- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015

[Senate Hearing 113-762]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015

----------

WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2014

U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9:59 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard J. Durbin (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Durbin, Cochran, Shelby, Collins, and
Murkowski.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Research and Innovation

STATEMENT OF ALAN SHAFFER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF

DEFENSE FOR RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING

opening statement of senator richard j. durbin

Senator Durbin. Good morning. Today the subcommittee meets
to receive testimony on the fiscal year 2015 budget request for
science and technology (S&T) funding for the Department of
Defense (DOD), the military services, and defense medical
research programs.
I want to welcome our witnesses: Mr. Alan Shaffer, Acting
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Development, Research and
Engineering for the Department of Defense; Dr. Arati Prabhakar,
Director of DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency);
Dr. Terry Rauch, Director of Defense Medical Research and
Development Program with the Office of Force Health Protection
and Readiness Programs; Ms. Mary Miller, Deputy Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Research and Technology; Dr. David
Walker, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for
Science, Technology, and Engineering; and Rear Admiral Matthew
Klunder, Chief of Naval Research.
This year's budget request for science and technology
funding among the Department and the services is $11.5 billion
out of a total research and development (R&D) request of $63.5
billion. In fiscal year 2015, the overall R&D budget increases
$569 million. However, this growth is not reflected in science
and technology research. Basic research is down by $150 million
across the Department and the services, overall science and
technology reduced by almost $500 million. I hope our witnesses
can provide some insight into the choices that need to be made
with these numbers.
Science and technology investments have led to stunning
advancements on behalf of our military men and women and the
Nation. From DARPA's early investments that led to the Internet
to the Department's development of one of the most widely used
drugs to fight breast cancer, these investments are critical in
keeping the U.S. at the top when it comes to new ideas and new
innovation.
I am worried that the budget decisions we have made over
the past several years may be putting this leadership at risk.
Two weeks ago, the full Appropriations Committee held a
hearing examining Federal investments that drive innovation.
During that hearing, Dr. Collins from NIH (National Institutes
of Health) presented a slide that was extremely worrisome. I
have provided a copy to our members and our witnesses. It shows
the relative decline in U.S. Federal investment in biomedical
research and compares this with the research of our allies and
competitors who are significantly increasing their biomedical
investments.
To address this research deficit, I have introduced a bill.
It is called the America Cures Act. The bill will make stable
investments in biomedical research at a rate of inflation plus
5 percent. This funding would provide stability to NIH, CDC
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), the Department of
Defense, and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) so they
can plan and execute their research programs with certainty.
But it is not just our biomedical edge that is at risk.
Lagging investments in science and technology risk sacrificing
America's technological edge to our enemies. It also poses
significant challenges to sustaining America's talented pool of
engineers and Ph.D.'s in computing, materials science, and many
other fields.
Advances in these fields are not just for our national
security. They find their way into high-tech components in
almost every household in America. Right now, we are carrying
around in our pockets a GPS device. This was designed and
originally discovered with the launch of Sputnik, a satellite
in 1957. They tried to track that Russian satellite and the
beep that it was emitting they were able to determine how they
could position themselves on earth and identify that location
based on where the satellite was. Now we carry it around in our
pockets and do not think twice about it. That is the kind of
thing where what looks like pure defense research turns out to
be research of great value to us in many other areas. The
gyroscopes in our cell phones, lithium batteries--the list goes
on and on--originating in the Department of Defense.
Ignorance is no shelter or refuge. I think back to that
same era when Congress decided to create the National Defense
Education Act in 1958, the first time in the history of the
United States that we gave scholarships to anyone who was not a
veteran. And the reason was we were scared of the Soviet Union
and their satellites. Our first line of defense was to educate
America. Let us get ready to fight this battle with people who
are well educated and trained and can not only defend us but
make us a stronger Nation and a stronger economy.
Now look where we are today. We are backing off of our
commitment to research, science, and technology. What does that
say about our future? How do we explain that to our kids?
Extremely shortsighted. That is why we are having this hearing.
I look forward to your testimony and note your full
statements will be part of the record.

prepared statement

Before I turn to the vice chairman of the subcommittee,
Senator Thad Cochran, Senator Collins submitted a statement to
be included in the record.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Susan M. Collins
Thank you, Chairman Durbin, for holding this important hearing on
Defense Research and Innovation.
Research and innovation reflect the American spirit of ingenuity.
Our national labs, colleges and universities (including the University
of Maine), private sector entrepreneurs, small businesses, investors,
and countless others play a significant role in spurring innovation,
and we should support policies that encourage such inventiveness and
allow the United States to remain a leader in creating cutting edge
technologies. I would note that one area where we can do more to
encourage innovation is increasing investment in small businesses that
are developing technologies that contribute to the national defense and
reducing the barriers they face in contracting with the Federal
Government.
The Rapid Innovation Program, which transitions small business
technologies into Defense Acquisition Programs, is a great example of
how the Defense Department can assist small business innovation.
MARCOR, located in Boothbay, Maine, is just one of the more than 360
companies since 2011 that have received contracts worth nearly $900
million in research and development (R&D) investment.
Another program that makes it easier for small businesses to apply
their innovation to our national security is through the Procurement
Technical Assistance Program, which has six locations in Maine. This
program helps small businesses seeking to do business with the Federal
Government. The Procurement Technical Assistance Centers plays a
critical role in facilitating matches by connecting small businesses
with prime contractors and Federal agencies, and by helping them
through the contracting process from start to finish.
A strong partnership between the public and private sectors is
vital to getting the most out of our R&D dollars, and as such this
partnership is vital to our national security as well.
I look forward to your testimony today.

Senator Durbin. Senator Cochran.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR THAD COCHRAN

Senator Cochran. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join you in
welcoming our panel of witnesses at the hearing this morning.
We appreciate the work that you do in identifying areas of
emphasis where we want to be sure that we appropriate the
adequate sum of dollars that are needed to take advantage of
the emerging technology in our society as it relates to our
national defense and the security of American citizens. We
thank you for being here this morning to share your thoughts
and observations about these issues.
Thank you.
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Senator Cochran.
We are going to ask the witnesses to each give a brief
opening statement before questions, and of course, their
written statements will be made part of the record.
Mr. Shaffer, why do you not start?

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF ALAN SHAFFER

Mr. Shaffer. Chairman Durbin, Vice Chairman Cochran,
members of the committee, I am pleased to come before you today
to testify about the state of the Department of Defense science
and technology program. I am proud to be here representing the
roughly 100,000 scientists and engineers in the Department's
workforce, a workforce that has provided, as you said, Mr.
Senator, remarkable achievements in the past but one that is
now showing the early stages of stress due to downsizing and
the combined sequester, furlough, and Government shutdown
challenges of the last year. These affected the health of our
workforce and their programs they execute in ways we are just
beginning to understand. We have begun to address these
challenges, but they remain a concern to us.
As you said, sir, the 2015 S&T budget request is down about
5 percent to $11.5 billion compared to the fiscal year 2014 $12
billion request. While the DOD tries to balance our overall
program, there are factors that led Secretary Hagel to conclude
in his February 24 budget rollout that we are entering an era
where American dominance on the seas, in the skies, and in
space can no longer be taken for granted.
The Department is in the third year of a protracted overall
budget drawdown and, as highlighted by Secretary Hagel, there
are three major areas that compromise the Department's budget:
force size, readiness, and modernization.
The current budget is driving a force reduction, but this
reduction will take several years to yield savings. In the
fiscal year 2015 budget, readiness and/or modernization will
pay a larger percentage of the overall Department bill.
To address the challenges, we needed to examine the
strategy we are using to focus the S&T investment on high
priority areas. From that review emerged a strategy for
investment. The Department invests in science and technology
for one of three reasons.
The first is to mitigate new and emerging threat
capabilities, and we see a significant need in the areas of
electronic warfare, cyber, counter-weapons of mass destruction,
and preserving space capabilities.
The second reason we invest in science and technology is to
affordably enable new or extended capabilities in existing
military systems and our future systems. We see a significant
need in growing our Department's system engineering, modeling
and simulation and prototyping.
The third reason we invest in science and technology is to
develop technology surprise. We want to keep potential
adversaries on their heels. We see significant need in areas
such as autonomy, human systems, quantum sensing, and big data.
While there are challenges, the Department continues to
perform. I would like to highlight several areas.
First, advances in understanding and treating such things
as traumatic brain injury. In addition, to the DARPA BRAIN
(Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies)
Initiative, the Department has developed some successful
technologies in this area in both the medical research program
and in our Army's research program. The combination of DARPA's
small blast gauge to measure the blast over-pressures and
acceleration of the head, coupled with the Defense Health
Programs' advances in therapeutics and photonic medicine,
provides promise to allow us to treat TBI (traumatic brain
injury) more quickly and effectively. The photonics
advancements, I will tell you, show real potential. Growing out
of that program, researchers have discovered that intense light
outside the skull prevents brain tissue decay after a TBI-
inducing event. The treatment is in clinical trials.
The Air Force X-51 WaveRider hypersonic demonstration was
the second successful demonstration of powered scramjet
technology demonstrating that we are getting close to
developing a full hypersonic system. No one else in the world
has done this.
The Navy is making dramatic progress on high energy laser
systems and is deploying a 30-kilowatt electric laser on the
USS Ponce this summer. If successful, this will be the first
operational deployment of a directed energy system.

PREPARED STATEMENT

The Army is forging the next generation of military
helicopters with their joint multirole technology demonstrator,
a program currently in design phase with four vendors leading
to the next generation of military-relevant helicopters.
These successes highlight that in spite of a difficult year
and in spite of difficult budget pressures, the DOD S&T program
continues to produce capability for our future force. With your
continued support, I am confident we will continue to do so in
the future.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alan R. Shaffer
Chairman Durbin, Vice Chairman Cochran, members of the committee: I
am pleased to come before you today to testify about the state of the
Department of Defense's science and technology (S&T) program. I am
proud to be here representing the roughly 100,000 scientists and
engineers in the science and engineering (S&E) workforce, a workforce
that has had remarkable achievements in the past, but is now a
workforce showing the early stages of stress due to downsizing and the
budget challenges of the last year. This past year has been unlike
previous years in our community; the collective impact of the
sequester-forced civilian furlough and program curtailment, the October
2013 Government shutdown, and the indirect impacts of the sequester,
such as restrictions on our young scientists and engineers attending
technical conferences, has impacted the health of our workforce and the
programs they execute in ways that we are just beginning to understand.
We have begun to address these challenges but they remain a concern for
us.
introduction
The fiscal year 2015 budget request for science and technology
(S&T) \1\ is relatively stable, when compared to the overall DOD top
line \2\ and modernization accounts. The DOD fiscal year 2015 S&T
request is $11.51 billion, compared to an fiscal year 2014
appropriation of $12.01 billion. This request represents a 4.1 percent
decrease (5.8 percent in real buying power) in the Department's S&T
compared to Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) account
that was virtually unchanged. While we continue to execute a balanced
program overall, there are factors that led Secretary Hagel to conclude
in his February 24, 2014 fiscal year 2015 budget rollout that ``we are
entering an era where American dominance on the seas, in the skies, and
in space can no longer be taken for granted''.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Science and Technology is defined as program 6, budget
activities 1, 2, and 3; frequently called 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 (basic
research, applied research, and advanced technology development);
Research and Engineering adds Advanced Capability Development and
Prototyping (6.4).
\2\ Top line refers to the total funds appropriated by Congress to
include ``supplemental'' or Oversees Contingency Operations funds.
\3\ Remarks by Secretary Hagel on the fiscal year 2015 budget
preview in the Pentagon Briefing Room on 24 February 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simultaneous with the challenges of balancing a reduced budget and
continuing to engage the total defense workforce in meaningful research
and engineering (R&E), the capability challenges to our R&E program are
also increasing. This is attributable to changes in the global S&T
landscape and the acceleration globally of development of advanced
military capabilities that could impact the superiority of U.S.
systems. The convergence of declining budgets, in real terms, and
increased risk is not a comfortable place to be. However, as I will
highlight in the latter sections of my statement, the Department has
begun to reshape the focus of our technical programs to address some of
our new challenges. We are also beginning to shift our programs to
better position the Department to meet our national security
challenges. Finally, we have some areas where we need your help in
order to be successful executing our fiscal year 2015 budget. I will
cover these areas at the end of my statement.
fiscal year 2015 president's budget request
The current fiscal environment presents significant challenges to
the DOD budget. The Department is in the third year of a protracted
overall topline and RDT&E budget drawdown. As highlighted by Secretary
Hagel, there are three major areas that comprise the Department's
budget: force size, readiness, and modernization. The current budget is
driving a force reduction, but this reduction will take several years
to yield significant savings. In the fiscal year 2015 budget, readiness
and/or modernization will pay a larger percentage of the ``bill''. As a
former airman who entered service in the 1970s, I am very well aware of
what happens when savings are gleaned from readiness--the hollow force
is not acceptable. Over the next several years of the budget we expect
modernization accounts (Procurement and RDT&E) to pay a large portion
of the Department's fiscal reduction bill. At the same time, Secretary
Hagel's strategy is to protect advanced technologies and capabilities.
The fiscal year 2015 budget must balance all of these drivers; we
believe we have done well, but do acknowledge there is increased risk.
The last several budgets have been characterized by instability and
rapid decline of the modernization accounts. The fiscal year 2013
sequestration reduced all accounts by 8.7 percent; for S&T, this
amounted to a loss of about $1 billion. The December 2013 Bipartisan
Budget Act increased the discretionary caps in fiscal year 2014 and
fiscal year 2015 to provide some relief, but less in fiscal year 2015
than fiscal year 2014. From fiscal year 2013 to 2015, the S&T program
operated with reductions of $1.4 billion compared to what had been
planned in the fiscal year 2013 budget.
One of the key points for S&T of the fiscal year 2015 budget is a
shift in focus at the macro scale from basic research to advanced
technology development and a shift from the Services to DARPA to
develop advanced capabilities. In fiscal year 2015, we funded DARPA at
the same level, after inflation, as was planned in fiscal year 2014
PBR. These numbers are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

Advanced Component Development and Prototypes (BA 4)......... 11,635 12,334 (12,116) 4.14%
--------------------------------------------------
DOD R&E (BAs 1-4)...................................... 23,644 23,849 (23,427) -0.92%

DOD Topline.................................................. 496,000 495,604 (486,841) -1.85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1--Defense Budget for Science &Technology; Research & Engineering; and DOD Top Line Budget (FY 2014
Appropriated and PBR 2015).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% Real change
FY 2014 PBR 2015 (FY 14 from FY 2014
appropriated CY $M) appropriated
($M) (FY 14 CY $)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army......................................................... 2,455 2,205 (2,166) -11.77%
Navy......................................................... 2,102 1,992 (1,957) -6.91%
Air Force.................................................... 2,308 2,129 (2,091) -9.39%
DARPA........................................................ 2,707 2,843 (2,793) 3.17%
Missile Defense Agency (MDA)................................. 255 176 (173) -32.20%
Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)....................... 476 473 (465) -2.39%
Chem Bio Defense Program (CBDP).............................. 393 407 (400) 1.73%
Other Defense Agencies....................................... 1,313 1,290 (1,267) -3.49%
--------------------------------------------------
DOD S&T................................................ 12,009 11,515 (11,311) -5.81%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Service and Agencies S&T Budgets (FY 2014 Appropriated and PBR 2015)

Research and Development is Not a Variable Cost
Over the past decade, the R&D accounts have been quite variable,
but this counters one of the key tenets of R&D investment made by the
Honorable Frank Kendall in discussing the fiscal year 2015 budget.
There has been a tendency in the past to reduce research and
development more or less proportionately to other budget reductions.
This tendency, if acted upon, can be detrimental because research and
development costs are not directly related to the size of our force or
the size of the inventory we intend to support. The cost of developing
a new weapons system is the same no matter how many units are produced.
In a recent speech, Secretary Kendall explained the invariant nature of
research and development this way:

R&D is not a variable cost. R&D drives our rate of modernization.
It has nothing to do with the size of the force structure. So,
when you cut R&D, you are cutting your ability to modernize on
a certain time scale, period--no matter how big your force
structure is.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Honorable Frank Kendall presentation to McAleese/Credit Suisse
fiscal year 2015 Defense Programs Conference on 25 February 2014.

If we don't do the research and development for a new system than the
number of systems of that type we will have is zero. It is not
variable.
Secretary Kendall said it this way:

[T]he investments we're making now in technology are going to
give us the forces that we're going to have in the future. The
forces we have now came out of investments that were made, to
some extent, in the 80s and 90s . . . if you give up the time
it takes for lead time to get . . . a capability, you are not
going to get that back.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Kendall, 25 February 2014.

There is another trend impacting the Department's ability to
deliver advanced capabilities. Recent data from the Nation Science
Foundation shows an upward trend in industry R&D spending compared to a
downward trend in Federal Government R&D spending (Figure 1). Industry
in the United States performs roughly 70 percent of the Nation's R&D
with the Federal Government and academia making up the remaining 30
percent. Figure 1 also shows the dependence of academic researchers on
Federal Government funding, as noted by the National Science Board:
Most of U.S. basic research is conducted at universities and
colleges and funded by the Federal Government. However, the largest
share of U.S. total R&D is development, which is largely performed by
the business sector. The business sector also performs the majority of
applied research.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ National Science Board. 2014. Science and Engineering
Indicators 2014. Arlington VA: National Science Foundation (NSB 14-01).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This implies that DOD needs to be more cognizant of industry R&D as
part of our overall capability development and remain sensitive to the
importance of federally funded academic research. We continue to push
in these areas through our continued support of the university research
portfolio and our recent emphasis on Independent Research and
Development (IR&D).

Figure 1--Changes in US GDP and R&D by Performer \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Science magazine. 13 January 2014. Retrieved from http://
news.sciencemag.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
science and engineering workforce
The Department's scientist and engineering (S&E) workforce consists
of in-house labs, engineering centers, test ranges, acquisition program
offices and so forth, and is augmented by our partners in the federally
funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) and University
Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs). The talented scientists and
engineers working within these organizations form the foundation of the
Department's technology base and are responsible for conceiving and
executing programs from basic research through demilitarization of
weapon systems. The technical health of this workforce is a priority
for me and the Department.
Our in-house labs have been designated by Congress as Science &
Technology Reinvention Laboratories (STRL) providing the directors of
these facilities special authorities to manage their workforce via pay-
for-performance personnel systems. Each director is granted flexibility
to create workforce policies unique to his/her lab with new personnel
initiatives being transferable to other STRLs if proven to be effective
in the hiring, retention and training of S&Es. Each year my office
works with the Services and their labs to ensure they have the
authorities our lab directors need. Recent accomplishments include
direct hiring authority for bachelors, masters and doctoral level
graduates, increase in the number of technical senior executive
billets, and authority for lab directors to manage their workforce
based upon available budgets.
Data from the Strategic Human Capital Workforce Plan published in
September 2013 indicates that our lab workforce is getting older. From
2011 to 2013, the average age of our scientists and engineers in our
labs has grown from 45.6 years to 45.7 years for scientists and from
43.2 years to 43.9 years for our engineers. Although the change seems
minimal over the past 2 years, it reverses the trend over the past
decade when we had been driving the average age down. Data from the
Science and Technology Functional Community indicate that the
combination of fewer new hires and retirement-eligible employees
working longer both contribute to the increase in average age. In 2013,
there were only 731 new hires in the S&T Functional Community, whereas
in 2010 there were 1,884. In 2010, retiring workers were retirement-
eligible for an average of only 4.1 years. From 2011-2013, that average
grew to 4.5 years. The trend indicates that we may not be replacing our
seasoned employees with enough young scientists and engineers who will
shape our future. This could be an indicator of older employees working
longer because of a down economy or it could be an indicator that we
are not hiring or retaining enough young scientists and engineers.
Although anecdotal, we are seeing a trend in why younger workers
may be leaving. We saw a number of young scientists and engineers leave
in 2013, early in their career. In conducting exit interviews, our
laboratory directors reported that these young workers consistently
cited travel and conference restrictions, as well as perceived
instability of a long term career as motivating factors for their
departure. This information, although anecdotal, is of concern;
consequently, we are attempting to gather data to see if we can discern
a definite signal.
Another area of significant Department and national interest is
building a robust science and engineering workforce through various
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) initiatives.
My office recently created the STEM Executive Board who has the
authority and continues to provide strategic leadership for the
Department's STEM initiatives.
Significant change to the Federal portfolio of STEM programs has
occurred over the past year. In response to the requirements of the
America Competes Reauthorization Act of 2010, Federal STEM-education
programs were reorganized with the goals of greater coherence,
efficiency, ease of evaluation, and focus on the highest priorities.
This resulted in the Federal STEM Education 5-Year Strategic Plan
designating the Smithsonian, Department of Education and National
Science Foundation as lead agencies in implementing this plan. The DOD
STEM Strategic plan is aligned with the Federal plan to achieve Federal
and Departmental STEM education goals.
We are also developing Department-wide guidance on STEM program
evaluation, coordinating within the Department and across the Federal
Government to improve effectiveness and efficiencies in these
investments in future workforce needs. A DOD STEM Annual Report,
expected to be delivered in fiscal year 2015 based on fiscal year 2014
data, will communicate the activities and results in achieving
Departmental goals.
In summary, budget constraints, furloughs, and conference and
travel restrictions have contributed to a drain on our most valuable
resource--people. To replace our losses and rebuild our workforce for
the future, we are working on bringing stability back to our S&E
programs, give our people challenging while enriching environments in
which to work.
challenges to maintaining technological superiority
The United States has relied on a DOD that has had technological
superiority for the better part of the post-World War II era. There are
factors that are converging such that the DOD maintaining technological
superiority is now being challenged. These challenges come from both
changes in the way technology matures and in advanced capabilities
being developed in the rest of the world. The Department is emerging
from over a decade of focusing on countering terrorism and insurgency.
While the challenges of counter terrorism remain, new national security
challenges are emerging. Other nations are developing advanced
capabilities in areas such as: cyber operations, advanced electronic
warfare, proliferation of ballistic missiles for strategic and tactical
intent, contested space, networked integrated air defenses, and a host
of other capabilities stressing the Department's capability advantages.
The Department's S&T program is being re-vectored to meet these new
challenges. In addition, the Department is shifting to a focus on the
Asia-Pacific region, a region with unique and challenging geographic
and cultural features. Most notably, the geographic extent of the Asia
Pacific region adds new challenges in terms of fuel efficiency and
logistics.
In short, the Department and Nation are at a strategic crossroads--
the funds available to the Department (and national security
infrastructure in general) are decreasing, while the complexity and
depth of the national security challenges are growing. The world we
live in is an uncertain place. Secretary Hagel said it best in his
recent roll out of the fiscal year 2015 budget:

The development and proliferation of more advanced military
technologies by other nations that means that we are entering
an era where American dominance on the seas, in the skies, and
in space can no longer be taken for granted.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Remarks by Secretary Hagel on the fiscal year 2015 budget
preview in the Pentagon Briefing Room on 24 February 2014.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secretary Hagel went on to say:

To fulfill this strategy DOD will continue to shift its
operational focus and forces to the Asia-Pacific, sustain
commitments to key allies and partners in the Middle East and
Europe, maintain engagement in other regions, and continue to
aggressively pursue global terrorist networks.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Hagel, 24 February 2014.

Global Changes in S&T Impact Technology Development.--The nature of
the international technology landscape is much different than it was
even 20 years ago in two fundamental ways:
--Many technologies of importance to the Department's capability
developments are driven by the commercial sector, and have
become a global commodity.
--The pace of maturation of technology is accelerating; that is,
technology maturation occurs on a more rapid scale than in the
past.
Our DOD S&T community needs to identify areas where technology has
become a global commodity and not expend resources working to develop
the same capability. We must track global technology developments,
harness them and apply the technology to our needs. This year, we have
initiated a project at the Defense Technical Information Center to
improve our ability understand global technology development, and are
in pilot phase to use automated tools to assess technology advances.
We already know that industry drives most microelectronics and
semiconductors development; older infrared focal planes, routine
communications, computers. The technology coming from these sectors is
sufficient to meet most DOD capability needs. The DOD should be an
adopter, not a leader in these areas while addressing the unique
security concerns of these technologies used in our military, cyber and
IT systems. The DOD should focus our research in technology integration
or in developing technologies into products at performance levels
beyond those commercially available or planned. Examples would include
electronic travelling wave tubes (led by Naval Research Lab), which
provide higher frequency and higher power output than is needed in
commercial applications; and infra-red (IR) ``super lattice''
semiconductors (led by the Army's Night Vision Laboratory), which give
high enough resolution in IR to make ``movies'' out of simple data and
images. The DOD should monitor and apply these technologies to meet our
needs.
At the same time, we know that the time to mature many technologies
is decreasing. We have seen the time from invention to market
penetration decrease by a factor of two over the past half century.
Consequently, I would like to cite comments made by Mr. Frank Kendall,
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics,
who states that one of the key factors to maintaining technological
superiority is to maintain a steady investment in technology.

The effects of time (lost) cannot be reversed. It is well
understood in the R&D community, and most particularly in the
S&T community, that the investments we make today may not
result in capability for a generation. It takes upwards of 5,
10, even 20 years to develop a new system, test it, and put it
into production. By taking higher risks and accepting
inefficiencies and higher costs we can reduce the ``time to
market'' of new weapon systems; in fact, we have reduced this
time . . . with reforms put in place in recent years.

