DOCSLIB.ORG

Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress Updated December 13, 2018 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL33745 Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program Summary The Aegis ballistic missile defense (BMD) program, which is carried out by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and the Navy, gives Navy Aegis cruisers and destroyers a capability for conducting BMD operations. Under the FY2019 budget submission, the number of BMD-capable Aegis ships is scheduled to be 41 at the end of FY2019 and 57 at the end of FY2023. Two Japan-homeported Navy BMD-capable Aegis destroyers included in the above figures—the Fitzgerald (DDG-62) and the John S McCain (DDG-56)—were seriously damaged in collisions with merchant ships in waters off the coasts of Japan and Singapore in June 2017 and August 2017, respectively, and are currently being repaired. The temporary loss of these two BMD- capable ships reinforced, at the margin, concerns among some observers about required numbers of BMD-capable Aegis ships versus available numbers of BMD-capable Aegis ships, particularly for performing BMD operations in the Western Pacific. Under the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) for European BMD operations, BMD- capable Aegis ships are operating in European waters to defend Europe from potential ballistic missile attacks from countries such as Iran. BMD-capable Aegis ships also operate in the Western Pacific and the Persian Gulf to provide regional defense against potential ballistic missile attacks from countries such as North Korea and Iran. The Aegis BMD program is funded mostly through MDA’s budget. The Navy’s budget provides additional funding for BMD-related efforts. MDA’s proposed FY2019 budget requests a total of $1,711.8 million in procurement and research and development funding for Aegis BMD efforts, including funding for two Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania that are to be part of the EPAA. MDA’s budget also includes operations and maintenance (O&M) and military construction (MilCon) funding for the Aegis BMD program. Issues for Congress regarding the Aegis BMD program include the following: whether to approve, reject, or modify MDA’s FY2019 funding procurement and research and development funding requests for the program; required numbers of BMD-capable Aegis ships versus available numbers of BMD-capable Aegis ships; the burden that BMD operations may be placing on the Navy’s fleet of Aegis ships, and whether there are alternative ways to perform BMD missions now performed by U.S. Navy Aegis ships, such as establishing more Aegis Ashore sites; burden sharing—how European naval contributions to European BMD capabilities and operations compare to U.S. naval contributions to European BMD capabilities and operations; the potential for ship-based lasers, electromagnetic railguns (EMRGs), and hypervelocity projectiles (HVPs) to contribute in coming years to Navy terminal- phase BMD operations and the impact this might eventually have on required numbers of ship-based BMD interceptor missiles; and technical risk and test and evaluation issues in the Aegis BMD program. Congressional Research Service Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Aegis Ships ............................................................................................................................... 1 Ticonderoga (CG-47) Class Aegis Cruisers ........................................................................ 1 Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) Class Aegis Destroyers .............................................................. 2 Aegis Ships in Allied Navies .............................................................................................. 2 Aegis BMD System................................................................................................................... 2 Versions and Capabilities of Aegis BMD System ............................................................... 3 Aegis BMD Interceptor Missiles ........................................................................................ 4 European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) for European BMD.......................................... 5 Numbers of BMD-Capable Aegis Ships and SM-3 Interceptors .............................................. 6 Homeporting of BMD-Capable DDG-51s in Spain .................................................................. 6 Aegis BMD Flight Tests ............................................................................................................ 7 Allied Participation and Interest in Aegis BMD Program ......................................................... 8 Japan ................................................................................................................................... 8 Other Countries ................................................................................................................. 10 FY2019 MDA Funding Request .............................................................................................. 11 Issues for Congress ......................................................................................................................... 11 FY19 Funding Request ............................................................................................................ 11 Required vs. Available Numbers of BMD-Capable Aegis Ships ............................................ 