Transcript: Army Officials Brief FY23 DOD Budget Request

By U.S. Army Public AffairsMarch 30, 2022

Editors Note: This is identical to the transcript posted on

Presenters: Under Secretary Of The Army Gabe Camarillo; Director Of The Army Budget Maj. Gen. Mark S. Bennett

March 28, 2022

LT. COL. BRANDON KELLEY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us today to discuss the Army's FY '23 budget requests. The Honorable Gabe Camarillo, Under Secretary of the Army and Major General Mark Bennett, the Director of the Army Budget will provide you an in-depth overview and take a few questions.

I'll be alternating between reporters in the room and phone line if we have any on the phone line. We will also hold a media roundtable tomorrow morning, you'll have more opportunity then to ask additional questions. Today, we have 40 minutes for this.

Gentlemen, the floor is yours.

UNDER SECRETARY OF THE ARMY GABE CAMARILLO: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, it's a pleasure to be here with all of you.

And what I'd like to do is maybe begin by opening up by highlighting some of the key investments in the Army's FY '23 budget submission and then I'll turn it over to Major General Mark Bennett, to my left, to give you a more detailed rundown of our PB submission.

So, I think I'd like to begin by just noting that the FY '23 budget is a positive one for the Army, because it really lets us do two things simultaneously. First, we maintain a high level of readiness with robust funding for our CTC rotations, our flying hours. And this is really important because it allows us, you know, to kind of continue building upon the just the record of tremendous performance across varied missions over the last year. You look back and there's the COVID response where over 50,000 Soldiers mobilized in support of nationwide response efforts, disaster response at home, where the National Guard mobilized to respond to flooding and wildfires. And then Operation Allies Welcome support, where we responded to support over 40,000 displaced Afghans at six Army installations. And then of course, I would be remiss if I didn't highlight our most recent example of that readiness in our response to Ukraine, supporting the NATO deterrence mission in Europe with over 45,000 Soldiers deployed to Germany and Poland.

But the second reason that this budget is positive for us is it enables a continued transformation to the Army of 2030 as we strategically pivot from two decades of a focus on counterterrorism to an Army adapted to meet our top pacing challenge in China, and the acute threat of Russian aggression. The Army's continued transformation is done by maintaining momentum in this budget on our modernization programs. We're including the fielding of our mobile protected firepower and the next generation squad weapon, and continuing our investment in people, in talent management, and building a positive command climate at scale, as well as cutting-edge formations. So, as part of that ongoing transformation, I'd like to just highlight a few of the ways that our budget invests in capabilities that will enable the Army to meet the objectives of the national defense strategy and our joint warfighting needs.

So, the department will, as you've heard today, achieve its strategic objectives through integrated deterrence, active campaigning, and building an enduring advantage. We use this framework to illustrate how our investments are aligned to the NDS. So, I'll start with enabling integrated deterrence, which as you've heard already, this is work working really across warfighting domains, across theaters and spectrums of conflict as part of the joint force. And as we look at this investing in some of our capabilities, just a few of our examples include delivering the long-range hypersonic weapon prototype -- the ultra-fast maneuverable long-range missiles that provide a powerful deterrent to adversaries -- and a next generation capability in combat operations, a mid-range capability missile prototype that integrates another next generation deterrence platform in support of the Army's long-range precision fires, and fielding our precision strike missiles with extended range, lethality and survivability, using current launcher platforms, and with investments in this budget to further upgrade capability into the future.

This also includes transforming our force structure as part of integrated deterrence. And that includes fielding, for example the Army's third multi-domain task force, which integrates fires, cyber-EW and info warfare, as well as Project Convergence '22, which is our continued effort to combine experimentation and exercises with our partners and allies to promote that interoperability. It's so critical as part of the joint force it improves situational awareness and accelerated decision-making timelines.

I'd also note here an issue on the Army's end strength. So, for the Army to keep momentum on our modernization programs and to transform to the Army of 2030 it's absolutely important that we maintain our emphasis on high quality talent that we need for our cutting-edge formations and as we field new capabilities, just as I said that we would use in our MDTFs. We did not want to lower our standards in FY '23 to address any gaps in our recruiting projections. So, we proactively made a decision to temporarily reduce our end strength from 485,000 Soldiers to 476,000 in FY '22, and 473,000 in FY '23. And I would just want to emphasize that this is not a budget driven decision. It's about maintaining high quality of our talents and of our recruiting, and we will look to build back up our end strength over the course of the FYDP.

