strategic dispersal concept, he was pushing hard for navy ships in alaska. but your comment about learning how to operate in the persian gulf, that brought back a strong memory to me about when we were secretary of the navy and we just started operating in there full time. and i remember visiting the uss stanley in the persian gulf. first thing that i did when i came to a ship, was always to go down to engineering spaces and ask them the last time the commanding officer visited the engineering spaces. the railings were so hot that you could not hold on to them.

so we have come a long way since then. i remained at the end of this hearing because i was quite surprised, to hear the response with respect to the questions from chairman levin and senator mccain regarding the independent study for the layout from okinawa and guam that we had mandated, and perhaps this is just a miscoordination, because it's not under the jurisdiction of the department of the navy, but i hope what you said is not right. we have mandated by law that there be an independent study and that they would report to the secretary of defense 90 days after the signing of the national defense authorization

bill which was december 31st, which means it the study was supposed to be contracted and give its first report in two weeks and the secretary of defense has up to 90 days after that to report to us. this is not a small thing as you know, and we are not in any way up here attempting to kill this program. we are trying to unstick it. the administration, plural, administrations have been working on this program for 15 years now. a little more than 15 years. i had dozens of japanese delegations visit any office this year and i have another one coming in this afternoon, and i have been saying to them over the last three months that there's an independent review that will take place in tandem with the reviews that are going

on. i'm visiting japan right after the first of april. and i had aassumed that there would be some sort of preliminary report in from the study and then we are hearing that apparently there hasn't been a contract led and i hope to clarify this. and admiral, maybe you can clarify this for me. the navy has halted potentially about $3 billion worth of construction projects on guam as we attempt to sort it all out. is that correct? >> i don't know that that number is correct in halting it. i will have to go back and do the research on. that there are some on hold but the specifics and what they are based on,vy to check it out. >> we are in a freeze, and it is being misunderstood on guam, the situation on okinawa is one of

the, probably the top two most volatile domestic political issues in japan. we need to get it going, we know there are continuing talks, we follow them every day in my office. this is a part of it and it's designed to get an independent set of eyeballs on it. >> there are harbor projects, that are proceeding. >> i know that, i came from guam ago and did everything that i could to get the white house to put money into that from the tiger funds. we follow it closely. but at the same time, you and i have had talks about this, one of the big questions on guam was exactly what the marine corp lay down would look like. i had my own questions about this when i first revisited guam

a couple of years ago, because they were doing a lay down that included depend ant personnel, and dha wthat was driving up tr customer and the numbers, from 8,000 to 20,000 people. i cannot stress how important it is that the law be obeyed here and second of all, we reach an end point on this for if good of our strategic posture in that part of the world and the relations with the people of japan and guam. no further response required but i wanted to restress what chairman mccain and sprnt levin were saying. >> thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman, thank you both for being here this morning.

hopefully i'm the last person that you have to hear from. i figure on thiscommtee, we save the best for last p i want to begin where some of my colleagues left off and particularly on the issue of energy. and i want to thank you very specifically secretary mabis, for coming to testify on monday, the water and power sub committee of the energy committee in the senate which i chair, held a field hearing down in norfolk on the usskersarge, i want to commend them for find ago name to hold the ship for us to hold the hearing on. it was a nice benefit to the hearing. but it's an excellent hearing and i wish everyone on this economy could have gone to , to see that moving towards

alternatives and energy efficiency is making for the efficiency and the capacity of our fighting and women out in the field to do their jobs. secretaries, mabis, you made the point that national security in today's day and age is about energy security and if we do not have to be defending the straits of hormuz and deploying we inin women around the world to defend foreign oil, we are in a better position to defend the country. i was impressed at some of the statistics that you mention in your testimony and that we heard at the hearing. the federal government is the biggest energy user within america. the department of defense is the biggest energy user within the federal government. 93% of all energy used is used by the department of defense and as you rightly point out, most

of that is fuel to power our vehicles. i know that there was an exchange earlier around the cost of bio fuels. i wonder if you can speak to the memorandum of understanding that you have with the department of agriculture and the department of energy to try and move forward to develop a biofuel that is drop in, and will allow us to be more efficient and reduce our foreign dependance on oil. >> the memorandum of understanding that the navy and others signed and the president signed was in response to the direction of the commander in chief to come up with a commercially viable, competitively priced biofuel

