Senators press nominee Phelan on shipbuilding delays, workforce and industrial base
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee pressed John Phelan on persistent shipbuilding delays, workforce shortages, and proposals to reinvigorate the U.S. shipbuilding industrial base, including use of incentives, the SHIPS Act and public‑private investments.
Senators told John Phelan at his confirmation hearing that stabilizing shipbuilding and the industrial base is his top priority if confirmed as secretary of the Navy. Committee members cited delayed programs, cost overruns and workforce shortages as structural obstacles to growing the fleet.
Chairman Wicker said the Navy remains "woefully short" of the statutory requirement of 355 ships and noted that plans showing growth to 315 ships by 2025 had not materialized; the hearing record cited 287 ships in 2025. Senators named specific programs that are behind schedule: Ford‑class carriers, Virginia‑class submarines, Columbia‑class ballistic‑missile submarines, and the Constellation‑class frigate.
Phelan told the committee he would visit shipyards and "take some of the best practices from those yards, some of the best practices from some of the foreign yards as well to learn." He said incentives that "telegraph demand"—for example, measures in the SHIPS Act—could induce private investment in yards, apprenticeships and training programs. He also said he would review existing contracts and consider restructuring those that allocate disproportionate risk to the government.
On submarines, senators emphasized the Columbia program's role in the nuclear deterrent and asked Phelan to prioritize funds and workforce to keep schedules. Senator Sullivan noted commitments to Australia that increase demand on submarine construction. Phelan said he would conduct root‑cause analyses and examine whether contracts need renegotiation.
Senators raised productivity and competition, suggesting greater use of allies' shipbuilding capacity, component competition, and benchmarking ship availability against commercial operators such as Maersk or cruise lines. Phelan agreed to explore automation and digital design tools to reduce change orders and to examine 3‑D printing and other manufacturing improvements.
Why it matters: shipbuilding pace, cost and workforce directly determine how quickly the Navy can expand and modernize the fleet. Senators framed the issue as central to deterrence against near‑peer competitors that are expanding naval capacity.
Phelan and senators referenced existing plans and investments including the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Plan (SIOP) and the SHIPS Act; Phelan committed to follow up with senators after fact‑finding visits to shipyards.