows that the Coast Guard has not ruled out the possibility of hybrid or integrated diesel-electric propulsion.

“One Line Diagram. During Contract Design the Contractor shall provide the Electric-Drive Propulsion System One Line Diagram (if an Electric Propulsion System or IDE is provided). [235-01-2219]”

Other included systems are:

Two encrypted computer networks including one for classified material.
Television systems for both monitoring security and entertainment and training.
UHF MIL SAT COM Equipment
A crane for loading stores
A bow thruster
An unmanned air system (UAS)

It appears there may also be a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility).

Generally it appears, a much more sophisticated ship that the WMECs they are replacing.

(illustration: French shipbuilder DCNS concept)

http://ryanerickson.com/ Returns

Posted on March 13, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Like to welcome the return of another Coast Guard Centric blogger. Ryan Erickson has begun posting again.

Intercept That Drug Runner–Sorry, Not Enough Ships

Posted on March 10, 2012 by Chuck Hill

There have been several articles recently as a result of a breakfast meeting with reporters hosted by Air Force Gen. Douglas Fraser, chief of the U.S. Southern Command, reporting that SouthCom is intercepting only one in three drug shipments that they know about. He sited diversion of assets for combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and operations off Libya, Somalia, and Iran.

One thing I found very curious, as noted in the AOL defense report, “Fraser focused on Navy vessels and did not specifically address the Coast Guard, which does contribute some ships to Southern Command operations.” Why the hell not?

The General reported a decline in our ability to intercept drug shipments.

At sea, Fraser explained, the U.S. Navy is retiring the smaller ships that have traditionally been the mainstay of drug interdiction patrols, the aging and increasingly expensive to operate Perry-class frigates, while their much-delayed replacement, the Littoral Combat Ships, is just beginning to enter service. “We ‘ll see a gap in the numbers of those types of ships,” Fraser said. “So we’re working with the Navy to see what other types of vessels and capability that’s coming back from Iraq might be available,” particularly small craft that have been used for river patrol and offshore patrol in the Gulf. Such boats could boost the U.S. fleet’s own interception capability but also, and perhaps more importantly, some could be transferred to friendly countries that are currently short on assets to intercept drug boats moving through their own territorial waters.

Nationaldefensemagazine.org also reported he made reference to the possibility of terrorists entering the US by using the drug smuggling routes.

There was much made of the lack of assets available to partner nations.

Here is a proposal, The Coast Guard still has 10 WHECs and 29 WMECs that are due for replacement. If we can get them replaced, we can turn them over to partner nations. That should essentially totally eliminate any shortage of vessels in SouthCom. The sooner we replace them the more useful they will be.

Why couldn’t the General have put in a good word for the Coast Guard?

Law of the Sea–Why not?

Posted on March 10, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty always seemed like a good thing. Both the Commandant and the CNO support it.

I can’t claim to have a full understanding of the treaty, but I have begun to get inklings of why others have reservations about it. As in all things legal, it is subject to interpretation, and the interpretation of others do not necessarily match our own.

In the interest of having a balance view, you might want to spend a few minutes reading what Peter Brookes, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, has to say about why its not a good idea.

The right of innocent passage seems to be one of the things that is subject to interpretation, and it is not just China and developing countries that see things differently. So do the Canadians. (More here, here, and here.)

Chinese General Calls for Creation of a Chinese Coast Guard

Posted on March 9, 2012 by Chuck Hill

As we have noted, the Chinese have a number of agencies that have duties that are assigned to the Coast Guard in the US. There have been calls for reorganization before. Now “The Global Times,” reports that Luo Yuan (Luo), a CPPCC member and major general of the PLA Academy of Military Sciences, has also proposed establishment of a national coast guard. He is interviewed here.

He also has some strong words for Vietnam and the Philippines, and of course accuses the US of meddling.

Informationdissemination took a comprehensive look at their vessels here.

Panama Canal Expansion May Impact Port Development

Posted on March 3, 2012 by Chuck Hill

Panama has begun expansion of the Panama Canal, (described here) with the intention passing ships three times as large as those currently able to use the canal.

Meanwhile Panama is hoping US ports will be expanded to accept the larger ships,

“By WALTER C. JONES – Morris News Service – ATLANTA — The administrator of the Panama Canal chastised U.S. and Canadian officials Tuesday for not preparing their ports to take advantage of the expansion his country is undertaking. Alberto Aleman Zubieta, CEO of the Panama Canal Authority, stressed that Panama is doubling the canal’s capacity by widening its system of locks and waterways to accommodate ships three times the current maximum. But Panama won’t realize the full benefits if East Coast ports aren’t also enhanced to accept those ships. “What concerns me is how long it takes to do these types of projects and that they are not now being done in the U.S.,” Aleman was quoted as saying by Modern Materials Handling magazine.

“He made his comments to the logistics managers attending the inaugural trade show of MODEX, sponsored by the Material Handling Industry of America. In two years, the canal will celebrate its 100th anniversary with the completion of its expansion project. East Coast ports like Savannah, Jacksonville and Charleston hope to attract that added traffic. However, none are deep enough for the larger ships to enter fully loaded except at high tide. Only ports in New York and Virginia can now.”

This is likely to have a long term impact of the relative importance of ports in the US with ports that can accommodate these larger ships doing relatively better than ports unable to accept them.

(Photo credit: Photo #: 80-G-701369, Official U.S. Navy Photograph, now in the collections of the National Archives.)

Development in Propulsion