product for the country. navy's contribution to that would come from the defense production act. which, as i pointed out a bit earlier, explicitly mentions energy as one of the things that the defense production act can be used for. i think it's important that the requirements, drop in fuel, that we are not going to change our, the engines on our ship or aircraft. we have to have a fuel that will operate on the feet we have today on the aircraft that we have today. and secondly that it ab geographically dispersed and third, it helped the industry reach commercial availability. we have seen the cost of biofuels come down dramatically. we bought biofuels to test and

certify our aircraft on, including the green hornet and the blue angeles have felony on biofu biofuels. we made, the largest purchase, we believe, in this country, this summer. if cost has been cut in half approximate in the last two years just in those test amounts. and we are convinced that as the military brings a market here that the cost of biofuels will be competitive with existing fossil fuels. and finally, one of the things that we got to talk about at the hearing, is that this really is one of the core competencies of the united states navy.

we move from sale to coal and from coal to fuel and we powered every time in the -- every time there were concerns about was the navy trading one form of very certain energy for another that was uncertain and more costly? every time, the change has proven to be correct and so, i appreciate your help that the opportunity to testify on the ship which represents the both the navy and marine corp in their efforts but also the opportunity to talk about how we are planning to use these biofuels and the way that we believe the costs will come down.

>> thank you, and general amus, we also saw some very impressive demonstration of some of the equipment that the marines are using out in the field in afghanistan, and i asked one of your colonels what was the reaction out in the field when they had exposured to the products and he said well, the first reaction was not so positive. but once they realized it could help them complete their mission easier and more effectively, they are sold. so, i wonder ifyo >> senator, i'll be happy to. marines are slow to change, 236 years of history unhinderd by change and progress, but once we do, we get on it with recommekl

abandon. i remember, when the f-3 crossed the border into iraq. one of the things we worried about and struggled with is batteries. honest to goodness, we would be sitting at the table and talking about batteries. by the way, you could not get them and then the other thing, you had to carry them. the other thing i will it will you is it went from being 120 degrees outside and now with a bit of some of the energy initiatives you can walk inside these things and it may be 87 degrees, but it might as well -- you may be at the north pole,

that is what these kids feel like. they have gotten into it and we are just on the cusp of it. >> thank you very much, i want though, as a final comment, you'll not be surprised to hear that i'm also concerned about our four public ship yards and the fact that this year's military construction budget does not, again, contain much needed dollars for the ports naval ship yard and we have requests for modernization report that senator collins, ayott and i included in the bill last year and it's due back by september first. i hope that will be on time and we will see what your commitment is to supporting our public ship yards. >> it will be on time.

>> thank you. >> thank you senator shaheen. any of my colleagues have additional questions. senator bloom enthall? >> i will and one question to follow on, the question about the submarine force and the possibility of going back to the two sub as year program in -- i believe that going bag to that program ulonrun. and i would just like, if you would, admiral green to comment on the possibility of alternative plans and the possibilities for frntransition to that kind of 2014, two-sub option.

>> right now, the submarines in 18, we are requesting a block buy starting in '14, '14 through '18. we request a multiple procurement authority, that gives us the opportunity to make an economic quantity buy, you can buy the turbines and shafts at a better price, the vendors are more efficient and the bourque load and learning curve is nor -- work load and learning curve is more efficient. what we are looking for is having an opportunity to use fiscal processes to if necessary, fund it, such that the savings we know that we will a crew in the later years, that those savings can be rolled forward, if you will and applied to a second submarine in '14.

so we would like to pursue that and appreciate your willingness to help us with that. >> i'm eager to help you and thank you forthat excellent answer. >> let me just close by commenting furthering on the energy issue which i made a statement in my opening statement. by the way, the army was here,s that posture hearing, with batteries, pointing out how much lighter they are that they will use with the troops and what difference that makes in terms of weight and security for our people as well as energy independence for the nation. so you'll find a lot of support for the energy initiatives that you took on the committee. there may be questions and opposition from some. but basically, i belief most of us will support at least i hope

most of us will support the initiatives that you have taken and the armiy is taking as well. we have seen it before, we have kind of gone through the whole business before, when tried to do, take some action on energy initiatives and energy alternatives, what we saw is the argument made, heck, they cost more in the short run. of course they do. that is why we cannot just rely on the private sector to produce them, because the private sectors that a different goal than our government and military does. their goal is profit and our goal is the nation's security and those are not always the same, short-term profit is not always the same as planning for a nation's security. so what you have done here is taken some initiatives which are the right way do go, they fill in a vacuum that exists in the private sector and fill a vital

need, we cannot rely on the initiatives because there's a short-term loss, they are not as competitive in the short-term, that is i couldn't have to have these test samples run and a number of other short-term production activities. so, we just want to add my voice at the end of the hearing as i did in the beginning of the hearing in support for these, i believe, creative initiatives our h are directly aimed at country. andf furthers questions we will adjourn again with thanks to all of you and good wishes for your continuing strong recovery, general.

