• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL

RELEASED BY THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT REFORM

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL

SECURITY, VETERAN'S AFFAIRS AND

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

 

 

 

STATEMENT OF

 

REAR ADMIRAL DAVID STONE

DEPUTY DIRECTOR, SURFACE WARFARE DIVISION

 

BEFORE THE

 

HOUSE GOVERNMENT REFORM SUBCOMMITTEE

ON NATIONAL SECURITY, VETERAN'S AFFAIRS, AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 

 

JUNE 21, 2000.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL

RELEASED BY THE

HOUSE GOVERNMENT REFORM SUBCOMMITTEE

ON NATIONAL SECURITY, VETERAN'S AFFAIRS,

AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of Secretary Danzig, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to appear here today to discuss the Navy's efforts to provide, maintain and train with individual protective equipment which is essential to operate in contaminated chemical/biological environments.

My office serves as the CNO's Executive Agent for Chem-Bio Defense and in that capacity, we coordinate relevant programmatic and operational issues. As I'm sure you're keenly aware, this is a complex effort involving multiple warfare areas that directly impacts fleet operational readiness. In that context, we are considering realignments to elevate the focus and enhance the program assessment process.

I plan to provide you details on the status of important personnel protection initiatives and related efforts in support of the Joint Service Chem-Bio Defense Program. In particular, I will address individual protective equipment items in the current inventory, and associated testing, training and maintenance evolutions used to verify equipment will perform as advertised without compromising personnel safety.

Background:

Lessons learned from the Gulf War provided important insights on asymmetrical threats and an impetus to improve our operational readiness and warfighting sustainability posture. Clearly, operations in an amphibious environment pose a serious element of concern to our forces as do threats to our shore-based Navy personnel. In all instances, we are committed to ensuring our sailors can effectively operate in harm's way and return home safely.

Discussion:

The goal of the Navy Chem-Bio Defense Program is to deter the use of chemical and biological weapons used against U.S., allied, and coalition forces by utilizing capabilities to deny an adversary significant military advantage from their use. From a deterrence perspective, essential capabilities need to include the requirement to survive an initial attack and continue operations in a contaminated environment.

The mission of our Navy is to conduct prompt and sustained combat operations from the sea in support of national objectives. Our Navy ensures that all deployed units are outfitted with the right level of Individual Protective Equipment (IPE). Navy IPE for shipboard and shore personnel consists of a protective mask (MCU-2/P), an overgarment (CPO OR JSLIST [AKA ACPG]), gloves and footwear covers. Aviators wear the MK-I undergarment for below-the-neck protection and are currently being outfitted with the A/P23P-14A(V) aircrew respirators.

Based on the concerns expressed by your committee, we acknowledge the importance of inventory management and material condition of IPE. Since the first DODIG Reports regarding deficiencies in the inventory process were issued in 1994, the Navy has consistently reviewed its procedures for inventory control, requisitions and organizational functions to ensure that we are on track. We noted the previous deficiencies identified in the DODIG reports were not specifically attributed to shortfalls in the management of the Navy's Inventory Control System. The main issue in the audit included whether suits known to be defective (suits produced by Isratex, Inc.) were separated from serviceable suits and whether inventory records matched actual physical counts of those items. The Navy did not field any battle dress overgarments manufactured by Isratex and thus the Navy was not adversely affected by this item recall. We recently learned that another service provided the Navy tenant activities in Korea with potential defective IPE. However, all discrepancies have been corrected.

As a follow-on to DOD IG Reports 94-154 and 95-021, the Navy has addressed the mask surveillance issue. Plans are being developed for testing all masks of pre-deploying ships to ensure they are in serviceable condition. The Navy has evaluated procedures for fixing the voicemitter attachment retaining ring problem after delivery. We have determined that there was no practicable fix at the organizational level of maintenance and are exploring intermediate level repair alternatives. PMS procedures continue to be updated, and an initial fleet advisory on mask care and maintenance was issued in 1998. The fleet is preparing to release a new message that provides important guidance and reinforces the need for conducting critical periodic maintenance.

New protective items being fielded include the JSLIST suit, which the Navy refers to as Advanced Chemical Protective Garment (ACPG). The ACPG will eventually replace the existing Chemical Protective Overgarment (CPO). The ACPGS features include improved chemical agent protection (liquid, vapor and aerosol); increased wear time, launderability and improved fit. Fleet shipment began in October 98 and are continuing through FY04; 120,546 suits have been issued to date. Our total requirement is for approximately 460,825 suits.