Next, I'd like to talk about the second pillar, which is executing our global campaigning. Where as part of the joint force, the Army enhances deterrence and gains military advantage over time by campaigning. And here I'd like to note that our budget includes investments for our SFABs, our rotations in EUCOM, and INDOPACOM that enhance interoperability and combined arms training at the tactical level. Our continued funding for Pacific Pathway exercises and DEFENDER-Europe, which obviously continue to build on the great work being done there in those two theaters, implementing the Army's Arctic strategy to build capacity and improve capabilities to our Army units in Alaska. And further investments in Army preposition stock. Next slide, please.

The third pillar is building an enduring advantage. And as we've heard today, it's -- it's all about, you know, building the reforms, putting into place the investments that are needed to make our capabilities enduring as part of a defense ecosystem, and maintaining that joint force advantage. And first, I would have to emphasize our investment in people within this budget. People are by far our greatest asset, and talent is our greatest advantage. So, we have investments to build positive command climate at scale, to include funding for cohesion assessment teams, continued implementation of the Independent Review Commission and Fort Hood Independent Review Commission, and that includes funding a prevention workforce, our ongoing CID, criminal investigation division transformation, and various talent management initiatives to include the BCAP and CCAP programs to help us get the right people with the right skills in the right job. Quality of Life investments in Soldiers barracks, housing and child development centers are all really important to make sure that we are investing in our people and their resiliency.

Next, I'd like to point here is tackling climate change to ensure operational effectiveness. The Army led the way in issuing the first climate strategy within the Department of Defense among the services. And that includes funding and investments in this budget for installation resilience, to include renewable energy generation, improved warfighting capability through hybrid electric tactical vehicles that will reduce signatures on the battlefield, and ultimately reduce the logistical burdens of fuel, and adaptive training in extreme weather environments. And then lastly, I'd note that there is funding in this budget will support further innovation in the industrial base, as evidenced by our continued investments in hypersonic weapons to support that growing industrial base, and modernization of our Army ammunition plants, which are a key part of building readiness for our warfighters.

So, now with that said, I'd like to turn it over to Major General Bennett who will provide you with additional details regarding the budget request.


Today, I will present an overview of the United States Army's fiscal year 2023 budget request, which if fully funded, supports Army readiness, maintains the momentum of the Army's transformation to a more capable force, and upholds our people first focus. Before we dive into the FY '23 requests, I do want to express the Army's thanks to Congress for providing the funding for this 2022 fiscal year and thank them for their continued support.

In the aggregate, you can see the Army's FY '23 budget request is $177.5 billion, which rounds up to roughly $178 billion. This is about $2.8 billion more than the '22 enacted levels. You will also note that this request for the second year in a row is all in based program funding. The light blue annotations near the top of the columns for FY '22 and FY '23 are still based program funding but support our overseas operations in the central and European commands.

It is also important to note that DoD and the Army did receive additional supplemental funding, and several of the continuing resolution measures in support of humanitarian assistance for Operational Allies Welcome and supplemental funding in the FY ‘22 omnibus appropriation for support to Ukraine that is not represented in the FY '22 columns.

I will now address additional details of how our request takes care of our people, maintains our near-term readiness, and continues our modernization efforts as we review each of the Army's operations. The Army's base budget request an increase of roughly $2.8 billion above the '22 enacted appropriation. This funding level total reflects the combined resource requirements for all three components, the active U.S. Army Reserve and Army National Guard to include our overseas operations costs. Our military personnel accounts grew $3.2 billion. These funds enable the Army to recruit, train and promote and retain quality Soldiers. These funds also pay reserve component Soldiers on active duty needed to support operational missions. The military pay accounts also provide recruiting and retention bonuses necessary to maintain the all-volunteer force.

The Operations and Maintenance funding request increased $3.6 billion from the '22 enacted levels. This funding provides readiness and also enhances our SHARP, suicide prevention and Criminal Investigation Division restructuring efforts. O&M also resources improvements for the civilian workforce, such as the pay raise and continues to invest in the quality of life of Soldiers through increased funding for the improvement of barracks and facilities.