Even during World War II we fought with the systems that had been
in development for years before the war began. We can shorten, but not
eliminate the time required to field new cutting edge weapons systems.
But one thing is for sure, if we do not make R&D investments today, we
will not have the capability in the future.
Capability Changes to DOD Technology Superiority.--More significant
than the changes in how technology is developed and delivered globally
are changes in military capabilities being developed by other nations.
I will cite just one example; there are many more. The convergence
of advanced digital signals and computer processing has given rise to
proliferation of a new class of system--the digital radio frequency
memory (DRFM) jammer. DRFM jammers are fairly inexpensive electronic
systems that ingest the radar (or communications) signal, analyze the
digital waveform, and then generate random signals, with the same
waveform, back to the transmitting radar receiver. The result is the
radar system sees a large number of ``electronic'' targets. If the U.S.
employed conventional weapons systems using the traditional methods, we
could shoot at or chase a lot of false targets. The consequence is that
the U.S. needs to develop a counter to DRFM jammers.
The convergence of computer processing, digital signal processing,
digital electronics, optical fibers, and precise timekeeping are giving
rise to inexpensive enablers that can improve the ability to counter
conventional weapons platforms. We are starting to see other nations
advance technologies to counter U.S. overmatch by combining the
components listed above to enhance capabilities in electronic warfare,
longer range air-to-air missiles, radars operating in non-conventional
bandwidths, counter-space capabilities, longer range and more accurate
ballistic and cruise missiles, improved undersea warfare capabilities,
as well as cyber and information operations. We see these types of new
capabilities emerging from many countries; to include China, Iran,
Russia and North Korea. This has led to a situation where, in the next
5 to 10 years, U.S. superiority in many warfare domains will be at
risk. Accordingly, the following section highlights some of the areas
where we are watching.
Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).--The 2013
National Security Interests published by the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff lists as the top priority interest ``Survival of the
Homeland''. The one existential threat to the United States comes from
Weapons of Mass Destruction. Traditionally, WMD has included nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons and their delivery systems. The
emergence of new countries with nuclear ambitions, such as North Korea
and Iran, make today's world much more dangerous. Chemical and
biological weapons, used in both World Wars, have been resurgent in the
past two decades. Perhaps the gravest danger for the United States and
the rest of the world is the possibility of WMD falling into the hands
of terrorist groups and other groups in the midst of instability. We
must continue our vigilance in this area and continue to develop ways
to deal with their use.
The United States is currently rebalancing to the Asia Pacific
region. As we do so, the Department is faced with a host of new
challenges. I will discuss some of the challenges over the next several
paragraphs.
Vulnerability of the U.S. Surface Fleet and Forward Bases in the
Western Pacific.--U.S. Navy ships and Western Pacific bases are
vulnerable to missile strikes from ballistic and cruise missiles
already in the inventory. China has prioritized land-based ballistic
and cruise missile programs to extend their strike warfare capabilities
further from its borders. Chinese military analysts have concluded that
logistics and power projection are potential vulnerabilities in modern
warfare, given the requirements for precision in coordinating
transportation, communications, and logistics networks. China is
fielding an array of conventionally armed ballistic missiles, ground-
and air-launched land-attack cruise missiles, special operations
forces, and cyber-warfare capabilities to hold targets at risk
throughout the region. The most mature theater missiles are the DF-21
C/D, which both have 1,500 km radius. They are also developing a longer
range missile that would be able to strike as far as Guam. These
ballistic missiles are coupled with advanced cruise missiles that could
threaten any surface warfare fleet by 2020.
The People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy has the largest force of
major combatants, submarines, and amphibious warfare ships in Asia.
China's naval forces include some 79 principal surface combatants,\10\
more than 55 submarines, 55 medium and large amphibious ships, and
roughly 85 missile-equipped small combatants. The first Chinese-built
carrier will likely be operational sometime in the second half of this
decade. In the next decade, China will likely construct the Type 095
guided-missile attack submarine (SSGN), which may enable a submarine-
based land-attack capability. In addition to likely incorporating
better quieting technologies, the Type 095 will likely fulfill
traditional anti-ship roles with the incorporation of torpedoes and
anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs). Since 2008, the PLA Navy has also
embarked on a robust surface combatant construction program of various
classes of ships, including guided missile destroyers (DDG) and guided
missile frigates in addition to more modern diesel powered attack
submarines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As of 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Air Dominance.--We see the same trend--development of systems
to push U.S. freedom of movement further from the Asia mainland. China
is developing an integrated air defense system that could challenge
U.S. air dominance and in some regions, air superiority is challenged
by 2020. The challenge to our air dominance comes primarily through the
aggregation of capabilities starting with an extensive integrated air
defense system (IADS), moving to development of advanced combat
aircraft, to enabling technologies, primarily electronic warfare
capabilities. China is demonstrating a systems approach through
advanced aircraft design of 5th generation fighters, advanced combat
systems, and advanced dense long range, networked air defense systems.
It should be noted that others (such as Iran, Syria, and North Korea)
are developing well integrated air defense systems. The PLA Air Force
is continuing a modernization effort to improve its capability to
conduct offensive and defensive off-shore operations such as strike,
air and missile defense, strategic mobility, and early warning and
reconnaissance missions. China continues its development of stealth
aircraft technology, with the appearance of a second stealth fighter
following on the heels of the maiden flight of the J-20 in January
2011, a 5th generation fighter scheduled to enter the operational
inventory in 2018.
Vulnerability of U.S. Satellites in Space.--China has been rapidly
expanding both the number, and quality of space capabilities; expanding
its space-based intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, navigation,
meteorological, and communications satellite constellations. In
parallel, China is developing a multi-dimensional program to rapidly
improve its capabilities to limit or prevent the use of space-based
assets by others during times of crisis or conflict.
China continues to develop the Long March 5 (LM-5) rocket, intended
to lift heavy payloads into space, doubling the size of the Low Earth
Orbit (LEO) and Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO) payloads China can place
into orbit. During 2012, China launched six Beidou navigation
satellites completing a regional network and the in-orbit validation
phase for the global network, expected to be completed by 2020. From
2012-2013 China launched 15 new remote sensing satellites, which can
perform both civil and military applications. China will likely
continue to increase its on-orbit constellation with the planned launch
of 100 satellites through 2015. These launches include imaging, remote
sensing, navigation, communication, and scientific satellites, as well
as manned spacecraft.
research and engineering strategy
To address the challenges of an accelerating, globalized research
and development environment coupled with pressurized DOD budgets and
the rapid growth of capabilities in other nations, we needed to examine
the strategy we are using to focus the DOD investment on high priority
areas.\11\ To develop the research and engineering strategy, we had to
go back to first principals. Why does the Department conduct research
and engineering? What does the Department expect the DOD R&E program to
deliver? After examination, we contend the Department conducts research
and engineering for three reasons, in priority order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ While the priorities listed below capture the cross-DOD
priorities, there are still individual Service priorities they must
address. These priorities do not address Naval responsibilities for the
Ocean, Army responsibilities for the ground or Air Force for the Air.
Rather, they comprise a set of areas that must be addressed across
component. It is interesting to note the large efforts in the Services
and DARPA largely align with the strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Mitigate New and Emerging Threat Capabilities.--The
Department must defend the homeland and overseas forces and
national interests against threats that exist today, and
threats that are still in development.
(2) Affordably Enable New or Extended Capabilities in Existing
Military Systems.--Coincident with a tighter budget, and the
fact that time is not recoverable, the DOD R&E program should
focus on controlling costs, both in existing and future weapons
systems.
(3) Develop Technology Surprise.--Finally, throughout the past
century, the Nation and the Department have looked to the
Department's R&E program to continually develop and mature new
capabilities that surprise potential adversaries.
priority 1: mitigating or eliminating new and emerging threats to
national security
The Department must be prepared to meet its current and future
national security missions, which include defending the homeland,
securing freedom of navigation, and being able to project power. The
research and engineering priorities inherent in this principal also
include protecting the nation against nuclear, chemical, and biological
weapons, from both State and non-State actors. This principal also
includes protecting the nation against new threats, such as cyber
operations and the proliferation of cruise missiles and UAVs. The final
emerging vector in this area is to find solutions to the new
capabilities that would prevent the US armed forces from fulfilling our
global mission, such as electronic warfare and maintaining space
capabilities.
Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (C-WMD).--The Department's
investment in countering weapons of mass destruction is made primarily
by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the Chemical Biological
Defense Program, as well as the Army. All totaled, the Department's
investment in C-WMD is about $800 million per year. Countering weapons
of mass destruction poses some unique challenges because of the urgency
and immediacy of the threats, the fact that threats present low
probability but high consequence events, and that there is a need for
on-call, comprehensive expertise. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency
emphasis for fiscal year 2015 include kinetic and non-kinetic means to
counter and defeat WMD in non-permissive environments, low visibility
search (and identification) for all threats (nuclear and chemical/
biological), global situational awareness through mining large, diverse
datasets, application of autonomy to reduce risk to the human,
persistent intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) for WMD,
WMD modelling and simulation, and operating in a high electromagnetic
pulse environment. To date, we have not identified the ``silver
bullet'' solution, so a sizable portion of the C-WMD program involves
international and interagency partnership.
Emerging trends over the last year includes the need to counter
threats as far ``upstream'' or left of event as possible. Therefore,
the entire C-WMD community is strengthening their program to interdict/
render safe WMD before they are used.
Missile Defense.--In fiscal year 2015, the investment in missile
defense S&T dropped from roughly $350 million in fiscal year 2014 to
$176 million in fiscal year 2015. Yet, missile defense remains a
priority. The reduction in missile defense is more than offset the Navy
and by the Office of the Secretary of Defense efforts in
electromagnetic rail gun technology; a nearly $200 million investment
in fiscal year 2015. This push in rail gun is being made to determine
if the technology is mature enough to field an inexpensive, kinetic
kill system to intercept theater ballistic missiles in terminal and
mid-course. The current investment supports demonstration of an
advanced rail gun against a missile surrogate in 2015.
Although not a capability that will be fielded soon, the Missile
Defense Agency continues to look at Directed Energy for missile
defense. They are the primary investor in both hybrid (diode pumped
alkaline laser) and fiber lasers. Significant demonstrations for both
of these directed energy capabilities will occur in 2015 to 2016.
A strategy based on only kinetic defense which requires a high-end
US missile intercept against this proliferation of missiles is cost-
imposing on the United States. Our research and engineering program is
also working on developing non-kinetic capabilities and less expensive
kinetic capability to reduce the effectiveness of potential
adversaries' missiles; we are making strides in this area.
Cyber and Information Operations.--The Department's investment in
Cyber S&T in fiscal year 2015 is $510 million. With the growing
reliance of modern military forces on information technology, cyber
operations will play an increasingly important role in ensuring
continuity of missions in the physical domains. Having effective
technologies to support those cyber operations makes cyber security
research an essential element in our long-term abilities to defend the
Nation.
This year, the Department rebuilt the cyber S&T investment around
warfighting capability requirements. We have then built a strong
integrated technical foundation across the Cyber research and
engineering enterprise through our Cyber Community of Interest, a group
made up of Senior Executive Service representatives from the Services,
NSA, and my organization. Our cyber S&T investments are guided by an
S&T Capabilities Framework that captures new and emerging mission
requirements including improved situation awareness and course of
action analysis. The framework has been developed with participation of
all the Services as well as the Intelligence Community, National
Laboratories, and our federally Funded Research and Development
Centers. We are placing emphasis on broadening the research beyond
standard computing systems to include defending against cyber threats
to tactical and embedded systems. Our cyber research includes
investments in providing a testing and evaluation environment for the
experimentation and testing of cyber technology across the full
spectrum of capabilities to help validate and accelerate research.
Additionally, and very importantly, it is a priority for the DOD to be
an early adopter of emerging technologies in cyber defense and to
ensure the transition of those products to our warfighters and the
programs supporting them.
Though challenges remain in all areas, Cyber S&T is making progress
and having significant impacts. Over the past few years, our cyber
investments, from fundamental research through advanced technology
demonstrations have resulted in many successes that directly benefit
our warfighters and the broader defense enterprise. Some highlights
are:
--Securing our telecommunications infrastructure through
vulnerability assessment, tool development, and best practice
dissemination;
--Developing technologies to accurately geo-locate illicit commercial
wireless devices to protect our networks;
--Producing a game-changing approach to signature-free malware
detection capable of defending against zero-day attacks;
--Designing a flexible, mission-based interoperability framework
enabling rapid, low-cost capability integration for our cyber
operation forces; and
--Developing tools and techniques that assure the secure operation of
microprocessors within our weapons platforms and systems.
This year, in concert with White House Priorities,\12\ we created
the Cyber Transition to Practice (CTP) Initiative. The goal of this
initiative is to mature and ultimately transition S&T products to
operational use. The development of cyber tools frequently happens on a
time scale much less than the traditional acquisition process. The CTP
initiative is intended to accelerate fielding of cyber tools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ This is in direct response to the NSS Cybersecurity FY2014
Budget Priority of September 11, 2012 (section 4.a of the annex).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loss of Assured Space.--Other nations have developed both kinetic
and non-kinetic means to degrade or deny the U.S. space layer.
Consequently, the DOD S&T program is working on developing the space
capabilities our forces rely on whether or not the space layer exists.
The capability may be degraded, but will also not be vulnerable. Other
nations are seeking to asymmetrically disrupt our military capabilities
that depend upon assured satellite communications; global systems for
positioning, navigation, and timing; and on-demand ISR, even in denied
areas. The U.S. will respond to these actions through increasing the
resilience of our space assets so they are free from interference as
well as develop alternative means to deliver the capabilities we
currently obtain from our space assets.
Current technologies in development include, but are not limited to
the following: improving our space situational awareness capabilities
employing improved ground- and space-based systems (such as the Air
Force Research Lab's 2006 demonstration of on-orbit, localized Space
Situational Awareness), enhanced terrestrial and airborne
communications or jam resistant communications (such as laser
communications); novel timing devices decoupled from continuous access
to GPS (like the Tactical Grade Atomic Clock, projected for transition
to the acquisition community in 2017); high performance Inertial
Measurement Units (like DARPA's High Dynamic Range Atom Sensor (HiDRA),
projected for 2016, and small-form-factor anti-jam GPS antennas); and
alternative ISR capabilities (which may incorporate advanced electro-
optic coatings and thermal protections measures under development at
the Air Force Research Lab). Finally, we have several Joint Capability
Technology Demonstrations (JCTDs) to determine the viability of
capabilities delivered from very small satellites. Kestrel Eye and
Vector JCTDs will demonstrate the viability of small satellite tactical
communications and ISR by 2016.
Electronic Warfare (Both Attack and Protection).--The Department's
investment in electronic warfare (EW) S&T is about $500 million per
year. This is an area that is evolving rapidly because of technology
advances. The two key parameters in EW are the frequency the system
operates and how complex is the signal. The concept behind electronic
warfare is simple--the goal is to control your electronic signature or
confuse an opponent's system if you are defending and to simplify the
overall situation (reject false targets and clutter) if you are
attempting to use your own electronic systems (radar, communications
and radio frequency).
Electronic warfare is becoming important and more critical because
the enabling technologies underlying frequency and complexity are
progressing very rapidly. To address the underlying technologies, the
components have coalesced around a concept called Advanced Components
for EW (ACE), which is focusing on Integrated Photonic Circuits,
Millimeter Wave, Electro-Optical and Infrared (EO/IR), and
Reconfigurable and Adaptive RF electronics. As a whole, these
technologies should improve simultaneous transmit and receive; expand
instantaneous bandwidth, and allow a huge leap ahead in complexity. ACE
kicked off in fiscal year 2013, with the components continuing to
develop components.
In addition to the underlying technology, the Services are involved
in building advanced electronic systems. We will cover two of them. The
Navy's Integrated Topside program is just completing attempting to use
multifunction transmitters on the top of a ship. This will reduce the
number of individual systems with a unique electronic signature, and
improve ship survivability.
The Home on GPS-Jam (HOG-J) is a small munition that will identify
foreign GPS jammers and vector the munition into the jammer. HOG-J has
had some preliminary successful tests, and could be ready to enter the
inventory in 2-3 years. There are other EW systems that could be
covered at the appropriate security level.
priority 2: affordably enabling new or extending military capabilities
The cost of Defense acquisition systems continues to be a challenge
for the Department. Over the past 3 years, the Department introduced
``Better Buying Power'' initiatives to improve the cost effectiveness
of the Defense acquisition system. Cost effectiveness and affordability
of defense systems starts before the acquisition enterprise kicks in.
There are two vectors to increasing affordability; technology to lower
cost and extend life cycle, and research and engineering processes to
address costs early in system development.
Systems Engineering.--The Department's systems engineering
capability and capacity are critical to enabling affordability across
the system life cycle of an acquisition program. The Department's
systems engineers drive affordable designs, develop technical plans and
specifications to support cost-effective procurement, and conduct
trade-off analyses to meet program cost, schedule and performance
requirements. Systems engineers are enabling strategies to identify
opportunities to reduce life-cycle costs. My organization has taken a
lead role in improving the Department's ability to achieve affordable
programs through strong SE policy, guidance, dissemination of best
practices, execution oversight and support for a healthy, qualified
engineering workforce.
Through an emphasis on affordability in recently updated policy and
guidance, the Department has established a clear role for systems
engineers in defining, establishing, and achieving affordability goals
and processes throughout the life cycle. Through required systems
engineering trade space analyses, individual acquisition programs
establish the cost, schedule and affordability drivers and can
demonstrate the cost-effective design point for the program. These
trade space analyses will be conducted across the program's life cycle
to continuously assess system affordability and technical feasibility
to support requirements, investments, and acquisition decisions and
depict the relationships between system life-cycle cost and the
system's performance requirements, design parameters, and delivery
schedules. Recent emphasis on better reliability engineering has
focused the Department's acquisition programs on reducing overall life-
cycle costs. My systems engineering staff maintains regular and
frequent engagement with acquisition programs to support the planning
and execution of effective technical risk management, as well as
affordability considerations. They provide regular oversight and
guidance to assist the programs as they mature through the life cycle.
Developmental Test and Evaluation.--Developmental Test and
Evaluation (DT&E) efforts focus on engaging major acquisition programs
early in their life cycle to ensure efficient and effective test
strategies, thereby ensuring a better understanding of program
technical risks and opportunities before major milestone decisions. In
2013, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Developmental Test
and Engineering (DASD(DTE)) introduced the ``shift left'' concept--
specifically to drive DT earlier in the acquisition process. Early DT&E
engagement with programs not only reduces acquisition costs through
efficient testing, but finding and fixing deficiencies early, well
before production and operations, drastically reduces overall life-
cycle costs. The DASD(DT&E) is focusing on a few key areas to improve
the overall effectiveness of developmental test and evaluation; use of
the Developmental Evaluation Framework, increased emphasis on testing
in a mission context, earlier cyber security testing, and an increased
emphasis on system reliability testing.
The Developmental Evaluation Framework is a disciplined process
that results in a clear linkage between program decisions, capability
evaluation, evaluation information needs, and test designs. Using the
Developmental Evaluation Framework provides an efficient, yet rigorous
T&E strategy to inform the program's decisions. Developmental Test and
Evaluation is also moving beyond the traditional technical test focus
to include testing in a mission context to characterize capabilities
and limitations before production. Robust DT&E should also include
early cyber security testing that previously was not tested until late
in the acquisition life cycle, where deficiencies are costly to fix.
Finally DT&E is focusing on increased system reliability testing.
System reliability is a major driver in the affordability of future
weapon systems. Improved reliability information early in the program
allows acquisition leadership to understand the program technical and
cost risks and take steps to improve system reliability and therefore
the affordability of the system.
Prototyping.--Another way to drive down costs of weapons systems is
through the expanded use of prototypes, which we use to prove a concept
or system prior to going to formal acquisition. Consequently, in fiscal
year 2015, we look to expand the use of developmental and operational
prototyping to advance our strategic shift to a greater emphasis on
future threats. In fiscal year 2015, the Department's investment in
prototypes or prototype like activities is around $900 million. This
includes activities that are not classical prototype efforts, but will
demonstrate capabilities, such as the Navy's Future Naval Capabilities,
Integrated Naval Prototypes, the Army's Joint Multi-role Helicopter and
Future Fighting Vehicle, as well as Air Force Flagship programs, and
the revamping of the Department's Joint Capability Technology
Demonstrations and Emerging Capabilities Technology Development
programs.
The RAND Corporation provides a good definition for prototyping,
describing it as ``a set of design and development activities to reduce
technical uncertainty and to generate information to improve the
quality of subsequent decisionmaking.'' \13\ We distinguish between two
types of prototyping activities. Developmental prototyping demonstrates
feasibility of promising emerging technologies and helps those
technologies overcome technical risk barriers. Operational prototyping
focuses on assessing military utility and integration of more mature
technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ ``From Marginal Adjustments to Meaningful Change'', pg 64,
Jeffrey Drezner and Meilinda Huang, RAND Corporation, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A recent example of an operational prototype is Instant Eye, a one
pound quad-copter. We outfitted Instant Eye with an electro-optical
camera and IR illuminator, bringing a field repairable, overhead
surveillance capability to the soldier in the field at a unit cost of
less than $1,000. Instant Eye would go on to provide targeting
information for the neutralization of seven insurgents waiting to
ambush a U.S. combat patrol.
Joint Multi-Effects Warhead System (JMEWS) is a good example of a
higher-risk, higher reward developmental prototype. The JMEWS project
took on the challenge of in-flight targeting and re-tasking of the
Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM). JMEWS' flexible lethality
increases the combat power of these expensive weapons by tailoring the
TLAM flight profile for best effect, taking advantage of information
often not available until after the weapon has launched. With the
developmental prototyping effort demonstrating the essential technical
aspects, all that remains for Navy is to integrate JMEWS into the TLAM
program of record.
Throughout the history of the Department, periods of fiscal
constraint have been marked by the use of prototypes to mature
technology and keep design teams active in advancing the state of
practice. We will use prototyping to demonstrate capability early in
the acquisition process. Prototyping will also be used to improve
capability development methods and manufacturing techniques, evaluate
new concepts, and rapidly field initial quantities of new systems.
Prototyping's ability to evaluate and reduce technical risk, and
clarify the resource picture that drives costs makes it a critical
piece of the larger research and engineering strategy. Put simply, by
prototyping in research and engineering, we can focus on key knowledge
points and burn down the risk before the risk reduction becomes
expensive.
Energy and Power.--Energy and Power Technology has a strong focus
of reducing DOD operational energy risks and costs. Power requirements
of new DOD systems continue to grow every year, and energy is a major
cost driver and logistic burden. The Department spends approximately
$300 million per year on Energy and Power science and technology. Some
significant programs are:
Unmanned Underwater Vehicles--Air Independent Propulsion (UUV-
AIP).--The Navy program is developing and delivering long
endurance, scalable air-independent propulsion solutions for
UUVs. Highly efficient fuel cell technologies will provide
extended mission duration in excess of 60 days, well beyond the
current and projected capability of batteries. Fuel cells are
also being assessed by other Services to extend duration of
UAVs and UGVs. These systems are already spinning out to
industry.
The Integrated Vehicle Energy Technology (INVENT).--The Air Force
INVENT program is developing power and thermal management
technologies and architectures that not only address today's
aircraft performance limits but also work with adaptive cycle
engines to enable next generation game changing high power
airborne capabilities. There are related Service initiatives to
realize higher performance, more fuel efficient designs for
rotorcraft and ground vehicles.
Advanced Vehicle Power Technology Alliance (AVPTA).--The Army is
working collaboratively with DoE (with secondary partners from
the National Labs, industry and academia) to accelerate energy-
related R&D initiatives into new vehicle designs. Current
efforts include: (1) advanced combustion, engines and
transmission with the help of Sandia National Laboratory; (2)
examination of lightweight structures for vehicles (partnering
with General Dynamics); (3) energy recovery and thermal
management for improved efficiency and reduced emissions
(industry partner, Gentherm); (4) advanced fuels and
lubricants; (5) integrated starter-generators (ISGs) without
rare earth permanent magnet materials (partners, Remy Intl and
Oak Ridge National Laboratory); and (6) computer-aided
engineering for electric drive batteries (CAEBAT).
Engineered Resilient Systems.--To address the need for more
affordable and mission-resilient warfighting systems, we are developing
an integrated suite of modern computational modeling and simulation
(M&S) capabilities and engineering tools aligned with acquisition and
operational business processes to transform engineering environments
under the Engineered Resilient Systems (ERS) initiative. The ERS tool
suite allows warfighters, engineers, and acquisition decisionmakers to
rapidly assess the cost and performance of potential system designs by
providing many data-driven alternatives resulting in systems which are
less sensitive to changes in external threats, mission needs, and
program constraints. ERS has already demonstrated that the insertion of
advanced S&T models, tools and techniques into early phases of
engineering processes and decisionmaking will positively impact
effectiveness, affordability and sustainability of defense systems,
thus addressing these most critical challenges head on. These new M&S-
based frameworks adopt the most advanced design and modeling approaches
of government, industry and academia to enable our Nation to meet
emergent threat, while insuring that we can do that affordably, today
and in an uncertain future.
priority 3: creating technology surprise through science and
engineering
The third and final reason the Department conducts research and
engineering is to create surprise to potential adversaries. Previous
Department of Defense investment in basic and applied research has a
long history of developing technologies that led to superior
capabilities. The DOD research program led to stealth, the Internet,
synthetic aperture radar, precision weapons, infra-red focal planes and
night vision devices, among others. Frequently, when investing in basic
research, we don't know the specific application that will emerge; in
fact, by definition, basic research is conducted without a specific
product or system in mind.
The Department invests in a structured way to create surprise.
Creation of surprise requires a robust basic research program coupled
with a strong applied research. While it is not really possible to know
where technology surprise will come from, there are several areas that
highlight the possibility; we will discuss several of them in
increasing level of maturity. The least mature is quantum science,
followed by nanotechnology, autonomous systems, human systems, and then
finally, directed energy systems.
Quantum Sciences.--The discoveries a century ago of the quantum
properties of the atom and the photon defined and propelled most of the
new technology of the 20th century--semiconductors, computers,
materials, communication, lasers--the technological basis of much of
our civilization. Now, the next quantum revolution may define new
technological directions for the 21st century, building upon the
intersection of quantum science and information theory. Consequently,
the DOD is increasing its basic research investment in Quantum
Information Science (QIS). QIS exploits our expanded quantum
capabilities in the laboratory to engineer new properties and states of
matter and light literally at the atomic scale. We are already
developing new capabilities in secure communication, ultra-sensitive
and high signal to noise physical sensing of the environment, and a
path to exponentially faster computing algorithms in special purpose
computers. The DOD research funding has driven quantum sciences in the
past decade. This funding has led to the demonstration to measure time
through cold atom research at 1,000 times more accurate than GPS. Using
quantum sciences, the DOD is likely within 10 years of fielding an
affordable timekeeping system that will cut our tether to GPS. We are
building in the laboratory gravity sensors of unprecedented
sensitivity, opening the possibility of remote detection of tunnels (or
submarines). Other military applications are just being realized, but
quantum science is a technology that will provide surprise.
Nanoengineering/Nanotechnology.--QIS is based on the ability to
control atoms. Nanoengineering also deals with the ability to develop
and engineer systems at the molecular level. This will, in turn, lead
to new system level capabilities. For instance, one of the limitations
to systems like directed energy is thermal management. By designing
systems at the molecular level, it is possible to increase thermal
management by several orders of magnitude. Materials like
``metamaterials'' (engineered materials for specific properties)
provide a promise of development of radars and electromagnetic systems
that operate much more effectively at much broader frequency ranges.
Metamaterials are especially intriguing because through clever design
and dissimilar materials integration, properties that are never seen in
nature's materials may be obtained. An example from the Navy's
fundamental research realm is the investigation of a metamaterial
suitable for antennas. This material system could become transparent to
radio frequency waves when exposed to high power radio frequency
radiation or pulses, preventing the coupling of this energy to an
aircraft's electronic systems and, thereby, avoiding damage. Engineered
nanomaterials and nanotechnology research remain very competitive in
our research portfolio for their potential to provide capability
advantage. Both the Navy and Army have explored coatings based on
materials with nanometer dimensions that have wear and corrosion
resistance superior to traditional and often hazardous metals. Most
recently a nanocrystalline coating based on nickel-tungsten alloys has
demonstrated properties exceeding hard chromium coatings without the
potential environmental problems of chromium. One of the most exciting
applications for engineered nanomaterials for defense and the whole
economy is catalysts. The Air Force is supporting research on
nanoparticle catalysts that are much more efficient in eliminating
methane, a greenhouse gas, from exhausts while using the same quantity
of the precious metal palladium and the rare earth element cerium.
Energetic nanomaterials comprise one area of nanotechnology that is of
interest primarily to defense at this time. The Army is examining
highly reactive, energetic materials based on metals and metal oxides
that are much less sensitive that traditional explosives. Because the
DOD is committed to prudent development and application of new
materials, we are studying the materials for any potentially unusual
toxic properties based on their chemistry or extremely small particle
size.
Autonomy.--A major cost driver to the Department of Defense is the
force structure but, technology is maturing to augment the human,
possibly keeping the warfighter out of harm's way and reducing the
numbers of warfighters needed to conduct operations. Autonomous
capabilities range from software to aid the intelligence analyst in
processing exploitation dissemination (PED) through very complex
networked autonomous air systems working in tandem with unmanned ground
or undersea vehicles. We could field simple autonomous systems within a
couple of years, but true autonomy will take years to realize.
Autonomous systems are truly multidisciplinary, in that they rely on
technologies ranging from sensors that understand the environment, to
software algorithms that aid decisionmaking or decide to seek human
assistance. Through autonomy, we seek to reduce the manpower required
to conduct missions, while extending and complementing human
capabilities. The Department has four technical areas of focus for
investments in Autonomy: Human and Agent System Interaction and
Collaboration; Scalable Teaming of Autonomous Systems; Machine
perception, Reasoning and Intelligence; and Test, Evaluation,
Validation, and Verification. Built around these four technical areas,
we launched an experiment last year to develop an in-house capacity in
autonomous systems. This experiment, called the Autonomy Research Pilot
Initiative (ARPI), funded seven proposals to work on technologies in
one of the four technical areas above. The awards were for 3 years, and
had to be completed in DOD laboratories by DOD personnel. ARPI efforts
include: Autonomous Squad Member--enabling robots to participate in
squad-level missions alongside soldiers; and Realizing Autonomy via
Intelligent Adaptive Hybrid Control-increasing robustness and
transparency of autonomous control to improve teaming of unmanned
vehicles with each other and with their human operators. Advancement of
technologies from the successful Department investment in the four
technical areas will result in autonomous systems that provide more
capability to warfighters, reduce the cognitive load on operators/
supervisors, and lower overall operational cost.
Human Systems.--Previous wars were won by massing power through
weapons systems. It is not clear that will be the case in future
conflicts. With the proliferation of sensors and data, future conflicts
may well be won by the person that can react quickest. Studies of human
cognition suggest that cognitive response times can be reduced by using
display systems that present information using multiple sensory
modalities. Such a reduction would give the force that is enabled with
these technologies the ability to process more information, faster than
their adversaries. Additionally, we are learning how to tailor training
to adapt to individual students' unique needs, leading to reductions in
the time needed to acquire expertise. Reducing the time to train forces
to an advanced level of competence offers another way to respond faster
than our adversaries. Additionally, robots, unmanned vehicles and other
advanced technologies continue to be deeply integrated with our
warfighters. We are developing new methodologies and technologies to
enable our warfighters to interact with these systems as naturally as
they do with their human counterparts leading to faster and more
accurate responses by these ``hybrid teams''. Lastly, we are optimizing
warfighter physical and cognitive performance for long durations, in
dynamic and unpredictable environments, through personalized
conditioning and nutritional regimens.
Directed Energy.--One of the most mature ``game changing''
technology areas is Directed Energy, and specifically, High Energy
Lasers. High Energy Lasers have been promised for many years, but these
lasers were always based on chemical lasers, which are difficult to
support logistically, and the byproducts are toxic. Over the past
several years, however, solid state (electric) lasers have matured,
largely through the Joint High Power Solid State Laser, a cross DOD
effort to develop a 100 kilowatt (KW) laser. At close range, 10-30 KW
is lethal. The JHPSSL was demonstrated in 2009. Since then, the
Services have worked on packaging a solid state laser that could be
deployed. In summer 2014, a 30 KW laser will be prototyped on the USS
Ponce in the CENTCOM area of responsibility. In December 2013, the Army
demonstrated the High Energy Laser Mobile Demonstrator at White Sands
missile range. This 10 KW laser successfully engaged nearly 90 percent
of the available targets. This system will be further demonstrated in a
maritime environment at Eglin Air Force Base.
reliance 21
The Department's Research and Engineering (R&E) Enterprise is wide-
ranging, and is the foundation of the Department's technological
strength. The enterprise includes DOD laboratories and product centers,
other government laboratories, federally funded research and
development centers (FFRDC's) and University affiliated research
centers (UARCs), U.S. and allied universities, our allied and partner
government laboratories, as well as industry. Last year I took the
opportunity to brief the members of this Committee as my impetus to
develop a strategy for the R&E Enterprise; this strategy was discussed
earlier. What is important this year is putting in place the structure
to attempt to optimize the S&T investment. Consequently, the
Department's S&T Executives and I have worked to put in place Reliance
21. Under Reliance 21, most of the Department's S&T program will be
managed in one of 17 cross-cutting portfolios. Each of these portfolios
will be made up of Senior Executive or Senior Leader from each Service
and Agency with investment in the area. These teams are building
integrated roadmaps, and beginning the process of integrating allied
and industry efforts onto our roadmaps. Each year, about one third of
the portfolios will be reviewed, in depth to the S&T Executives, who
will approve or redirect the roadmaps. The roadmap will include the
technical and operational objective, the critical technical efforts
needed to meet the objective, the gaps to reaching the objectives, and
an assessment of where the portfolio leads recommend changes. The 17
portfolios are all called Communities of Interest (COI). Done
correctly, management of a large portion of the Department's S&T
execution will be collaboratively achieved by the COIs.
what congress can do for the defense s&t program
We are the most technologically advanced military in the world but,
as Secretary Hagel so aptly stated in his remarks on the 24th of
February of this year, ``we must maintain our technological edge over
potential adversaries''.\14\ I have outlined what we are doing with the
resources that we have been given and what we plan to do with the
resources in the fiscal year 2015 President's budget. Success, however,
will depend on your support. In that regard I have two requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Hagel, 24 February 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I ask that you enact the Research, Development, Test and Evaluation
portion of the President's Budget as submitted. We spent a lot of time
to balance the program to best meet DOD priorities.
The President's budget seeks funding for fiscal year 2016-2021 that
is above the estimated sequestration levels under current law. As
pointed out earlier, with no relief from the BCA in the out years, we
expect modernization and readiness accounts to bear the brunt. This
would heighten the increased risk we are already seeing. Simply, at
that sequestration level, we expect continued erosion of the S&T and
RDT&E accounts.
Second, I would ask that you support our efforts in prototyping. We
are expanding the use of developmental and operational prototyping in
lieu of formal acquisition programs. Throughout the history of the
Department, during periods of fiscal constraint, the Department has
used prototypes to mature technology and keep design teams intact and
moving forward. Prototyping has another advantage--it allows the
Department to build a capability early in the acquisition process,
before all the structure affiliated with the acquisition process
begins. By prototyping in research and engineering, we can acquire
valuable knowledge and buy down risk and lead time to production at
relatively low cost.
closing
In summary, the last year has been a challenge to the Department's
S&T program. The risk to our force is growing, and the need for the S&T
community is likewise increasing. We have shifted our focus to
protecting the future by countering anti-access, area-denial threats,
addressing the increasing complexity of adversary's weapons systems,
shortening the maturation time of developing our own systems, and
addressing the erosion of the United States' stature in international
science markers. We need your help to remove the crippling uncertainty
associated with sequestration so that we can transition to the balance
of force structure, readiness and modernization the country needs and
deserves from us.

Senator Durbin. Thank you.
Dr. Prabhakar.
STATEMENT OF DR. ARATI PRABHAKAR, DIRECTOR, DEFENSE
ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY
Dr. Prabhakar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Cochran,
and members of the subcommittee. It is very good to be here
today with my colleagues, and I appreciate the chance to talk
with you all.
DARPA is part of this Defense Department's science and
technology community. We are also part of the larger national
ecosystem for research and development. Within these
communities, we have a particular role and that role is to make
the pivotal early investments that change what is possible so
that we can take big strides forward in our national security
capabilities.
And very much in keeping with your comments, Mr. Chairman,
DARPA too was started in the wake of Sputnik. So we have been
around pursuing that mission for 56 years. We were created
precisely to prevent that kind of technological surprise that
Sputnik had created for us. We have delivered on our mission
for 56 years by creating a few surprises of our own, and while
our output is technology, we really count our successes when
those technologies change outcomes. So every time a stealth
aircraft evades an air defense system, every time a soldier on
the ground can place himself precisely using GPS so that he can
call for fires, every time that a radar tells a carrier strike
group about a threat that is out there long before it sees us,
that is when we have succeeded in our mission at DARPA because
in each of those cases, we made those early investments. We
showed what was possible.
And in every one of those cases, it took a much larger
community to turn those ideas into real capabilities. Of
course, it took our partners that we work with very closely
across the services in science and technology. It also took the
services' further development work and acquisition efforts.
Every one of these technologies traces back to research often
conducted in universities or other labs. Every one of these
advances relied on industry, defense, and commercial industry,
large companies and small. And at the end of the day, it took
warfighters to turn those technologies into real military
capabilities.
So that is how that whole ecosystem works for that DARPA
portion of it. That mission that we have had of breakthrough
technologies for national security has not changed over 56
years. The world in which we work continues to change, but that
core mission is still why our people charge through the front
doors every single morning.
And so let me just share with you a few of the things that
we are doing today to deliver on our mission in the context of
the world that we are living in.
One thing that we see happening today is that the classic
approach to major military systems has gotten so costly and
inflexible that it is really not going to be effective for the
challenges that we are going to face in the future. So a number
of our investments at DARPA are rethinking complex military
systems, and we are coming up with powerful, new approaches for
new radars and weapons, new ways to do navigation and
communications, new ways to architect space systems.
In a very different arena, we can see the massive scale of
information changing every aspect of national security. So here
we are creating first a new breed of cybersecurity technologies
so that we can actually trust the information that we have
become so reliant on.
We are also inventing new tools to keep up with and to
start using this explosion of data. One example is a new
program that we have that is tackling the networks involved in
human trafficking. Today these trafficking networks very easily
can hide in the vast data that is online. So really finding
ways to see those bad actors in vast volumes of data is part of
the objective of our programs.
And then in a very wide range of research areas today, we
see the seeds of what could be the next generation of
technological surprise. One area that I think is quite vibrant
right now is in the research where biology is intersecting with
engineering. And here we are investing to create the capability
to outpace the spread of infectious disease, to understand and
even harness brain function, and to speed the development of
new chemistries and materials coming out of synthetic biology.
So, obviously, I would be happy to talk about any of these
or other efforts in the DARPA portfolio.
But let me just end my remarks this morning by saying that
when I talk with our leaders in the Pentagon and here on
Capitol Hill, I often feel that I can see the weight of our
national security challenges weighing on them and on you. I
think we all feel it. We do live in a volatile world. We all
see the shifting threats. We are all dealing with constrained
budgets and the corrosive effects of sequestration. But I also
know that American innovation has turned the tide time and
again, and I am really confident that the work that we are all
doing today can do that again for the years to come.