12 Overview ........................................................................................................................... 12 BMD-Capable Destroyers Fitzgerald and John S McCain Seriously Damaged .............. 12 Burden of BMD Mission on U.S. Navy Aegis Ships .............................................................. 13 Burden Sharing: U.S. vs. European Naval Contributions to European BMD ......................... 15 Potential Future BMD Contribution from Lasers, Railguns, and Gun-Launched Guided Projectiles ................................................................................................................ 16 Technical Risk and Test and Evaluation Issues ....................................................................... 16 January 2018 DOT&E Report .......................................................................................... 16 May 2017 GAO Report ..................................................................................................... 21 Legislative Activity for FY2019 .................................................................................................... 24 Summary of Action on FY2019 MDA Funding Request ........................................................ 24 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019/John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (H.R. 5515/S. 2987/P.L. 115-232) ........... 25 House ................................................................................................................................ 25 Senate ................................................................................................................................ 29 Conference ........................................................................................................................ 30 FY2019 DOD Appropriations Act (H.R. 6157/S. 3159/Division A of H.R. 6157/P.L. 115-245) ............................................................................................................................... 31 House ................................................................................................................................ 31 Senate ................................................................................................................................ 32 Conference ........................................................................................................................ 33 Figures Figure 1. Aegis BMD System Variants ............................................................................................ 3 Congressional Research Service Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program Tables Table 1. Numbers of BMD-Capable Aegis Ships and SM-3 Missiles Under FY2019 Budget Submission ......................................................................................................... 7 Table 2. MDA Funding for Aegis BMD Efforts, FY2019-FY2023................................................ 11 Table 3. Summary of Congressional Action on FY2019 Request for MDA Procurement and RDT&E Funding for Aegis BMD Program ......................................................................... 25 Table A-1. Aegis BMD Flight Tests From January 2002 to the Present ........................................ 35 Appendixes Appendix A. Aegis BMD Flight Tests ........................................................................................... 34 Appendix B. Homeporting of U.S. Navy Aegis BMD Ships at Rota, Spain ................................. 66 Appendix C. Allied Participation and Interest in Aegis BMD Program ........................................ 69 Appendix D. Target for Simulating Endo-Atmospheric Flight of DF-21 ASBM .......................... 79 Contacts Author Information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2014 Ships and Submarines of the United States Navy
    AIRCRAFT CARRIER DDG 1000 AMPHIBIOUS Multi-Purpose Aircraft Carrier (Nuclear-Propulsion) THE U.S. NAvy’s next-GENERATION MULTI-MISSION DESTROYER Amphibious Assault Ship Gerald R. Ford Class CVN Tarawa Class LHA Gerald R. Ford CVN-78 USS Peleliu LHA-5 John F. Kennedy CVN-79 Enterprise CVN-80 Nimitz Class CVN Wasp Class LHD USS Wasp LHD-1 USS Bataan LHD-5 USS Nimitz CVN-68 USS Abraham Lincoln CVN-72 USS Harry S. Truman CVN-75 USS Essex LHD-2 USS Bonhomme Richard LHD-6 USS Dwight D. Eisenhower CVN-69 USS George Washington CVN-73 USS Ronald Reagan CVN-76 USS Kearsarge LHD-3 USS Iwo Jima LHD-7 USS Carl Vinson CVN-70 USS John C. Stennis CVN-74 USS George H.W. Bush CVN-77 USS Boxer LHD-4 USS Makin Island LHD-8 USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71 SUBMARINE Submarine (Nuclear-Powered) America Class LHA America LHA-6 SURFACE COMBATANT Los Angeles Class SSN Tripoli LHA-7 USS Bremerton SSN-698 USS Pittsburgh SSN-720 USS Albany SSN-753 USS Santa Fe SSN-763 Guided Missile Cruiser USS Jacksonville SSN-699 USS Chicago SSN-721 USS Topeka SSN-754 USS Boise SSN-764 USS Dallas SSN-700 USS Key West SSN-722 USS Scranton SSN-756 USS Montpelier SSN-765 USS La Jolla SSN-701 USS Oklahoma City SSN-723 USS Alexandria SSN-757 USS Charlotte SSN-766 Ticonderoga Class CG USS City of Corpus Christi SSN-705 USS Louisville SSN-724 USS Asheville SSN-758 USS Hampton SSN-767 USS Albuquerque SSN-706 USS Helena SSN-725 USS Jefferson City SSN-759 USS Hartford SSN-768 USS Bunker Hill CG-52 USS Princeton CG-59 USS Gettysburg CG-64 USS Lake Erie CG-70 USS San Francisco SSN-711 USS Newport News SSN-750 USS Annapolis SSN-760 USS Toledo SSN-769 USS Mobile Bay CG-53 USS Normandy CG-60 USS Chosin CG-65 USS Cape St.