The procurement and research development test and evaluation request of $35 billion allows the Army to maintain momentum of our modernization efforts as we continue our transition from irregular warfare to strategic competition. The Army also continues to emphasize our six signature priority efforts that are critical to maintaining the competitive edge. The military construction request of $1.9 billion supports a total of 29 projects across the total Army. The priorities for facility investments will remain as quality-of-life, readiness, and modernization. Lastly, you will note in our other accounts, the elimination of the roughly $3.3 billion in the Afghan security forces fund from our FY '22 enactment and the FY '23 President's budget request.

I will now begin a more in-depth look at the budget request beginning with the Army's end strength. As previously addressed by Honorable Camarillo, we did not want to lower our recruiting standards. So, we proactively made a decision to temporarily reduce end strength from 485,000 Soldiers to 473,000 Soldiers in FY '23. Army National Guard and Army Reserve end strength remains unchanged. This was not a budget driven decision. It's about quality, and we will look to build and strength over the future years defense program. For the Army to keep momentum on modernization and to transform to the Army of 2030 we must maintain emphasis on high quality talent needed for cutting-edge formations and new capabilities like we use in our multi-domain task forces. Funding that would have been used for the previously higher end strength was placed against Reserve Component mobilization requirements, funded through the active military personnel appropriation. The requested end strength enables the Army to fill units and provide new capabilities designed to face emerging threats and supports the all-domain fight.

Military personnel accounts are the second largest portion of the Army's base budget. The FY '23 request of $69.1 billion is an increase of $3.2 billion from the FY '22 enacted levels. The request compensates Soldiers with a 4.6 percent pay raise the largest in 20 years, and provides the recruiting and retention incentives, increases allowances for housing by 3.9 percent, and also an increase in food subsistence allowance by 3.4 percent. The National Guard and Army Reserve Components military personnel accounts fund their statutory training days, exercise participation, recruiting and retention incentives, and education benefits and full-time support.

Now let's take a look at operations and maintenance. The Army's operation and maintenance accounts represent the largest appropriation category within the Army and provide funds to recruit, organize, train and sustain Active Army component forces worldwide. The FY '23 Active Army request of $58.3 billion reflects an increase of approximately $3 billion dollars from FY '22 a roughly 5.4 percent above the '22 enacted level. The operations and maintenance Army account resources home station training and that required directed readiness table levels for active brigade combat teams and our Combat Aviation brigades. Army's O&M focus also funds further implementation of the regionally aligned modern -- readiness modernization model, or ReARMM.

To increase readiness for joint all-domain operations, there is also an increase for two for a total of 22 combat training center rotations, eight at the National Training Center, eight at the Joint Readiness Training Center, four at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center, and two exportable rotations, one in -- one each in Alaska and Hawaii. Two of these rotations are Army National Guard VCT rotations at JRTC, the Joint Readiness Training Center, emphasizing total Army readiness and our interoperability. Operations and Maintenance funding supports numerous multilateral exercises around the globe in support of allies, and in partnership activity and partnership building to include our Pacific Pathways theater exercise activities. It also allows for the continuation of the Army's multi-year campaign for Project Convergence, which the next event is scheduled to begin this September. In FY '23, the Army will implement 28 of the Independent Review Commission recommendations to include further implementation of the Army prevention workforce across all components of the Army, continuing the restructure of the Army Sexual Harassment and Assault Response and Prevention program, and implementing criminal justice reforms to include the establishment of a centralized office of special trial counsel.

The Army will also focus its efforts on installation resiliency, where we will see energy improvements and efficiency to include plan, design, and execution of energy and utility projects. We will use engineering solutions and partnerships to increase installation energy resilience, through energy savings performance contracts and utility energy service contracts. In FY '23, the Active Army addresses several critical installation and facility readiness programs by increasing funding for the restoration and modernization of our facilities by $420 million increasing funding for facility sustainment from 80 to 85 percent of the requirement, and increasing funding for base operations and support to 93 percent of the requirements.