PREPARED STATEMENT

Your support to make that possible to this point has been
essential. So I really thank you for that. I would also like to
ask for your full support of the President's budget request for
fiscal year 2015 so that we can continue these vital
investments.
Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions
along with my colleagues.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Arati Prabhakar
Chairman Durbin, Vice Chairman Cochran and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you
today. I am Arati Prabhakar, Director of the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency, DARPA. It is a pleasure to be here with my colleagues
across the Department of Defense (DOD) Science and Technology (S&T)
community. Our organizations work together every day to advance our
Nation's defense technologies. DARPA plays a particular role in this
community, and in the broader U.S. technology ecosystem. That role is
to anticipate, create, and demonstrate breakthrough technologies that
are outside and beyond conventional approaches--technologies that hold
the potential for extraordinary advances in national security
capability. This mission and our current work and plans are the focus
of my testimony today.
darpa's mission and the diverse threats facing our nation
In the fall of 1957, a polished metal sphere, 23 inches in diameter
and launched from Soviet soil, began its orbit around the Earth,
passing over American skies approximately every 96 minutes and
initiating the space age, a space race, and a new era in the long
struggle to maintain American military and technological superiority.
Starting DARPA was one of the pivotal choices our Nation made in the
wake of Sputnik. America today enjoys a hard-earned, privileged
position, with tremendous military might, economic strength, and social
and political freedom. Yet, as this Subcommittee knows well, risk is
ever evolving in our complex and dynamic world. Regional instability,
shifting military and economic positions, demographic and natural
resource trends--these forces drive constant change in our national
security environment. Today and in the years ahead, our potential
adversaries will still include nation states, but also smaller, less
well defined bad actors and an increasingly networked terror threat.
National security challenges will continue to range from the acute to
the chronic. This is the threat environment that shapes our technology
investments today at DARPA.
Adding to the security challenges we face is the fact that
technology and its accessibility have changed so significantly.
Startlingly powerful technologies--semiconductors, information systems,
and nuclear and biological technologies among them--are now globally
available to a much wider swath of society, for good and for evil. And
while the cost of some technologies has dropped precipitously, other
technology and non-technology related costs have risen steeply, leading
DOD to make difficult choices about our operational capabilities. That
means our assumptions about the cost of military systems must change.
These factors will also continue to shape our investments at DARPA.
DARPA was designed and built for just this kind of shifting,
challenging threat environment. Through more than 5 decades of
tumultuous geopolitical and technological change, we have delivered
outsized impact by focusing on our mission of breakthrough technologies
for national security. We imagine groundbreaking new technology
advances with the potential for defense applications. We bring the best
of those ideas to fruition by providing the right mix of research
support, intellectual freedom, and responsible oversight to outstanding
performers in industry, academia, and other government organizations.
And we facilitate the transition and operationalization of these new,
paradigm-shifting capabilities.
harnessing complexity to create exceptional new capabilities: darpa's
programs
Like most truly great problems that confront us, today's diverse
threats can either be viewed as an imposing barrier or as an
opportunity to overcome a difficult challenge. Either way, I believe
our national security will depend upon how we deal with complexity.
DARPA chooses to tackle complexity by harnessing it, and our programs
reflect that approach of playing offense. We do that with game-changing
new capabilities and with layered, adaptable, multi-technology systems.
We do that by catalyzing major new national technology advances and by
rapidly exploiting commercially available technologies. And at a time
when systems cost is the difference between building operational
capability or just building PowerPoint, we do that by striving to
invert the cost equation for our military.
DARPA has made important strides forward in delivering key
breakthrough technologies. In discussing how we are tackling various
aspects of technological complexity, I will update you on several new
programs that we have launched, results we have achieved, and
transitions that have been accomplished or are in process.
Rethinking Complex Military Systems
Much of DARPA's work rethinks complex military systems, recasting
today's approach with the intention of achieving far greater
capabilities at lower cost. Today, our military relies upon the meshing
of electronic, optical, software, and mechanical components to create
satellites and the vehicles, aircraft, and ships that carry our
Warfighters into battle. We also depend upon this integration of
components in designing and producing the weapons these men and women
must be prepared to use. That is not new. But today, these technology
components are becoming ever more complex. Consider: radar systems have
thousands of antenna elements, platforms run millions of lines of code,
and integrated circuits are made of billions of transistors. These many
components are also now interdependent and interacting to an
unprecedented degree. And, of course, these platforms and mission
systems must operate in an environment that will be increasingly
contested by others with access to ever-improving global technologies.
All these factors contribute to the high cost, long development times,
and inflexibility of today's most advanced systems. This demands that
we rethink--sometimes in fundamental ways--how we approach the next
generation of defense systems.
Let me give you a few examples of how DARPA is tackling this
challenge from our portfolio of programs.
Robust Space
In times of conflict, our Nation's leaders count on our military to
wage precise, overpowering war. This type of highly effective
warfighting is critically dependent on space--for imaging and sensing,
for communications, for navigation, even for keeping time. As never
before, we require ready access to space and strategic control over our
assets in space. But while space is becoming increasingly important,
it's also becoming increasingly crowded and contested, and DOD's
ability to access and operate in space has become less nimble and more
expensive over many years. DARPA has several programs underway to
change that equation.
Rapid Launch: Experimental Space Plane (XS-1) and
Airborne Launch Assisted Space Access (ALASA)
Imagine a world in which getting a satellite into orbit can be as
quick and reliable as an aircraft takeoff. Our new Experimental
Spaceplane is designed to take a 3,000- to 5,000-pound payload into
orbit using an expendable upper stage, all for under $5 million; that
is one-tenth the cost of a comparable launch today. Our ALASA program
focuses on 100-pound payloads for less than $1 million. Even more
striking is our goal of providing satellite launches for these payloads
with just 24 hours' notice.
Avoiding Collisions in Space: Space Surveillance
Telescope (SST)
In space, one major challenge is simply a lack of knowledge of what
is around you. With satellite traffic and the risk of space collisions
growing, space domain awareness is a top priority. DARPA's SST enables
much faster discovery and tracking of previously unseen, hard-to-find
objects in geosynchronous orbits. We expect it to be ready for
operations within 2 years in Australia as a result of a memorandum of
understanding signed last November by Secretary of Defense Hagel with
his counterpart. Once operational on the Northwest Cape of Australia,
SST will provide detection and tracking of satellites and space debris
at and near geosynchronous orbits within the Asia-Pacific region,
information U.S. space operators can use to better protect critical
U.S. and Allied space-based capabilities.
Lowering the Risk and Cost for Satellites
Communications satellites in geosynchronous orbit, approximately
36,000 kilometers above the Earth, provide vital communication
capabilities to Warfighters and others. Today, when a satellite fails,
we usually face the expensive prospect of having to launch a brand new
replacement. Our Phoenix program strives to develop and demonstrate
technology to robotically service, maintain, and construct satellites
in the harsh environment of geosynchronous orbit. Phoenix is also
exploring a paradigm change to satellite design that would enable
ground and on-orbit assemble-able platforms to potentially lower the
cost of next-generation space systems by a factor of 10 compared to
what is possible today.
Winning in Contested Environments
Space is not the only environment that is growing more crowded and
dangerous. We must always anticipate an actively contested environment
as we look ahead to potential challenges from future adversaries.
Today, we are dependent on centralized command and control, and the
fragile lines of communications linking tactical assets to decision
makers. While DARPA has multiple programs addressing these challenges
for the air, ground and sea, a common thread is the development of
technologies to shift and distribute capability at the forward edge of
the battle and to adapt quickly to a changing technology landscape.
Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM)
Today's anti-ship missiles face challenges penetrating
sophisticated air defense systems from long range. As a result,
Warfighters may require multiple missile launches and overhead
targeting assets to engage specific enemy warships from beyond the
reach of counter-fire systems. In important progress to overcome these
challenges, the DARPA-Navy LRASM program has had a series of successful
flight tests on a precision-guided anti-ship standoff missile. That
will reduce dependence on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
platforms, network links, and Global Positioning System (GPS)
navigation in electronic warfare environments. DARPA is collaborating
with the Navy via a new joint program office, helping to move this
leap-ahead capability to deployment very quickly.
Distributed Battle Management (DBM) and Communications
in Contested Environments (C2E)
Under our Air Dominance Initiative, DARPA, the Air Force and the
Navy together have been exploring systems-of-systems concepts in which
networks of manned and unmanned platforms, weapons, sensors and
electronic warfare systems interact to succeed in a contested
battlespace. These approaches could offer flexible and powerful options
to the Warfighter, but the complexity introduced by the increase in the
number of employment alternatives--particularly in a dynamic
situation--creates a battle management challenge. Further complicating
matters, in future conflicts U.S. forces may face degradation or denial
of critical communications capabilities essential for coordination and
shared situational understanding.
We recently launched two programs that address these challenges.
The Distributed Battle Management (DBM) program seeks to develop
control algorithms and demonstrate robust decision-aid software for air
battle management at the tactical edge. Our new Communications in
Contested Environments (C2E) program is, at the same time, exploring
the use of reference architectures to enable robust, scalable and
rapidly evolvable airborne communications networks.
Dominating the Electromagnetic Spectrum
The challenge of the threat environment extends to the airwaves as
well, a reality that also is beginning to affect commercial and civil
activity as demand continues to grow for access to the electromagnetic
spectrum. The United States and our Allies learned an important lesson
in World War II, when we became the first to control and take advantage
of one small part of the spectrum--the range occupied by radar. By many
assessments, Allied dominance in radar technology was pivotal to our
winning that crucial war. Today we can say that the next war may be won
by the nation that controls the electromagnetic spectrum over the full
range of wavelengths--a degree of control that can ensure dominance in
communications and in the important linked domains of timing, location
and navigation. It also can ensure dominance in seeing what our
adversaries are doing, and in controlling what they see of us--both our
capacity to hide things from their sensors and our capacity to make
``visible'' an array of things that are not really there.
Spectrum Challenge
One approach to dominating the spectrum is simply to be more
nimble, both in sensing and using whatever portions of the spectrum are
available. Radios, for example, lack agility, despite the fact that
they are used for the most mundane to the most critical of
communications, from garage door openers to first responders to
military operations. Wireless devices often inadvertently interfere
with and disrupt radio communications, and, in battlefield
environments, adversaries may intentionally jam friendly
communications. To stimulate the development of radio techniques that
can overcome these impediments, DARPA launched its Spectrum Challenge,
a national competition to develop advanced radio technology capable of
communicating in congested and contested electromagnetic environments
without direct coordination or spectrum preplanning. We expect to see a
massive increase in innovation when the teams return for the final part
of the Challenge with promising results for future applications.
Moving to New Frequency Domains: Terahertz Electronics
(THz)
Another way to control the spectrum is to move to new frequency
domains, where hardware limitations currently prevent us from operating
effectively. The submillimeter wave, or terahertz, part of the
electromagnetic spectrum falls between the frequencies of 0.3 and 3
terahertz, between microwaves and infrared light. Unlocking this band's
potential may benefit military applications such as high-data-rate
communications, improved radar, and new methods of sensing. But access
to these applications has been limited due to physics and our limited
understanding.
Researchers under DARPA's Terahertz Electronics (THz) program have
designed and demonstrated a 0.85 terahertz power amplifier using a
micromachined vacuum tube; we believe it to be a world first. The
vacuum tube power amplifier is one achievement of the broader THz
program, which seeks to develop a variety of breakthrough component and
integration technologies necessary to 1 day build complex terahertz
circuits for communications and sensing.
Many more DARPA programs also rethink complex military systems.
These include efforts to use the undersea environment to observe and
access regions around the world; to rapidly bring advances in
commercial technology to the battlefield; to develop hypersonic
technologies for advanced speed, reach and range; and to create new
distributed architectures for the contested environments of the future.
Information at Scale
Let's consider a different aspect of complexity. As the information
revolution continues, the sheer scale and variety of data seems
immensely, and perhaps overwhelmingly, complex--but this challenge also
presents major opportunities.
Insight to Enhance Analysts' Capabilities and Performance
Military intelligence analysts face the monumental and escalating
task of analyzing massive volumes of complex data from multiple,
diverse sources such as physical sensors, human contacts, and
contextual databases. DARPA's Insight program addresses the need for
new tools and automation to enhance analyst capabilities and
performance. The program seeks to enable analysts to make sense of the
huge volumes of intelligence-rich information available to them from
existing sensors and data sources. Automated behavioral learning and
prediction algorithms help analysts discover and identify potential
threats, as well as make and confirm hypotheses about those threats'
potential behavior. The goal is a comprehensive operating picture in
which expedient delivery of fused actionable intelligence improves
support of time-sensitive operations on the battlefield. We are working
closely with the Army and the Air Force to transition operational
capabilities to programs of record.
MEMEX: A Different Approach to Search
Despite the vast amounts of data available, today's Web searches
use a centralized, one-size-fits-all approach that searches the
Internet with the same set of tools for all queries. While that model
has been wildly successful commercially, it does not work well for many
government use cases. Current search practices miss information in the
deep Web--the parts of the Web not indexed by standard commercial
search engines--and ignore shared content across pages.
To help overcome these challenges, DARPA launched the Memory and
Exploration of the Internet for Defense (MEMEX) program. This ambitious
effort seeks to develop domain-specific search technologies and
revolutionize the discovery, organization and presentation of the types
of search results needed for national security concerns. MEMEX's
initial focus will be human trafficking, which is a factor in many
types of military, law enforcement and intelligence investigations and
has a significant Web presence to attract customers.
Mining and Understanding Software Enclaves (MUSE)
Information at scale includes not just data, but software code as
well. Within the last few years, there has been a tremendous explosion
in the number of open source projects and the size of codebases these
projects contain. Software repositories today are estimated to contain
more than 100 billion lines of code, and the number continues to grow.
Open source software is widely used in mission-critical DOD systems as
well as in the commercial world. DARPA's new Mining and Understanding
Software Enclaves (MUSE) program aims to harness the scale and
complexity of this array of software to instigate a fundamental shift
in the way we conceive, design, implement, and maintain software. If
successful, MUSE could lead to a new programming methodology, leading
to automated mechanisms for improving resilience, reducing
vulnerabilities, and simplifying the construction of software systems.
High-Assurance Cyber Military Systems (HACMS)
Embedded systems form a pervasive network that underlies much of
modern technological society. Such systems range from large supervisory
control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems that manage physical
infrastructure to medical devices such as pacemakers and insulin pumps,
to computer peripherals such as printers and routers, to communication
devices such as cell phones and radios, to vehicles such as automobiles
and airplanes. These devices have been networked for a variety of
reasons, including the ability to conveniently access diagnostic
information, perform software updates, provide innovative features,
lower costs, and improve ease of use. But researchers and hackers have
shown that these kinds of networked embedded systems are vulnerable to
remote attack, and such attacks can cause physical damage while hiding
the effects from monitors. DARPA launched the High-Assurance Cyber
Military Systems (HACMS) program to create technology to construct
high-assurance cyberphysical systems. Achieving this goal requires a
fundamentally different approach from what the software community has
taken to date. If successful, HACMS will produce a set of publicly
available tools integrated into a high-assurance software workbench,
which will be widely distributed for use in both the commercial and
defense software sectors. For the defense sector, HACMS will enable
high-assurance military systems ranging from unmanned vehicles to
weapons systems, satellites and command and control devices. In an
early demonstration of the program, we are running first-of-its-kind
provably correct software on a commercially available automobile.
These programs are examples from DARPA's broader portfolio in cyber
and information at scale. Other efforts are developing new technologies
to enable distributed computer systems to work through attacks; permit
trustworthy Internet communications in untrusted environments; automate
the discovery, identification and characterization of new malware;
provide DOD with military cyber capabilities; and automatically process
text information to discover meanings and connections that might
otherwise not be readily apparent to analysts.
Biology as Technology
A third area of complexity of growing interest and importance to
DARPA--and among the most promising for future major capabilities--is
the idea of biology as technology. Biology is nature's ultimate
innovator, and any agency that hangs its hat on innovation would be
foolish not to look to this master of networked complexity for
inspiration and solutions.
Living Foundries
Synthetic biology--a hybrid discipline of biology and engineering--
has already proven itself capable of using customized bacteria to
produce medicines, and now it is heading toward even more interesting
applications as we harness it to create entirely new chemistries. Our
Living Foundries program seeks to develop the next-generation tools and
technologies for engineering biological systems, compressing the
biological design-build-test cycle in both time and cost. For example,
the program has demonstrated the ability to generate a suite of novel
bioproducts in weeks rather than years. The program is also producing
new classes of materials with novel properties that can enable a new
generation of mechanical, optical and electrical products.
Rapid Threat Assessment (RTA)
Even as we develop new materials and tools for engineering
biological systems, we understand that we must also be prepared to
react quickly to how our adversaries may seek to use similar
capabilities. This concern is not new: novel chemical and biological
weapons have historically been mass-produced within a year of
discovery. Using current methods and technologies, researchers would
require decades of study to gain a cellular-level understanding of how
new threat agents affect humans. This gap between threat emergence,
mechanistic understanding and potential treatment leaves U.S. forces
and populations here and around the world vulnerable.
DARPA launched the Rapid Threat Assessment (RTA) program with an
aggressive goal: develop methods and technologies that can, within 30
days of exposure to a human cell, map the complete molecular mechanism
through which a threat agent alters cellular processes. This would give
researchers the framework with which to develop medical countermeasures
and mitigate threats. If successful, RTA could shift the cost-benefit
trade space of using chemical or biological weapons against U.S. forces
and could also apply to drug development to combat emerging diseases.
Brain Function Research
In an era when harnessing complexity will be the sine qua non of
success, it should not be surprising that DARPA has a particular
interest in tackling the brain. DARPA's interest starts with our desire
to protect and assist our Warfighters, whether it means preventing or
treating traumatic brain injury, easing the effects of post-traumatic
stress disorder, or learning to operate sophisticated prosthetic limbs
with thoughts alone, as is now increasingly possible with our new and
exciting technologies. These advances also open the door to a much
deeper understanding of how humans interact with the world around
them--new insights that may fuel the next revolution in how we work
with complex technologies and systems. Over the past year, we launched
several new brain function-related programs that are now getting
underway. These efforts are part of the President's initiative in brain
research. Recently, we have made unprecedented advances in developing
advanced prosthetic arm systems and methods to restore near-natural
movement and control, as demonstrated by the DEKA Arm System approved
by the Food and Drug Administration last week.
DARPA's biology-related investments also include diagnostics and
novel prophylaxes to outpace the spread of infectious disease and new
methods to accelerate the testing of critical therapeutics.
New Frontiers
Consistent with our mission to prevent technological surprise by
creating it, DARPA continues to invest across a wide range of fields
where we see promising research that could lead to powerful technology
capability. These investments are the seeds of what my successors,
perhaps 5, 10, or 15 years from now, will be describing to you as
technology revolutions.
I described earlier our work in developing new algorithms, software
and architectures that allow us to better mesh our electronic, optical
and mechanical components together. What about those components
themselves? We are pushing the frontiers of physics to make them
dramatically smaller, or more capable, or both.
iPhod, COUGAR, and ORCHID
Consider the many ways we are developing to harness light, which
will directly affect the size, weight, cost and performance of military
components ranging from small navigation sensors to phased array radars
and communication antennas. One recently concluded program (iPhod)
successfully miniaturized tools for creating delays in light
transmission, while another (COUGAR) demonstrated unique designs in
hollow-core fibers, which guide light within a device much more
efficiently than conventional optical fibers. Yet another (ORCHID)
successfully demonstrated the ``squeezing'' of light, a concept in
quantum optics that can ultimately lead to dramatic performance gains
in microsystems. These programs challenge the assumption that highly
specialized, high-precision systems must be large and expensive.
Miniaturization with National Security Implications
Other advances in miniaturization include a recent demonstration by
DARPA-funded researchers of the world's smallest vacuum pumps. This
breakthrough technology may create new national security applications
for electronics and sensors that require a vacuum: highly sensitive gas
analyzers that can detect chemical or biological attack, for instance,
or extremely accurate laser-cooled chip-scale atomic clocks and
microscale vacuum tubes. As part of another program (QuASAR), one which
seeks to exploit the extreme precision and control of atomic physics
for new sensor technology, researchers have developed methods for
measuring magnetic fields at scales smaller than the size of a single
cell. Applications include critical advances in position, timing and
navigation--all critical to military situational awareness and
operations.
Ground Robotics
Some advances seem much closer to our doorstep than they really
are--thanks to science fiction and the amazing special effects of
creative individuals and teams who lead our entertainment industry.
Ground robotics is one such domain. At the DARPA Robotics Challenge
trials a few months ago, we drove robotics technology forward by
engaging teams of creative specialists at companies, universities and
other government agencies. These world-leading experts were charged
with advancing the capabilities of robots to perform basic skills that
would be required in carrying out humanitarian and disaster relief
missions. The Robotics Challenge--which is still underway--is showing
how robotics capabilities can advance. It is also demonstrating just
how far these kinds of robots are from serious battlefield application.
That, too, is part of DARPA's mission: push the research frontiers of
what is possible and inform our military decision makers where those
limits are and the prospects for the future.
Algorithms Opening New Horizons
Research in mathematical algorithms is also creating important new
technological opportunities. Clustering algorithms can detect common
activity patterns across a vast data set. A combination of vector
mathematics, time integration, and power law distributions enables the
analysis of ensemble behaviors--patterns that only become visible when
correlated across large numbers of points. Time series analysis can
find previously unknown outliers in a data set for anomaly detection.
Our programs apply these mathematical techniques to immense data sets
with hundreds of millions or even many billions of elements.
Individually or in combination, these new algorithmic approaches enable
rapid analysis of data volumes that finally begins to scale with the
complexity of the national security challenges that we face today.
I have cited several examples of DARPA technologies that made
significant progress in the last year. There are many more in that same
category. Additional examples of successes in the making are attached
to my testimony.
the president's fiscal year 2015 budget request
The President's fiscal year 2015 budget request for DARPA is $2.915
billion. This compares with $2.779 billion appropriated for fiscal year
2014, an increase of $136 million. Before describing our fiscal year
2015 plan, let me put this number in context.
From fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2013, DARPA's budget declined
through a series of small reductions followed by the 8 percent across-
the-board sequestration cut in fiscal year 2013. The total reduction to
DARPA's budget from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2013 was 20 percent
in real terms.
This pernicious trend turned around last year. I thank this
Subcommittee, and Congress more broadly, for your support in helping us
to begin to address this issue in fiscal year 2014 by restoring an
initial $199 million. The President's fiscal year 2015 request
continues restoration, almost returning the Agency's budget to its pre-
sequestration level in real terms.
Let me outline what these budget changes mean in terms of our
ability to execute DARPA's vital mission. As budgets eroded over the
last few years, one effect was a reduction in our major demonstration
programs. In some cases, we have been unable to advance our work to the
point of actually demonstrating that a totally new approach is
workable. In other cases, we had to rely on a single approach to
solving a particularly challenging problem because we could fund only
one performing organization. That is especially problematic since we
are trying to do things that have never been achieved before. Reduced
funds also meant fewer early-stage investments to explore new research
frontiers. Sequestration further affected our programs, with many being
delayed or reduced.
In the current fiscal year, the partial restoration of funds is
making a real difference in DARPA's ability to attack the thorny
problems the Nation faces in today's military and national security
environment. As a projects agency, DARPA is always beginning new
programs as old ones end. But the new efforts in fiscal year 2014 are
stronger because of the healthier budget level. In some areas, we are
now able to plan for the real-world prototyping and field testing
needed for new concepts to be fully evaluated. And our new programs
include the important exploratory projects that will expand future
national security opportunities. The fiscal year 2015 request before
you today will allow us to continue to restore and strengthen our
portfolio of investments. With this funding level, we will be on the
right track.
Let me close by saying that I am mindful of the challenges that our
Nation faces and the increasingly difficult environment in which we
work, including severe constraints on resources. But I also am excited
about what lies ahead and confident that--with your support for the
President's fiscal year 2015 budget request--DARPA will continue to
make a real and outsized difference in redefining the national security
landscape and our Nation's security.
Again, thank you for your support--past, present, and future. I
look forward to working with you, and will be pleased to respond to
your questions.
addendum
DARPA Transitions
Many technologies from earlier DARPA investments are now moving
forward with a wide variety of our partners and customers. These
summaries provide snapshots of progress for some programs from recent
years.
Leap Ahead in Surface Warfare Capabilities by Reducing Dependence on
ISR Platforms, Network Links, and GPS: Long Range Anti-Ship
Missile (LRASM)
Technology Description and Program Goal
--Our current anti-ship missiles must penetrate sophisticated enemy
air defense systems from long range. As a result, Warfighters
may require multiple missile launches and overhead targeting
assets to engage specific enemy warships from beyond the reach
of counter-fire systems. To overcome these challenges, the
DARPA-Navy Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) program is
investing in advanced technologies to provide a leap ahead in
U.S. surface warfare capability.
--LRASM aims to reduce dependence on intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance (ISR) platforms, network links, and GPS
navigation in electronic warfare environments. Autonomous
guidance algorithms should allow LRASM to use less-precise
target cueing data to pinpoint specific targets in the
contested domain. The program also focuses on innovative
terminal survivability approaches and precision lethality in
the face of advanced countermeasures.
--LRASM began in 2009. Now in its final DARPA phase, this program
leverages the state-of-the-art Joint Air to Surface Standoff
Missile Extended Range (JASSM-ER) airframe and incorporates
additional sensors and systems to achieve a stealthy and
survivable subsonic cruise missile.
--In 2013, DARPA conducted two flight demonstrations, each with
resounding success. The LRASM was dropped from an Air Force B-
1, successfully separated from the aircraft, navigated through
a series of preplanned waypoints, and then transitioned to an
autonomous mode while seeking the target it had been instructed
to attack. The missile detected, identified, and tracked the
mobile ship target at extended range; transitioned to guidance
on the terminal sensor; and impacted the target with a miss
distance well within acceptable error probabilities. Other
flight achievements include weapon data link updates,
transmission of weapon in-flight tracks, and increased flight
range.
Transition Plan and Status
--The program is on track to deliver an advanced prototype weapon to
the Navy and Air Force with capability for challenging future
operational environments, while being sufficiently mature to
transition rapidly to an acquisition program to address near-
term operational challenges.
--DARPA is engaged with the U.S. Navy NAVAIR's Program Executive
Office for Unmanned Aviation and Strike Weapons (PEO U&W) to
provide an innovative management approach for rapid acquisition
of LRASM for Air Force and Navy air launch platforms to meet
offensive anti-surface warfare missions. This approach
leverages DARPA investment, program security, contracts, and
infrastructure. Ultimately, it will leverage DARPA's technology
development and risk reduction efforts to expeditiously field
LRASM. In fiscal year 2014, DARPA and Navy efforts include
continued technology development, integration risk reduction,
and pre-Milestone B activities.
--DARPA has transitioned the technology to a new DARPA/Navy/Air Force
co-staffed office chartered by USD(AT&L) to rapidly deploy this
dramatically enhanced new capability.
Reducing Drag and Fuel Usage: Formation Flight for Aerodynamic Benefit
Technology Description and Program Goal
--With the Air Force consuming more than 2.5 billion gallons of
aviation fuel in 2010, DARPA launched the Formation Flight for
Aerodynamic Benefit program to seek creative ways to reduce
drag and fuel usage in the C-17 fleet.
--C-17s are the largest single user of aviation fuel, consuming 650
million gallons (26 percent) in 2010. DARPA's goal was to
achieve a 10 percent reduction in fuel flow.
--The approach taken was motivated by large flocks of migratory birds
that fly in a ``V'' formation.
--All aircraft produce wingtip vortices when flying, which are a drag
byproduct of producing aerodynamic lift. After analyzing C-17
wingtip vortices, DARPA predicted optimum formation positions.
--The DARPA program created new software that innovatively enabled
precise autopilot and auto-throttle formation flight operations
with existing C-17 hardware.
--DARPA simulation, modeling, and lab testing projected success in
reaching the target reduction in fuel flow using this software
modification.
Transition Plan and Status
--DARPA transitioned the software to the Air Force Research
Laboratory (AFRL) in July 2012 as the Surfing Aircraft Vortices
for Energy ($AVE) program.
--AFRL conducted 30 hours of flight testing in C-17 formation flight,
including 12 hours on operational flight routes over the
Pacific in 2013.
--That testing validated a 10 percent fuel flow reduction with the
DARPA software modification. Moreover, the changes were safe,
aircrew friendly, and aircraft friendly--and made business
sense.
--The Applied Technology Council approved funding for an Advanced
Technology Demonstration (ATD) of the DARPA C-17 software-only
modification. The ATD will enable the Air Mobility Command to
develop CONOPS for rapid fielding this DARPA energy efficiency
advancement.
--AFRL is examining use of this technology to obtain fuel savings on
C-130s and other DOD platforms.
--Commercial carriers, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) expressed
interest in civilian applications of this DARPA technology.
--This DARPA program success reflects significant contributions from
the Air Mobility Command, AFRL, 412th Test Wing, Air Force Life
Cycle Management Center, Boeing Company, and NASA Neil A.
Armstrong Flight Research Center.
New Approaches to Tackling DOD's Language Challenges: BOLT, RATS, and
MADCAT
Technology Description & Program Goal
--DARPA has invested in solutions for DOD to recognize, classify, and
help digest written and spoken foreign languages.
--Technology from the Broad Operational Language Translation (BOLT)
program provides automated translation and linguistic analysis
that can be applied to informal genres of text and speech as
well as multilingual search capability and unrestricted multi-
turn bilingual conversation.
--The Robust Automatic Transcription of Speech (RATS) program creates
algorithms and software to perform the following tasks on
potentially speech-containing signals received over channels
that are extremely noisy and/or highly distorted: speech
activity detection, language identification, speaker
identification, and keyword spotting in foreign languages.
--The Multilingual Automatic Document Classification Analysis and
Translation (MADCAT) program automatically converts foreign
language text images into English transcripts, eliminating the
need for linguists and analysts while automatically providing
relevant, distilled actionable information to military command
and personnel in a timely fashion.
BOLT Transition Plan and Status
--The Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office (CTTSO), under the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low-
Intensity Conflict, successfully transitioned to military users
a tool for translation of and topic spotting and data
exploitation in social media. Initial implementation is with a
military user with plans to extend use to multiple government,
military, and academic media monitoring system users.
RATS Transition Plan and Status
--The Air Force has provided lab facilities to test RATS capability
using operational data. Initial evaluations show RATS
technology superior to any other system, and plans are underway
for integrating the speech activity detection portion of the
RATS technology into systems that provide noisy speech signal
processing capabilities. Other interested DOD elements are
awaiting the results of operational field trials before
pursuing acquisition.
MADCAT Transition Plan and Status
--MADCAT optical character recognition has been coupled with machine
translation and deployed in 11 languages to enable English-
speaking government and military personnel to read hardcopy
foreign language documents. A project also is underway to
further develop Korean optical character recognition and
machine translation to support user requirements.
--MADCAT offline handwriting recognition system was delivered to a
government user in 2011 and is in operational use. The CTTSO is
supporting the MADCAT transition to various other DOD and
intelligence community users.
Achieving Dramatically Faster Mapping: High-Altitude LIDAR Operations
Experiment (HALOE)
Technology Description and Program Goal
--Leveraging past DARPA developments in Light Detection and Ranging
(LIDAR) systems, a sensor pod for rapid collect, wide area,
long range, high-resolution 3D datasets was developed for the
HALOE system. In 2010 and 2011, DARPA invested funds to harden
the sensor system in preparation for a prolonged operational
trial in Afghanistan.
--HALOE provided forces in Afghanistan with unprecedented access to
high-resolution 3D data, and it collected orders of magnitude
faster and from much longer ranges than conventional methods.
At full operational capacity, HALOE could enable mapping of 50
percent of Afghanistan in 90 days. State-of-the-art deployed
systems would have required 3 years to accomplish that task,
and more conventional systems would have required 30 years.
--This increased performance is enabled by advances in shortwave
infrared sensitive material properties that permitted photon-
counting detector arrays so sensitive that it is now possible
to make range measurements with fewer than 10 photons received,
versus tens of thousands of photons. As is true with any
camera, increased sensitivity means an image can be captured
more quickly since the shutter has to be open for less time--
and less light is required to capture an image. Less time and
less power translate to higher collection rates at greater
standoff. HALOE can collect data at a rate more than 10 times
faster than state-of-the-art systems or 100 times faster than
conventional systems.
--HALOE was one of several DARPA advances directly supporting the
Warfighter that earned the agency the Joint Meritorious Unit
Award from the Secretary of Defense late in 2012.
Transition Plan and Status
--The HALOE sensor pod was initially integrated onto a WB-57 aircraft
and deployed to Afghanistan from November 2010 through August
2011 in a joint effort with the Army Geospatial Center (AGC).
During this time, over 70,000 square kilometers of terrain data
(about 10 percent of Afghanistan) were collected, reflecting
the priorities of operational units.
--In March 2012, with AGC funding, the HALOE sensor pod was
integrated onto a BD700 aircraft, a highly customized, longer-
range flight platform.
--In July 2013 the HALOE system was deployed to the AFRICOM Area Of
Responsibility (AOR). The system collected data in Africa
during eight flight sorties through August.
--In September 2013, HALOE was transferred to Afghanistan in
September 2013.
--HALOE performed exceedingly well in its several deployments in
Afghanistan, collecting more than 83 percent of all tasked
regions with a cumulative mission area of greater than 74,000
square kilometers. The collected data have been in response to
multiple RFIs in support of operational units. The HALOE system
has transitioned out of theater, with the last sortie flown in
December 2013.
--Plans call for a 6-month period in CONUS for maintenance and
training followed by redeployment in June 2014 for the
remainder of fiscal year 2014. Potential locations include AOR
of USCENTCOM (not Afghanistan), USAFRICOM, and USPACOM.
Blast Monitoring Tool Also Will Improve Future Understanding of
Injuries: Blast Gauge
Technology Description and Program Goal
--Blast Gauge is a low-cost, disposable, individually wearable sensor
system that records the environment during an explosive event--
for example, an attack from an improvised explosive
device (IED) or a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG), or the firing of
a missile or rocket during training.
--The goal was to rapidly develop and field a system to quantify
blast exposure, assist commanders in finding injured Service
Members who would otherwise not report, and record data to
understand blast injuries, including traumatic brain injury
(TBI).
--DARPA recognized that blast overpressure and linear acceleration
must be recorded--and at multiple points on the body--to
understand blast-related injuries and that the needed
technology could be built completely out of common commercial
components.
--The device was developed in just 11 months; Special Operations
Forces (SOF) fielded Blast Gauge in Afghanistan in July 2011
and Rochester Institute of Technology researchers who developed
the dosimeter quickly formed a small business to commercialize
and manufacture the gauges.
--Costing less than $50 per device, the gauge includes a simple
three-light system (red, yellow, green) to indicate condition
and magnitude immediately following a blast. Service Members
wear three gauges: on the back of the helmet, shoulder, and
chest. This allows a blast to be captured regardless of its
relative location.
--Information is transmitted to medical staff and researchers;
doctors and medics report that the lights are a valuable
feature for augmenting triage following a blast.
--DARPA also developed a system to capture the data, contributing to
better understanding of the effects of blasts on the brain.
Transition Plan and Status
--DARPA completed development with release of the latest generation
gauge in June 2013. It can be purchased directly from the
manufacturer or from Defense Logistics Agency stock.
--DARPA initially provided field support to train Soldiers on the
gauges and to distribute gauges and collect exposure data. More
than 150,000 gauges (50,000 sets) have been distributed to all
Services.
--As a result of the DARPA-funded field trials, Blast Gauge
technology has been adopted by SOF and the Army:
--The Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force Afghanistan
(CJSOTF-A) mandated that all special operators in its task
forces use blast gauges. They are purchasing 60,000 gauges
for deployed forces and stateside training.
--Other SOF units are purchasing and using gauges throughout
training and operations. In these cases, Blast Gauge has
become a key component of their strategy for managing TBI.
--The Army has selected Blast Gauge as one of three components of
its Integrated Soldier Sensor System (ISSS) requirement.
DARPA is supporting the Army in designing and evaluating
the ISSS.
--While the Army is developing its objective solution (ISSS), it
selected the Blast Gauge to be fielded to 18,000 Soldiers
in OEF.
--Other services (including the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory),
NATO partners, and Australia have independently evaluated the
gauges and are deciding on next steps.
--Blast Gauge was cited as a DARPA advance directly supporting the
Warfighter that contributed to the agency being awarded the
Joint Meritorious Unit Award from the Secretary of Defense in
2012.
--Military officials have shown interest in examining the data and
post-event analyses to gain insights into potential issues with
brain injuries resulting from improper techniques and
procedures for using equipment, including during training when
most exposures occur.
Revolutionizing Prosthetics (RP): Restoring Near-Natural Movement and
Control of Upper Limbs
Technology Description and Program Goal
--When DARPA launched the Revolutionizing Prosthetics (RP) program in
2006, the state of upper-limb prosthetic technology was far
behind lower-limb technology and was judged to be a more
difficult medical and engineering challenge.
--The concept of a new system design may open the option for Service
Members and others with upper-limb loss the chance to return to
more fully active lives.
--The two research teams selected for the program, DEKA Integrated
Solutions Corporation and the Johns Hopkins University Applied
Physics Lab (APL), were tasked to:
--Design and build anthropomorphic electromechanical upper
extremity prostheses that mimic the capabilities of a
natural arm for people with loss of an upper-limb.
--Develop near-natural control modalities including exploration of
direct neural control from peripheral nerves or the brain.
--Investigate the ability to provide sensory feedback from sensors
on the prosthesis through peripheral nerves or directly to
the brain.
--Collaboration with Veterans Affairs, National Institutes of Health,
Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, and Walter Reed
National Military Medical Center has given more than75 users
(amputees and tetraplegics) an opportunity to provide input to
the design of both arm systems and supported regulatory
submissions. In addition, Revolutionizing Prosthetics became
the pilot program of the Food and Drug Administration's
Innovation Initiative in 2011, providing a new pathway for
novel medical technologies.
Transition Plan and Status
--Since February 2012, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, a
subcontractor to the Applied Physics Lab (APL), has conducted a
successful clinical study in which research participants living
with tetraplegia were able to use neural signals from their
brain to directly control the Modular Prosthetic Limb (MPL).
This work has demonstrated that advanced prosthetics and direct
neural interfaces can enable restoration of near-natural arm
control to improve the quality of life for military personnel
and civilians living with amputation or paralysis.
--Veterans Affairs is conducting an independent 3-year home study of
the DEKA Arm System. The Food and Drug Administration's May
2014 approval allows DEKA to pursue manufacturing and
commercial opportunities to bring the arm to market. Their
transition plan includes development of advanced manufacturing
and distribution to medical practitioners.
--The APL's MPL serves as a research platform and some MPL technology
has transitioned to small robotic systems used in manipulating
unexploded ordnance and suspicious objects.
Smartphone Apps for the Dismounted Warfighter: Transformative Apps
(TransApps)
Technology Description and Program Goal
--Today's Warfighters perform increasingly complex tasks but are
still using outdated tools to access and share information on
the battlefield. From a ground Soldier's perspective, little
has changed in the last 20 years. They rely on inferior paper
maps, written notes and reference materials, and voice radio
transmissions to carry out their missions. Many technology
advances that consumers take for granted have not made their
way to the battlefield for a variety of reasons, especially
security concerns and lack of robust high-bandwidth networks.
--With the TransApps program, DARPA aims to put today's commercial
smartphone-grade capabilities in the hands of the Soldiers who
most need them--those on daily patrols in theater--making their
work much more effective and their lives easier and safer. In
the field, the devices are providing Soldiers with an
integrated ecosystem for situational awareness.
--Soldiers on patrol can keep up with fast-paced missions and
changing environments by sharing and managing information in
real time. That allows Warfighters and decision makers up and
down the ranks and in various functions to share a common
operating picture.
--They do this by using features and apps designed for their unique
requirements: for example taking note of changes in the field--
such as new bridges, structures, or civilians in an area--and
sharing that information immediately with others who will
direct and carry out future operations in that area.
--TransApps created a new agile development process, integration
framework, and customized test cycles to allow rapid
development of new applications, with new features and
enhancements deployed quickly based on Soldiers' evolving
requirements. When Soldiers need new apps, they can get them
quickly--sometimes the very next day. This is a radical
departure from how they have been operating. The TransApps
ecosystem bridges old and new, allowing future technologies to
work seamlessly with legacy radios and information systems. By
endowing commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) smartphones with
custom multilayered security and agile development processes
modified for the tactical community, TransApps is creating a
scalable and sustainable infrastructure template.
Transition Plan and Status
--A 4-year program that concludes in fiscal year 2014, TransApps was
first fielded to Afghanistan in 2011; within 18 months, more
than 3,000 systems were deployed to the battlefield, supporting
all Army maneuver operations theater-wide.
--In fiscal year 2014, DARPA is working with the Army Nett Warrior
Program to fully transition TransApps capabilities into the
enduring Program of Record, as part of the Army's efforts to
get new technologies into the hands of the Soldier.
--Other organizations and agencies are preparing to transition
program components. These include the Application Testing
Portal for streamlined security and performance analysis of
mobile applications, as well as TransApps' custom imagery
processing and configuration tools, which empower Soldiers to
manage their own maps based on mission requirements.
Persistent Close Air Support: Faster and There When Troops Need It
Technology Description and Program Goal
--To maintain a decisive tactical advantage in 21st-century combat,
Warfighters need to safely, rapidly, and collaboratively deploy
ordnance against elusive mobile targets. Unfortunately, air-
ground fire coordination, referred to as Close Air Support, or
CAS, has changed little since World War I.
--Pilots and dismounted ground agents can focus on only one target at
a time and often must ensure they hit it using just voice
directions and a paper map. In complex environments, it can
take up to an hour to confer, get in position and strike--time
in which targets can attack first or move out of reach.
--DARPA created the Persistent Close Air Support (PCAS) program to
enable dismounted ground agents and combat aircrews to share
real-time situational awareness and weapons systems data.
--The system DARPA developed and tested enables ground agents to
quickly and positively identify multiple targets
simultaneously. Ground and air forces would jointly select
precision-guided ordnance that best fits each target and
minimizes collateral damage and friendly fire.
Finally, both parties would authorize weapons deployment.
--Benefits would include reduction in time from calling in a strike
to target hits reduced from as much as 60 minutes to just 6
minutes; direct coordination of airstrikes by a ground agent
from manned or unmanned air vehicles; improved speed and
survivability of ground forces engaged with enemy forces; and
use of smaller, more precise munitions against smaller and
moving targets in degraded visual environments. Another benefit
is graceful degradation; if one piece of the system fails,
Warfighters still retain capability of more basic
functionality.
Transition Plan and Status
--In early 2013, DARPA deployed 500 Android tablets equipped with
PCAS-Ground situational awareness software to units stationed
in Afghanistan. An operator on the ground--with a tablet and
voice radio--communicated with a pilot who had a tablet in the
cockpit about imagery they both share on their tablets. (The
program also developed a networked solution that allows even
more rapid information sharing.)
--Field reports show that PCAS-Ground replaced those units' legacy
paper maps, dramatically improving ground forces' ability to
quickly and safely coordinate air engagements.
--The program, which began in fiscal year 2010 and concludes in early
2015, is in the flight-testing phase, which concludes with live
fire demonstrations.
--Elements of PCAS, particularly the JTAC ground software, are seeing
traction among various JTAC-related programs of record across
the Services.

