Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans

How big should the United States Navy be, how should its ships be paid for, and what happens when an ambitious fleet plan collides with a hard budget ceiling? Few questions have shaped American defense policy more persistently, and few documents answer them with the discipline of this one. This Nimble Books edition reproduces Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress (CRS report RL32665), the April 1, 2013 installment prepared by Ronald O’Rourke, the Congressional Research Service’s longtime Specialist in Naval Affairs, for the Members and committees of the 113th Congress.CRS reports are nonpartisan analyses written to inform legislative deliberation: they take no position and recommend no outcome, instead laying out the facts, the competing arguments, and the oversight questions a lawmaker should ask. This particular title is one of the most enduring in the CRS catalog, continuously revised across many years to track the recurring debate over fleet size and shipbuilding funding. The 2013 edition captures a uniquely dramatic budget season. The Navy’s proposed FY2013 plan cut its five-year shipbuilding program to just 41 ships, roughly a quarter fewer than the prior year, while carrying a newly fixed long-range goal of a 306-ship battle force. Written in the immediate aftermath of the March 1, 2013 sequester and amid the uncertainty of a six-month continuing resolution, it documents Navy testimony warning that sustained Budget Control Act caps could shrink the fleet toward 230 ships and cost at least two carrier strike groups.O’Rourke’s method is comparative and quantitative. The report moves from the Navy’s force-structure goal through its five-year and thirty-year (FY2013 to FY2042) shipbuilding plans, into projected force levels that show shortfalls in cruisers and destroyers, attack submarines, and amphibious ships. Its affordability core juxtaposes the Navy’s cost estimate against the Congressional Budget Office’s higher figure of about $20 billion per year, and it dissects the dreaded mid-period funding 'hump' driven by the Ohio-replacement ballistic-missile submarine program. A signature comparative table sets the 306-ship goal beside a decade of earlier plans, from the 313-ship plans of 2006 and 2011 back to the 375-ship vision of the early 2000s, revealing how categories rose and fell. Reprinted appendices preserve testimony from senior officials on the concrete effects of sequestration, down to specific hulls and shipyards.This edition pairs a faithful reproduction with a full editorial apparatus prepared specifically for it: a Historical Context essay reconstructing the FY2013 budget crisis and the report’s place in the long shipbuilding debate; two complementary plain-language abstracts, an accessible explanation for newcomers and an advanced analytical summary for specialists; a Glossary decoding the dense vocabulary of force planning; and Indexes of persons, places, and concepts that turn a reference document into a navigable resource. An original computational RKHS knowledge-graph analysis situates the report among related works on naval strategy and defense budgeting, mapping the conceptual terrain it occupies.The result is both a primary source on the early-2010s defense-budget crisis and a durable primer on the recurring programs, tradeoffs, and language of American naval force planning. Defense scholars, congressional staff, students of acquisition policy, librarians building reference collections, and any reader seeking to understand how the United States decides the size of its fleet will find here a model of analytic tradecraft, every figure tied to a budget submission, a CBO study, or named testimony, and every contested choice framed as argument rather than verdict.