    [Show full text]
  • Virtualremembrance Day
    JANUARY 2021 YEARin REVIEW A look back at 2020 Admiral’s Commentary The new year ahead VirtualRemembrance Day WalkMLK Jr. Day Observance On the Cover: USS Chung-Hoon Underway File photo by MC1 Devin Langer PHOTO OF THE MONTH Your Navy Team in Hawaii CONTENTS Welcome Commander, Navy Region Hawaii oversees two installations: Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam on Oahu and Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, on Kauai. As Naval Surface Group Middle Home Pacific, we provide oversight for the ten surface ships homeported at JBPHH. Navy aircraft squadrons are also co-located at Marine Corps Special Edition USS William P. Lawrence Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, Oahu, and training is sometimes also conducted on other islands, but most Navy assets are located at JBPHH and PMRF. These two installations serve fleet, fighter and family under the direction of Commander, Navy Installations Command. A guided-missile cruiser and destroyers of Commander, Naval Surface Force Pacific deploy Commander independently or as part of a group for Commander, Navy Region Hawaii and U.S. Third Fleet and in the Seventh Fleet and Fifth Naval Surface Group Middle Pacifi c Fleet areas of responsibility. The Navy, including in your Navy team in Hawaii, builds partnerships and REAR ADM. ROBB CHADWICK strengthens interoperability in the Pacific. Each YEAR year, Navy ships, submarines and aircraft from Hawaii participate in various training exercises with allies and friends in the Pacific and Indian Oceans to strengthen interoperability. Navy service members and civilians conduct humanitarian assistance and disaster response missions in the South Pacific and in Asia. Working with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Naval Force Structure
    Alternative Naval Force Structure A compendium by CIMSEC Articles By Steve Wills · Javier Gonzalez · Tom Meyer · Bob Hein · Eric Beaty Chuck Hill · Jan Musil · Wayne P. Hughes Jr. Edited By Dmitry Filipoff · David Van Dyk · John Stryker 1 Contents Preface ................................................................................................................................ 3 The Perils of Alternative Force Structure ................................................... 4 By Steve Wills Unmanned­Centric Force Structure ............................................................... 8 By Javier Gonzalez Proposing A Modern High Speed Transport – The Long Range Patrol Vessel ................................................................................................... 11 By Tom Meyer No Time To Spare: Drawing on History to Inspire Capability Innovation in Today’s Navy ................................................................................. 15 By Bob Hein Enhancing Existing Force Structure by Optimizing Maritime Service Specialization .............................................................................................. 18 By Eric Beaty Augment Naval Force Structure By Upgunning The Coast Guard .......................................................................................................... 21 By Chuck Hill A Fleet Plan for 2045: The Navy the U.S. Ought to be Building ..... 25 By Jan Musil Closing Remarks on Changing Naval Force Structure ....................... 31 By Wayne P. Hughes Jr. CIMSEC 22 www.cimsec.org
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress Updated September 30, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL33745 SUMMARY RL33745 Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) September 30, 2021 Program: Background and Issues for Congress Ronald O'Rourke The Aegis ballistic missile defense (BMD) program, which is carried out by the Missile Defense Specialist in Naval Affairs Agency (MDA) and the Navy, gives Navy Aegis cruisers and destroyers a capability for conducting BMD operations. BMD-capable Aegis ships operate in European waters to defend Europe from potential ballistic missile attacks from countries such as Iran, and in in the Western Pacific and the Persian Gulf to provide regional defense against potential ballistic missile attacks from countries such as North Korea and Iran. MDA’s FY2022 budget submission states that “by the end of FY 2022 there will be 48 total BMDS [BMD system] capable ships requiring maintenance support.” The Aegis BMD program is funded mostly through MDA’s budget. The Navy’s budget provides additional funding for BMD-related efforts. MDA’s proposed FY2021 budget requested a total of $1,647.9 million (i.e., about $1.6 billion) in procurement and research and development funding for Aegis BMD efforts, including funding for two Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania. MDA’s budget also includes operations and maintenance (O&M) and military construction (MilCon) funding for the Aegis BMD program. Issues for Congress regarding the Aegis BMD program include the following: whether to approve, reject, or modify MDA’s annual procurement and research and development funding requests for the program; the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the execution of Aegis BMD program efforts; what role, if any, the Aegis BMD program should play in defending the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ballistic-Missile Defense