We'll now take a look at the O&M for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve. The Army's '23 budget request supports a combined $11.4 billion O&M requirement for the Army National Guard and the U.S. Army Reserve. The operation and maintenance National Guard request of 8.2 billion represents an increase of $500 million from the '22 enacted amount and resources the National Guard to enhance warfighter readiness and increased lethality while simultaneously investing in sustainment, restoration and modernization of facilities. The budget funds Army National Guard BCTs, brigade combat teams, to a platoon level of proficiency and provides a force that can support combatant commander requirements, defend against threats to the homeland, and remain responsive to governors for natural disasters and emergencies. The operation and maintenance Army Reserve request of $3.2 billion is a $200 million increase from the FY '22 and active level. The Army Reserves '23 O&M budget focuses on the core competency of units supporting a responsive, flexible and enduring Army Reserve capable of providing essential combat enablers who are trained, equipped and lethal. The budget also provides sufficient funding to train the Army Reserve to a platoon level proficiency. It provides resources to increase the Army Reserve’s home station flying hour program to support the rotational requirements of Reserve aviation units, increasing aviation units training to a company level proficiency.

Now that I've discussed the Army -- Army's personnel and operations and maintenance readiness accounts, I'll present the Army's '23 budget request aimed towards our modernization strategy and our research, development and acquisition accounts. The '23 budget requests for research, development and acquisition is $35 billion. The Army's modernization efforts are critical to maintaining our competitive edge as we transition our focus from irregular warfare to strategic power competition. We continue to emphasize the six signature priority efforts of long-range fires, next generation combat vehicles, future vertical lift, the network, air and missile defense, and Soldiers lethality.

The Army is focusing its signature efforts to -- focusing on its signature efforts to enable a holistic approach to our modernization efforts to provide the joint force with relevant, credible and modernized forces and capabilities to meet future challenges.

Over the next few slides, I will highlight how our budget request supports Army modernization priorities, as seen through RDT&E and procurement appropriation requests. The Army's $13.7 billion research development test and evaluation request accelerates incremental upgrades to existing systems, delivering greater capabilities to our Soldiers sooner, and advances cutting-edge technologies that will generate the decision dominance and overmatch required to win the next fight. Accounting for one-time funding received in FY '22, the FY '23 RDT&E request is $1.6 billion higher than the remaining FY '22 enacted amount, which facilitates the Army's momentum and its modernization efforts.

The FY '23 request includes $2.7 billion for science and technology efforts to continue to seek out and mature technologies that address Army modernization along with enabling technologies, including Project Convergence and artificial intelligence that support the transformation towards a data centric Army with integration across our modernization priorities. In FY '23, we plan to deliver prototypes with continued investments in a long-range hypersonic weapon for one battery, mid-range capability missile and flight testing, and the precision strike munitions. The FY '23 President's budget request also includes $90.8 million in FY '23 funding for Project Convergence this a combination of O&M and RDT&E. This funding will enable the joint force to continue to focus on joint experimentation that incorporates our closest allies and partners. Project Convergence will continue to experiment with emerging technologies and joint concepts that will result in the combined forces’ ability to demonstrate offensive and defensive capabilities that can deter peer adversaries and, if necessary, defeat them in large scale combat operations. Army RDT&E investments support the Army's modernization priorities through early integration of concepts, prototyping and testing to ensure future generations of Soldiers continue to be the most lethal fighting force in the world.

Next, we'll move to procurement. The Army's '23 procurement requested $21.3 billion supports enduring equipment as well as the transition to procuring our modernized capabilities.

I will continue through each of the procurement appropriations. Army aircraft procurement continuous investment and operational enduring aviation platforms and systems while modernization efforts progress in the research and development phase discussed earlier. The reduction of roughly $500 million dollars is due largely to the reductions for one-time funding in the Gray Eagle, UH-60, and CH-47 aircraft programs. The '23 air and missile defense munitions portfolio provides critical munitions to accommodate the change in the current operational environment. The funding request supports critical munitions for combatant commanders, with the increased purchase of the Joint Air to Ground Missile and the Missile Segment Enhancement Missile programs.

