The U.S. Navy has a combat readiness problem. This deficiency is not in the conventional warfare areas. The Navy is still the best-trained maritime force on the planet. The readiness crisis, rather, is in the unconventional weapons of mass destruction (WMD) domain. WMD include chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons. This article does not focus on nuclear training and readiness; however, CBRN is used in reference to specific training courses and programs, as there is variation among the services on training course titles and CBRN defense. The Navy primarily uses CBR or CBR-Defense (CBR-D) for training.
The Navy is far behind the other armed services in CBR defense training and readiness for two reasons: absence of formal training requirements and a failure to prioritize and enforce policy that should provide the resources needed. This has been true for many years, during which the possibility of WMD use was acknowledged as a low-probability event. As a result of this assessment, the Navy has accepted risk in CBR readiness in favor of prioritizing limited resources for more likely threats.
One would have expected an increase in priority and demand following the 9/11 and 2001 anthrax attacks, because of greatly increased concerns over terrorist pursuit of WMD. However, the Navy placed no such emphasis. The CBR readiness gap only matters if there is an increased CBR threat—and today there is. WMD are still a real threat, perhaps more so than at any time since the Cold War.
In today’s security environment, the United States is at greater risk of conflict with adversaries that either are known to possess WMD or are suspected of maintaining WMD programs. The U.S intelligence community, Department of Defense (DoD), and State Department believe several adversaries have chemical and biological weapons in violation of international arms control treaties. The 2022 National Defense Strategy, 2022 National Biodefense Strategy and Implementation Plan, 2023 Biodefense Posture Review, and 2023 DoD Strategy for Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction all stress an increased risk of military forces facing CBRN weapons—and the importance of preparing and protecting the force. Yet the Navy is ill-equipped to do so, with most sailors having little or no CBR defense training or equipment while on shore duty or during the Fleet Response Training Plan cycle during sea-duty assignments. The other services have standing training requirements, dedicated schools, and career CBR defense specialists.
CBR Training Availability
Navy sailors get some basic CBR defense training as new recruits. Those assigned to ships also get some in shipboard firefighter training. In addition, sailors deploying overseas receive some CBR defense academics and personal protective equipment familiarization when their gear is issued. Sailors on overseas tours may even get more CBR defense training based on their location. Navy expeditionary sailors receive various levels of CBR defense training depending on their ratings and missions.
There are Navy-specific CBR defense courses for surface and expeditionary sailors in three locations. Surface Warfare Schools Command has the Shipboard CBR-D Operations and Training Specialist Course at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri; and Naval Construction Force has five CBR defense courses at the Center for Seabees and Facilities Engineering in Gulfport, Mississippi, and at a detachment learning site in Port Hueneme, California. Three Marine Corps courses are colocated with the Army CBRN school at Fort Leonard Wood, and multiple courses, including the Chemical Biological Operations Incident Response Force Basic Operations Course, are offered at Naval Support Facility Indian Head, Maryland. Finally, the Marine Corps’ comprehensive week-long CBRNE Responder course (“E” for high-yield explosives) includes multiple classroom and practical events covering CBRNE awareness, operations, and management and CBR detection and decontamination (I attended the latter while stationed at Marine Corps Base Hawaii). This is a good start to CBRN defense, but the minimum training required across the fleet leaves most sailors vulnerable and unprepared for a WMD scenario. The Navy must do more.
First, the Navy has no program to build subject-matter experts in CBR defense. While Navy CBR defense courses are open to all fleet sailors, because of competing demands and undermanning, commands generally send sailors only when required by directive or instruction. Notable exceptions are the naval construction force and explosive ordnance disposal specialists, both expeditionary ratings. The Navy must make several changes to policy and doctrine, but it does not need to establish new training courses. The training and facilities already exist within the surface and expeditionary training commands and at Fort Leonard Wood.
Second, there is no Navy rating for CBR or WMD defense. Worse, there is no service requirement for periodic CBR defense refresher training for all sailors, and no training requirement for commanding, security, or antiterrorism officers (ATOs)—despite their having responsibility for CBR consequence management in unit antiterrorism plans.
This means that most of the U.S. homeland-based Navy, including leaders and security personnel, have no current CBR defense training, knowledge, or equipment to survive, respond to, or operate in a contaminated environment. Most commanding officers have no CBR defense specialist to advise them, and ATOs receive no formal school or training to properly address CBR threats in their antiterrorism plans. A WMD attack against a U.S. naval installation would result in catastrophic casualties because few of those who work there have any recent CBR defense training or equipment.
Establish New Requirements
The Navy needs new policy and requirements to ensure all sailors receive basic CBR defense training and periodic refresher training, after recruit training. In 2017, the Air Force changed the periodicity of its CBR defense training requirement from every 36 months to every 18 months for all airmen. The Navy needs a similar approach for all sailors. The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) must establish new training requirements to protect sailors and enforce provisions in CNO Instruction 3400.10H: Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense Requirements Supporting Operational Readiness, last updated in 2017, to ensure proper resourcing across all warfare domains. Fleet commanders must then articulate and enforce these requirements.
The Navy can model CBR defense training after the antiterrorism training continuum, establishing four levels: Level I for all sailors, Level II for first responders, Level III for security and force-protection officers/ATOs, and Level IV for commanding and executive officers. This could be implemented rapidly by maximizing sailor throughput at current Navy and joint CBR defense courses.
Level III–trained security and force-protection officers/ATOs could deliver Level I training locally, which would not incur travel or training costs to the command. Some sailors could have appropriate CBR defense training added to their permanent-change-of-station orders as an intermediate stop enroute to their next duty station.
One intermediate step for developing Navy CBR subject-matter experts would be establishing an officer subspecialty code with a defined training path using the available joint courses. Another possibility would be sending senior enlisted leaders to one of the advanced specialist courses at the Army or Navy schools. A longer-term solution would be to establish a CBR defense warfare tactics instructor (WTI) program that emulates the proven aviation, surface, and expeditionary WTI models. Of note, the Navy is developing a force-protection WTI curriculum for senior-level experts.
DoD can set the policy and provide the resources for the services to prepare to defend against CBRN threats, but more Navy investment in training and equipment is required to enhance readiness.