    Copyright © 2013, Proceedings, U.S. Naval Institute, Annapolis, Maryland (410) 268-6110 www.usni.org Leading the Way in Ballistic-Missile Defense By Captain George Galdorisi, U.S. Navy (Retired), and Scott C. Truver For the U.S. Navy and a growing number of its partners, the key word is ‘Aegis.’ 32 • December 2013 www.usni.org he United States has put in place an inte- An Indispensable Element grated—if still embryonic—national-level The first priority of the BMD implementation strategy–– ballistic-missile defense system (BMDS). establishing a limited defensive capability against North All elements of the land, sea, air, and Korean ballistic missiles––has largely been achieved with Tspace system are linked together to provide the best Patriot Advanced Capability-3 batteries, the Ground-based affordable defense against a growing threat of bal- Mid-course Defense (GMD) system, the forward-deployed listic missiles, some armed with weapons of mass AN/TPY-2 radar, and Aegis BMD long-range search, cue- destruction (WMD). The U.S. Navy’s contribution is ing, and engagement warships. Aegis BMD interoperates based on the Aegis weapon system and has been on with other assets, including the Terminal High-Altitude Area patrol in guided-missile cruisers and destroyers since Defense (THAAD) system, as well as ground-, air-, and 2004. Aegis BMD has grown in importance based space-based sensors. on its proven performance as well as its long-term Good enough, to be sure. But in his 2009 Proceedings 1 potential. Indeed, at this time Aegis BMD may well article, Commander Denny argued for Aegis to serve as a be the first among equals based on its multimission primary national BMD asset: capabilities as well as its ability to integrate with the emerging BMD capabilities of allied and partner The United States should place a higher priority on its sea- nations.
    [Show full text]
  • US Navy Program Guide 2012
    U.S. NAVY PROGRAM GUIDE 2012 U.S. NAVY PROGRAM GUIDE 2012 FOREWORD The U.S. Navy is the world’s preeminent cal change continues in the Arab world. Nations like Iran maritime force. Our fleet operates forward every day, and North Korea continue to pursue nuclear capabilities, providing America offshore options to deter conflict and while rising powers are rapidly modernizing their militar- advance our national interests in an era of uncertainty. ies and investing in capabilities to deny freedom of action As it has for more than 200 years, our Navy remains ready on the sea, in the air and in cyberspace. To ensure we are for today’s challenges. Our fleet continues to deliver cred- prepared to meet our missions, I will continue to focus on ible capability for deterrence, sea control, and power pro- my three main priorities: 1) Remain ready to meet current jection to prevent and contain conflict and to fight and challenges, today; 2) Build a relevant and capable future win our nation’s wars. We protect the interconnected sys- force; and 3) Enable and support our Sailors, Navy Civil- tems of trade, information, and security that enable our ians, and their Families. Most importantly, we will ensure nation’s economic prosperity while ensuring operational we do not create a “hollow force” unable to do the mission access for the Joint force to the maritime domain and the due to shortfalls in maintenance, personnel, or training. littorals. These are fiscally challenging times. We will pursue these Our Navy is integral to combat, counter-terrorism, and priorities effectively and efficiently, innovating to maxi- crisis response.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4: Persian Gulf
    4 3HUVLDQ*XOI Australia’s participation in the Maritime Interception Force 4.1 The Maritime Interception Force was established in August 1990, in response to resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council, to halt all inward and outward maritime traffic to Iraq to ensure compliance with the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq after its invasion of Kuwait.1 4.2 Royal Australian Navy (RAN) ships have participated in the Maritime Interception Force since its inception, under the codename OPERATION DAMASK. In the period before the September 11 terrorist attacks, 13 RAN ships had been deployed to participate in the Interception Force. Other nations have also routinely contributed ships to the Interception Force, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Belgium, New Zealand, Italy and the Netherlands. 