We are also replenishing wartime stockpiles of preferred and advanced munitions. In weapons and track combat vehicles, the Army has transitioned to modernization efforts for the Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, Mobile Protected Firepower, and the Next Generation Squad Weapon. While slowing enduring systems enhancements for Abrams, Bradley, Stryker, and the Paladin Integrated Management programs. The Army continues to invest in maintaining and upgrading organic industrial base production facilities with investments at the Holston Ammunition Plant, and Watervliet Arsenal to meet the requirements of upcoming next generation ammunition and equipment, environmental standards and workplace safety. The Army's other procurement account decreases by just under $1 billion due to one-time increases and other reductions, including for All Terrain Cranes, and Explosive Ordnance Render Safe Sets. Notable increases in our request include counter small UAS division sets in service retrofit kits for Humvees, and a Tactical Intelligence Target Access Node, which is a critical intel system in support of our number one modernization priority of long-range fires.

Now let's take a look at a select set of quantity comparisons from FY '22 to FY '23. This chart provides a snapshot of select procurement program quantities. The Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle schedule was re-baselined due to production startup issues and pandemic impacts, which is why there were none in FY '22 and now 72 requested in '23. Our Next Generation Squad Weapon purchase supports fielding to over six combat brigades.

I will pause a few moments to allow you to review further.

We can now move on to facilities. The Army's facility infrastructure is a critical aspect of Army readiness. Army senior leaders recognize our Soldiers, civilians and their families should be provided a quality of life commensurate to their selfless service and commitment to our nation. Accounting for roughly $1 billion in one-time increased funding received in FY '22, our FY '23 military construction and family housing request is roughly $200 million below the FY '22 enacted levels. The request addresses requirements to recapitalization needs including: $153 million for two barracks projects, one at Joint Base Lewis McChord and the other in Germany; $32 million dollars for one Child Development Center at Fort Polk, Louisiana; $69 million for a medical clinic at Kwajalein Atoll; $229 million for 11 readiness centers, nine in the National Guard and two in the Army Reserve; $135 million for minor construction for active Guard and Reserve components; $202 million for planning design across all components; and $152 million for two overseas family housing construction projects, one in Baumholder, Germany and the other in Vicenza, Italy.

There's $185.4 million in support of our European Deterrence Initiative efforts, including for two battalion training complexes for operations and vehicle maintenance in Grafenwoehr, Germany. The Army's BRAC funding request supports environmental cleanup, restoration and conveyance of excess properties and locations designated under previous BRAC rounds. FY '23 requested funds keep the Army's planned cleanup efforts on track.

Next up is the Army's other accounts. In the Army's other accounts, our request includes other basic requirements that are funded outside our main appropriations, including at one of our most important sites. This year's request includes $156 million for the Arlington National Cemetery to fund day-to-day operations of the final resting place for our fallen heroes. The Army is also requesting over $1 billion for the Chemical Demilitarization Program. And lastly, the FY '23 Army's working capital fund request is $29.9 million, which due to rounding, only displays as zero on the chart.

The last funding type I will discuss is Overseas Operations Costs. The Army has managed large overseas contingency operations budgets since 2001. The funding required for these operations changes from year to year and, starting in FY '22, funding formerly known as OCO is now referred to as overseas operations with all the funds in the base budget. The Army is requesting over $14.6 billion in overseas operation costs primarily for our operations and support here in the continental United States, and in the Central, European and Horn of Africa area of operations.

The military personnel request supports roughly 25,000 mobilized RC Soldiers that will serve overseas as well as in the continental United States. Operations and maintenance costs of $9.7 billion are requested to support direct and enduring costs for Operation Inherent Resolve, Operation Enduring Sentinel, and Operation Spartan Shield, as well as counterterrorism support operations, Guantanamo and the Horn of Africa. Our European Deterrence Initiative funding grows an additional $464 million to $2.8 billion request that includes $942 million for increased presence through the rotation of a division headquarters, Armored Brigade Combat Team, and other enabler units supported with additional, active, and mobilized reserve component units and Soldiers. $305 million of that request provides funding for exercises and support of DEFENDER-Europe, Operation Atlantic Resolve and Operation Joint Guardian in Kosovo and $41 million has been requested to enhance and sustain a mission partner environment network.

As a reminder, the Afghan Security Forces Fund was neither enacted in '22, nor requested in FY '23, as shown in the table. The Army still manages funding for the Counter Islamic State of Iraq and Syria train and equip fund, or CTEF. The CTEF is a pass-through account for the military support of partner nations in combating terrorism. And while it is called a pass-through account, the Army exercises fiscal stewardship and oversight in accordance with the DoD financial management regulations.