Senator Durbin. Thank you.
Dr. Rauch.
STATEMENT OF DR. TERRY RAUCH, DIRECTOR, MEDICAL
RESEARCH FOR THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE
Dr. Rauch. Chairman Durbin, Vice Chairman Cochran, members
of the committee, I would like to thank you for the opportunity
to appear before you to discuss our research within the
military health system and our collaborations across
Government, academia, and industry.

IMPROVEMENTS IN COMBAT CASUALTY CARE

The military health system is a complex enterprise that we
use to gather health care delivery, medical education, public
health, private sector partnerships and cutting edge research.
Our research is the engine to integrate and embed emerging
evidence-based practices into a learning healthcare system
where healthcare providers, scientists, patients participate in
the generation of knowledge on health outcomes, identifying and
evaluating best medical practices, and assessing the impact of
changes in medical practice.
Research in the military health system has played a
significant role in changing health outcomes over the last 13
years of war. As the war progressed, the case fatality rate of
our servicemembers was nearly cut in half, and remarkably, this
occurred when the severity of injuries were increasing. Today
we deliver the highest survivability rates in the history of
warfare and that survivability is coupled with greater post-
injury quality of life. This is a tribute to our learning
healthcare system.

PREVENTION, CARE, AND TREATMENT OF POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER AND
OTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH ISSUES

Many of the results stemming from our research have not
only contributed to the survival and recovery of U.S.
servicemembers, but also translates well into the civilian
setting. Similar to the military experience, the results of
military medical research translate into improved hemorrhage
control, resuscitation en-route care, and damage control
surgery in the civil setting. Although significant and
continuing improvements in combat casualty care and personal
equipment have reduced fatal injuries, many servicemembers
return home with traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD), suicidal thoughts or behaviors, and other co-
occurring conditions such as depression, substance abuse
related to alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs, including misuse
and abuse of prescription drugs, and of course, chronic pain.
All of these complicate the prevention and treatment of PTSD,
traumatic brain injury, and suicidal behaviors.
To improve the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of
mental health conditions affecting veterans and servicemembers
and military families, the President issued an Executive order
in 2012 and directed the Federal agencies to develop a
coordinated national research action plan. The Department of
Defense with the VA and HHS (Department of Health and Human
Services) and the Department of Education responded with a
wide-reaching plan to improve scientific understanding, provide
effective treatment, and reduce the occurrences of PTSD,
traumatic brain injury, various co-occurring conditions, and
suicide. The plan builds on substantial work already underway
in the Federal agencies and provides a framework for improved
coordination across Government and in partnership with academia
and industry to share information, brainstorm innovations, and
accelerate science.

PREPARED STATEMENT

Scientific progress is incremental. It takes time, but our
servicemembers and their family members need more effective
prevention strategies and treatments. So our research mission
is urgent, most urgent.
I am both pleased and proud to be here today to represent
the women and men who perform the research mission of the
military health system, and I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Terry M. Rauch
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss medical research in
the Military Health System (MHS) and, in particular, our research
collaborations across government, academia, and industry.
The MHS is a complex system that weaves together healthcare
delivery, medical education, public health, private sector partnerships
and cutting edge medical research. Research in the MHS is the engine to
integrate and embed emerging evidenced-based practices into a learning
healthcare system in which the healthcare providers, scientists,
systems, and patients participate in the generation of knowledge on
trends in health and illness, the testing and identification of best
practices, and the assessment of the impact of practice changes.
Research by the MHS has played a significant role in the
performance of military trauma care over the last 13 years of war. As
the war progressed, we improved survivability rates--although the
severity of injuries increased. Today, we deliver the highest
survivability rates in the history of warfare and that survivability is
coupled with greater post-injury quality of life. These notable
achievements reflect the return on investment by MHS research in combat
casualty care, traumatic brain injury (TBI), psychological health and
suicide, rehabilitation and regenerative medicine, military operational
medicine, military infectious diseases, and medical training and
simulation. I will highlight achievements in some of these areas as
well as our collaborations across government, academia and industry.
combat casualty care research
Accomplishments in combat casualty care have led to the fielding of
safe and effective tourniquets, improved hemostatic dressings, as well
as numerous clinical practice guidelines to improve trauma care on the
battlefield. A significant enabler in these accomplishments is the
Joint Trauma System or JTS which has developed into the Department of
Defense's (DOD) ``go-to'' entity for real-time process improvement to
optimize survival and recovery of the warfighter. The swift translation
of evidence from military research through the JTS to the battlefield
represents a first in military medical history. The JTS maintains the
Department of Defense Trauma Registry (DODTR) which is the largest
repository of combat injury and trauma management information in
history. In this capacity, the JTS and the process it supports serve as
a fitting ``bedside'' to generate many of the clinical questions that
need answers from military medical and trauma research.
Recently, MHS researchers collaborating with industry received Food
and Drug Administration approval for a hemostatic device for the
control of bleeding from junctional wounds in the groin or axilla not
amenable to tourniquet application. In addition, the MHS is conducting
advanced development efforts on a dried plasma product to help control
hemorrhage on the battlefield. Other research efforts investigate
genetic, genomic, and immunological responses to trauma and hemorrhage
and finding improved means to reduce hypothermia.
documenting and sharing lessons learned
Advances in trauma care stemming from the military's learning
health system have been accelerated by the unprecedented burden of
injury resulting from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. While the more
than 30 Clinical Practice Guidelines maintained by the JTS are evidence
based, they are also responsive and practical. Reports on the
translation of advances in military trauma care to the civilian
community have become increasingly common. We are taking intentional
steps to codify and garner the lessons within the military's learning
healthcare system and promote their translation to the civilian sector
in partnership with the Institute of Medicine.
vaccine research
As a final step towards FDA licensure in the United States, a
clinical trial of a third generation smallpox vaccine, already approved
in Europe and Canada, is about to start in U.S. forces stationed in
South Korea. The DOD is participating in the clinical trial with the
vaccine manufacturer and has designated a staff member from the U.S.
Army Research Institute of Infectious Diseases to serve as the DOD
principal investigator. The new product is a modern smallpox vaccine
that does not replicate in human cells and is expected to be a safe
alternative for individuals who have certain contraindications to the
current smallpox vaccine.
national interagency biodefense campus
The National Interagency Biodefense Campus (NIBC) is a prime
example of interagency collaboration and includes not only DOD, but the
HHS' National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Departments of Agriculture
(USDA) and Homeland Security (DHS). Key DOD components of the NIBC are
the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases and the
U.S. Navy Medical Research Center. The NIBC is leading in the
development of medical counter measures as well as enhancing the U.S.
response to emerging threats and national emergencies and is one of the
Nation's few laboratory centers with Biosafety level 3 and 4
laboratories conducting world class research against the world's most
dangerous pathogens such as viral hemorrhagic fevers and plague. The
NIBC is a part of the larger interagency confederation known at the
National Interagency for Biological Research (NICBR).
u.s. army medical research institute of chemical defense
With your support the DOD has invested significantly in the U.S.
Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense (MRICD) with a
recapitalization project. The MRICD is currently at the 95 percent
stage of construction completion for a new Command and state of the art
laboratory building. They are scheduled to occupy the new building in
early January 2015. The MRICD is the Nation's Center of Excellence for
medical chemical defense research. Their world renowned scientists
conduct basic and applied research on the mechanisms of action of
chemical warfare threat agents, toxic industrial chemicals, and toxins
of biological origin. These hazardous chemicals and toxins endanger not
only our deployed our military forces but also pose an extremely
serious homeland security threat to our entire civilian population as
recent events in the Middle East have shown. The MRICD operates on a
whole of government approach by being the premier laboratory to
research candidate pretreatment, prophylactic, and treatment compounds.
These compounds establish a scientific and technical base from which to
plan and formulate enhanced medical countermeasures for our entire
population. Their efforts have produced many candidates for transition
into the advance development arena. Their scientists are on point to
investigate medical countermeasures for all non-traditional agents as
well as any emerging chemical threat agent regardless of the source.
The MRICD also provides consultative subject matter expertise on
medical chemical defense issues. They educate and train the full
spectrum of military/civilian first responders and medical
professionals in the identification and management of chemical
casualties. Many of our allied partners have recently sent personnel to
be trained in their courses so they can treat chemical casualties no
matter the circumstances.
rehabilitation and regenerative medicine research
Due to advances in combat casualty care, increasing numbers of
Service members are surviving with extreme trauma to the extremities
and head. Research by the MHS in rehabilitation and regenerative
medicine focuses on definitive and rehabilitative care innovations
required to reset Service members, both in terms of duty performance
and quality of life. The program has multiple initiatives to achieve
its goals, including improving prosthetic function, enhancing self-
regenerative capacity, improving limb and organ transplant success,
creating full functioning limbs and organs, repairing damaged eyes,
treating visual dysfunction following injury, improving pain
management, and enhancing rehabilitative care. Innovative
reconstructive research supported by the MHS in partnership with
Brigham and Women's Hospital has performed successful face transplants
on patients with severe facial deformity to provide functional and
aesthetic benefits. In addition, research supported by the MHS in
partnership with Johns Hopkins Hospital performed a bi-lateral hand
transplant on a Service member who lost all four limbs from a road side
bomb in Iraq. Today that Service member has achieved significant
function in both hands. Regenerative medicine technologies present many
opportunities for the treatment of combat-related traumatic injury and
the MHS is supporting the Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative
Medicine-Warrior Restoration Consortium to position promising
technologies and therapeutic/restorative practices for entrance into
human clinical trials. The Warrior Restoration Consortium is a
partnership with more than 30 academic institutions and industry
partners to address five focus areas in: extremity regeneration;
craniomaxillofacial regeneration; skin regeneration; genitourinary/
lower abdomen reconstruction; and composite tissue allotransplantation
(i.e., organ transplant from a donor) and immunomodulation or
modification of the immune response.
research to improve mental health for service members and military
families: the national research action plan
Although significant and continuing improvements in combat casualty
care and personal protective equipment have limited fatal injuries,
many Service members return with TBI, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD), suicidal thoughts or behaviors, and comorbidities. These
comorbidities include depression; substance abuse related to alcohol,
tobacco, and other drugs, including the misuse and abuse of
prescription drugs; and chronic pain, all of which can complicate the
prevention and treatment of PTSD, TBI, and suicidal behaviors. Family
members also are affected by the multiple stressors associated with
deployment and reintegration. Overall, the need for mental health
services for Service members and their family members is anticipated to
increase in coming years.
To improve prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of mental health
conditions affecting veterans, Service members, and military families,
the President issued an Executive Order in 2012 directing Federal
agencies to develop a coordinated National Research Action Plan (NRAP).
The Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human
Services, and Education responded with a wide-reaching plan to improve
scientific understanding; provide effective treatment; and reduce
occurrences of PTSD, TBI, various co-occurring conditions, and suicide.
The NRAP, released in August 2013, is a strategic blueprint for
interagency research to identify and develop more effective diagnostic
and treatment methodologies to improve outcomes for TBI, PTSD, and
related conditions as well as develop and test suicide risk assessments
and suicide prevention and treatment interventions. These efforts
include collaborative research on biomarkers to detect disorders early
and accurately; safe and effective treatments to improve function and
quality of life; and developing a more precise definition of mTBI. The
NRAP includes clear timelines and goals to achieve the same level of
urgency, specificity of deliverables, as well as accountability, as
expressed in the Executive Order. It is important to note that
improving mental health outcomes for Service members and Veterans and
the NRAP are included in the newly-established Cross-Agency Priority
Goal framework overseen by the Office of Management and Budget and the
Performance Improvement Council. The Cross-Agency Priority Goal,
Improving Mental Health Outcomes for Service members and Veterans, was
announced on March 10, 2014, and will continue over a 3 year period.
Leadership will report quarterly to the Office of Management and Budget
on their progress under the Goal.
Critical to the implementation of the NRAP is a continuing
understanding of the agency-specific activities and assuring a
collaborative and integrated research strategy to meet the requirements
in the NRAP. This collaboration and integration is provided in an
annual Joint Review and Analysis meeting on research related to PTSD,
TBI, suicide prevention, and substance abuse. Agency representation at
the meeting included DOD, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the
Department of Education (represented by the National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research [NIDRR]), and Health and Human
Services (represented by the National Institute of Neurological
Disorders and Stroke, the National Institute of Mental Health, and the
National Institute on Drug Abuse).
MHS researchers are attempting to answer questions across the
research continuum. However, fundamental gaps in scientific knowledge
remain, such as: the lack of a clinically-useful definition for mild
TBI (mTBI)/concussion makes it difficult to adequately diagnose this
condition. Note mTBI and concussion are used interchangeably herein.
For mTBI, improved techniques are needed to determine if symptoms are
attributable to the traumatic event. Prevention and treatment
interventions are needed that address the comorbidities that often
occur with PTSD. Evidence-based approaches are limited for reducing
suicide risk, and the relationships between PTSD, TBI, suicide, and co-
occurring conditions are not well understood.
Activities are underway in support of inter-agency collaboration,
including the DOD's Systems Biology Program and the Millennium Cohort
and Family Cohort Studies, the VA's Million Veteran Program, the
National Institutes of Health (NIH) biomarker research program, and
research dedicated to advancing prevention and treatment interventions.
The DOD and the Centers for Disease Control are partnering with the
Brain Trauma Foundation to develop a clinically useful definition of
mTBI/concussion. Suicide prevention research includes the DOD's
Military Suicide Research Consortium and the National Institute of
Mental Health and DOD Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in
Service members (Army STARRS) program.
Data-sharing efforts include the DOD/NIH Federal TBI Research
Informatics System for TBI clinical research (a central repository for
new TBI-related data that links to existing databases to facilitate
sharing of information), the VA computing infrastructure, and NIDRR's
TBI Model Systems National Database, which contains retrospective data
on the clinical progress and outcomes of individuals with moderate to
severe TBI.
Recently initiated activities include two new joint funded DOD and
VA research consortium efforts with academia to support PTSD and TBI
biomarker studies. The Consortium to Alleviate PTSD is a new research
effort focused on biomarker discovery and development with the aim of
identifying biomarkers for subacute and chronic PTSD that can be used
for therapeutic and outcome assessment. This represents a major
investment to advance knowledge related to biomarkers and clinical
utility. The Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium will establish
the association of the chronic effects of mTBI and common
comorbidities; determine whether there is a causative effect of chronic
mTBI/concussion on neurodegenerative disease and other comorbidities;
identify diagnostic and prognostic indicators of neurodegenerative
disease and other comorbidities associated with mTBI/concussion; and
develop and advance methods to treat and rehabilitate chronic
neurodegenerative disease and comorbid effects of mTBI/concussion.
The MHS is funding a wide variety of studies relevant to military
family members, including research focused on: understanding risk and
resilience factors of military families and communities; suicide
bereavement in Service members and their families; interventions to
enhance resilience, address and prevent relationship problems, and
support families during deployment; the effectiveness of web-enhanced
support tools for military families; and the effects of military
deployment of parents on adolescent mental health.
conclusion
Scientific progress is incremental and takes time, but Service
members and their family members need more effective prevention
strategies and treatments, so our research mission is urgent. I am both
pleased and proud to be here with you today to represent the men and
women who perform the research mission of the MHS, and I look forward
to answering your questions.

Senator Durbin. Thank you very much.
Ms. Miller.
STATEMENT OF MARY MILLER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
THE ARMY FOR RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Miller. Thank you, Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member
Cochran, members of the committee. Thank you for this
opportunity to discuss the Army's science and technology
program for fiscal year 2015.
After 13 years of persistent conflict, the Army finds
itself in a familiar situation, facing a declining defense
budget and a strategic landscape that continues to evolve. As a
result, the Army must balance between force structure,
operational readiness, and modernization to maintain a capable
force able to prevent, shape, and win in any engagement.
Modernization will be slowed over the next 5 years. New
programs will not be initiated as originally envisioned, and
the Army's science and technology enterprise will be challenged
to better prepare for the programs and capabilities of the
future.
To ensure that we make the best choices for the future
Army, we have established a comprehensive modernization
strategy that facilitates, informs strategic decisions based on
long-term objectives within a resource-constrained environment.
This long-term look over 30 years was exceptionally powerful in
facilitating the strategic decisions made within the Army as we
built fiscal year 2015's President's budget. It allowed the
Army leadership to make tough program decisions based on
providing the most capability to the soldier, knowing that in
some cases that meant delaying desired capabilities. This is
essential as the Army looks at its S&T community to conduct
more technology demonstration and prototyping initiatives that
will focus on maturing technology, reducing program risk,
defining realistic requirements, and conducting experimentation
with soldiers to refine new capabilities and operational
concepts. The S&T community will be challenged to bring forward
not only new capabilities but capabilities that are affordable.
They are up to this challenge.

PREPARED STATEMENT

We remain an Army that is looking towards the future while
taking care of our soldiers of today. I hope that we can
continue to count on your support as we move forward. Thank you
again for all that you do for our soldiers.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mary J. Miller
Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Cochran, and distinguished members
of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the
Army's Science and Technology (S&T) Program for fiscal year 2015.

``Over the past 12 years of conflict, our Army has proven itself in
arguably the most difficult environment we have ever faced. Our
leaders at every level have displayed unparalleled ingenuity,
flexibility and adaptability. Our Soldiers have displayed
mental and physical toughness and courage under fire. They have
transformed the Army into the most versatile, agile, rapidly
deployable and sustainable strategic land force in the world.''
\1\ --Secretary John W. McHugh, General Raymond T. Odierno
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Posture of the United States Army, Committee on Armed
Services, United States House of Representatives, April 23, 2013.

After 13 years of persistent conflict, the United States finds
itself in a familiar situation--facing a declining defense budget and a
strategic landscape that continues to evolve. As our current large-
scale military campaign draws down, the United States still faces a
complex and growing array of security challenges across the globe as
``wars over ideology have given way to wars over religious, ethnic, and
tribal identity; nuclear dangers have proliferated; inequality and
economic instability have intensified; damage to our environment, food
insecurity, and dangers to public health are increasingly shared; and
the same tools that empower individuals to build enable them to
destroy.'' \2\ Unlike past draw downs, where the threats we faced were
going away, there remain a number of challenges that we still have to
confront--challenges that call for a change in America's defense
priorities. Despite these challenges, the United States Army is
committed to remaining capable across the spectrum of operations. While
the future force will become smaller and leaner, its great strength
will lie in its increased agility, flexibility, and ability to deploy
quickly, while remaining technologically advanced. We will continue to
conduct a complex set of missions ranging from counterterrorism, to
countering weapons of mass destruction, to maintaining a safe, secure
and effective nuclear deterrent. We will remain fully prepared to
protect our interests and defend our homeland.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ National Security Strategy, May 2010.
\3\ ``The Posture of the United States Army,'' The Honorable John
M. McHugh, Secretary of the Army and General Raymond T. Odierno, Chief
of Staff, United States Army before the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Defense, May 22, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army depends on its Science and Technology (S&T) program to
help prepare for the future, mitigate the possibility of technical
surprise and ensure that we remain dominant in any environment. The
Army's S&T mission is to foster discovery, innovation, demonstration
and transition of knowledge and materiel solutions that enable future
force capabilities and/or enhance current force systems. The Army
counts on the S&T Enterprise to be seers of the future--to make
informed investments now, ensuring our success for the future.
The Army is ending combat operations in Afghanistan and refocusing
on the Asia-Pacific region with greater emphasis on responses to
sophisticated, technologically proficient threats. We are at a pivotal
juncture--one that requires us to relook the past 13 years of conflict
and capitalize on all the lessons that we have learned, while we
implement a strategic shift to prepare for a more capable enemy. As the
Department of Defense prepares for the strategic shift, the Army will
adapt--remaining an ever present land force--unparalleled throughout
the World.
We are grateful to the members of this Committee for your sustained
support of our Soldiers, your support of our laboratories and centers
and your continued commitment to ensure that funding is available to
provide our current and future Soldiers with the technology that
enables them to defend America's interests and those of our allies
around the world.
Strategic Landscape
As we built the fiscal year 2015 President's Budget Request, the
Army faced a number of significant challenges. While the Army has many
priorities, the first and foremost priority is and always will be to
support our Soldiers in the fight. We are pulling our troops and
equipment out of Afghanistan by the end of this December, we are
drawing down our force structure, we are resetting our equipment after
13 plus years of war and we are trying to modernize. Given the budget
downturn within the Department of Defense, the Army has been forced to
face some difficult choices. The Army is in the midst of a significant
force structure reduction--taking the Army to pre-World War II manning
levels. The Chief of Staff of the Army has undertaken difficult
decisions balancing force structure, operational readiness, and
modernization to maintain a capable force able to prevent, shape and
win in any engagement. As a result, over the next 5 years, we face a
situation where modernization will be slowed, new programs will not be
initiated as originally envisioned and the Army's S&T Enterprise will
be challenged to better prepare for the programs and capabilities of
the future. We will focus on maturing technology, reducing program
risk, developing prototypes that can be used to better define
requirements and conducting mission relevant experimentation with
Soldiers to refine new operational concepts. The S&T community will be
challenged to bring forward not only new capabilities, but capabilities
that are affordable for the Army of the future.

``Going forward, we will be an Army in transition. An Army that
will apply the lessons learned in recent combat as we
transition to evolving threats and strategies. An Army that
will remain the best manned, best equipped, best trained, and
best led force as we transition to a leaner, more agile force
that remains adaptive, innovative, versatile and ready as part
of Joint Force 2020.'' \4\ --General Raymond T. Odierno, 38th
Chief of Staff, Army
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Marching Orders,'' General Raymond T. Odierno, 38th Chief of
Staff, U.S. Army, January 2012.

Goals and Commitments
The emerging operational environment presents a diverse range of
threats that vary from near-peer to minor actors, resulting in new
challenges and opportunities. In this environment, it is likely that
U.S. forces will be called upon to operate under a broad variety of
conditions. This environment requires a force that can operate across
the range of military operations with a myriad of partners,
simultaneously helping friends and allies while being capable of
undertaking independent action to defeat enemies, deter aggression, and
shape the environment. At the same time, innovation and technology are
reshaping this environment, multiplying and intensifying the effects
that even minor actors are able to achieve.
The Army's S&T investment is postured to address these emerging
threats and capitalize on opportunities. The S&T investment continues
to not only focus on developing more capable and affordable systems,
but also on understanding the complexity of the future environment. We
have focused on assessing technology and system vulnerabilities (from
both a technical and operational perspective) to better effect future
resilient designs and to prepare countermeasures that restore our
capabilities when necessary.
There are persistent (and challenging) areas where the Army invests
its S&T resources to ensure that we remain the most lethal and
effective Army in the world. As the Army defines its role in future
conflicts, we are confident that these challenges will remain relevant
to the Army and its ability to win the fight. The S&T community is
committed to help enable the Army achieve its vision of an
expeditionary, tailorable, scalable, self-sufficient, and leaner force,
by addressing these challenges:
--Enabling greater force protection for Soldiers, air and ground
platforms, and bases (e.g., lighter and stronger body armor,
helmets, pelvic protection, enhanced vehicle survivability,
integrated base protection).
--Easing overburdened Soldiers in small units (both cognitive and
physical burden, e.g., lighter weight multi-functional
materials).
--Enabling timely mission command and tactical intelligence to
provide situation awareness and communications in ALL
environments (mountainous, forested, desert, urban, jamming,
etc.).
--Reducing logistic burden of storing, transporting, distributing and
retrograding materials.
--Creating operational overmatch (enhancing lethality and accuracy).
--Achieving operational maneuverability in all environments and at
high operational tempo (e.g., greater mobility, greater range,
ability to operate in high/hot environments).
--Enabling early detection and treatment for Traumatic Brain Injury
(TBI) and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
--Improving operational energy (e.g., power management, micro-grids,
increased fuel efficiency engines, higher efficiency
generators, etc.).
--Improving individual and team training (e.g., live-virtual-
constructive training).
--Reducing lifecycle costs of future Army capabilities.
In addition to these enduring challenges, the S&T community
conducts research and technology development that impacts our ability
to maintain an agile and ever ready force. This includes efforts such
as establishing environmentally compatible installations and materiel
without compromising readiness or training, creating leader selection
methodologies, and new test tools that can save resources and reduce
test time, and establishing methods and measures to improve Soldier and
unit readiness and resilience.
The Army S&T strategy acknowledges that we must respond to the new
fiscal environment and changing technology playing field. Many critical
technology breakthroughs are being driven principally by commercial and
international concerns. We can no longer do business as if we dominate
the technology landscape. We must find new ways of operating and
partnering. We realize that we should invest where the Army must retain
critical capabilities but reap the benefits of commercially driven
technology development. No matter the source, we will ensure the Army
is aware of the best and most capable technologies to enable a global,
networked and full-spectrum joint force in the future. As the U.S.
rebalances its focus by region and mission, it must continue to make
important investments in emerging and proven capabilities. In a world
where all have nearly equal access to open technology, innovation is
the most important discriminator in assuring technology superiority.
The Chief of Staff of the Army has made his vision clear.