4.3 Following the September 11 attacks, Australia’s participation in the Interception Force was extended indefinitely and the forces deployed were incorporated into OPERATION SLIPPER, the ADF’s contribution to the International Coalition Against Terrorism. 4.4 The Maritime Interception Force conducts patrol and boarding operations in the central and northern Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Vessels containing cargoes of prohibited goods bound for Iraq are turned away or escorted back to their port of origin. Vessels containing prohibited exports from Iraq (mostly oil, but also other commodities) are detained and diverted to ports in the area for sanctions enforcement actions as required by the United Nations Security Council resolutions. The Interception Force 1 See United Nations Security Council Resolutions 661, 665, 687, 986 and 1175. 28 FORCES DEPLOYED TO THE INTERNATIONAL COALITION AGAINST TERRORISM does not conduct operations within the territorial waters of Gulf States, other than Iraq and Kuwait (which allows Interception Force ships to berth for resupply and maintenance purposes).
    [Show full text]
  • US War Plans and the “Strait of Hormuz Incident”: Just Who Threatens Whom?
    US War Plans and the “Strait of Hormuz Incident”: Just Who Threatens Whom? By Prof Michel Chossudovsky Global Research, January 11, 2008 11 January 2008 Instigated by the Pentagon, a bungled media disinformation campaign directed against Iran has unfolded. Five Iranian patrol boats, visibly with no military capabilities, have been accused of threatening three US war ships in the Strait of Hormuz. According to a Pentagon spokesman: The Iranian vessels “showed reckless, dangerous and potentially hostile intent,” Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said. The encounter [on 6 January 2008] lasted between 15 and 25 minutes, he said. “We haven’t had an event of this serious nature recently,” Whitman said, referring to encounters between U.S. Navy vessels and Iranian warships. (Bloomberg, January 7, 2008) At one point the U.S. ships received a threatening radio call from the Iranians, “to the effect that they were closing (on) our ships and that the ships would explode — the U.S. ships would explode,” Cosgriff said. The Associated Press Pentagon Says Ships Harassed by Iran) The Pentagon said the incident was serious. It described the Iranian actions as “careless, reckless and potentially hostile” and said Tehran should provide an explanation. (Arab Times, 7 January 2008) Media Disinformation Coinciding with Bush’s Middle East trip, the intent of the Pentagon’s propaganda ploy is to present Iran as the aggressor. The patrol activities of these boats are presented as “a serious threat” and an act of “provocation”. The London Times goes even further:
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Armed Services Committee Testimony Of
    SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE TESTIMONY OF ADMIRAL JAMES G. STAVRIDIS, UNITED STATES NAVY COMMANDER, UNITED STATES EUROPEAN COMMAND BEFORE THE 112TH CONGRESS MARCH 1, 2012 INTRODUCTION Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, Distinguished Members of the Committee: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. For nearly three years now, I’ve had the privilege to command the exceptional men and women of the United States European Command and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Allied Command Operations. As you know, it has been a busy year for these commands, for the NATO Alliance, and for our international and interagency partners who are such a vital part of our mission, our many initiatives, and our team. Working together, we have accomplished some important objectives since I saw you last: saving tens of thousands of lives from a despotic and unstable regime in Libya; supporting continued progress and transition in Afghanistan; maintaining a safe environment in the Balkans; sustaining vital relationships with our key allies and emerging partners in the region; and developing the necessary capabilities to meet the rising—and, in many cases, different—security challenges of the 21st century. I am happy to report that we continue to make sound and efficient progress, in concert with our allies and partners, toward ensuring continued security and stability across our theater and, in so doing, are providing for the forward defense of the United States. But before reporting our progress and achievements over the past year, I want to take a moment to examine a fundamental question on many minds here in Washington and abroad: How does the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. European Command