The Joint Service General Purpose Mask (JSGPM) will replace the MCU-2/P starting in FY06, and will be issued to all afloat and ashore unit personnel.

The Joint Aviation and Ground Glove (JAGG) is planned for FY04. For aircrew applications, the Joint Protective Aircrew Ensemble (JPACE) will replace the MK-I starting in FY05. The Joint Service Aircrew Mask (JSAM) will replace existing aircrew masks starting in FY05.

We have an aggressive acceptance program for IPE. During their manufacture, masks, canisters and suits are subjected to production line quality assurance testing as part of the acceptance process. Testing after items are delivered to the stock system is characterized as wholesale surveillance. Testing is conducted on stock items to determine if the shelf life of the item should be extended or if the item can no longer be used. For instance, the Army's Pine Bluff Arsenal conducts this type of wholesale surveillance on the C2 and C2A1 gas mask canisters and issues shelf life updates which also apply to retail canisters.

Navy IPE is maintained at the organizational ("O") level through various Planned Maintenance Systems. MCU-2/P masks have several PMS requirements: annual check for material inspection, inventory and cleaning/disinfecting. CPOS and ACPGS have similar requirements.

Aircrew masks and suits undergo routine inspection cycles at the organizational level, and are subjected to intermediate level maintenance every 90 days.

The Navy agrees that mask inspection and fit testing is an integral part of operational readiness. Studies have been conducted over the past several years to ascertain material problems with the MCU mask. In addition to the loose voicemitter ring previously addressed, we have corrected the improper seating of the outlet valve, which was originally due to a design problem. We have conducted random surveillances to assess the conditions of the masks and we are satisfied that our efforts have provided us good confidence of material integrity. Our emphasis on IPE maintenance is essential to ensure that these items will function as advertised.

With regard to shipboard stowage of individual protective equipment, we have reviewed previous JSIG recommendations and directed operational units to ensure compliance with existing stowage procedures.

We are working with the fleet to reinvigorate a mask maintenance and fit test program. A pilot effort is underway to expedite this most important initiative.

On the training side, it is critical that all forces afloat and ashore be intimately familiar with the use of individual protective equipment. The Chief of Naval Education and Training (CNET) has overarching responsibility for Navy training, including CBR-D. CNET'S schoolhouse CBR-D training responds specifically to fleet requirements. CNET provides introductory CBR-D training to all recruits during accession training. My office sponsors a majority of CBR-D training funds and provides oversight and guidance to ensure that CBR-D courses are efficient and effective and meet fleet requirements. The Fleet, Bureau of Medicine, Surface Warfare, Special Warfare, SEABEES, Military Sealift Command, and other Communities provide specific follow-on training, as appropriate, to meet their own unique requirements.

As part of regular training plans and especially during pre-deployment certification, Fleet units conduct CBR-D drills and exercises to train and evaluate sailors in the use of protective equipment. Fleet Exercise Publication (FXP) 4 provides the specific guidance for the conduct and evaluation of such CBR-D training and exercises afloat. Ultimately, Commanding Officers (CO) both afloat and ashore are responsible for CBR-D readiness of their command. Navy units conduct basic, intermediate, and advanced training exercises as part of the Training and Readiness Cycle prior to deployment. During the basic training phase, CBR-D training exercises are overseen by the appropriate Type Commander and may involve additional unit training by CBR-D specialists from an Afloat Training Group. During the intermediate and advanced phases of the training cycles, combat readiness is reinforced through Composite Training Unit Exercises and Fleet Exercises. The exercises conducted by deploying Battle Groups and Amphibious Readiness Groups during these pre-deployment exercises are designed to meet Fleet Commander in Chief training requirements for forces in the deployment area of responsibility. We will be discussing these priority issues at our upcoming Damage Control/Firefighting/Chem-Bio Defense Working Group Conference scheduled in September 2000 and will take appropriate actions to institutionalize this process.

I have released a Chief of Naval Operations message to Navy commands re-iterating the vital importance of proper maintenance, training and readiness of all Chem-Bio Individual Protective Equipment, particularly protective masks. This message lays the groundwork for follow-on discussions at our conference in September of this year.

Summary:

The Navy has a Chem-Bio Defense Program in place to protect the warfighter. Efforts are consistent with the Joint RDA and modernization plans. We are fully committed to ensuring our sailors can effectively operate in harm's way and return home safely.