``The All-Volunteer Army will remain the most highly trained and
professional land force in the world. It is uniquely organized
with the capability and capacity to provide expeditionary,
decisive landpower to the Joint Force and ready to perform
across the range of military operations to Prevent, Shape, and
Win in support of Combatant Commanders to defend the Nation and
its interests at home and abroad, both today and against
emerging threats.'' \5\ --General Raymond T. Odierno, 38th
Chief of Staff, Army
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Gen Raymond Odierno, 38th Chief of Staff Army, ``CSA Strategic
Priorities, Waypoint 2'', 2014.

The Army is relying on its S&T community to carry out this vision
for the Army of the future.
Implementing New Processes
Turning science into capability takes a continuum of effort
including fundamental research, the development and demonstration of
technology, the validation of that technology and its ultimate
conversion into capability. From an S&T materiel perspective, this
includes the laboratory confirmation of theory, the demonstration of
technical performance, and the experimentation with new technologies to
identify potential future capabilities and to help refine/improve
system designs. But the S&T Enterprise is also charged with helping to
conceptualize the future--to use our understanding of the laws of
physics and an ability to envision a future environment to broaden the
perspective of the requirements developers as well as the technology
providers.
As part of this continuum, the Army has adopted a 30 year planning
perspective to help facilitate more informed program planning and
budget decisions. A major part of the S&T strategy is to align S&T
investments to support the acquisition Programs of Record (PoRs)
throughout all phases of their lifecycle and across the full DOTMLPF
(Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel, and
Facilities) process. By expanding the perspective, we are able to
identify areas where there are unaffordable alignments of activities
(such as multiple major Engineering Change Proposals in the same
portfolio within the same 2-3 year timeframe) or unrealistic alignments
(such as planned technology upgrades to a system that has already
transitioned into sustainment). With that information in mind, the Army
has established ``tradespace'' to generate options that inform
strategic decisions that allow the Army to stay within its fiscal top
line while maximizing its capabilities for the Warfighter.
This new and ongoing process, known as the Long Range Investment
Requirements Analysis (LIRA), has put additional rigor into the
development of the Army's budget submission and creates an environment
where the communities who invest in all phases of the materiel
lifecycle work together to maximize the Army's capabilities over time.
From an S&T perspective, it clearly starts to inform the materiel
community as to WHEN technology is needed for insertion as part of a
planned upgrade. It also cues us as to when to start investing for
replacement platforms. In addition, this long-range planning can
introduce opportunities for convergence of capabilities such as the
development of a single radar that can perform multiple functions for
multiple platforms or the convergence of cyber and Electronic Warfare
(EW) capabilities into one system. Aside from the obvious benefits
achieved by laying out the Army's programs and seeing where we may have
generated unrealizable fiscal challenges, it has reinvigorated the
relationships and strengthened the ties between the S&T community and
their Program Executive Office (PEO) partners. We are working together
to identify technical opportunities and the potential insertion of new
capabilities across this 30 year timeframe.
The LIRA process was used to inform the development of the fiscal
year 2015 President's Budget. As the Army faced a dramatic decline in
its modernization accounts (a 40 percent decrement over the next 2
years), we used the results of the LIRA to ensure that we had a
fiscally sound strategy.
The S&T Portfolio
The nature of S&T is such that continuity and stability have great
importance. Starting and stopping programs prevents momentum in
research and lengthens the timelines for discovery and innovation.
While the Army S&T portfolio gains valuable insight from the threat
community, this only represents one input to the portfolio and likely
describes the most probable future. To have a balanced outlook across
all the possible futures requires that the portfolio also address the
``possible'' and ``unthinkable.'' The Army's S&T portfolio is postured
to address these possible futures across the eight technology
portfolios identified Figure 1.

The efforts of the S&T Enterprise are managed by portfolio to
ensure maximum synergy of efforts and reduction of unnecessary
duplication. The S&T program is organized into eight investment
portfolios that address challenges across six Army-wide capability
areas (Soldier/Squad; Air; Ground Maneuver; Command, Control,
Communications, and Intelligence (C3I); Lethality; and Medical) and two
S&T enabling areas (Basic Research and Innovation Enablers).
The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) protects and prioritizes
key investments in technology to maintain or increase capability while
forces grow leaner. This is an opportunity to look at innovative
applications of technology. As a result, in the fiscal year 2015
President's budget request, the Army is maintaining, and shifting
investments where necessary within portfolios as well at various stages
of technology maturity, emphasizing on technology areas that enable the
Army to be leaner, expeditionary, and more lethal. In fiscal year 2015,
our Advanced Technology Development investments increase to 42 percent
of our $2.2 billion budget. This is a deliberate increase from previous
years as the Army looks to its S&T community to conduct more technology
demonstration/prototyping initiatives that will inform future Programs
of Record (PoRs).
We are now in an era of declining acquisition budgets and are
mindful of the challenges this brings to our S&T programs. We will have
fewer opportunities for transition to Programs of Record in the next
few years. This ``pause'' in acquisition does however afford us the
opportunity to further develop and mature technologies, ensuring that
when acquisition budgets do recover, S&T will be properly positioned to
support the Army's next generation of capabilities. This year finds the
Army beginning to rebalance its S&T funding between Basic Research,
applied research and advanced technology development. We appreciate the
flexibility that was provided to the DOD S&T executives to better align
our funding to our Service/Agency needs after years of proscriptive
direction.
The Army is maintaining its level of investment in the S&T
portfolio from fiscal year 2014 to fiscal year 2015, dedicating more
than $2.2 billion to meeting the Army's needs and priorities for future
capability: $424 million in Basic Research, $863 million in Applied
Research, and $918 million in Advanced Technology Demonstrations.
Specifically you will see the Army shifting or increasing emphasis on
research areas that support the next generation of combat vehicles
(including power and energy efficiency, mobility and survivability
systems), Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) technologies such as assured
Position Navigation and Timing (PNT) and austere entry capabilities,
Soldier selection tools and training technologies, as well as long
range fires. Two of these efforts, the Future Infantry Fighting Vehicle
(FIFV) and the assured Position Navigation and Timing (PNT) efforts are
being done in collaboration with the respective PEOs to ensure that the
capability developed and demonstrated not only helps to refine the
requirements for the future PoRs but establishes an effective link for
transition. We are also increasing our investments in vulnerability
assessments of both technology and systems as well as expanding our Red
Teaming efforts to identify potential vulnerabilities in emerging
technologies, systems and systems-of-systems, including performance
degradation in contested environments, interoperability, adaptability,
and training/ease of use. This year begins the re-alignment necessary
to implement our strategy of investing in areas critical to the Army--
areas where we have critical skills sets, and leveraging others (sister
services, other government agencies, academia, industry, allies) for
everything else.
We anticipate a future where rapidly advancing technologies such as
autonomous systems, high yield energetics, immersive training
environments, alternative power and energy solutions, and the use of
smart phones and social media will become critical to military
effectiveness. The Army will continue to develop countermeasures to
future threat capabilities and pursue technological opportunities.
Enemies and adversaries however, will counter U.S. technological
advantages through cover, concealment, camouflage, denial, deception,
emulation, adaptation, or evasion. Finally, understanding how humans
apply technology to gain capabilities and train will continue to be at
least as important as the technologies themselves.
We are mindful however that the Army will continue to be called on
for missions around the globe. The Army is currently deployed in 160
countries conducting missions that range from humanitarian support to
stability operations to major theater warfare. As we have seen in the
last few months, the world is an unpredictable place, and our Soldiers
must have the capabilities to deal with an ever changing set of
threats.
S&T Portfolio Highlights
I'd like to highlight a few of our new initiatives and remind you
of some of our ongoing activities that will help frame the options for
the Army of the future.
Soldier/Squad Portfolio (Fiscal Year 2015 = $252 Million)
One of the important initiatives currently underway that we
anticipate will make major inroads into our efforts to lighten the
Soldier's load is the development of a Soldier Systems Engineering
Architecture, which has a $45 million investment in fiscal year 2015.
This architecture, developed in concert with our acquisition and
requirements community, is an analytical decision-based model through
which changes in Soldier system inputs (loads, technology/equipment,
physiological & cognitive state, stress levels, training, etc.) may be
assessed to predict changes in performance outputs of the Soldier
system in operationally relevant environments. By using a systems
engineering approach, the model will result in a full system level
analysis capable of predicting impacts of both materiel and non-
materiel solutions on fully equipped Soldiers performing operational
missions/tasks
In keeping with the CSA's vision, our S&T efforts also support the
Army's training modernization strategy by developing technologies for
future training environments that sufficiently replicate the
operational environment. We are also developing new training
effectiveness measures and methods, ensuring that these new training
technologies can rapidly and effectively transfer emerging warfighting
experience and knowledge into robust capabilities. In addition, the
need to reduce force structure has increased the importance of our
research in the area of personnel selection and classification. This
research will provide the Army with methods to acquire and retain
candidates best suited for the Army--increasing our flexibility to
adapt to changes in force size, structure and mission demands. Other
important research includes developing scientifically valid measures
and metrics to assess command climate and reduce conduct related
incidences, including sexual harassment and assault in units to ensure
the Army can maintain a climate of dignity, respect and inclusion.
Air Portfolio (Fiscal Year 2015 = $176 Million)
As the lead service for rotorcraft, owning and operating over 80
percent of the Department of Defense's vertical lift aircraft, the
preponderance of rotorcraft technology research and development takes
place within the Army. Our key initiative, the Joint Multi-Role
Technology Demonstrator (JMR TD) program which has a $54 million
investment in fiscal year 2015, is focused on addressing the Anti-
Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) need for longer range and more efficient
combat profiles. As we shift to the Pacific Rim focus, future Areas of
Operation (AO) may be sixteen times larger than those of our current
AOs. The Army needs a faster, more efficient rotorcraft, capable of
operating in high/hot environments (6,000 feet and 95 degrees) with
significantly decreased operating costs and maintenance required. The
new rotorcraft will also require improved survivability against current
and future threats. The goal of the JMR TD effort is to reduce risk for
the Future Vertical Lift planned PoR, the Department of Defense's next
potential ``clean sheet'' design rotorcraft. The overall JMR TD effort
will use integrated government/industry platform design teams and
exercise agile prototyping approaches. At the same time, the Army is
collaborating with DARPA on their x-plane effort. While the DARPA
program is addressing far riskier technologies that are not constrained
by requirements, we will look to leverage technology advancements
developed under the DARPA effort where possible.
Another initiative that we are beginning in fiscal year 2015, with
an investment of $32 million, is addressing one of the biggest causes
of aircraft loss--accidents that occur while operating in a Degraded
Visual Environments (DVE). DVE is much more than operating while in
brown out--this effort looks at mitigating all sources of visual
impairment, either those caused by the aircraft itself (brownout,
whiteout) or other ``natural'' sources (rain, fog, smoke, etc.). We are
currently conducting a synchronized, collaborative effort with PEO
Aviation to define control system, cueing, and pilotage sensor
combinations which enable maximum operational mitigation of DVE. This
S&T effort will result in a prioritized list of compatible, affordable
DVE mitigation technologies, and operational specification development
that will help inform future Army decisions. This program is tightly
coupled with the PEO Aviation strategy and potential technology off-
ramps will be transitioned to the acquisition community along the way,
when feasible.
Ground Maneuver Portfolio (Fiscal Year 2015 = $383 Million)
The Ground Maneuver Portfolio is focused on maturing and
demonstrating technologies to enable future combat vehicles, including
the FIFV. The fiscal year 2015 S&T investment in FIFV is $131 million.
In fiscal year 2015, you will see the beginning of a focused initiative
done in collaboration with PEO Ground Combat Systems, to develop
critical sub-system prototypes to inform the development and
requirements for the Army's FIFV. These sub-system demonstrators focus
on mobility (e.g., engine, transmission, suspension); survivability
(e.g., ballistic protection, under-body blast mitigation, advanced
materials); Active Protection Systems (APS); a medium caliber gun and
turret; and an open vehicle power and data architecture that will
provide industry with a standard interface for integrating
communications and sensor components into ground vehicles.
Armor remains an Army-unique challenge and we have persistent
investments for combat and tactical vehicle armor, focusing not only on
protection but also affordability and weight reduction. We continue to
invest in advanced materials and armor technologies to inform the next
generation of combat and tactical vehicles.
In fiscal year 2015, this portfolio continues to shift its focus to
address A2/AD challenges. We've increased efforts on technologies to
enable stand-off evaluation of austere ports of entry and
infrastructure to better enable our ability to enter areas of conflict.
We are also maintaining technology investments in detection and
neutralization of mines and improvised explosive devices to ensure
freedom of maneuver.
C3I Portfolio (Fiscal Year 2015 = $321 Million)
The C3I portfolio provides enabling capability across many of the
Army enduring challenges, but specifically seeks to provide responsive
capabilities for the future in congested Electro-Magnetic environments.
These capabilities are supported by sustained efforts in sensors,
communications, electronic warfare and information adaptable in
dynamic, congested and austere (disconnected, intermittent and limited)
environments to support battlefield operations and non-kinetic warfare.
Renewed efforts in the C3I portfolio include reinvigorating efforts in
sensor protection. We continue to invest in EW vulnerability analysis
to perform characterization and analysis of radio frequency devices to
develop detection and characterization techniques, tactics, and
technologies to mitigate the effects of contested environments (such as
jamming) on Army C4ISR systems.
Given the potential challenges that we face while operating in a
more contested environment, we are placing additional emphasis on
assured PNT, developing technologies that allow navigation in Global
Positioning System (GPS) denied/degraded environments for mounted and
dismounted Soldiers and unmanned vehicles such as exploiting signals of
opportunity. The fiscal year 2015 investment in PNT is $24 million. We
will study improvements for high sensitivity GPS receivers that could
allow acquisition and tracking in challenging locations such as under
triple canopy jungles, in urban areas, and inside buildings. We are
developing Anti-Jam capabilities as well as supporting mission command
with interference source detection and location and signal strength
measurement, thereby enabling the Army to conduct its mission in
challenging electromagnetic environments.
The C3I Portfolio also includes efforts in cyber, both defensive
and offensive at an investment level of $44.5 million. Defensive
efforts in cyber security will investigate and develop software,
algorithms and devices to protect wireless tactical networks against
computer network attacks. We are developing sophisticated software
assurance algorithms to differentiate between stealthy life cycle
attacks and software coding errors, as well as investigating and
assessing secure coding methodologies that can detect and self-correct
against malicious code insertion. We will research and design
sophisticated, optimized cyber maneuver capabilities that incorporate
the use of reasoning, intuition, and perception while determining the
optimal scenario on when to maneuver, as well as the ability to map and
manage the network to determine probable attack paths and the
likelihood of exploitation.
On the offensive side of cyber operations, we will develop
integrated electronic attack (EA) and computer network operations
hardware and software to execute force protection, EA, electronic
surveillance and signals intelligence missions in a dynamic,
distributed and coordinated fashion.
We will demonstrate protocol exploitation software and techniques
that allow users to remotely coordinate, plan, control and manage
tactical EW and cyber assets; develop techniques to exploit protocols
of threat devices not conventionally viewed as cyber to expand total
situational awareness by providing access to and control of adversary
electronic devices in an area of operations.
Lethality Portfolio (Fiscal Year 2015 = $230 Million)
In fiscal year 2015, you will see continued emphasis on the
development of A2/AD capabilities through Long Range Fires and Counter
Unmanned Aircraft technologies. S&T is focusing on advanced seeker
technologies to enable acquisition of low signature threats at extended
ranges, along with dual pulse solid rocket motor propulsion to provide
longer range rockets and extend the protected areas of air defense
systems. To support these capabilities, we are conducting research in
new energetic materials focused on both propulsive and explosive
applications. These materials have significantly higher energetic yield
than current materials and will increase the both effectiveness of our
systems and reduce their size.
We also continue to develop Solid State High Energy Lasers, at an
investment level of $44.9 million in fiscal year 2015, to provide low
cost defeat of rockets, artillery, mortars and unmanned aircraft. We
have had multiple successes in High Energy Lasers, as we demonstrated
successful tracking and defeat of mortars and unmanned aircraft in
flight this year (fiscal year 2014) from our mobile demonstrator.
Additionally, we are supporting the Ground Maneuver Portfolio in
the demonstration of a medium caliber weapon system, at an investment
level of $13.5 million in fiscal year 2015, to enable FIFV requirements
for range and lethality including an airburst munition.
Medical (Fiscal Year 2015 = $143 Million)
The Medical portfolio addresses the wellness and fitness of our
Soldiers from accession through training, deployment, treatment of
injuries and return to duty or to civilian life. Ongoing efforts
address multiple threats to our Soldiers' health and readiness. Medical
research focuses on areas of physiological and psychological health
that directly support the Chief of Staff of the Army Ready and
Resilience Campaign and the Army Surgeon General's Performance Triad
(Activity, Nutrition and Sleep). Research in these portfolios includes
important areas such as Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD), totaling $41.5 million in fiscal year 2015. In
fiscal year 2015, $47 million has gone into continued research to
mitigate infectious diseases prevalent in the Far East as well as
combat casualty care solutions at the point of injury that will extend
Soldier's lives during the extended distances associated with
conducting operations in the Pacific.
TBI research efforts include furthering our understanding of cell
death signals and neuroprotection mechanisms, as well as identifying
critical thresholds for secondary injury comprising TBI. The Army is
also evaluating other nontraditional therapies for TBI, and identifying
``combination'' therapeutics that substantially mitigate or reduce TBI-
induced brain damage. Current Army funded research efforts in the area
of PTSD are primarily focused upon development of pharmacologic
solutions for the prevention and treatment of PTSD. A large-scale
clinical trial is currently underway evaluating the effectiveness of
Sertraline, one of two Selected Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs)
approved for the treatment of civilian PTSD, but not combat-related
PTSD. This study will evaluate Sertraline's effectiveness in the
treatment of combat-related PTSD both alone and in combination with
psychotherapy.
Innovation Enablers (Fiscal Year 2015 = $275 Million)
As the largest land-owner/user within the DOD, it is incumbent upon
the Army to be good stewards in their protection of the environment. As
such, the Army develops and validates lifecycle models for sustainable
facilities, creates dynamic resource planning/management tools for
contingency basing, develops decision tools for infrastructure
protection and resiliency and assesses the impact of sustainable
materials/systems on the environment.
In addition, we conduct blast noise assessment and develop
mitigation technologies to ensure that we remain ``good neighbors''
within Army communities and work to protect endangered species while we
ensure that the Army mission can continue.
The High Performance Computing (HPC) Modernization Program, at an
investment level of $181.6 million in fiscal year 2015, supports the
requirements of the DOD's scientists and engineers by providing them
with access to supercomputing resource centers, the Defense Research
and Engineering Network (DREN) (a research network which matures and
demonstrates state of the art computer network technologies), and
support for software applications, including the experts that help to
improve and optimize the performance of critical common DOD
applications programs to run efficiently on advanced HPC systems
maturing and demonstrating leading-edge computational technology.
The Army's Technology Maturation Initiatives effort, established in
fiscal year 2012 enables a strategic partnership between the S&T and
acquisition communities. This effort, funded at $75 million in fiscal
year 2015, has become especially important as the Army heads into a
funding downturn. We plan to use these funds to prepare the Army to
capitalize on S&T investments as we come out of the funding ``bathtub''
near the end of the decade. We are using these Budget Activity 4
resources to target areas where acquisition programs intended to
provide necessary capabilities have been delayed, such as assured PNT,
the FIFV, and APS. We are investing resources that will either provide
capability or inform/refine requirements for the Army's future systems
(all of which will be done via collaborative programs executed with our
acquisition/PEO partners).
This portfolio includes our ManTech efforts as well, funded at $76
million in fiscal year 2015. Last month, President Obama announced the
launch of the Digital Manufacturing and Design Innovation Institute
(DMDI). Headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, and managed by the U.S.
Army's Aviation and Missile Research Development and Engineering
Center, the DMDI Institute spearheads a consortium of 73 companies,
universities, nonprofits, and research labs. The president announced a
government investment of $70 million and matching private investments
totaling $250 million for the institute. DMDI is part of the
president's National Network of Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) and
will focus on the development of novel model-based design
methodologies, virtual manufacturing tools, and sensor and robotics
based manufacturing networks that will accelerate the innovation in
digital manufacturing and increase U.S. competitiveness.
Basic Research (Fiscal Year 2015 = $424 Million)
Underpinning all of our efforts and impacting all of the enduring
Army challenges is a strong basic research program. Army Basic Research
includes all scientific study and experimentation directed toward
increasing fundamental knowledge and understanding in those fields of
the physical, engineering, environmental, and life sciences related to
long-term national security needs. The vision for Army Basic Research
is to advance the frontiers of fundamental science and technology and
drive long-term, game-changing capabilities for the Army through a
multi-disciplinary portfolio teaming our in-house researchers with the
global academic community to ensure overwhelming land-warfighting
capabilities against any future adversary.
While we have made some significant adjustments within the Basic
Research investments within the Army, we will continue to emphasize
several areas that we feel have a high payoff potential for the
Warfighter. These areas include: Materials in Extreme Environments;
Quantum Information and Sensing; Intelligent Autonomous Systems; and
Human Sciences/Cybernetics.
For centuries, the fabrication of solid materials has hinged
largely on manipulating a narrow range of temperatures and pressures.
Our Materials in Extreme Environments initiative invests in new
revolutionary and targeted scientific opportunities to discover and
exploit the fundamental interaction of matter under extreme static
pressures and magnetic fields, controlled electromagnetic wave
interactions (microwave, electrical) and acoustic waves (ultrasound) to
dramatically enhance fabrication and create engineered materials with
tailored microstructures and revolutionary functionalities.
Additionally, we are in the midst of a second quantum revolution--
moving from merely computing quantum properties of systems to
exploiting them.
To enable the Warfighter, animal-like intelligence is desired for
simple autonomous platforms, such as robotic followers, and for aerial
and ground sensor platforms. We are investing in research that will
enable highly intelligent systems that allow platforms to set waypoints
autonomously, increasing mission effectiveness; followers that
recognize the actions of their unit, that can perceive when the unit is
deviating from a previously prescribed plan and know enough to query
why; and that recognize when the unit is resting and be capable of
doing so without explicit instructions from the Soldier.
Regardless of specific definition, human sciences are critical and
can safely be predicted to become pervasive across all Army research
activities. Cognitive predictions of social person-to-person
communication based on observed gestures, eye movement, and body
language are becoming possible. In addition, brain-to-brain interaction
is emerging as a potential paradigm based on external sensors and brain
stimulation. The Army will continue to study these and other possible
techniques, to understand shared knowledge, social coordination,
discourse comprehension, and detection and mitigation of conflict.
Cognitive models combined with sensors also have the potential for
dramatic breakthroughs in human-autonomy interaction, including aspects
such as active learning algorithms, real-time crowd-sourcing with
humans and machines in the cloud, and maximizing artificial
intelligence (AI) prediction accuracy. Devices and sensors that are
wearable or implantable (including biomarkers and drug therapy) have
the potential to enhance performance dramatically and to augment
sensory information through new human-sensor-machine interface designs.
The role of Basic Research is to provide the knowledge, technology,
and advanced concepts to enable the best equipped, trained and
protected Army to successfully execute the national security strategy,
cannot be understated. The key to success in Basic Research is picking
the right research challenges, the right people to do the work, and
providing the right level of resources to maximize the likelihood of
success.
Impact of Sequestration
I am often asked what impact sequestration had on the Army's S&T
portfolio, so I would like to address some of the impacts we have seen.
The fiscal year 2013 application of sequestration targets (hitting
every Program Element in the S&T portfolio by a set percentage) forced
the Army into a scenario where we decremented programs that we would
have protected, if given the opportunity. This lack of flexibility made
for some very bad business and technical ramifications. Within the S&T
community, we were able to balance our sequestration targets at the
Program Element, vice Project level--giving us the ability to avoid
civilian
Reduction in Force (RIF) actions where possible. That said,
sequestration did result in unfunded efforts and delays in applied
research and technology development areas across the S&T portfolio.
More generally, the sequestration cuts added unnecessary risk to
acquisition programs and delayed the transition of critical
capabilities to the Warfighter.
However, by far the most serious consequence of sequestration (and
the related pay freezes, shutdowns, conference restrictions, etc.) has
been the impact on our personnel. Without a world-class cadre of
scientists and engineers, the Army S&T enterprise would be unable to
support the needs of the Army. The Army Labs and Research, Development
and Engineering Centers have reported multiple personnel leaving for
other job opportunities or early retirement. For example, the Night
Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate lost eight personnel in the 2
months prior to the well-publicized DOD-wide furloughs, compared to an
average annual loss of around 19 personnel. These losses include
personnel across experience levels with specialized expertise critical
to the Army. While the average attrition rate over the past 2 years is
running at about 8 percent (similar to a typical attrition rate found
in prior years), the concerning impact is that 60 percent of the
personnel leaving the Army are NOT eligible for retirement. This is a
big change. During our exit interviews, reasons cited included
conference restrictions (impeding the ability to progress
professionally) coupled with increasing job insecurity due to budget
decrements and planned manpower reductions. Complicating this loss of
technical expertise is the restriction on hiring replacements for the
lost government civilians. We are on a replacement cycle that varies
between 1 hire per every 3 losses at one lab, to 1 hire for every 20
losses at another. This pattern of loss is unsustainable if we hope to
maintain a premier technical workforce. Finally, as we address the 2013
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Section 955 language which
mandates a reduction in the civilian workforce commensurate with a
reduction in the military, we must confront the impacts of any civilian
reductions, which are implemented through a personnel process that
tends to primarily impact those employees who have less tenure in the
government. For the S&T community that typically impacts those areas of
new technical emphasis within the DOD--key areas such as cyber research
and systems biology.
While the Bipartisan Budget Act has provided some relief and
stability for fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2015, the uncertainty
again looming on the horizon makes it even more difficult to recruit
and retain the scientists and engineers the Army depends on. As you
know, the key to any success within the Army lies with our people.
The S&T Enterprise Infrastructure and Workforce
Our laboratory infrastructure is aging, with an average approximate
facility age of 50 years. Despite this, the S&T Enterprise manages to
maximize the scarce sustainment, restoration, and modernization funding
and the authorities for minor military construction using NDAA, Sec.
219 funding to minimize the impact on the R&D functions with the
Enterprise. However, we are only making improvements to our
infrastructure at the margins, and where possible we have used MILCON,
through your generous support and unspecified minor construction to
modernize facilities and infrastructure. However, we do acknowledge
that much of the Army is in a similar position. This is not a long-term
solution. While the authorities that you have given us have been
helpful, they alone are not enough, and we are still faced with the
difficulty of competing within the Army for ever-scarcer military
construction dollars at the levels needed to properly maintain world-
class research facilities. This will be one of our major challenges in
the years to come and I look forward to working with OSD and Congress
to find a solution to this issue.
The S&T community affords us the flexibility and agility to respond
to the many challenges that the Army will face. Without the world-class
cadre of over 12,000 Federal civilian scientists and engineers and the
infrastructure that supports their work, the Army S&T Enterprise would
be unable to support the needs of the Warfighter. To maintain
technological superiority now and in the future, the Army must maintain
an agile workforce. Despite this current environment of unease within
the government civilian workforce, exacerbated by conference
restrictions, budget uncertainty, furloughs, and near zero pay
increases, we continue to have an exceptional workforce. But, as I
mentioned earlier, attracting and retaining the best science and
engineering talent into the Army Laboratories and Centers is becoming
more and more challenging. Our laboratory personnel demonstrations give
us the flexibility to enhance recruiting and afford the opportunity to
reshape our workforce, and I appreciate Congress' continued support for
these authorities to include the flexibilities given to the
Laboratories and Centers in the 2014 NDAA, Section 1107 language. The
flexibilities given to the laboratories and centers allow the
laboratory directors the maximum management flexibility to shape their
workforce and remain competitive with the private sector.
The Army S&T Enterprise cannot survive without developing the next
generation of scientists and engineers. We continue to have an amazing
group of young scientists and engineers that serve as role models for
the next generation. For example, last year Dr. Ronald Polcawich, a
researcher at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL), was named by
President Obama to receive a 2012 Presidential Early Career Award for
Scientists and Engineers as one of the Nation's outstanding young
scientists for his work in Piezoelectric-Micro Electro-Mechanical
Systems (PiezoMEMS) Technology. Dr. Polcawich, is leading a team of
researchers at the ARL in studying PiezoMEMS with a focus on developing
solutions for RF systems and actuators for millimeter-scale robotics.
These actuators combined/integrated with low power sensors are being
developed to enable millimeter-scale mechanical insect-inspired robotic
platforms.
The need for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM) literacy, the ability to understand and apply concepts from
science, technology, engineering and mathematics in order to solve
complex problems, goes well beyond the traditional STEM occupations of
scientist, engineer or mathematician. The Army also has a growing need
for highly qualified, STEM-literate technicians and skilled workers in
advanced manufacturing, logistics, management and other technology-
driven fields. Success and sustainment for the Army S&T Enterprise
depends on a STEM-literate population to support innovation and the
Army must contribute to building future generations of STEM-literate
and agile talent.
Through the Army Educational Outreach Program (AEOP), funded at $9
million in fiscal year 2015, the Army makes a unique and valuable
contribution to meet the national STEM challenge--a challenge which
includes the growing demand for STEM competencies; the global
competitiveness for STEM talent; an unbalanced representation of our
Nation's demographics in STEM fields; and the critical need for an
agile and resilient STEM workforce. AEOP offers a cohesive,
collaborative portfolio of STEM programs that provides students, as
well as teachers, access to our world-class Army technical
professionals and research centers. Exposure to STEM fields and STEM
professionals is critical to growing the next generation of STEM-
literate young men and women who will form the Army's workforce of
tomorrow.
In the 2012-2013 academic year, AEOP directly engaged more than
66,000 students and nearly 1,500 teachers in authentic research
experiences. Almost 2,351 Army Scientists and Engineers (S&E's)
provided mentorship, either from our in-house research laboratories or
through our university partnerships. Additionally in fiscal year 2013,
we initiated a comprehensive evaluation strategy (the first of its
kind) that uses the government and a consortium of STEM organizations
known for their nationwide education and outreach efforts to annually
assess our program. Aligned with Federal guidance, AEOP requires the
evaluation of all elements of the program based on specific, cohesive,
metrics and evidence-based approaches to achieve key objectives of Army
outreach; increased program efficiency and coherence; the ability to
share and leverage best practices; as well as focus on Army priorities.
The AEOP priorities are:
--STEM Literate Citizenry: Broaden, deepen and diversify the pool of
STEM talent in support of the Army and our defense industry
base.
--STEM Savvy Educators: Support and empower educators with unique
Army research and technology resources.
--Sustainable Infrastructure: Develop and implement a cohesive,
coordinated and sustainable STEM education outreach
infrastructure across the Army.
For fiscal year 2015, we are concentrating on implementing
evidence-based program improvements, strengthening additional joint
service sponsored efforts, and identifying ways to expand the reach and
influence of successful existing programs by leveraging partnerships
and resources with other agencies, industry and academia.
New Approaches to Enhance Innovation
It is widely acknowledged that innovation depends on bringing
multiple scientific disciplines together to engage in collaborative
projects--often yielding unpredictable, yet highly productive results.
Formal and informal interactions among scientists lead to knowledge-
building and research breakthroughs. These types of collaborations are
happening on a day-to-day basis across our labs and engineering centers
to produce the superior technology that our Army needs today, tomorrow
and beyond. With shrinking budgets and huge leaps in the pace of
technological change, our Army S&T organizations must do more with less
and faster than ever before to develop technology that will ensure
mission success for the Army's first battle after next. To this end, we
must more succinctly leverage scientific discovery from our academic
and industry base by increasing the scientific engagement and flow of
ideas that leads to ground breaking innovation.
In 1945, Vannevar Bush`s concepts documented in ``Science--the
Endless Frontier'' stressed the necessity of a robust/synergistic
university, industry and government laboratory research system. Over
the years, the rigid and insular nature of the defense laboratories
have caused an erosion of that university/industry/government lab
synergy that is critical to the discovery, innovation and transition of
science and technology important to national security.
In an effort to reenergize that synergy, the U.S. Army Research
Laboratory (ARL) is working to extend their alliances through an Open
Campus Concept that brings together under one roof the triad of
industry, academia, and government. Leveraging the cutting-edge
innovation of academia, the system development and transition expertise
of industry and their own Army-focused fundamental research; ARL can
harness the power of the triad to produce revolutionary science and
technology more efficiently and effectively. The Open Campus Concept
creates an ecosystem for academia, defense labs, and industry to share
people, facilities and resources to develop and deliver transformative
science oriented on solving complex Army problems. It will provide the
means for our world-class scientific talent to work together in state-
of-the-art facilities to provide innovation that allows rapid
transition of technology to our Soldiers. ARL's Open Campus Concept
could lead to a new business model that would transform the defense
laboratory enterprise into an agile, efficient and effective laboratory
system that supports the continuous flow of people and ideas to ensure
transformative scientific discovery, innovation and transition critical
to national security.
Finally, we are increasingly mindful of the globalization of S&T
capabilities and expertise. Our International S&T strategy provides a
framework to leverage cutting edge foreign science and technology
enabled capabilities and engages with allies through Global S&T Watch.
Global S&T Watch is a systematic process for identifying, assessing,
and documenting relevant foreign research and technology developments.
The Research, Development and Engineering Command's (RDECOM)
International Technology Centers (ITCs), Engineer Research and
Development Center (ERDC) international research office and the Medical
Research Materiel Command's OCONUS laboratories identify and document
relevant foreign S&T developments. We have initiated a new process to
strategically identify and selectively engage our allies when their
technologies and materiel developments can contribute to Army needs and
facilitate coalition interoperability. The resultant engagements will
augment the existing bilateral leadership forums we currently maintain
with the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and Israel which provide both
visibility of and management decisions on allied developments that
merit follow-up for possible collaboration.
Summary
As the Army S&T program continues to identify and harvest
technologies suitable for transition to our force, we aim to remain
ever vigilant of potential and emerging threats. We are implementing a
strategic approach to modernization that includes an awareness of
existing and potential gaps; an understanding of emerging threats;
knowledge of state-of-the-art commercial, academic, and government
research; as well as a clear understanding of competing needs for
limited resources. Army S&T will sharpen its research efforts to focus
upon those core capabilities it needs to sustain while identifying
promising or disruptive technologies able to change the existing
paradigms of understanding. Ultimately, the focus remains upon
Soldiers; Army S&T consistently seeks new avenues to increase the
Soldier's capability and ensure their technological superiority today,
tomorrow, and decades from now. The Army S&T mission is not complete
until the right technologies provide superior, yet affordable,
overmatch capability for our Soldiers. I will leave you with a last
thought from the Secretary of the Army, the Honorable John McHugh.