    U.S. European Command Communication and Engagement Directorate - Media Operations Division Comm: +49 (0) 711 680 6868/6618/8010 / DSN: 314-430-6868/6618/8010 [email protected] www.facebook.com/eucom www.twitter.com/us_eucom www.instagram.com/us_eucom EUCOM DVIDS Hub: https://www.dvidshub.net/unit/EUCOM#.VQBztSz_7Gw European Security/DoD Specials Page: http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2014/0514_atlanticresolve/ OPERATION ATLANTIC RESOLVE (SEPTEMBER 2015) Operation Atlantic Resolve is a demonstration of our continued commitment to the collective security of NATO and dedication to the enduring peace and stability in the region, in light of the Russian intervention in Ukraine specifically. U.S. commitment to the security of every NATO ally is resolute and uniform. In meeting our global security commitments, the United States must have strong, committed and capable allies, which is why we have fought, exercised and trained with our European allies for the past 70 years. The U.S.-European strategic partnership is built on a foundation of shared values, experiences and vision. The U.S. took several immediate steps to demonstrate solidarity with our NATO allies, such as augmenting the air, ground and naval presence in the region, and enhancing previously scheduled exercises. Russia's aggressive actions have already led many to call for reinforcing NATO's readiness through Article 5-related planning training and adjustments to force posture. Operation Atlantic Resolve will remain in place as long as the need exists to reassure our allies and deter Russia from regional hegemony. European Reassurance Initiative ERI is part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015, signed by President Obama on December 19, 2014, included $985 million in ERI funds.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Simulation for Training in the U.S. Navy Surface Force
    Use of Simulation for Training in the U.S. Navy Surface Force Roland J. Yardley • Harry J. Thie • John F. Schank • Jolene Galegher • Jessie L. Riposo Prepared for the United States Navy Approved for public release; distribution unlimited R NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Navy. The research was conducted in RAND’s National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center supported by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the unified commands, and the defense agencies under Contract DASW01-01-C-0004. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Use of simulation for training in the U.S. Navy surface force / Roland J. Yardley ... [et al.]. p. cm. “MR-1770.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-8330-3481-2 (pbk. : alk paper) 1. Naval education—United States—Simulation methods. 2. Sailors—Training of—United States. I. Yardley, Roland J. VA11.U84 2003 359.5'078—dc22 2003022269 Cover photograph: United States Navy photo by Photographer's Mate 1st Class Michael W. Pendergrass (www.news.navy.mil) RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND® is a registered trademark. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. Cover design by Stephen Bloodsworth © Copyright 2003 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. Published 2003 by RAND 1700 Main Street, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program: Background and Issues for Congress Ronald O'Rourke Specialist in Naval Affairs Updated February 6, 2019 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL33745 Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Program Summary The Aegis ballistic missile defense (BMD) program, which is carried out by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and the Navy, gives Navy Aegis cruisers and destroyers a capability for conducting BMD operations. The Department of Defense’s January 2019 missile defense review report states that the number of operational BMD-capable Aegis ships was 38 at the end of FY2018 and is planned to increase to 60 by the end of FY2023. The Aegis BMD program is funded mostly through MDA’s budget. The Navy’s budget provides additional funding for BMD-related efforts. MDA’s proposed FY2019 budget requests a total of $1,711.8 million in procurement and research and development funding for Aegis BMD efforts, including funding for two Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania that are to be part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA). MDA’s budget also includes operations and maintenance (O&M) and military construction (MilCon) funding for the Aegis BMD program. Under the EPAA for European BMD operations, BMD-capable Aegis ships are operating in European waters to defend Europe from potential ballistic missile attacks from countries such as Iran. BMD-capable Aegis ships also operate in the Western Pacific and the Persian Gulf to provide regional defense against potential ballistic missile attacks from countries such as North Korea and Iran.
    [Show full text]