Thank you for your time and attention this afternoon. I will now turn it back over to the Honorable Camarillo for his summary closing comments.

MR. CAMARILLO: Ladies, gentlemen, I'll be very brief and just say that this budget puts us on a sustainable strategic path to get to the Army of 2030. Our three priorities of readiness, people, and modernization are all addressed. It enables our ability to maintain that high level of readiness that I mentioned at the outset, invests in key capabilities to support Soldiers and their families. And then of course, maintains continuity on the modernization of our warfighting capabilities.

So, we look forward to hearing your questions. And thank you all for being here today.


TONY CAPACCIO: Tony Capaccio, Bloomberg. Two questions one, when in the FYDP do you start building back up to 12,000, you both mentioned a couple times temporary, what years '26, '27?

And for General Bennett, $3 billion increase over enacted. Is that negative real growth or what is the real growth that the Army experienced? Secretary McCord earlier said the DoD experienced a 1.5 percent real growth over the enacted once inflation is factored in.

GEN. BENNETT: Sir, I think first I’ll address the -- the end-strength question there. The Army will continually assess as Honorable McCord mentioned kind of our -- our posture on towards that and teaming that take a look at that end strength there. So, I think that will be an ongoing assessment as we continue forward into the future.

Now for your inflation question. The -- as the Honorable McCord did mention, we did take a look, we paid a lot of attention to it. The 1.5 percent real growth above the '22 of the already inflated position there so, from the Army's perspective, we did receive roughly a billion dollars to cover their pay raises that supported that, as well as we got a roughly $3 billion to address what I'll call non pay and non-field price growth.

To help answer your question there.

TONY CAPACCIO: Is it -- what percentage of real growth did the Army experience? You know, 1 percent or negative growth or what? I just...

GEN. BENNETT: Sure. I'll have to get back to you on the percent of real growth question. It's more complicated than it sounds.



JEN JUDSON: Jen Judson. I just have a quick question. I think we're all asking, which is the acquisition program so a weapon system book that the DoD put out? Does it match your trifold for specific programs in RDA? There's only some of them that are listed. So, what number should we trust the -- the numbers in the little trifold or the numbers in the DoD wide book?

GEN. BENNETT: Do you have a specific example I might be able to address, or?

JEN JUDSON: Yes, (OFF-MIC) I think is precision strike…

MR. CAMARILLO:  The PrSM, yeah.

JEN JUDSON: The PrSM; yeah, that one is confusing.

Q:  The little trifold says 260 million for PrSM and then the DoD weapons cost as 472.7 million.

GEN. BENNETT: Yeah, we're going to have to get that answer back to you because I'm not...


MR. CAMARILLO:  ... is, obviously, there's different increments of the precision strike missile program that are happening simultaneously. So, there is obviously increment, the current increment we're on and then the next increment, which will do the multimode seeker. So, to the extent that those are overlapping in any of those characterizations, I think that might be it but we'll double check and verify.

JEN JUDSON: OK, thank you.

And then just the question that I actually had was, you had mentioned that you're slowing Abrams, Bradley, Stryker, and PIM. I think had a little fidelity on Abrams and Stryker already. So, how much is Bradley and PIM slowed based on what you were we're planning in FY '22, for FY '23? How has that changed?

And then for the AMPV numbers, you're procuring 72, I believe, or you're funding the procurement of 72. So, is that what DAE is capable of delivering in a year? Or could they go faster? And is this a budget-based decision?

MR. CAMARILLO: So, I'll start.

Obviously, when we balanced the overall portfolio for RDA, particularly in our procurement programs, it is a careful fine-tuning of systems that we are developing with R&D, RDT&E funding. And then, of course, what we're procuring as we're transitioning from the enduring systems to the new. So, it is a careful balance every single year, and that always is the case.

The quantities as far as AMPV are concerned, we'll have to double check whether that's just a carryover from the prior year, or if they were obviously experiencing the supply chain issues. But we can get back to you on that one.

And then I believe your other question was with respect to was it, PIM?

JEN JUDSON: Bradley and PIM.

MR. CAMARILLO: And I'll turn to General Bennett for that one.