``Our Strategic Vision is based on a decisive technological
superiority to any potential adversary.'' \6\ --Honorable John
W. McHugh, 21st Secretary of the Army
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Terms of Reference, fiscal year 2012 Army Science Board Summer
Study, Secretary of the Army, John M. McHugh, October 28, 2011.

This is an interesting, yet challenging, time to be in the Army.
Despite this, we remain an Army that is looking towards the future
while taking care of the Soldiers today. I hope that we can continue to
count on your support as we move forward, and I would like to again
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
thank the members of the Committee for all you do for our Soldiers.

Senator Durbin. Thank you, Ms. Miller.
Dr. Walker.
STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID WALKER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING
Dr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Durbin,
Senator Cochran, members of the subcommittee, I am pleased to
have an opportunity today to provide testimony on the Air Force
science and technology program.
The globalization and the proliferation of technology means
that we have a wide spectrum of threats that we have to face,
which has led to competition across all domains that we operate
in. As our Chief of Staff stated in his recent vision,
``Despite the best analysis and projection by national security
experts, the time and place of the next crisis are never
certain and rarely what we expect.''
To guarantee our security in this dynamic environment
requires that we learn lessons from the past couple of decades
of war that we have been involved in but also be able to
creatively visualize what our future will be and to develop a
science and technology program to address that.
In this space, we are really finding great opportunity. The
Air Force scientists and engineers continue to evolve and
advance innovative, game-changing technologies and enabling
technologies that will transform the landscape of how the Air
Force flies, flights, and wins in the airspace and cyberspace.
In close coordination with the requirements, intelligence,
and acquisition communities, we have structured our S&T program
to address our highest priority needs of the Air Force, to
execute a balanced and integrated program that is responsive to
the Air Force core mission, and to advance critical technical
competencies needed to address future research.
The Air Force as a whole had to make difficult trades
between force structure, readiness, and modernization in this
year's President's budget submission. The Air Force S&T request
is approximately $2.3 billion, which is about a 6.2-percent
decrease over the fiscal year 2014 request. However, when you
look at this compared to the overall Air Force RDT&E (research,
development, testing, and evaluation) input in the fiscal year
2015, that was a decrease of 9 percent. So S&T actually fared
well versus the RDT&E as a whole.
Our budget request has rebalanced our basic research
spending as part of our overall portfolio to increase our
emphasis on technology demonstrations. It also emphasized our
game-changing technologies of hypersonics, autonomy, directed
energy, and fuel-efficient propulsion technologies. All of
these provide us a greater range, speed, and lethality for
operations in highly contested environments described in our
2014 QDR (Quadrennial Defense Review) report.
As I stated earlier, our scientific opportunities lie
between learning from the past and visualizing the future. The
increased laboratory hiring and personnel management
authorities and the flexibilities provided by Congress over the
last several years have done much to improve our ability to
attract the Nation's best talents and to explore these
opportunities. However, we still have work to do to ensure that
we sustain the quality of our laboratories and if we have long-
term budget decreases, this will impact our ability to fund
this. So funding uncertainties and the decreases in budget
really lead to an uncertain future for our S&T, which leads to
loss of opportunities for new discovery and for innovative
technologies.
As a result of sequestration in fiscal year 2013, we
canceled or delayed or rescoped over 100 contracts, resulting
in a cost and an extended technology development schedule,
ultimately delaying improved capabilities for the warfighter.
For example, the rescoping of work on a very sophisticated
ground-based imaging of objects in extremely high altitude
orbits is going to delay technology availability for at least a
year for a transition into our Air Force Space Command.

PREPARED STATEMENT

In closing, I firmly believe maintaining and even expanding
our technological advantage is vital to ensuring assured access
and freedom of action in the airspace and cyberspace. The
focused and balanced investments of the Air Force fiscal year
2015 S&T program are hedges against an unpredictable future and
provide a pathway to a flexible, precise, and lethal force at a
relatively low cost in relation to the return on investment.
On behalf of the dedicated scientists and engineers of the
Air Force S&T enterprise, I thank you again for the opportunity
to testify today and look forward to your questions and thank
you all for your support of the Air Force S&T community.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. David E. Walker
introduction
Chairman Durbin, Vice Chairman Cochran, and Members of the
Subcommittee, I am pleased to have the opportunity to provide testimony
on the fiscal year 2015 Air Force Science and Technology (S&T) Program,
especially during this unprecedented time in our history.
Our Nation is one of a vast array of actors in a complex, volatile,
and unpredictable security environment. Globalization and the
proliferation of technology mean we face threats across a wide spectrum
and competition across all domains. We're confronted by ever-evolving
adversaries ranging from one person with a single interconnected
computer to sophisticated capable militaries and everything in between.
We're also challenged by the shear pace of change among our adversaries
fueled by profound information and technology diffusion worldwide. As
stated by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force in the Global Vigilance,
Global Reach and Global Power For Our Nation vision, ``despite the best
analyses and projections by national security experts, the time and
place of the next crisis are never certain and are rarely what we
expect.'' Success and the guaranty of security in this dynamic
environment require that we both take lessons learned from the last
decade of conflict and creatively visualize the future strategic
landscape. It's in this space, between learning from the past and
keeping an open eye to the future, where we find opportunity.
The focused and balanced investments of the Air Force fiscal year
2015 S&T Program are hedges against the unpredictable future and
provide pathways to a flexible, precise and lethal force at a
relatively low cost in in relation to the return on investment. The
Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
recently reminded us that complacency now and in the future is simply
not an option. Maintaining, and even expanding, our technological
advantage is vital to ensuring sustained freedom of access and action
in air, space and cyberspace.
air force fiscal year 2015 s&t program
The Air Force as a whole had to make difficult trades between force
structure (capacity), readiness, and modernization (capability) in the
Service's fiscal year 2015 President's Budget submission to recover
from budget uncertainty over the two previous fiscal years. The Air
Force fiscal year 2015 President's Budget request for S&T is
approximately $2.1 billion, which includes nearly $178 million in
support of devolved programs consisting of High Energy Laser efforts
and the University Research Initiative. This year's Air Force S&T
budget request represents a decrease of $141 million or a 6.2 percent
decrease from the fiscal year 2014 President's Budget request, a
slightly larger reduction as compared to the overall Air Force topline
reduction. This budget request rebalances basic research spending as
part of the overall portfolio to increase emphasis on conducting
technology demonstrations. The Air Force was able to reduce funding in
the aerospace systems and materials areas while still advancing
capabilities for the Air Force and the Department of Defense (DOD) by
smartly leveraging research being conducted by the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in the hypersonics area.
We've learned a great deal over the last decade. The dedicated
scientists and engineers of the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)
have successfully supported warfighters during conflicts in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and North Africa through the rapid development of systems
and capabilities including persistent intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance (ISR); data fusion and integration from multiple
sensors; and near real-time monitoring of some orbiting U.S. and
commercial spacecraft assets. With the pivot to the Pacific as outlined
in the Defense Strategic Guidance, we must continue to evolve and
advance ``game-changing'' and enabling technologies which can transform
the landscape of how the Air Force flies, fights and wins against the
high-end threats in contested environments envisioned in the future.
In close coordination with the requirements, intelligence and
acquisition communities, we have structured our Air Force fiscal year
2015 S&T Program to address the highest priority needs of the Air Force
across the near-, mid- and far-term; execute a balanced and integrated
program that is responsive to Air Force core missions; and advance
critical technical competencies needed to address the full range of
product and support capabilities. The Air Force continues to focus
efforts to deliberately align S&T planning, technology transition
planning, development planning and early systems engineering. The
linkages between these planning activities are critical to initiating
acquisition programs with more mature technologies and credible cost
estimates, and we are institutionalizing these linkages in Air Force
policy. Air Force S&T provides critical inputs at several phases of the
Chief of Staff of the Air Force's Air Force 2023 strategic planning
effort including helping to shape the ``realm of the possible'' when
envisioning long term strategy, offering technologies to expand the
strategic viewpoint and identifying potential solutions to requirements
and capability gaps. Our forthcoming updated Air Force S&T strategy
focuses on investing in S&T for the future, as well as leverages our
organic capacity, and the capacity of our partners (domestic and
international), to integrate existing capabilities and mature
technologies into innovative, affordable, and sustainable solutions.
This flexible strategy provides us the technological agility to adapt
our S&T Program to dynamic strategic, budgetary, and technology
environments and will shape prioritized actionable S&T plans.
near term technology transition
The Air Force continues to move our Flagship Capability Concept
(FCC) projects toward transition to the warfighter. A well-defined
scope and specific objectives desired by a Major Command (MAJCOM) are
key factors in commissioning this type of an Air Force-level technology
demonstration effort. The technologies are matured by the Air Force
Research Laboratory with the intent to transition to the acquisition
community for eventual deployment to an end user. These FCCs are
sponsored by the using MAJCOM and are vetted through the S&T Governance
Structure and Air Force Requirements Oversight Council to ensure they
align with Air Force strategic priorities. In fiscal year 2014, the Air
Force successfully completed and transitioned the Selective Cyber
Operations Technology Integration (SCOTI) FCC and will continue work on
the High Velocity Penetrating Weapon (HVPW) and Precision Airdrop (PAD)
FCCs.
AFRL delivered the SCOTI FCC to the Air Force Life Cycle Management
Center (AFLCMC) in September 2013, on time, on budget and within
specification. SCOTI consists of cyber technologies capable of
affecting multiple nodes for the purposes of achieving a military
objective and gaining cyberspace superiority. SCOTI's robust, modular
architecture provides vital extensibility to allow cyber warriors to
keep pace with rapidly evolving threats. AFLCMC is evaluating the
delivered SCOTI architecture for integration with operational cyber
mission software to directly meet the needs of a major capability area
in the Air Force Cyberspace Superiority Core Function Master Plan. By
successfully meeting the requirements of the stakeholder-approved
Technology Transition Plan, SCOTI is the first FCC to transition and
will serve as a baseline for current and future integrated cyber tools
to provide needed effects for the warfighter.
The HVPW FCC was established to demonstrate critical technologies
to reduce the technical risk for a new generation of penetrating
weapons to defeat difficult, hard targets. This FCC matures
technologies that can be applied to the hard target munitions
acquisition including guidance and control, terminal seeker, fuze,
energetic materials and warhead case design. This effort develops
improved penetration capability of hard, deep targets containing high
strength concrete with up to 2,500 feet per second (boosted velocity)
impact in a GPS-degraded environment. This technology will demonstrate
penetration capability of a 5,000 pound-class gravity weapon with a
2,000 pound weapon thus enabling increased loadout for bombers and
fighters. Tests will demonstrate complete warhead functionality, and
are scheduled to be completed the end of September 2014.
The PAD FCC was commissioned in response to a request from the
Commander of Air Mobility Command for technologies to improve airdrop
accuracy and effectiveness while minimizing risk to our aircrews. To
date, PAD FCC efforts have focused on: early systems engineering
analysis to determine major error sources, data collection, flying with
crews, wind profiling, bundle tracking, and designing modeling and
simulation activities. The Air Force Research Laboratory completed the
bundle tracker development in fiscal year 2013 and in fiscal year 2014
began wind profile sensor development.
game-changing technologies
The Air Force S&T Program provides technology options to enable
operations in anti-access, area-denial environments and transform the
way we fly, fight and win in air, space and cyberspace. To illustrate
how, I will highlight some of our efforts in game-changing and enabling
technology areas:
Hypersonics
Speed provides options for engagement of time sensitive targets in
anti-access/area-denial environments, and improves the survivability of
Air Force systems. Hypersonic speed weapons are also a force multiplier
as fewer are required to defeat difficult targets and fewer platforms
are required from greater standoff distances. The Air Force S&T
community continues to execute the high speed technology roadmaps
developed with industry over the last 3 years. We are also building on
the success of the X-51A Waverider scramjet engine hypersonic
demonstrator, which on 1 May 2013 reached an approximate Mach Number of
5.1 during its fourth and final flight. The Air Force has focused
multi-faceted, phased investments in game-changing technology for
survivable, time-critical strike in the near term and a penetrating
regional intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and
strike aircraft in the far term.
The near term strike effort is the High Speed Strike Weapon (HSSW)
program. This effort will mature cruise missile technology to address
many of those items necessary to realize a missile in the hypersonic
speed regime including: modeling and simulation; ramjet/scramjet
propulsion; high temperature materials; guidance, navigation, and
control; seekers and their required apertures; warhead and subsystems;
thermal protection and management; manufacturing technology; and
compact energetic booster technologies.
The Air Force conducts research and development in all aspects of
hypersonic technologies in partnership with NASA, DARPA, and industry/
academic sectors. The HSSW program will include two parallel integrated
technology demonstration efforts to leverage DARPA's recent experience
in hypersonic technologies that are relevant to reduce risk in key
areas. One of the demonstrations will be a tactically-relevant
demonstration of an air breathing missile technology that is compatible
with Air Force 5th generation platforms including geometric and weight
limits for internal B-2 Spirit bomber carriage and external F-35
Lightening II fighter carriage. This demonstration will build on the X-
51 success and will include a tactically compliant engine start
capability and launch from a relevant altitude.
For the other demonstration, the Air Force and DARPA will seek to
develop technologies and demonstrate capabilities that will enable
transformational changes in prompt, survivable, long-range strike
against using the Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) concept. The objective of
the TBG effort is to develop and demonstrate the critical technologies
that will enable an air launched tactical range, hypersonic boost-glide
missile. Both efforts will build upon experience gained through recent
hypersonic vehicle development and demonstration efforts supported by
DARPA and the Air Force. These demonstrations are traceable to an
operationally relevant weapon that could be launched from existing
aircraft. Technology and concepts from these efforts will provide
options for an operational weapon system for rapidly and effectively
prosecuting targets in highly contested environments.
Autonomy
Analysis of these future operating environments has also led the
Air Force to invest in game-changing advances in autonomous systems.
Autonomous systems can extend human reach by providing potentially
unlimited persistent capabilities without degradation due to fatigue or
lack of attention. The Air Force S&T Program is developing technologies
that realize true autonomous capabilities including those that advance
the state-of-the-art in machine intelligence, decisionmaking, and
integration with the warfighter to form effective human-machine teams.
The greater use of autonomous systems increases the capability of
U.S. forces to execute well within the adversaries' decision loops.
Human decision-makers intelligently integrated into autonomous systems
enable the right balance of human and machine capability to meet Air
Force challenges in the future. The Air Force S&T Program invests in
the development of technologies to enable warfighters and machines to
work together, with each understanding mission context, sharing
understanding and situation awareness, and adapting to the needs and
capabilities of the other. The keys to maximizing this human-machine
interaction are: instilling confidence and trust among the team
members; understanding of each member's tasks, intentions, capabilities
and progress; and ensuring effective and timely communication. All of
which must be provided within a flexible architecture for autonomy,
facilitating different levels of authority, control and collaboration.
Current research is focused on understanding human cognition and
applying these concepts to machine learning. Efforts develop efficient
interfaces for an operator to supervise multiple unmanned air systems
(UAS) platforms and providing the ISR analyst with tools to assist
identifying, tracking, targets of interest.
Autonomy also allows machines to synchronize activity and
information. Systems that coordinate location, status, mission intent,
and intelligence and surveillance data can provide redundancy,
increased coverage, decreased costs and/or increased capability.
Research efforts are developing control software to enable multiple,
small UASs to coordinate mission tasking with other air systems or with
ground sensors. Other research efforts are developing munition sensors
and guidance systems that will increase operator trust, validation, and
flexibility while capitalizing on the growing ability of munitions to
autonomously search a region of interest, provide additional
situational awareness, plan optimum flight paths, de-conflict
trajectories, optimize weapon-to-target orientation, and cooperate to
achieve optimum effects.
Finally, before any system is fielded, adequate testing must be
conducted to demonstrate that it meets requirements and will operate as
intended. As technologies with greater levels of autonomy mature, the
number of test parameters will increase exponentially. Due to this
increase, it will be impractical to verify and validate autonomous
system performance, cost-effectively, using current methods. The Air
Force is developing test techniques that verify the decisionmaking and
logic of the system and validate the system's ability to appropriately
handle unexpected situations. Efforts are focused at the software-level
and build to overall system to verify codes are valid and trustworthy.
The Air Force will demonstrate the tools needed to ensure autonomous
systems operate safely and effectively in unanticipated and dynamic
environments.
Directed Energy
With a uniquely focused directorate within AFRL, the Air Force is
in a leading position in the game-changing area of directed energy.
These technologies, including high powered microwave (HPM) and high
energy lasers (HELs), can provide distinctive and revolutionary
capabilities to several Air Force and joint mission areas. Laser
technologies are rapidly evolving for infrared seeker jamming, secure
communications in congested and jammed spectrum environments, space
situational awareness, and vastly improved ISR and target
identification capabilities at ever increasing ranges. To get HELs to a
weapon system useful to the Air Force, our S&T program invests in
research in laser sources from developing narrow line width fiber
lasers to scaling large numbers of fiber lasers with DARPA and MDA.
Since HEL devices are not sufficient for a weapon, the Air Force
directed energy research also includes beam control, atmospheric
compensation, acquisition, pointing, tracking, laser effects, and
physics based end-to-end modeling and simulation. The Air Force also
funds the High Energy Laser Joint Technology Office (HEL JTO) which
supports all of the services by being the key motivator of high power
laser devices such as the successful 100 kilowatt, lab-scale Joint High
Power Solid State Laser (JHPSSL) and other funding many smaller
successes. The current primer program, which is jointly funded with
core Army and Air Force funds, is the Robust Electric Laser Initiative
(RELI). The initiative funds efforts to develop designs for efficient
and weaponizable solid state lasers with options leading to a 100
kilowatt laser device.
Our HPM S&T will complement kinetic weapons to engage multiple
targets, neutralizing communication systems, computers, command and
control nodes, and other electronics, with low collateral damage for
counter-anti-access/area denial in future combat situations. The Air
Force is using the results of from the highly successful Counter-
Electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project (CHAMP) Joint
Capabilities Technology Demonstration (JCTD) to inform an effort known
as Non-Kinetic Counter Electronics (NKCE). NKCE is currently in pre-
Alternative of Alternatives (AoA) phase, with an AoA potentially
starting in fiscal year 2015. The AoA will examine the cost and
performances for kinetic, non-kinetic, and cyber options for air
superiority and seeks to have a procured and operational weapon system
to support the targets and requirements of the Combatant Commanders in
the mid-2020 timeframe. In parallel, the Air Force S&T Program is
continuing HPM research and development to provide a more capable and
smaller counter-electronics system that can fit onto a variety of
platforms.
The DOD directed energy research community is highly integrated and
the Air Force leverages the work of other agencies. For example, the
Air Force is working with the Missile Defense Agency on integrated
electro-optical/infrared pulsed-laser targeting to enhance situational
awareness and increase survivability by enabling the use of legacy
weapons in the 2016 timeframe. In addition, the Air Force is partnering
with DARPA on the Demonstrator Laser Weapon System, a ground-based
fully integrated laser weapon system demonstration over the next 2
fiscal years and an Air-to-Air Defensive Weapon Concept.
Fuel Efficiency Technologies
For the longer term reduction in energy demand, the Air Force is
investing in the development of adaptive turbine engine technologies
which have the potential to reduce fuel consumption while also
increasing capability in anti-access/area denial environments through
increased range and time-on-station. The Air Force has several priority
efforts as part of the DOD's Versatile Advanced Affordable Turbine
Engine (VAATE) technology program. VAATE is a coordinated Army, Navy,
and Air Force plan initiated in 2003 to develop revolutionary advances
in propulsion system performance, fuel efficiency and affordability for
the DOD's turbine engine powered air platforms.
The initial effort, Adaptive Versatile Engine Technology (ADVENT),
began in fiscal year 2007 and is set to complete this year. General
Electric is currently in final testing of the ADVENT engine
technologies which include a next generation high pressure ratio core
and an adaptive fan in a third stream engine architecture.
The Adaptive Engine Technology Development (AETD) program, our
accelerated follow-on adaptive engine effort for the combat Air Force,
is progressing very well. The objective of AETD is to fully mature
adaptive engine technologies for low risk transition to multiple combat
aircraft alternatives ready for fielding as soon as the early 2020's.
The effort will deliver a preliminary prototype engine design,
substantiated by major hardware demonstrations that can be tailored to
specific applications when the DOD is ready to launch new development
programs. The overarching goal of AETD is to mature adaptive engine
technologies so that these programs can launch with significantly lower
risk than previous propulsion development programs.
The High Energy Efficient Turbine Engine (HEETE) S&T effort is our
flagship large engine effort under the VAATE technology program. The
HEETE effort's primary objective is to demonstrate engine technologies
that enable a 35 percent fuel efficiency improvement versus the VAATE
year 2000 baseline, or at least 10 percent beyond current VAATE
technology capabilities being demonstrated in the ADVENT program.
The Air Force Research Laboratory and industry have conducted a
number of HEETE payoff studies that show significant potential benefits
to future transport and ISR aircraft (e.g., 18 percent to 30 percent
increase in strategic transport range, 45 percent to 60 percent
increase in tactical transport radius, and 37 percent to 75 percent
increase in ISR UAV loiter time). A study of Air Force's fleet fuel
usage showed that introduction of HEETE-derived engines into the
mobility and the tanker fleet would enable fuel savings of
approximately 203 million gallons per year by the mid-2030's.
Investments in these efforts help us reduce energy demand, bridge
the ``valley of death'' between S&T and potential acquisition programs,
and help maintain the U.S. industrial technological edge and lead in
turbine engines.
enabling technologies
In addition to these game-changing technologies, the Air Force S&T
Program also invests in many enabling technologies to facilitate major
advances and ensure maximum effectiveness in the near-, mid-, and far
term:
Cyber
Operations in cyberspace magnify military effects by increasing the
efficiency and effectiveness of air and space operations and by helping
to integrate capabilities across all domains. However, the cyberspace
domain is increasingly contested and/or denied and the Air Force faces
risks from malicious insiders, insecure supply chains, and increasingly
sophisticated adversaries. Fortunately, cyberspace S&T can provide
assurance, resilience, affordability, and empowerment to enable the Air
Force's assured cyber advantage.
In 2012, the Air Force developed Cyber Vision 2025 which described
the Air Force vision and blueprint for cyber S&T spanning cyberspace,
air, space, command and control, intelligence, and mission support.
Cyber Vision 2025 provides a long-range vision for cyberspace to
identify and analyze current and forecasted capabilities, threats,
vulnerabilities and consequences across core Air Force missions in
order to identify key S&T gaps and opportunities. The Air Force's cyber
S&T investments for fiscal year 2015 are aligned to the four themes
identified in Cyber Vision 2025: Mission Assurance, Agility and
Resilience, Optimized Human-Machine Systems, and Foundations of Trust.
Air Force S&T efforts in Mission Assurance seek to ensure
survivability and freedom of action in contested and denied
environments through enhanced cyber situational awareness for air,
space, and cyber commanders. Current research efforts seek to provide
dynamic, real-time mapping and analysis of critical mission functions
onto cyberspace. This analysis includes the cyber situation awareness
functions of monitoring the health and status of cyber assets, and
extends to capture how missions flow through cyberspace. This work
seeks to provide commanders with the ability to recognize attacks and
prioritize defensive actions to protect assets supporting critical
missions. Other research efforts develop techniques to measure and
assess the effects of cyber operations and integrate them with cross-
domain effects to achieve military objectives.
Research in Agility and Survivability develops rapid and
unpredictable maneuver capabilities to disrupt the adversaries' cyber
``kill chain'' along with their planning and decisionmaking processes
and hardening cyber elements to improve the ability to fight through,
survive, and rapidly recover from attacks. Air Force S&T efforts are
creating dynamic, randomizable, reconfigurable architectures capable of
autonomously detecting compromises, repairing and recovering from
damage, and evading threats in real-time. Cyber resiliency is enhanced
through an effective mix of redundancy, diversity, and distributed
functionality that leverages advances in virtualization and cloud
technologies.
The Air Force works to maximize the human and machine potential
through the measurement of physiological, perceptual, and cognitive
states to enable personnel selection, customized training, and (user,
mission, and environment) tailored augmented cognition. S&T efforts
develop visualization technologies to enable a global common
operational picture (COP) of complex cyber capabilities that can be
readily manipulated to support Air Force mission-essential functions
(MEFs). Other efforts seek to identify the critical human skills and
abilities that are the foundation for superior cyber warriors and
develop a realistic distributed network training environment integrated
with new individualized and continuous learning technologies.
The Air Force is developing secure foundations of computing to
provide operator trust in Air Force weapon systems that include a mix
of embedded systems, customized and militarized commercial systems,
commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment, and unverified hardware and
software that is developed outside the United States. Research into
formal verification and validation of complex, large scale,
interdependent systems as well as vulnerability analysis, automated
reverse engineering, and real-time forensics tools will enable
designers to quantify the level of trust in various components of the
infrastructure and to understand the risk these components pose to the
execution of critical mission functions. Efforts to design and build
secure hardware will provide a secure root-of-trust and enable a more
intelligent mixing of government off-the-shelf (GOTS) and COTS
components based on the systems' security requirements.
Cognitive Electronic Warfare
With the highly contested future EW environment, we have focused
S&T efforts on creating the ability to rapidly respond to threats. This
is accomplished by developing the analytic ability to understand a
complex threat environment and determine the best combination of
techniques across all available platforms. In addition, leveraging
cognitive and autonomy concepts improve the cycle time between
emergence of a threat and development of an effective response. This
system-of-systems solution approach is implemented in a physics based
interactive simulation capability to evaluate novel concepts. The Air
Force is also developing technologies to enhance survivability and
improve situational awareness in the electro-optical (EO)/infrared (IR)
and radio frequency (RF) warning and countermeasures area. New
electronic components (antennas, amplifiers, processors) will improve
the ability to detect threats with emphasis on advanced processing and
software to assess threats in a crowded RF environment. This includes
solutions to detect and defeat infrared and optical threats. These will
enable protection against autonomous seekers using multi-spectral
tracking.
Space Situational Awareness/Space Control
The ability to counter threats, intentional or unintentional, in
the increasingly congested and contested space domain begins with Space
Situational Awareness (SSA). The SSA S&T investments needed to maintain
our core Space Superiority and Command and Control missions in such an
environment are substantial and include research in Assured Recognition
and Persistent Tracking of Space Objects, Characterization of Space
Objects and Events, Timely and Actionable Threat Warning and
Assessment, and Effective Decision Support through Data Integration and
Exploitation. The Air Force works across these areas in cooperation
with the DOD, intelligence community, and industry.
To help build a holistic national SSA capability, the Air Force's
S&T investment is designed to exploit our in-house expertise to
innovate in areas with short-, mid- and long-term impact that are not
already being addressed by others. Examples include working with
federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and academia
to attack the deep space uncorrelated target association problem to
improve custody of space objects and reduce the burden on the space
surveillance network; better conjunction assessment and re-entry
estimation algorithms to reduce collision probabilities and unnecessary
maneuvers; and infrared star catalog improvement to ease observation
calibrations. These products have recently transitioned to national SSA
capabilities. Advanced component technologies developed with industry
include visible focal plane arrays, deployable baffles and lenses to
meet performance, and cost and weight requirements for future space-
based surveillance systems.
As part of the Air Force Research Laboratory's long history of
proving new technologies in relevant environments, the Automated
Navigation and Guidance Experiment for Local Space (ANGELS) program
examines techniques to provide a clearer picture of the environment
around our vital space assets through safe, automated spacecraft
operations above Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO). Equipped with
significant detection, tracking and characterization technology, ANGELS
will launch in 2014. It will maneuver around its booster's upper stage
and explore increased levels of automation in mission planning and
execution, enabling more timely and complex operations with reduced
footprint. Additional indications and warning work focuses on change
detection and characterization technologies to provide key observables
that improve response time and efficacy.
Satellite Resilience
Our Nation and our military are heavily dependent on space
capabilities. With an operational space domain that is becoming
increasingly congested, competitive and contested, the Air Force has
seen the need for development of technologies to increase resilience of
our space capabilities. The satellites upon which we rely so heavily
must be able to avoid or survive threats, both man-made and natural,
and to operate through and subsequently quickly recover should threat
or environmental effects manifest. To this end, the Air Force S&T
Program has increased technological investment in tactical sensing and
threat warning, reactive satellite control, and hardening.
Satellites today are equipped with a wide range of sensors, that,
if exploited in new ways and/or coupled with new hosted threat sensing
technologies could yield significant increases to tactical sensing and
threat warning. The Air Force pursues a range of internally-focused
health and status sensing (e.g. structural integrity, thermal, cyber)
and externally focused object or phenomena sensing (e.g. space
environment, threat sensing, directed energy detection) technologies,
and a range of data fusion approaches to maximize the timeliness and
confidence of that warning. While tactical warning is vital, it is only
immediately helpful when a satellite is able to tactically respond in
some way to avoid a threat or minimize its effects. Any choice of a
response requires some means of reconciling warning with viable courses
of action available. The Air Force focuses on efforts specifically
dedicated to tailoring satellite control based on tactical warning
inputs. Finally, hardening technologies refers to a range of both
passive and active capabilities that, when selected and executed, could
result in threat avoidance, lessening their effects or recovering lost
capability more quickly. For example, for particular types of threats,
dynamic configuration changes, optical protection, cyber quarantine,
dynamic thermal management or possibly maneuvers might achieve the
desired protection.
Precision Navigation and Timing
Most U.S. weapon systems rely on the Global Positioning System
(GPS) satellites to provide the required position navigation and timing
(PNT) to function properly. This reliance has created a vulnerability
which is being exploited by our adversaries through development of
jammers to degrade access to the GPS signals. For success in the long
term, Air Force S&T is improving the robustness of military GPS
receivers and also developing several non-GPS based alternative
capabilities including exploitation of other satellite navigation
constellations, use of new signals of opportunity, and incorporation of
additional sensors such as star trackers and terrain viewing optical
systems. These receivers provide new navigation options with different
accuracy depending on available sensors and computational power. Rapid
progress is being made on advanced Inertial Measurement Units based on
cold atom technologies. These units have the potential to provide
accurate PNT for extended periods without any external update.
Together, these approaches will provide future options to enable the
Air Force mission to continue in contested and denied environments.
Assured Communications
Assured communications are critical to the warfighter in all
aspects of the Air Force core missions. The Air Force S&T Program is
developing technologies to counter threats to mission performance, such
as spectrum congestion and jamming, and to maintain or increase
available bandwidth through access to new portions of the radio
frequency spectrum, alleviating pressure on DOD spectrum allocations.
Future ability to use new spectrum will increase DOD communications
architecture capacity and affordability, by requiring fewer expensive,
high capacity gateways. Additional bandwidth will allow improved anti-
jam communications performance and higher frequency communications,
which will reduce scintillation losses for nuclear command and control
(C2). The performance enhancements would directly improve the ability
of remotely-piloted aircraft to transmit images and data (ISR) and
improve command and control assurance.
Efforts in Assured Communications include the Future Space
Communications effort which includes research to characterize and
provide new spectrum for future military space communications through
the W/V-band Space Communications Experiment (WSCE). WSCE will
characterize and model the atmospheric effects of upper V-band and W-
band (71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz) signal transmission. Space-based data
collection and atmospheric attenuation model development is necessary
to provide the statistics necessary to design a future satellite
communications architecture that will allow use of the currently empty
V- and W-band spectrum.
Long Range Sensing
For the past decade the Air Force has provided near persistent ISR
for Combatant Commanders conducting operations in the uncontested air
environments of Iraq and Afghanistan. We do not see the appetite for
ISR waning in the future. However, the ability to perform effective
sensing in anti-access/area denial and contested environments is
threatened by many new and different challenges rarely seen during the
past 10 years of permissive environment operations. In the past,
airborne collection platforms conducted airborne ISR outside of the
lethal range of air defense systems. Today, however, the modern and
evolving foreign Integrated Air Defense Systems (IADS) of our
adversaries have increased lethality and significantly improved
engagement capabilities which will force ISR aircraft to fly at longer
stand-off distances. The effectiveness of current precision weapons
will be reduced with distance limiting the ability to accurately
detect, identify and geo-locate targets.
The Air Force S&T Program is focused on significantly improving our
sensing ability to adequately address the challenges of extended range
ISR collection. The efforts include: 1) next generation RF sensing for
contested spectrum environments in which long stand-off sensing is
primarily focused on all-weather ISR using traditional active radar
modes at ranges of greater than 100 miles; 2) passive RF Sensing in
which signals of opportunity are exploited to detect, identify and
locate targets through the use of passive multi-mode and distributed
multi-static techniques; 3) laser radar sensing focused on enhancing
target identification through the use of synthetic aperture laser radar
and also addressing high resolution wide-area three dimensional imaging
through advancements in direct detection radar; and 4) passive EO/IR
sensing to enhance capabilities to detect and track difficult targets,
improve target identification at long standoff ranges and perform
material identification through advancing hyperspectral and stand-off
high resolution imaging technology.
Live, Virtual, and Constructive
The Air Force continues to develop and demonstrate technologies for
Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) operations to maintain combat
readiness. The training need for LVC is real while training costs are
increasing and threat environments are complex. In particular,
realistic training for anti-access/area-denial environments is not
available. During a recent demonstration of LVC capability for tactical
forces at Shaw AFB, South Carolina, AFRL LVC research capability was
integrated in operations with an F-16 Unit Training Device (a virtual
simulator) to simultaneously interoperate with a mix of live F-16
aircraft, other virtual simulations, and high fidelity computer-
generated constructive players. This mix of players enabled the real
time and realistic portrayal and interaction of other strike package
assets and aggressor aircraft with a level of complexity that could not
be achieved if limited to live assets, given the expense and
availability of them to support the scenarios. LVC S&T has the
capability to provide greater focused training for our warfighters
across a range of operational domains such as tactical air, special
operations, cyber, ISR, and C2. The Air Force is exploring a 5th
generation LVC Proof of Concept set of demonstrations that would
validate the requirements for a formal program of record for LVC.
Basic Research
The development of revolutionary capabilities requires the careful
investment in foundational science to generate new knowledge. Our
scientists discover the potential military utility of these new ideas
and concepts, develop this understanding to change the art-of-the-
possible and then transition the S&T for further use. Air Force basic
research sits at the center of an innovation network that tracks the
best S&T in the DOD, with our partners in the Army, the Navy, DARPA,
and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), while monitoring the
investments and breakthroughs of the NSF, NASA, NIST, and the
Department of Energy. Air Force scientists and engineers watch and
collaborate with the best universities and research centers from around
the world in open, publishable research that cuts across multiple
scientific disciplines aligned to military needs.
For example, Air Force basic research played a role in the Air
Force's successful CHAMP technology demonstration discussed earlier.
While the CHAMP demonstration required extensive applied research and
advanced technology development, fundamental basic research investment
in both supercomputers and computational mathematics provided a virtual
prototyping capability called Improved Concurrent Electromagnetic
Particle-In-Cell (ICEPIC) for directed energy concepts to Air Force
researchers. This allowed new ideas to be studied effectively and
affordably on the computer without costly manufacture for every
iteration of the technology. Virtual prototyping was a critical
enabling technology, and resulted from nearly two decades of steady,
targeted investments in fundamental algorithms that then transitioned
to a capability driving technology development in Air Force
laboratories and in industry.
Manufacturing Technologies
A key cross-cutting enabling technology area is in developing
materials, processes, and advanced manufacturing technologies for all
systems including aircraft, spacecraft, missiles, rockets, ground-based
systems and their structural, electronic and optical components. The
fiscal year 2015 Air Force S&T Program emphasizes materials work from
improved design and manufacturing processes to risk reduction through
assessing manufacturing readiness.
The Air Force's investment in additive manufacturing technologies
offers new and innovative approaches to the design and manufacture of
Air Force and DOD systems. Additive manufacturing, or the process of
joining materials to make objects from 3D model data layer by layer,
changes the conventional approach to design, enabling a more direct
design to requirements. As opposed to subtractive processes like
machining, additive manufacturing offers a whole new design realm in
which geometric complexity is not a constraint and material properties
can be specifically located where needed. As with the insertion of all
advanced materials and processes, the Air Force strives to ensure
appropriate application and proper qualification of additive
manufacturing for warfighter safety and system performance.
Currently, the Air Force is invested in more than a dozen programs
ranging from assisting in major high-Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
qualification programs to mid-TRL process improvement programs, to low-
TRL process modeling and simulation programs. Overall, we have
established a strategic program to quantify risk for implementation and
to advance the understanding of processing capabilities. We have
identified multiple technical areas that require Air Force investment
and are developing an initiative that integrates pervasive additive
manufacturing technologies across Air Force sectors, spanning multiple
material classes from structural, metallic applications to functional,
electronic needs.
The Air Force leverages its additive manufacturing resources and
interests with the Administration's National Network for Manufacturing
Innovation (NNMI) to support the acceleration of additive manufacturing
technologies to the U.S. manufacturing sector to increase domestic
competitiveness. In fiscal year 2013, the Air Force played a key role
in supporting the NNMI National Additive Manufacturing Innovation
Institute called ``America Makes.'' The Air Force, on behalf of the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, led an interagency effort, which
included DOD, DOE, DOC/NIST, NASA, and NSF, to launch a $69 million
public-private partnership in Additive Manufacturing.
Cooperatively working with the private partner team lead, the Air
Force helped ``America Makes'' achieve significant accomplishments in
its first year. After opening it headquarters in Youngstown, Ohio in
September 2012, the ``America Makes'' consortium has grown to
approximately 80 member organizations consisting of manufacturing
companies, universities, community colleges, and non-profit
organizations. A shared public-private leadership governance structure,
organizational charter, and intellectual property strategy were
implemented and two project calls were launched in Additive
Manufacturing and 3D printing technology research, discovery, creation,
and innovation. So far, more than 20 projects totaling approximately
$29 million and involving more than 75 partners have been started
covering a broad set of priorities including advances in materials,
design and manufacturing processes, equipment, qualification and
certification, and knowledge base development. ``America Makes'' serves
as an example for future NNMI institutes and the Air Force has provided
support to establish two additional DOD sponsored institutes of
manufacturing innovation.
The Air Force Manufacturing Technology program continues to lead
the way in developing methods and tools for Manufacturing Readiness
Assessments and continues to lead assessments on new technology,
components, processes, and subsystems to identify manufacturing
maturity and associated risk. Increasing numbers of weapon system prime
contractors and suppliers have integrated Manufacturing Readiness into
their culture which aids in product and process transition and
implementation, resulting in reduced cost, schedule and performance
risk. Benefits from the advanced manufacturing propulsion initiative
continue to accrue in the form of reduced turbine engine cost and
weight through advanced manufacturing of light weight castings and
ceramic composites and improved airfoil processing. Advanced next
generation radar and coatings affordability projects continue to reduce
cost and manufacturing risk to systems such as the F-22 and F-35
aircraft. The Air Force Manufacturing Technology investment continues
to make a significant impact on the F-35 program in particular, driving
down life cycle costs by over $3 billion, with a number of ongoing
projects that will benefit multiple F-35 program Integrated Product
Teams.
The Air Force is also leveraging basic research efforts to improve
sustainment of legacy systems. The ``Digital Twin'' concept combines
the state-of-the-art in computational tools, advanced sensors, and
novel algorithms to create a digital model of every platform in the
fleet. Imagine a world where instead of using fleet averages for the
maintenance and sustainment of an airframe, there is a computer model
of each plane that records all the data from each flight, integrates
the stress of the flights into the history of the actual materials on
the platform, and continually checks the health of vital components.
Thus, the computer model mimics all the missions of the physical asset,
thereby allowing us to do maintenance exactly when required. This is
the airplane equivalent of individualized medicine, making sure that
each individual asset of the Air Force is set to operate at peak
performance. Interdisciplinary basic research in material science,
fundamental studies in new sensors and novel inquiry into new,
transformational computer architecture enable the Digital Twin
concepts. These foundational studies are tightly integrated with
applied research, both in the Air Force Research Laboratory as well as
efforts in NASA, to drive forward the S&T to permit breakthroughs in
affordable sustainment.
rapid innovation program and small business innovation research
The Air Force recognizes small businesses are critical to our
defense industrial base and essential to our Nation's economy. The U.S.
relies heavily on innovation through research and development as the
small businesses continue to be a major driver of high-technology
innovation and economic growth in the U.S. We continue to engage small
businesses through the Rapid Innovation Program, and the Small Business
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer
(STTR) programs.
The Rapid Innovation Program has been an excellent means for the
Air Force to communicate critical needs and solicit vendors to respond
with innovative technology solutions. The program provides a vehicle
for businesses, especially small businesses, to easily submit their
innovative technologies where they feel it will best meet military
needs. The Air Force benefits from the ability to evaluate proposed
innovative technologies against critical needs, and selecting the most
compelling for contract award. The response to the program has been
overwhelming, and instrumental to the transition of capability by small
businesses. Over the last 3 years, the Air Force has received over
2,200 white paper submissions from vendors offering solutions to
critical Air Force needs. We have awarded over 60 projects directly to
small businesses and anticipate awarding another 25 by the end of this
fiscal year.
Projects from the fiscal year 2011 Rapid Innovation Program are now
maturing and showing great promise. For example, one project developed
a handheld instrument for quality assurance of surface preparation
processes used in manufacturing of the F-35 aircraft. Current F-35
aircraft manufacturing processes require manual testing of 30,000 nut
plates on each plane to ensure correct bonding of materials. The
current failure rate is averaging 1 percent or 300 nut plates. Each
failure requires individual re-preparation and re-bonding with
supervisory oversight. The Rapid Innovation Program project handheld
device will significantly reduce the failure rate of adhesively bonded
nut plates. In turn, this will reduce rework and inspection costs,
increase aircraft availability, assist Lockheed Martin in achieving its
target production rate, and reduce repetitive injury claims from
employees. Lockheed Martin has been very closely monitoring this
technology and will be completing a return-on-investment review in the
coming months following prototype evaluation.
The Air Force continues to collaborate with other Federal agencies
and Air Force acquisition programs to streamline our SBIR and STTR
processes. We are also collaborating with the Air Force's Small
Business office (SAF/SB) to implement the provisions of the
reauthorization and to assist in maximizing small business
opportunities in government contracts while enhancing the impact and
value of small businesses.
For example, to improve the effectiveness of SBIR investments, the
Air Force Research Laboratory has started to strategically bundle,
coordinate, and align Air Force SBIR topics against top Air Force
priorities identified by Air Force Program Executive Officers (PEO). In
the Fall of 2013, the Laboratory began a pilot effort with the Air
Force Program Executive Officer for Space to focus the combined
investments of approximately 45 SBIR Phase I awards and 15 Phase II
SBIR awards on the identified, top priority challenge of transforming
our military space-based PNT capabilities.
In conjunction with this strategic initiative, the Air Force is
also energizing efforts to seek out and attract non-traditional
participants, which are small businesses with skills, knowledge and
abilities relevant to the bundled topics, in SBIR awards but who, for
various reasons, do not routinely participate in the SBIR proposal
process. This strategic concentration of small business innovation
against top priorities will ultimately enhance the transitioning of
small business innovation, raise the visibility and importance of those
investments, and take advantage of the Nation's small business
innovation. If proven successful, the Air Force will begin to
institutionalize it as a model for organizing and aligning SBIR topics
against other top priority issues.
One recent SBIR project developed innovative low profile and
conformal antennas to allow air platforms, including small Remotely
Piloted Aircraft (RPA), to operate more aerodynamically and ground
vehicles to operate more covertly in areas where Improvised Explosive
Devices (IEDs) are a threat. The wideband low profile antenna assembly
for vehicle Counter Radio Controlled IED Electronic Warfare (CREW)
systems operates efficiently from VHF to S-band, and at a height of
less than 3 inches, greatly reduces visual signature. The wideband
conformal antenna technologies developed for RPA systems operate from
UHF through S-band and minimize the number of required antennas,
significantly reducing weight and aerodynamic drag.
world class workforce
Maintaining our U.S. military's decisive technological edge
requires an agile, capable workforce that leads cutting-edge research,
explores emerging technology areas, and promotes innovation across
government, industry and academia. Nurturing our current world class
workforce and the next generations of science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM) professionals is an Air Force, DOD and national
concern. We must be able to recruit, retain and develop a capable STEM
workforce in the face of worldwide competition for the same talent.
The Air Force continues to focus on developing technical experts
and leaders who can provide the very best research and technical advice
across the entire lifecycle of our systems, from acquisition, test,
deployment and sustainment. After yielding success since 2011, the
original Bright Horizons, the Air Force STEM Workforce Strategic
Roadmap, is currently being updated with new goals and objectives to
reflect the current environment. The Air Force has also developed a
soon-to-be-released Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan aimed at
recruiting, developing and retaining the scientist and engineer talent
to meet the future need of the Air Force.
The increased Laboratory hiring and personnel management
authorities and flexibilities provided by the Congress over the last
several years have done much to improve our ability to attract the
Nation's best talent. The Air Force is currently developing
implementation plans for the authorities most recently provided in the
fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. The ability to
manage Laboratory personnel levels according to budget will allow us to
be more agile and targeted in hiring for new and emerging research
areas. The Air Force Research Laboratory recruits up-and-coming, as
well as seasoned, scientists and engineers, including continuing a
vibrant relationship with Historically Black Colleges and Universities
and Minority Serving Institutions (HBCU/MI), who conduct research
projects, improve infrastructure, and intern with the Air Force
Research Laboratory in support of the Air Force mission.
The Air Force also leverages the National Defense Education Program
(NDEP) Science Mathematics and Research for Transformation (SMART)
Program that supports U.S. undergraduate and graduate students pursuing
degrees in 19 STEM disciplines. The Air Force provides advisors for the
SMART scholars, summer internships, and post-graduation employment
opportunities. The Air Force has sponsored 523 SMART scholars during
the past 8 years, and of the 315 scholars that have completed the
program, 88 percent are still working for the Air Force, 9 percent are
getting advanced degrees, and 3 percent have left due to various
reasons including furlough and government funding uncertainty. The Air
Force identified 110 Key Technology Areas essential for current and
future support to the war fighter, which we used for selecting academic
specialties for SMART scholars. SMART Scholars are an essential
recruitment source of employees to enable key technology advances and
future STEM leaders.
Sequestration and fiscal uncertainty in fiscal year 2013 caused the
Air Force to significantly curtail travel expenses and severely limit
conference attendance. It is essential for our scientists and engineers
to be fully engaged within the national and international community so
this curtailment disproportionately impacted the S&T community. We have
worked with Air Force leadership to solve these issues and establish
policies allowing greater flexibility for this mission imperative in
2014 and beyond. We can recover from the 1 year (2013) of non-
participation in the greater S&T national and international community.
However, severe travel restrictions over the long term could undermine
the Air Force's ability retain top talent.
The Air Force has effectively used the authority provided by
Section 219 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act not
only to increase the rate of innovation and accelerate the development
and fielding of needed military capabilities but also to grow and
develop the workforce and provide premier Laboratory infrastructure.
For example, the Information Directorate of the Air Force Research
Laboratory located in Rome, New York used funding made available by
Section 219 to develop curriculum at Clarkson University. The
curriculum is aligned to the Information Directorate's command,
control, communications, cyber and intelligence (C4I) technology
mission and provides training and development programs to Laboratory
personnel. To fully utilize the new Section 219 authorities from the
fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, the Laboratory is
now developing a targeted infrastructure plan to provide its scientist
and engineer workforce premier laboratory facilities in its locations
nationwide. Recent success in the infrastructure area includes the
opening of two state-of-the-art fuze laboratories at Eglin AFB,
Florida, which are enabling enhanced research and development into
hardened penetration and point burst fuzing.
conclusion
The threats our Nation faces today and those forecast in the future
leave the U.S. military with one imperative. We must maintain decisive
technological advantage. We must take lessons from the last decade of
conflict and creatively visualize the future strategic landscape. We
must capitalize on the opportunities found within this space.
The focused and balanced investments of the Air Force fiscal year
2015 S&T Program are hedges against the unpredictable future and
provide pathways to this flexible, precise and lethal force at a
relatively low cost in in relation to the return on investment. We
recognize that fiscal challenges will not disappear tomorrow, and that
is why we have continued to improve our processes to make better
investment decisions and efficiently deliver capability to our
warfighters.
Chairman Durbin, Vice Chairman Cochran, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you again for the opportunity to testify today and
thank you for your continuing support of the U.S. Air Force's S&T
Program.