>> we are live at georgetown university where experts will discuss the role of religious groups in the arab world. we will hear how more democratic governments are coming to power in that part of the world and how they are handling religious groups, this is live on c-span 3. >> and lessons from the arab spring. the goal of our religious freedom project is to frame and

conduct a lively fruitful, and on going conversation with the meaning and value of religious freed freedom, both in the united states and around the world. our premise is that this subject is of vital importance to all of us and it has not received the sustained attention that it merits from scholars and the media, and policy makers here or abro abroad. the blue insert will tell you how we approach the subject and it will give you information about our team, it will tell you what we have been up to and some of the exciting events that we have in the months to come. for the viewers, you can go to our web page, at berkly

center.georgetown.edu or google the religious freedom project at georgetown. i'll mention a book that is just out, by our associate director, tim shaw, the book is entitled, "religious freedom, why now," if you would like a copy of the book, we have copies here, or if you write to us, we will provide you a copy. two weeks ago, we had a terrific conversation about the book and had a key note address by professor robert george of princeton university. that dress is up at our website as well as a fascinating discussion held that evening at a private dinner between professor george and usef, i highly recommend both videos to you. tim's book explores the entire range of issues in religious freedom, thee lolg cal,

philosophical, and moral. perhaps more relevant is it examines in detail how it may help counter violent religious extremism and ordered liberty in places like egypt and the other arab spring countries that are struggling, if you will to put to mantel of democracy and to keep it on. the book provides some recommendations to policy makers. so, i hope you'll take a look at it. it represents the kind of work being done by our scholares and the kind of scrutiny that we intend to bring to bare upon this important subject. before i introduce the subject of today's conference, let me mention that next thursday morning here at george town, we will be holding another public

kfrgd -- auto contraception and services and the religious freedom discussion in the united states. we will have melissa rodgers and ellen alvira, and marty lederman, and michael mcconnell here. we invite you to come and you can sign up for the event on our web page. today, we are going to address a timely and important topic, religious freedom and religious extremism, lessons from the arab spring, we will hear from some of the nation's top pexperts on the topic. as always, we want you to be encouraged to be involved in the conversation. both today and in the future. let us hear from you. the over arching question is

what role if any ought religious freedom to play in the struggle for self governance. can it play a role in rooting demauk r demauk rassy in these -- democracy. -- open to the use of violence. can religious freedom in fact limit religious extremists, how should american policy seek to best counter religious extremism in practice. our first panel will discuss a growing body of work, some of it produced, of much of it producen

their own about how the forms of religious political engagement, and second the conditions under which greater religious freedom might undermine religious extremism and practice. after this first panel, we will break for about half an hour around noon for lunch here, and we invite you to stay, at 12:30, we will have what we are calling a key note conversation, among three of the leading u.s. middle east policy makers from the obama and bush administrations, dennis ross, steve hadly and elliot abrams. it will be moderated by our own scholar. in the afternoon, i'll moderate our second and final panel when will explore the impliyations

and how it effects the other nations of the arab spring, let us begin, i want to produce monica duffy tuft who will moderate the first panel. she is an associate professor in the kennedy school of law. professor toft is the coauthor with tim shaw and danielphilpot of the boom "god's century." she is also with professor's shaw and philpot, a member of our scholars team. >> this morning we have been tasked with investigating the space of religious extremism. and the degree to the which the

exclusion or inclusion of religious actors and political parties in the political process provokes violence. so i'm joined by three panelists and we will move from the more general, and she is an author of -- price of freedom denied, religious conflict in the 21st century and a head of a doctoral committee. he has written suicide bombers in iraq, and the third, kwh i think will be the focus of many of his comments today is why muslims rebell. johana will talk to us about politics and the degree of the

exclusion or inclusion can be attempted. we will talk about governments and the way they restrict religious actors within states or allow them to act openly and freely within different societies and the connection of that to violence. is he clear in most of his work, that correlation and not mean causation, but it seems to be have a relationship and his book showed that in the most recent data, and mohamed will be sort of on the outside, he is sort of challenging some of the data, there does appear to be support for both ideas, that the more free given societies are in allowing people to express their religion publically, politically, the