GEN. BENNETT: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

Now, again, we're slowing -- it's slowing down. So, roughly $181 million for Bradley, and $171 -- $170 million in PIM. And that's just the last year to this year.

JEN JUDSON: What does that -- what does that not get you that you were planning in FY '22 though, do you have like a sense? Like, I know that, for instance, the Abrams and Stryker -- Abrams, I think the original attachment in FY '22 for FY '23 was that you are going to -- I may have this wrong -- three quarters of an ABCT, but now it's half of an ABCT. Do you have something like that for Bradley and PIM laid out that you could help us...

GEN. BENNETT: I can get that information to you, yes.

JEN JUDSON: OK. Yeah, the dollar amount it's hard for me to understand.

ASHLEY ROQUE: Hi, Ashley Roque. You've mentioned some of the procurement slowdowns. Could you talk about any RDT&E programs that you might have slowed down to help funds, other modernization priorities?

And then also going through the P-1s, I didn't see anything for infantry squad vehicle or IBAS, so I'm not sure if they're just listed somewhere else, or something's missing? Or if you could just update us?

MR. CAMARILLO: Let me just answer the question, generally and I'll turn it to General Bennett.

So, obviously, there are a fact of life changes every year with programs that are in the developmental phase. So, if it is a test event that gets delayed, as we've seen with IBAS, there could be adjustments, obviously, to the funding profile that are associated with those. So, you know, were the sources -- were the programs in the developmental phase sources for, you know, wholesale changes in the portfolio? That certainly was not our approach. But again, if there are kind of puts and takes it would just reflect the realities of where the programs are executing.

So, as far as the specific programs you mentioned, I'll turn to General Bennett to answer your questions.

GEN. BENNETT: And we did aim 82 percent of our RDT&E budget at our -- our top six priorities, a lot of effort focusing would be aimed towards that. And I'll have to provide you some specific examples RDT&E accounts never being reduced.

Q: (OFF-MIC) Are you funding IBAS and infantry squad vehicle? (OFF-MIC) there's nothing in the budget...


MR. CAMARILLO: Both programs are moving forward. On IBAS we're just moving forward to the IOT that was obviously slightly delayed. And then I continued, we are continuing on the ISP program. So, as far as whatever numbers did or didn't show up in the justification documents or any of the materials you have, we'll get that you.

Q: Thank you.

LT. COL. BRANDON KELLEY: We're going to go to the phone line real quick. Steve Beynon?

STEVE BEYNON: Hi, can you guys hear me?


You got me?


LT. COL. BRANDON KELLEY: All right. We'll come back to Steve. Haley?

HALEY BRITZKY: Haley Britzky, Task and Purpose.

I noticed or you mentioned CTC rotations '22 funded that seems to be pretty in line with years’ past. But in 2020, I know the Army said that we're looking to reduce some of that reducing the OPTEMPO and stress on families and Soldiers. I mean, are we seeing a reduction in that? Is that no longer really an option, given what's happening in Europe that that is being set aside?

And then also, with the end strength numbers I know that you've mentioned it's about quality of recruits not with a budget issue. What issue with the quality of the recruiting pool now are you expecting to no longer be an issue in a few years to build up those numbers again?

MR. CAMARILLO: Yeah, let me answer your second question first. And then I'll take your first.

So, certainly, I think, unlike every other employer in the economy, we're facing, obviously, some challenging conditions in terms of our ability to recruit and attract talent. It's no different all of us in the Department of Defense are all in a war for talent every single year. And what we're just seeing is given the particular conditions of a very tight labor market, our ability to meet all of our projected recruiting goals, were a little bit challenged in FY '22 and FY '23.

And so, we made the assessment that we would not want to adjust our specific criteria for quality. And so, we want the highest quality caliber recruits that we can bring into the Army. And so, we made the decision to just temporarily reduce end strength, as opposed to lowering our standards.

So, we don't anticipate that it is a lasting change, as we talked about earlier, it is something that we hope to bring back up over the course of the fight up. And it's something that we certainly think is reflective of what we hope to be transient conditions in the labor market.