Senator Durbin. Thanks, Dr. Walker.
Admiral Klunder.
STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL MATTHEW L. KLUNDER, CHIEF OF
NAVAL RESEARCH
Admiral Klunder. Good morning, Chairman Durbin, Vice
Chairman Cochran, and other distinguished subcommittee members.
It is an honor to report on science and technology efforts in
the Department of the Navy and discuss how the President's 2015
budget request supports the Navy and Marine Corps.
We use S&T to enable your Navy and Marine Corps team to
maintain the technological edge necessary to prevail in any
environment where we are called to defend U.S. interests. We
work with the Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval
Operations, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps to balance
the allocation of resources between near-term innovation and
long-term leap-ahead research. Our goal is to improve our
warfighting capability to encounter increasingly complex
threats in uncertain environments while, at the same time,
addressing affordability in a serious way with our systems.
Beginning with the evolution of current systems,
incremental spiral development of current technology, we move
toward exploiting yet-to-be-discovered, disruptive game-
changing technologies. The Naval S&T strategic plan guides our
investments and it is regularly updated by Navy and Marine
Corps leadership to validate the alignment of S&T with the
current and future missions, priorities and requirements when
they come about. It ensures S&T has long-term focus, meets
near-term objectives, and makes what we do clear to
decisionmakers, partners, customers, and performers. The S&T
plan is currently under review and will be updated in the very
near future.
We fully understand that anti-access and area denial
threats continue to increase. The cyber war challenge, my
colleagues have noted already, will also increase and become
more complex. These are problems that are not easy to solve,
but we are making progress. As I said before, we also want to
get away from using $3 million weapons to defeat a $50,000
threat. We have weapons in development and being fielded that
will allow us to reverse that asymmetrical cost advantage
currently held by some of our adversaries. And here is really
what is important to me. At the end of the day, I never want to
see a sailor or a marine in a fair fight, and we are confident
that we can do that in an affordable way.
These are not pie-in-the-sky science projects. They are
being tested. They work. I invite you and your staffs to get
hands-on experience and see them for yourselves. A number of
your colleagues and your staff have already been down to
Dahlgren, Virginia, the Naval Research Lab here in Anacostia
where world-class scientists and civilian employees are making
that happen.
The bottom line is we are constantly transitioning the
results of discovery and invention and applied research into
fielding prototypes, weapons, and acquisition programs of
record. We were commended for the way we do that by the 2013
Government Accountability Office report cited in my testimony.
But it is not enough to build transition-effective systems.
They need to be extremely affordable. An ongoing example of our
success in this venue is the laser weapon system I think I have
briefed some of you on before. It is part of our solid state
maturation program that we have ongoing. Energy weapons,
specifically directed energy weapons, offer the Navy and Marine
Corps game-changing capabilities and speed-of-light
engagements, deep magazines, multimission functionality, and
affordable missions. Laser weapons have very low engagement
costs. Right now, today, the one we are going to put on the USS
Ponce is under a dollar, under a U.S. dollar for one round of
pulsed energy. We think that is critical in our current fiscal
environment. We really do. They are capable of defeating
adversarial threats, including fast boats, UAV's, low-cost
widely available weapons. Our laser weapon system that you are
going to see this summer on the ship out in the gulf leverages
advancements in commercial technology for use in a rugged,
robust, prototype laser weapon capable of identifying,
illuminating, tracking, and lasing the enemy's surface and air
threats. The Navy is installing the LaWS system on the Ponce
in the Arabian Gulf this year. That harsh operationally
important environment we think will provide a real ideal
opportunity for us to evaluate long-term system performance.
The LaWS has every potential for extraordinary success. We have
never missed yet on all of our targets, and in terms of
fielding an effective and affordable system for our marines and
sailors, we think it is an ideal concept.
There is also another one. The electromagnetic railgun is
similarly poised to provide game-changing, disruptive
capabilities for our long-range land attack, ballistic and
cruise missile defense, and anti-surface warfare against ships
and small boats. Fired by an electric pulse, no gunpowder, that
railgun has the potential to launch a projectile over 110
nautical miles at a speed of over Mach 7. The projectile itself
development is currently well underway, and the barrel life
that we have for these guns is well on its path for over 1,000
shots for each barrel. Current research is focused on improving
and increasing the repetition rate of that fire and that
capability for multiple rounds per minute, and those
developments are certainly available to your staffs.
We also think the pulse power that comes to feed that gun
is also well on its way and it is making tremendous progress
also.
The development tests that are ongoing right now at the
Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren that I alluded to
earlier is also at NRL, nearby in Anacostia. And along with
those evaluations and the test results we have performed and
saw thus far, we see this as an integration into some of our
new and existing naval vessels and platforms. As a matter of
fact, we are so confident, we are going to put that on one of
our joint high speed vessels here in 2016 for just checking out
integration.

PREPARED STATEMENT

We will continue to duplicate these kinds of successes in
other S&T areas with our innovative research and disrupted
thinking, always trying to make our existing systems more
effective and affordable while improving acquisition programs.
Our research is both exhilarating and unpredictable. We balance
a range of complementary but competing research initiatives and
coordinate with my colleagues and support advances in
established operational areas while also sustaining far-
reaching, long-term efforts that may prove disruptive to
traditional operational concepts.
I thank you again for your support and look forward to
answering any questions. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rear Admiral Matthew L. Klunder
introduction
It is an honor to report on Department of the Navy (DoN) Science
and Technology (S&T) and discuss how the President's fiscal year 2015
Budget supports the Navy and Marine Corps (USMC). The fiscal year 2015
Budget requests approximately $2 billion for Naval S&T. The Navy and
Marine Corps use S&T to enable the Fleet/Force to maintain the
technological edge necessary to prevail in any environment where we may
be called to defend U.S. interests. We work with the Secretary of the
Navy (SECNAV), Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) and Commandant of the
Marine Corps (CMC) to balance the allocation of resources between near-
term technology development and long-term research. We strive to
improve affordability, communication with the acquisition community,
and engage with stakeholders.
science and technology strategic plan
The Naval S&T Strategic Plan guides our investments and is
regularly updated by Navy and USMC leadership to validate alignment of
S&T with current missions, leadership priorities, and future
requirements. It ensures S&T has long-term focus, meets near-term
objectives, and makes what we do clear to decision makers, partners,
customers and performers. The Plan identifies nine areas that help to
focus S&T to meet Navy/USMC needs: (1) Assure Access to Maritime
Battlespace, (2) Autonomy and Unmanned Systems, (3) Expeditionary and
Irregular Warfare, (4) Information Dominance, (5) Platform Design and
Survivability, (6) Power and Energy, (7) Power Projection and
Integrated Defense, (8) Total Ownership Cost, and (9) Warfighter
Performance. Our goal is to move from existing systems and concepts of
operations toward a warfighting capability to counter predicted threats
in an increasingly complex and uncertain environment. Beginning with
the evolution of current systems through incremental improvement and
spiral development of known technology, we move toward exploiting yet-
to-be-discovered, disruptive, game-changing technologies. The S&T
Strategic Plan and focus areas are currently under review and will be
updated in the near future.
implementing the strategy
Based on time-to-delivery and specification of need, Naval S&T can
be viewed as fitting into four primary areas--Discovery and Invention
(D&I), Leap Ahead Innovations (Innovative Naval Prototypes/INP),
Acquisition Enablers (Future Naval Capabilities/FNC), and a Quick
Reaction capability to respond to emerging requirements. Our S&T
portfolio balances a range of complementary but competing initiatives
by supporting advances in established operational areas--while
sustaining long-term research that may prove disruptive to traditional
operational concepts.
discovery and invention
Discovery and Invention (D&I) includes basic research (6.1) and
early applied research (6.2) in areas essential to Naval missions, as
well as emerging areas with promise for future application. D&I
develops fundamental knowledge, provides a basis for future Navy/Marine
Corps systems, and sustains our Scientist/Engineer workforce. D&I
develops knowledge from which INP, FNC, and Quick Reaction efforts are
generated and is the foundation for advanced technology.
Approximately 45 percent of ONR investments are in D&I, with
roughly 60 percent of that total executed by academic and non-profit
performers. D&I is peer reviewed by outside experts who independently
assess scientific merit--and overseen by ONR program officers and
senior leadership. Investment decisions are guided by risk, impact,
significance, originality, principal investigator, and budget
resources.
ONR's University Research Initiative (URI) includes the
Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative (MURI), the Defense
University Research Implementation Program (DURIP), and the
Presidential Early Career Award for Scientist and Engineers (PECASE).
MURI supports teams of researchers investigating topics that intersect
multiple technical disciplines. DURIP provides grants for the purchase
of instrumentation necessary to perform research essential to the Navy.
PECASE recognizes achievements of young scientists/engineers and
encourages them to explore professions in academia and Naval
laboratories. The Basic Research Challenge funds promising research not
addressed by ONR's core program. The Young Investigator Program
supports scientists and engineers with exceptional promise for Naval
research. Research opportunities for undergraduate and grad students,
fellows, and future faculty members are provided by the Naval Research
Enterprise Internship Program (NREIP), where participants work at Naval
laboratories and warfare centers. The In-House Laboratory Independent
Research (ILIR) and Independent Applied Research (IAR) programs sponsor
critical research, while furthering the education of scientists and
engineers at warfare centers. ONR also brings Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) together
with Naval laboratories and warfare centers to give students hands-on
experience in the Naval research environment.
Supporting warfighters depends on our Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) workforce--but that workforce is
aging. With half of Navy science and engineering professionals
retirement eligible by 2020, we face an acute shortfall in our Naval
engineering, computer science and ocean engineering workforce.
Production of engineers has been flat for two decades, and less in
specialty fields. A complicating factor is that DoN must rely on U.S.
citizens for classified work; the number of U.S. citizen STEM graduates
will not keep up with domestic or international competition for the
same talent. ONR evaluates STEM investments with metrics tailored to
measure numbers of students and teachers, overall impact, and overall
ability to achieve Naval requirements in coordination with other
Federal STEM programs.
leap ahead innovations (innovative naval prototypes)
Innovative Naval Prototypes (INP) total about 12 percent of the S&T
budget. INPs are high-risk/high-payoff opportunities from D&I that are
discontinuous, disruptive departures from established requirements and
operational concepts that can dramatically change the way Naval forces
fight, while reducing acquisition risk. Overseen by the Naval Research,
Development, Testing and Evaluation (RTD&E) Corporate Board
(Undersecretary of the Navy; Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Research, Development and Acquisition (ASN-RDA); Vice CNO; Assistant
CMC; Director of Innovation, Test, and Evaluation and Technology
Requirements; Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for RDT&E; and
Deputy Under Secretary of the Navy for Plans, Policy, Oversight and
Integration), the goal is to prove concepts and mature technology in 4-
7 years, allowing informed decisions about risk reduction and
transition to acquisition programs. INP Program Managers and Deputies
are from ONR and the acquisition community.
INPs include:

Integrated Topside (InTop) will enable the Navy to operate freely
in the electromagnetic spectrum while denying adversaries'
ability to do the same through development of multi-beam,
multi-function ultra-wideband apertures and Radio Frequency
(RF) equipment for all ship classes. We are developing
Electronic Warfare, Information Operations, Radar, Satellite,
and Line of Sight Communications using: (1) open architecture
RF hardware/software to enable a broad industrial base to
contribute to development of affordable systems, and (2)
modular systems to enable technology to be scalable across Navy
platforms and reduce logistics, training, and maintenance
costs. We continue prototype tests/demonstrations with testing
by the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC) for submarine
Satellite Communications (SATCOM) and by the Naval Research
Laboratory (NRL) for the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement
Program (SEWIP). Accomplishments include over the air testing
of the Submarine Wideband SATCOM Antenna transmitter,
integration of all antennas and electronics for the Electronic
Warfare/Information Operations/Line of Sight Communications
Advanced Development Model, building the Low Level Resource
Allocation Manager, and award of the Flexible Distributed Array
Radar contract.

The Large Displacement Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (LDUUV) program is
developing a reliable, fully autonomous, long endurance UUV
capable of extended operation (60+ days) in cluttered littoral
environments. The program has already built three vehicles and
is developing the energy, autonomy and core systems to operate
in a complex ocean environment near harbors, shorelines, and
other high traffic locations. Key goals include doubling
current air-independent UUV energy density, using open
architecture to lower cost, and enabling full pier to pier
autonomy in over-the-horizon operations. Achieving these goals
will reduce platform vulnerability, enhance warfighter
capability and safety, and close gaps in critical and complex
mission areas by extending the reach of the Navy into denied
areas.

The Autonomous Aerial Cargo/Utility System (AACUS) is developing
intelligent, autonomous capabilities for rapid, affordable,
reliable rotorcraft supply in permissive, hostile and GPS-
denied settings. AACUS-enabled aircraft will be supervised by
field personnel from a handheld device. Challenges include
dynamic mission management and contingency planning, as well as
landing execution and obstacle avoidance. AACUS has already
demonstrated numerous successful flights and is designed for
open system architecture to promote modularity and
affordability. It could be used in logistics missions, Casualty
Evacuation (CASEVAC), combat rescue, and humanitarian aid
missions. S&T partners include the Air Force, Army, USMC,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Naval Air
Systems Command (NAVAIR), and other academic, private sector,
and government organizations.

The Electromagnetic Railgun (EMRG) has multi-mission potential for
long-range land-attack, ballistic and cruise missile defense,
and anti-surface warfare against ships and small boats. Fired
by electric pulse, Railgun eliminates gun propellant from
magazines resulting in greater resistance to battle damage.
Since 2005, launch energy has advanced by a factor of 5 (to 32
mega joules) with potential to launch projectiles 110 nautical
miles. Projectile design is underway, with early prototype
testing, component development, and modeling and simulation.

Barrel life has increased from tens of shots to over 400, with a
program path to achieve 1000 shots. Advanced composite
launchers have been strength tested to operational levels.
Physical size of the pulsed power system was reduced by a
factor of 2.5 through increased energy density so the system
will fit in current and future surface combatants. Current
research is focused on a rep-rate capability of multiple rounds
per minute which entails development of a tactical prototype
gun barrel and pulsed power systems incorporating advanced
cooling techniques. Components are designed to transition
directly into prototype systems now being conceptualized. ONR
is working with Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) and the
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Strategic Capabilities
Office to ensure commonality and reduce the need for expensive
redesign. Developmental tests are ongoing at Naval Surface
Warfare Center, Dahlgren and NRL, along with evaluations of
integration into new and existing Naval platforms.

Electromagnetic Railgun testing aboard a Joint High Speed Vessel
(JHSV) will begin in 2016 and utilize components largely in
common with those developed and demonstrated at Dahlgren. At-
sea testing is one of the critical events planned in coming
years to demonstrate multi-mission capability. At-sea tests
capture lessons learned for incorporation into a full future
tactical design and allow us to understand any potential
modifications before fully integrating the technology on our
ships. Further, it will gather data to support design for
reliability and sustainability related to Railgun operation in
a marine environment.

