Today, the U.S. Navy numbers about 293 battle force ships, including 35 amphibious warfare ships, which are designed to carry marines and their equipment into combat. In addition, the Navy has 16 cargo ships that make up the maritime prepositioning force, which carries equipment and 30 days' worth of supplies for three Marine infantry brigades (though not the marines themselves). The Navy plans to modernize both its amphibious and maritime prepositioning ships over the next 30 years. Its plans include developing a sea-basing capability that would allow the Navy to deploy and sustain Marine Corps units on shore without needing to build up a supply depot on land. Carrying out those plans would require the Navy to spend an average of $2.4 billion a year over the next three decades to buy new amphibious and maritime prepositioning ships--more than twice what it has spent on those categories of ships since 1980. At the same time, the Navy has modernization plans for other types of ships that, if fully implemented, would also require more resources than the Navy now spends on ship construction.

Are there ways to modernize the amphibious and maritime prepositioning forces at a lower cost than what the Navy plans to spend? This Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study--prepared at the request of the Subcommittee on Seapower of the Senate Committee on Armed Services--addresses that question. It examines the Navy's modernizations plans for amphibious and maritime prepositioning ships and their budgetary implications. It also evaluates four lower-cost options for those ships, two of which would cost roughly what the Navy has spent annually since 1980 and two of which would require a spending increase of a little over one-third. Those alternatives would result in smaller, less capable forces than the Navy envisions--or than exist now--but they would provide some of the capabilities that the Navy and Marine Corps desire. In keeping with CBO's mandate to provide objective, impartial analysis, this study makes no recommendations.

Eric J. Labs of CBO's National Security Division wrote the study under the general supervision of J. Michael Gilmore. Raymond Hall of CBO's Budget Analysis Division prepared the cost estimates under the general supervision of Jo Ann Vines. Hannah Robinson provided assistance in preparing some of the figures, and Natalie Fries (a former CBO intern who is now a commissioned naval officer) provided early research for this project. Michael Simpson, Barbara Edwards, Arlene Holen, and Elizabeth Robinson of CBO provided thoughtful comments on an earlier draft of the study. In addition, numerous officials and analysts from the Navy and Marine Corps provided information that improved the analysis, and Robert Work of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments offered valuable insights and comments. (The assistance of such external participants implies no responsibility for the final product, which rests solely with CBO.)

Christian Spoor edited the study, and Christine Bogusz and Leah Mazade proofread it. Cynthia Cleveland formatted the tables. Maureen Costantino designed the cover, produced the figures, and prepared the study for publication. Lenny Skutnik printed the initial copies, and Annette Kalicki prepared the electronic versions of the report for CBO's Web site.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin
Director
November 2004