As to your second -- or your first question, on the CTC rotations. You know, certainly we feel that maintaining that high level of readiness is consistent with the you know, consistent demand for what the Army does year in and year out. We have seen in all three compos that they have been asked to do quite a bit. So, we are always conscious and concerned about the stresses on the force, particularly our families as well. So, we are looking at ways that we can perhaps mitigate some of those burdens on our Soldiers that are having deployed quite a bit over the last couple of years to perform pretty -- pretty extraordinary missions.

HALEY BRITZKY: So, was that 2020 decision has that just not been enacted to reduce some of that? Or has that -- is that something that will happen slowly over the next several years? I’m just wondering where we are in that compared to what the funding is now.

MR. CAMARILLO: Yeah. And I'll let General Bennett chime in because that predates me. So, to be honest with you, that decision was not made when I was here. But certainly, I know we are looking at across the spectrum of different ways that we can try to address kind of that -- that churn and that those impacts on -- on military families. So, but again, we are -- we are doing what we need to do to make sure that we maintain our readiness levels at where we need them, given what the Army's requirements are.

Do you want to add anything?

GEN. BENNETT: Thanks, sir. I think I can add to that.

Like the Honorable Camarillo said, we are taking a look at obviously on the impact on our families, but I'll also add that one of the best ways to take care of Soldiers is to train them. OK, and they like training and they like to focus on being ready to do their job, and readiness being one of the things that the Army has demonstrated this year. But that is able to bring to the table for our combatant commanders, both here with the Allies Welcome mission, as well, as we've just demonstrated here recently in Europe. So, but that's -- that's, I would say it's getting ready and ready makes them -- makes them happy and makes them ready to go.

BRIAN EVERSTINE: Brian Everstine of Aviation Week.

I was hoping to drill down a little bit more on the FVL funding. Does this support the regular schedule, the schedule for IOC in 2030 for source selection coming up? And can you drill down anymore on the breakdown for FARA, FLRAA, ITEP within that amount?

GEN. BENNETT: I am going to have to get back to you on that level of detail. I'm not the expert on the FVL and FARA and FLRAA.

MR. CAMARILLO: Let me jump in if I could just for a little bit.

So, we have not adjusted the schedule for kind of the two FVL programs we're hoping to make that -- make the milestones that we had set in place, given the current competition. I know that particularly in the case of FARA, I think we had to realign some of the funding dollars just to align them to the ITEP program. But you'll see kind of those kinds of puts and takes, as I said earlier fact of life changes within the current budget submission.

I think your third question was just the ITEP? Or was there another platform?

BRIAN EVERSTINE: A break -- is there any breakdown from...


MR. CAMARILLO: We can get you the fill breakdown between the three programs.

LT. COL. BRANDON KELLEY: All right, we'll try Steve online one more time.

STEVE BEYNON: Hey, appreciate it.

I see we're getting a lot more next generation squad of weapons; can we just get an update on where we are at and who is testing those weapons this year? And can we also get a few more details on the Arctic Strategy of what money is going there?

Thank you.

MR. CAMARILLO: Let me start with a question with regard to the Arctic Strategy. You know, certainly as we begin to operationalize that there are some investments in this budget, I believe it's just south of $100 million. I want to say it's about $90 million-$91 million, if I'm correct, and General Bennett can correct me. And that funds a variety of efforts to include additional training efforts, some of the cold weather equipment that we have certainly prioritize as part of this strategy for our Soldiers that are stationed in Alaska and some of the other things that we can do to kind of help operationalize it.

With regard to the next generation squad weapon, we can get back to you with regard to specific production quantities that we are funding in this budget unless General Bennett has it.

GEN. BENNETT: I've got some details, sir. You were very close on the -- on the Arctic Strategy. We've got just over 101. -- $101.8 million really aimed at four main avenues. First, we're going to purchase 13 cold all weather, all-terrain vehicles or the CATVs. We've got winterization of equipment. We're also including the exportable CTC that I previously mentioned, and we're also continuing to purchase winter OCIE.

To your Next Generation Squad Weapon question, the plan replacement for this saw the plan we're purchasing 17,164 NGSW fire control modules as well as purchasing 1704 automatic rifles and 16,348 rifles in '23.

LT. COL. BRANDON KELLEY: All right, ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the time we have for today. As a reminder, we have a media roundtable tomorrow. You should have the information in your email, if you do not, please see me after the brief.

Thank you.