Finally, although similarly high-risk and disruptive, SwampWorks
programs are smaller than INPs and intended to produce quick
results in 1-3 years. SwampWorks efforts have substantial
flexibility in planning and execution, with a streamlined
approval process. Formal transition agreements are not
required, but SwampWorks programs have advocates outside ONR,
either from the acquisition community or Fleet/Force.
SwampWorks products are frequently inserted into Fleet/Force
experimentation.
directed energy roadmap
Development and ship integration of energy-intensive systems such
as Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) (e.g. high-energy lasers (HEL) and
High Powered Radio Frequency (HPRF)) and EMRG requires careful
engineering. Shipboard integration considerations include space,
weight, power, cooling, stability, impact on combat systems, fire
control, and interfaces. Technical maturity and integration will be
accomplished through a measured approach to allocation of ship services
and interface with ship systems.
Navy's near-term focus is on a Solid State Laser Quick Reaction
Capability (SSL-QRC), which will field a prototype system based on the
Laser Weapon System (LaWS), and the Solid State Laser Technology
Maturation (SSL-TM) program. The Navy plans to deploy SSL-QRC (LaWS) to
the Persian Gulf aboard USS PONCE in 2014 to demonstrate the ability to
meet gaps in ship self-defense against armed fast boats and unmanned
aerial vehicle threats. Navy is also investigating the use of non-
lethal HPRF technologies for vessel stopping and counter UAS.
Development continues on Free Electron Laser technologies for long-term
solutions requiring power levels beyond that which Solid State Lasers
can deliver.
SSL-TM will help determine the load capacity and most effective
means to integrate a HEL on surface ships such as DDG-51 and the
Littoral Combat Ship. The SSL-TM goal is to demonstrate a 100-150
kilowatt Advanced Development Model (ADM) by 2016. The program will
address technical challenges in rugged laser subsystems, optics
suitable for maritime environments, and capability to propagate lethal
power levels in the maritime atmosphere. The SSL-TM prototype will be
sufficiently mature to commence an acquisition program of record.
Progress on technologies covered in the Naval DE Roadmap efforts
(HEL, HPRF) and EMRG are projected to result in capabilities that meet
future requirements. As part of the Navy's Two-Pass Six-Gate review
process for major acquisition programs, a Gate 6 Configuration Steering
Board (CSB) is conducted annually for each ship class. Once a DEW
achieves maturity, the CSB reviews technology, requirements, and cost
to determine if transitioning to acquisition program and incorporation
in a ship class is warranted. If warranted, the CSB determines on which
hull the technology will be incorporated. For technology that provides
significant capability but also significant installation impact to a
ship, cost/benefit will be weighed against installation during new
construction. If the installation impact is less, the technology could
be included as part of a back fit or post-delivery installation.
In 2013, NAVSEA developed the Naval Power Systems Technology
Development Roadmap (NPS TDR). NPS TDR aligns power system developments
with warfighter needs, including DEWs and energy-intensive weapons and
sensors for shipboard use, to ensure that future ships are capable of
accepting power and cooling loads of such systems as they are
developed. The roadmap addresses new construction integration and back
fit of technologies for ships in service. NPS TDR is adapted to
evolving requirements from weapons and sensor system developments, as
well as changes in the Navy's 30-year shipbuilding plan, and will be
updated every 2 years. NPS TDR introduced the concept of an Energy
Magazine to provide the required power from the ship's electrical
system and interface with high powered weapons and sensors. The Energy
Magazine will initially support near-term applications, such as HEL, on
a legacy platform. As new systems become available, the Energy Magazine
can be expanded to accommodate multiple loads by providing the
appropriate power conversion and energy storage.
The Naval Directed Energy Steering Group is currently drafting a
Naval DE roadmap based on the Naval DE Vision and Strategy to establish
goals, principles, priorities, roles, responsibilities, and objectives
regarding acquisition and fielding of DEWs by the Navy and Marine
Corps. This roadmap will address the way ahead for platform
requirements, as well as power and cooling necessary to support these
systems.
acquisition enablers (future naval capabilities)
Acquisition Enablers (AE) are the critical component of our
transition strategy. AE consists of our Future Naval Capabilities (FNC)
program, USMC Advanced Technology Development (6.3) funds, Joint Non-
Lethal Weapons Directorate (6.3) funds, the Manufacturing Technology
(ManTech) program, and Low Observable, Counter Low Observable funds.
FNCs are near-term (2-4 year), requirements-driven, delivery-
oriented S&T projects. FNCs deliver mature technologies to acquisition
sponsors for incorporation into systems that provide new capabilities.
FNCs use a collaborative process involving requirements, research,
acquisition, and Fleet/Force communities to align this part of the S&T
portfolio with Naval Capability Gaps identified by the Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) and the Marine Corps Combat
Development Command (MCCDC). A gap is any capability required to
achieve Naval objectives that is not achievable with current platforms,
weapon systems, doctrine, organizational structure, training,
materials, leadership, personnel or facilities and requires S&T
investment to solve or overcome. Capability Gaps define the
requirement, not how to meet it.
FNCs are aligned to functional areas called ``Pillars'': Sea
Shield, Sea Strike, Sea Basing, FORCEnet, Naval Expeditionary Maneuver
Warfare, Capable Manpower, Force Health Protection, Enterprise and
Platform Enablers, and Power and Energy. FNC projects address specific
gaps in each of those areas, with final prioritization approved by a 3-
Star Technology Oversight Group (TOG) representing OPNAV, Marine Corps,
U.S. Fleet Forces Command, ASN-RDA, and ONR. FNCs are based on D&I
investments where technology can be matured from Technology Readiness
Level (TRL) 3 to TRL 6 in 3-5 years. Selection takes account of related
work in the Department of Defense (DOD), government agencies, industry
and Naval centers of excellence. Our investments focus on the most
pressing gaps, with funding changes based on successful transitions,
reprioritization, new starts, and evolving Naval needs. As FNC products
mature, Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) change, moving products from
6.2 to 6.3 PEs. Year one is mostly 6.2; the final year mostly 6.3--with
a mix of 6.2/6.3 between. As FNC products transition from S&T to
Advanced Component Development and Prototypes (6.4) and Engineering and
Manufacturing Development (6.5), responsibility for continued
development shifts from ONR to acquisition commands.
Approved FNC products have Technology Transition Agreements to
document the commitment of the resource sponsor, acquisition program,
and ONR to develop, deliver and integrate products into new or upgraded
systems. Every product is measured by technical and financial
milestones. All products must meet required transition commitment
levels for S&T development to continue. Products that no longer have
viable transition paths are terminated with residual funding used to
solve problems with existing projects, or start new projects in
compliance with Navy priorities, charters, business rules and
development guidelines. The measure of success is whether projects meet
technology requirements and exit criteria, and whether acquisition
sponsors have transition funds in programs to accept and integrate FNC
products. The transition status of FNC products is actively monitored
on an annual basis, with products terminated if the S&T is failing or
the transition plan is no longer viable. Through the end of fiscal year
2013, 216 FNC products completed S&T development (a success rate of 84
percent), with 41 FNC products terminated before completion.
Results are evaluated by a Transition Review Board (TRB) consisting
of Naval Reserve Officers representing Requirements, Acquisition and
S&T communities. The TRB provides an objective, independent assessment
of FNC products after successful transition or termination, analyzing
the causes and residual value of unsuccessful transitions and
deployments. Even in case of products which do not deploy, there is
significant residual value in technology that can be leveraged for
follow-on S&T efforts and made available for future transitions.
Nothing goes to waste.
quick reaction s&t
ONR maintains quick-reaction capability for projects lasting 12-24
months that respond to immediate requirements identified by Fleet/Force
or Naval leadership. TechSolutions provides short-term solutions to
immediate operational and tactical requirements. Accessible via
Internet and SIPRnet, TechSolutions accepts recommendations from
Sailors and Marines about ways to improve mission effectiveness through
the application of technology. TechSolutions uses rapid prototyping to
meet specific requirements, with each project structured around
definable metrics, and appropriate acquisition/test systems by
integrated product teams. While neither a substitute for the
acquisition process, nor a replacement for systems commands,
TechSolutions prototypes deliver solutions to address immediate needs
that can be easily transitioned to the Fleet/Force.
Technology development often occurs faster than DOD Planning,
Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) can respond. Our Technology
Insertion for Program Savings (TIPS) program provides current-year
funding (inside the PPBE process), eliminating time lag in the PPBE
cycle. TIPS provides up to $2 million for development efforts taking no
more than 2 years, coupled with Fleet/Force support and resource
sponsor commitment to fund moving the technology into the acquisition
Program of Record (POR) or operating system. TIPS focuses on
improvements that substantially reduce operating and support costs for
warfighting systems.
In partnership with ONR, Naval Warfare Development Command (NWDC),
Naval Postgraduate School, Naval War College and Marine Corps
Warfighting Lab (MCWL) assess new warfighting concepts and
technologies. Initiatives in support of our maritime strategy are
applied, tested, analyzed and refined through war games, exercises,
experiments and operational lessons learned.
government accountability office (gao) report on technology transition
In the March 2013 Government Accountability Office Report,
``DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT: Technology Transition Programs
Support Military Users, but Opportunities Exist to Improve Measurement
of Outcomes (GAO-13-286),'' GAO reported:

``. . . the Office of Naval Research (ONR) has a well-established
technology transition focus. ONR's Office of Transition manages
the Future Naval Capabilities (FNC) portfolio, which is the
Navy's largest transition program--for which nearly $450
million was budgeted in fiscal year 2013. The program, which
was initiated in 1999, seeks to provide the best technology
solutions to address operational requirements, delivering
technology products to acquisition programs that enhance
capabilities within a 5-year timeframe. ONR's Offices of
Transition and Innovation also support rapid technology
transition to the fleet, force, and acquisition communities via
the Rapid Technology Transition (RTT), Technology Insertion
Program for Savings (TIPS), TechSolutions (TS), and SwampWorks
and Experimentation (SW/Exp) programs.'' (p. 9)

GAO said, ``The Navy uses a Transition Review Board to monitor
completed projects from the Future Naval Capabilities, Rapid
Technology Transition, and Technology Insertion Program for
Savings programs. The board determines and reports on whether
transitioned projects are utilized in systems that support Navy
warfighters. The Navy determined, for example, that of the 155
technology products the Future Naval Capabilities program
delivered to acquisition programs between fiscal years 2006-
2011, 21 percent were subsequently deployed to fleet forces, 35
percent were still with the acquisition programs, and 44
percent failed to deploy. For projects that do not successfully
deploy, the board assesses whether there are other benefits
achieved, such as technologies leveraged for follow-on S&T
work. The board also identifies obstacles to transition, such
as loss of interest by the user or inadequacy of funding. These
findings, along with a detailed one-page summary for each
project, are then used to inform the Navy's annual review
process. We found that by maintaining this level of tracking,
the Navy is better aware of the benefits and obstacles
associated with a substantial portion of their S&T portfolio,
which may better inform decisions made by Navy leadership.''
(pp. 21-22)

GAO continued, ``At the program level, many program officials
indicated that senior leadership engagement, particularly in
providing oversight for projects through to transition, is
essential to having an effective program. We found the Future
Naval Capabilities program provides a good example of senior
leadership positively affecting project management activities.
Specifically, due to funding constraints in its fiscal year
2013 S&T budget, Navy senior leadership supported the
termination of ongoing Future Naval Capabilities projects that
were determined to be lower priorities so that new, higher
priority projects could be pursued. Navy officials stated that
this type of awareness and understanding at senior levels
enables the Future Naval Capabilities program to make efficient
decisions that are less likely to meet resistance and that
support the highest priority projects being developed for
transition opportunities. (p. 25)

``Several transition programs also emphasized the relationship
between ``working-level'' stakeholders--S&T developers and
acquisition programs or warfighters in the field--when
discussing the keys to technology transition. These
stakeholders manage expectations throughout a project and
ensure it will meet user needs. This reduces the risk of
completed projects languishing because funding is not available
or because user requirements have changed, or both. Some
programs that we reviewed use integrated product teams, which
may be composed of individuals representing the requirements,
acquisition, operational, and S&T communities, among others, to
facilitate continuous communication with stakeholders and
ensure that transition planning is on track. In the case of the
Navy, integrated product teams identify capability gaps,
provide input on which S&T projects may address those gaps,
assess project progress, make sure transition strategies remain
valid, and confirm funding is aligned to support transition.
According to Navy officials, the results of integrated product
team efforts also support information sharing across senior-
and working-level stakeholders to validate development status
and transition planning activities.'' (pp. 25-26)

GAO concluded, ``We found the Future Naval Capabilities program
uses technology transition agreements as management tools to
increase the level of documented commitment as a project
progresses over time. To accomplish this, the program has three
levels for agreements that reflect the requisite knowledge
available at different phases of a project. Key elements of an
initial agreement include a basic project description,
identification of initial exit criteria, a high-level
integration strategy, and a likely transition funding source.
As a project progresses, the other two levels of agreement
require increasing commitment and specificity of requirements
from stakeholders to develop, deliver, and integrate a Future
Naval Capabilities project into an acquisition program or other
form of deployment. Key elements of the second and third tier
agreements involve refining and finalizing project
descriptions, detailing exit criteria, providing greater
specificity about the integration strategy, and providing
estimates for transition costs and eventually executing
transition funding. Stakeholders review the agreements annually
to revalidate the commitments laid out within the document.
(p.27)

``We also found Transition Commitment Level (TCL) assessment tools
. . . offer another means of validating that transition
programs are investing in projects that have a firm transition
commitment from prospective users. These tools provide
scorecards that chart how well-defined the fundamental
characteristics that support a strong commitment to transition
projects are at a given point in time. The Future Naval
Capabilities program uses a single TCL tool that documents
level of transition commitment from project start to
completion.'' (p.27)
s&t highlights
The Naval S&T portfolio includes a range of projects and programs
entering or about to enter the Fleet/Force. Examples follow.
expeditionary maneuver warfare and combating terrorism
Marine expeditionary forces are forward-deployed and forward-based,
right-sized to respond to missions across the range of military
operations from combat to Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief
(HADR). This is best achieved by a Middleweight Force which can launch
from the sea and project power in sophisticated anti-access, area-
denial (A2/AD) environments. The imperative to lighten the load for
every Marine and the Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTAF) is critical,
requiring research in technologies that increase speed, agility and
range, develop advanced materials for lighter body armor, helmets and
eye protection, while reducing fuel consumption and vulnerability to
Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and mines. We develop over-horizon,
beyond line-of-sight, restricted environment communications, and
adaptable sensor systems to detect, classify, identify, locate and
track low level entities in urban clutter, improve situational
awareness, and enhance real time tactical decisionmaking.
Improving resilience of Marines enables them to more effectively,
efficiently observe, orient, decide and act (OODA) in complex,
stressful conditions. We explore technologies to provide autonomous
logistics, and enhance fuel, water and maintenance self-sufficiency.
On-demand, reduced logistics enable a high operational tempo, and allow
the Corps to out-maneuver and dominate any enemy. Marines out-perform
and out-think enemies by understanding battlespace in greater detail,
making decisions with greater understanding of enemy intent, and
getting inside the enemy decision cycle. To achieve this, ONR created a
small unit leader training framework based on codified learning models
and theories to deliver technology and knowledge products for the USMC
Training and Education Command (TECOM) that maximizes learning and
skill acquisition at minimal cost. We invest in S&T to improve training
efficiency based on cutting-edge, neuro-cognitive, psychologically-
driven instructional strategies that enable Sailors and Marines to
survive the brutal environment of combat, as well as retain emotional
and mental health after they leave the traumatic environment.
Current S&T investments include projects to improve On-Board
Vehicle Power, Advanced Remanufacturing and Sustainment Technologies,
and Internally Transportable Vehicle Autonomy Conversion. Force
Protection projects include development of Personal Protection
Technologies, On-The-Move Detection-of-Threat Optics, the Modular
Explosive Hazard Defeat System (MEHDS), and Ground Based Air Defense
(On-the-Move). Fires projects (Advanced Ammunition and Energetics)
include an Integrated Day-Night Sight, the High Reliability DPICM (Dual
Purpose Improved Conventional Munition) Replacement Program, and High
Performance Alloys for Weapons. Logistics applications will improve
Pallet Handling and Packaging, a JP-8 Solid Oxide Fuel Cell, and
Autonomous Resupply technology. Human Performance, Training and
Education investments will provide an Advanced Training System for
Small Unit Decision-Making, and Training to Optimize Use of Resilience
Skills (TOURS). Finally, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
projects include Night Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS), Entity
Disambiguation, and Semantic Web enablement to enhance mission-centric
knowledge generation and delivery. Our S&T efforts are undertaken hand-
in-glove with the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory at Quantico,
Virginia, whose mission is to rigorously explore and assess Marine
Corps concepts using an integral combination of war-gaming, concept-
based experimentation, technology assessments, and analysis to
validate, modify or reject the concept's viability, and identify
opportunities for future force development.
command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance
and reconnaissance (c4isr)
The proliferation of anti-access, area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities
among potential adversaries drives the need for technologies that
assure access for Naval forces. Our challenges include the requirement
to project power despite A2/AD challenges and to provide information
dominance to the warfighter.
Improved decisionmaking is central to the Navy's S&T plan to
provide information dominance to the warfighter. One goal is to develop
a highly flexible, open architecture, information and decisionmaking
capability with applications enabling operational and tactical forces
to function with the same distributed information base across all
warfare and mission areas. Information gathering and analysis will be
largely automated and autonomously controlled so warfighters can have
more time to make decisions and execute plans. A key aspect of this is
our use of the electromagnetic spectrum for dominance, while denying
the same to our adversaries. To this end ONR, Navy, and the other
services are working to deliver hardware and software to support
electromagnetic spectrum dominance in the near and far term.
Capabilities are in various stages of maturity and deployment.
ONR developed software to evaluate effectiveness of new Electronic
Warfare countermeasures. When the Fleet identified a requirement to
improve threat awareness and assess vulnerability to anti-ship cruise
missiles using organic Electronics Support Measures (ESM) sensors and
radar, ONR used the same software to address the new requirement by
developing a Human-Machine Interface (HMI), installing it on ships, and
deploying scientists to make the new HMI sailor friendly. This gave the
Task Force a clearer picture of ESM effectiveness and vulnerabilities
relative to current sensors, weather, and threats--allowing them to
reassign sensor coverage and move platforms to reduce vulnerabilities.
The Joint Counter Radio Controlled Improvised Explosive Device
Electronic Warfare (JCREW) effort is developing flexible, dynamic
system architecture to detect IED signals across the entire spectrum
and provide automated responses. Unlike current technology, JCREW is
designed to allow detection and communication systems to operate
simultaneously.
ocean battlespace sensing
To continue to dominate in the maritime environment Naval forces
must be able to accurately predict and adapt to ocean, air, littoral
and riverine environments on both tactical and strategic levels. Recent
changes in climate conditions and extremes have created an emerging
need for more accurate and longer range forecasts for DOD and Naval
operations. In support of the Navy's Task Force Climate Change, the
National Oceanographic Partnership Program, and in partnership with the
Air Force, Department of Energy, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and
National Science Foundation (NSF), we invest in S&T to provide mobile
autonomous environment sensing, match predictive capability to tactical
requirements, develop systems that adapt to environmental variability,
and integrate atmospheric and ocean models to enable better
forecasting. Additional investments will provide a better understanding
of surface wind impact on upper ocean dynamics and energy fluxes across
ocean boundary layers, increase knowledge of high latitude Arctic
environments, and enhance our ability to forecast operational
conditions with longer lead times. The payoff is safer, more efficient
Naval operations in maritime environments through improved immediate,
seasonal and longer range forecasts.
ONR's environmental research is heavily field-oriented, employing
oceanographic ships, aircraft, and autonomous air and undersea
vehicles. For example, the Navy owns six University-National
Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) Ocean Class Research Vessels
that ONR schedules and supports in partnership with NSF. Construction
of two replacement vessels is underway, with Auxiliary General
Oceanographic Research Ship (AGOR) 27--Research Vessel (R/V) Neil
Armstrong assigned to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and AGOR
28--R/V Sally Ride assigned to Scripps Institution of Oceanography.
Both are expected to begin research operations in fiscal year 2015.
In addition, we are developing rapid, standoff mine countermeasures
to support unencumbered maneuver of combatants, assure access, ensure
strategic mobility and sustainment, decrease mine countermeasure (MCM)
hazards, and increase the standoff range of combatants from minefields.
ONR experiments with sensing and autonomy technologies help small
vessels to operate at night, in all weather, at higher speeds, and with
less risk over large, poorly mapped riverine systems. Our Advanced
Undersea Weapon System (AUWS) will deliver targeting sensors and
remotely controllable or autonomous weapons into chokepoints or
channels to neutralize maritime threats. ONR's Advanced Sonar
Technology for High Clearance Rate MCM in the surf and autonomous
minehunting payloads for Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USV), reduce
timelines for detecting, identifying and clearing floating, drifting,
moored and bottom mines in shallow water.
ONR supports research in acoustic propagation and scattering to
improve anti-submarine wide area surveillance, detection, localization,
tracking, and attack capabilities against adversary submarines in
noisy, cluttered shallow water environments. We provide S&T to mitigate
effects of acoustic systems on marine mammals, to improve probability
of kill for undersea weapons, and to enable new undersea weapon
concepts of operation. Projects include the Remote Aerial Sonar and
Communications Laser (RASCL), Affordable Compact Bow Sonar for large
deck surface ships, holding threat submarines at risk in forward areas,
screening transiting battle groups, and providing torpedo defense for
ships.
sea warfare and weapons
ONR's major focus in this area is to improve surface, submarine,
ground, and air platforms, as well as undersea weapon performance. S&T
investments provide options for advanced electrical systems and
components, and for survivable, agile, mobile, sustainable, manned and
unmanned, surface and sub-surface sea platforms, and undersea weapons.
Significant investments provide S&T to improve performance and
affordability of the Nation's strategic submarine assets under the Ohio
Replacement Program (ORP), as well as Virginia-class submarines. Our
Electric Ship Research and Development Consortium enlists academic
institutions to develop electric power architectures and technologies
to enable use of next generation high power sensors and weapons,
including directed energy weapons (DEW) systems described earlier.
Investments encompass projects to transition S&T necessary to improve
performance and capabilities of our current fleet of torpedoes,
undersea weapons and vehicles, as well as effective countermeasures and
defensive weapons to protect against undersea weapon threats. Undersea
vehicle S&T includes research, development and deployment of long-
endurance, air-independent power systems for unmanned undersea vehicles
(UUVs). Additionally, we utilize extensive experience in surface craft
design and autonomy to provide the Fleet with unmanned surface vessels
(USVs) capable of operating effectively in a range of marine
environments.
A key enabler of these Sea Warfare and other capabilities is S&T
investment in naval materials. These investments focus on performance
and affordability of advanced materials for applications such as
lightweight structures, corrosion and biofouling mitigation,
maintenance cost-reduction, undersea acoustics, and energy- and power-
dense electrical energy conversion and storage. These efforts explore
and apply fundamental materials physics to discover and engineer future
materials meeting warfighting platform demands now and in the future.
Consistent with this approach, our investment in Integrated
Computational Materials Engineering is a key contributor to the
recently established Lightweight and Modern Metals Manufacturing
Initiative (LM3I).
warfighter performance
Warfighter Performance S&T addresses the full range of research
issues involving human system interactions, medical and biological
systems, and supports the SECNAV mission of protecting the safety and
privacy rights of human research subjects.
Human system research helps the DoN recruit the right people,
assign them to the right jobs, while ensuring they have the right
skills in safe systems that are designed to support effective
decisionmaking and collaboration. Our S&T investments in this area
helps improve small team, platform, task force, and battle group
operations by developing training technology and decision support
systems that accommodate human capabilities and limits. ONR initiatives
include simulation-based approaches to fleet integrated, multi-
platform, multi-mission training and experimentation that enable near-
real time collaboration, decisionmaking and planning across platforms
and organizations.
Warfighter performance goals are to enhance performance, improve
the timeliness and quality of decisionmaking, develop strategies to
mitigate workload, resolve ambiguity, and reduce workload and manning,
while improving situational awareness and speed of command. Training
technology S&T designs virtual networked learning environments that
exploit live assets, virtual simulators and artificially intelligent
constructive (Live, Virtual, Constructive/LVC) entities in distributed
training environments to increase individual and team skill, knowledge,
expertise and experience in warfighting tasks. S&T enables the Navy and
Marine Corps to effectively and affordably train in classrooms,
simulated environments, and on deployment.
Medical S&T improves the health, well-being, protection and
survival of personnel in undersea, shipboard and expeditionary
settings. ONR develops medical equipment, diagnostic capabilities, and
treatments to improve warfighter performance and resilience. ONR
develops solutions for point of injury care and casualty evacuation,
new approaches to mitigate risks associated with operations in extreme
environments such as dive medicine, and continues to address noise
induced hearing loss by reducing noise at the source, limiting
exposure, and developing protective technologies.
ONR's biological research program exploits principles from nature
to design, control and power autonomous systems; improve processes,
materials and sensors; and develop synthetic biology tools to support
the Fleet/Force. Biocentric technologies offer a variety of enabling
capabilities, including bio-inspired autonomous vehicles, acoustic/
seismic discrimination systems, microbial fuel cells for sustainable
power, engineered plants that produce energetic material precursors,
and diagnostic tools to assess the health of marine mammals.
Human subject research is critical to support the Navy and Marine
Corps warfighter, training and operational capability, and Navy
Medicine. Many RDT&E activities designed to respond to Fleet/Force
requirements necessitate human subject participation. As part of the
DoN Human Research Protection Program, ONR is responsible for
implementation of human subject protections in the Navy's systems
commands, operational forces, training units, and at Navy-sponsored
extramural institutions. ONR reconciles the competing priorities of
conducting potentially risky research involving human subjects and
compliance with Federal, DOD, and DoN human protection policies.
naval air warfare and weapons
ONR's Naval Air Warfare goal is to develop, demonstrate and
transition technologies to expand Naval weapon system stand-off ranges
and reduce engagement timelines to enable rapid, precise, assured
defeat of moving land, sea and air targets. We invest in S&T to develop
propulsion for high speed weapons requiring technologies associated
with high acceleration, high temperature, and high strength materials.
We develop advanced structural materials and corrosion protection for
aircraft, improvements that enhance operational characteristics such as
improved lift, and to address other requirements driven by operations
in the unique maritime environment. These include kinematic and
lethality enhancements to increase range and effectiveness of tactical
weapons, and aided target recognition to provide the F/A-18 with
advanced target identification capabilities.
naval research laboratory (nrl)
ONR supports the DoN corporate lab, the Naval Research Laboratory
(NRL). The NRL base program develops S&T to meet needs identified in
the Naval S&T Strategic Plan and sustains world class skills and
innovation in our in-house laboratory. Research at NRL is the
foundation that can focus on any area to develop technology from
concept to operation when high-priority, short-term needs arise. NRL is
the lead Navy lab for space systems, firefighting, tactical electronic
warfare, advanced electronics and artificial intelligence. Among our
greatest challenges is to recapitalize NRL infrastructure. I invite you
to visit this facility and learn more about research undertaken there
by our world-class scientists and engineers.
onr global
ONR has offices in London, Prague, Singapore, Tokyo and Santiago--
and closely coordinates activities with the other services and
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Research and Engineering). We search
for emerging research and technologies to help address current Naval
needs, as well as requirements for future capabilities. ONR Global
establishes contacts with international S&T leaders, giving us new
perspectives and helping identify trends and forecast threats. It
enables us to recruit the world's scientists and engineers in
partnerships to benefit the U.S. and our allies. Global includes
Science Advisors who communicate Fleet/Force needs to the Naval
Research Enterprise (primarily Navy labs, warfare centers, affiliated
universities) to facilitate development of solutions to transition to
the Fleet/Force. Participants include Naval engineers who coordinate
experimentation, develop prototypes, define transition options, and
collaborate with Fleet/Force to define S&T investments. Our
International Science Program gives scientists from academia,
government and industry opportunities to engage leading international
scientists and innovators. Our technical staff helps establish
collaboration between Naval scientists and their foreign counterparts,
and identifies centers of excellence for Naval S&T.
conclusion
The fiscal year 2015 President's budget request will enable us to
continue moving toward enhanced capabilities, more effective
partnership between research and acquisition, and strengthened
partnerships with the Army, Air Force, DARPA and other DOD research
organizations--as well as performers outside the Naval R&D system. We
strive to tap into the full spectrum of discovery and accelerate the
transition of appropriate technologies to civilian use. Our S&T
investments represent careful stewardship of taxpayer dollars that will
achieve these goals and significantly enhance the safety and
performance of warfighters as they serve in defense of the United
States. Thank you for your support.

Senator Durbin. Thanks, Admiral.
I have three questions for the panel. I am going to state
all three of them and anyone who feels inclined can jump in.
First question: When I go to the NIH and ask Dr. Collins,
he tells me that there is a dramatic decline in NIH
researchers, that they are seeing in 1982 19 percent of their
researchers were under the age of 36. Today it is 3 percent. He
believes that our failure to fund his agency on a regular basis
has created a crisis of confidence in those who are scientists
and engineers who might otherwise go into biomedical research.
I would like to know if you have seen this phenomenon in
the work that you are doing.
Secondly, I would like to address an issue that is timely
because it is on the floor of the Senate. We are now
contemplating extending the R&D tax credit under our tax code
for private companies to invest in research and development. We
believe that that work is so valuable that we ought to create a
tax incentive for it, and I have always voted for it because I
agree with that conclusion.
However, we are running into an interesting political
dilemma. There are some who say that because it is a tax cut,
you do not have to pay for it. However, if you took tax dollars
and spent them at your agencies or the National Institutes of
Health, you have to cut spending somewhere else. I do not
understand the difference.
And the basic question is this: Do you believe that the R&D
tax credit is enough to sustain America's superiority when it
comes to basic research or developmental research, or do you
believe the Government plays a unique role or a different role
that ought to be served as well by adequately funding research
efforts. I think I know the answer to that question.
The third issue relates to the coordination of effort. This
worries me. I have put in this budget more money, I believe,
than in past years for medical research. I really intensely
believe in it, and I believe the Department of Defense has
proven that the money they receive can be well spent in medical
research. I am interested in the coordination of medical
research. I want to make sure, for example, when we have a
BRAIN (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative
Neurotechnologies) initiative that is shared by DARPA and NIH
and other agencies, they are actually, at the beginning of this
conversation, sitting down and establishing parameters and
goals and methods of funding so we are not tripping over one
another and wasting these precious medical research resources.
Jump ball. Dr. Prabhakar.
Dr. Prabhakar. Mr. Chairman, let me dive in because you
talked about things that I want to discuss. I think they are
very much on point.
Let me try to attack the first two questions from the
following perspective. I am now at a point where I have spent
half of my professional life in the public sector and half in
the private sector. When I returned to Washington about a year
and a half ago, I came from 15 years in Silicon Valley, most of
that in venture capital. And from that perspective, let me
comment on the issue of the research community in the United
States, who the people are that are engaged in this enterprise,
and the R&D tax credit question.
On the people issue, one of the things that really struck
me, when I returned to the national security community after
serving on the boards of small private companies as venture
capitalists, is it was such a stark reminder that in the
national security work, we really have migrated to where we
connect with a very narrow part of the broader technical
community. A lot of that has to do with the backgrounds of a
lot who constitutes our technology community today. Over half
of the Ph.D. engineers who practice in the United States today
are foreign-born. The DOD does not have great ways of reaching
into those communities, and I think without active efforts to
reach into the research community to make those connections,
recognizing that there are real security issues that have to be
dealt with, we need, I think, to continue the kinds of work
that all of us are doing that reach into research institutions
and reach beyond just the defense community, the classic
defense industrial base and the classic research labs in DOD,
if we are to tap that broader human capital that is so vital to
our national security needs. Number one.
On the issue of the different kinds of funding, many others
have much more knowledge, and obviously, I will leave it to you
all to sort out tax policy. The point I really want to
underscore, though, is the question of whether private
companies' access to R&D tax credits or any investments that
private companies make--how those contrast to the kind of work
that happens with publicly supported R&D, particularly in the
Defense Department. And again, I have seen both sides of that
story.
This is a national R&D ecosystem, and in an ecosystem, all
the portions have to be healthy. So, yes, absolutely it matters
that our companies continue to make the R&D investments which
they make in order to build the next products and services that
they can sell at a profit. That is what they do. That is how
the economy works. Very important but different than the public
R&D investment that is made. In our cases, of course, we are
making that R&D investment for national security purposes, and
our portfolios are chock full of the kinds of research that
simply is not going to get invested in by private companies.
Now, often we end up laying a research base. Sometimes we
lay a research base that leads to much bigger private
investment and then leads to, for example, all the technologies
in the cell phone that you described earlier. But the reason
all of us are making these investments is because it is simply
not going to happen any other way, and it is vital to our
Nation's needs.
Mr. Shaffer. Sir, I would like to follow on to Arati's
comments. I fully support what she said. I would like to add a
little bit of data to some of that.
For the first question on researchers, across our
laboratories, we have basically a bimodal distribution with a
larger number of researchers around 35 to 45, a large number of
researchers 55 to 65, a bathtub from the last Government
drawdown. I am concerned about the future because last year
across the Department we hired under 1,000 new scientists into
our laboratories, compared to a normal 3,000. Furthermore,
right now what we are seeing across the board is about for
every three who leave, we can hire one coming back in. That is
just because of the budget crisis. So I am concerned. We are
gathering across the panel that you see here better metrics,
but there is a problem.
The other thing I would like to comment on are the R&D tax
credits. I am not going to get into taxes and tax policy, but I
will tell you we are trying to make the industrial research
part of what we are thinking about every day in the Department.
We have made a strong emphasis on IR&D (independent research
and development), but we are seeing data coming out of the
industrial sector. In fact, CSIS (Center for Strategic and
International Studies) issued a report yesterday that showed,
with one notable exception--I am not going to get into which
company--the amount of industrial IR&D over the last decade has
declined fairly dramatically to the point where some of our
major defense contractors are not putting much money back into
R&D. And that is a concern because they are part, as Arati
said, of the entire ecosystem.
Senator Durbin. Senator Cochran.
Senator Cochran. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to join you
and other members of the committee in reviewing the testimony
or presentations being made by this distinguished panel of
witnesses today.
Ms. Miller, I understand coincidentally you visited the
Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center
laboratories in Vicksburg earlier this week. I would be
interested in hearing your impressions of that visit. And to
the extent that it is not classified, tell us what your
impressions were.
Ms. Miller. Thank you for the opportunity.
It was a great visit. I have, obviously, been working with
the Corps of Engineers for a long time as my role here as DASA
R&T (Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and
Technology), but this was the first time I had actually made it
down to Vicksburg. I have had a number of trips scheduled and
been called off, and this time, even though they knew I was
testifying on Wednesday, I said I was coming anyway. So I am
here on 3 hours of sleep because we had a little bit of weather
coming back into DC last night. So I apologize for that.
The Corps is very impressive. The Engineer Research and
Development Center is very impressive. While I was there, they
took me through a number of their major activities. They have
been looking at climate change and its impact not only on the
environment but on the Army in particular, how we can utilize
training ranges, how it might impact BRAC (base realignment and
closure), not that we want one, but if BRAC happens again, we
want to be prepared to understand the impacts on the Army areas
that we might choose to relocate, how it affects operations in
the Army as we go forward in the future and the upsetness that
might happen in the world as we see it. We talked about
environmental work. We talked about nanotechnology and the
fundamentals that they do there to understand the impact of new
materials that the Army is looking at using before they become
a problem to the environment and to the soldiers that will be
using them. All that is foundational and informs the rest of
our weapons development and our material development.
We also talked about high performance computing. They are
the executive agent on behalf of all of the services for
executing that program, which was divested from OSD (Office of
the Secretary of Defense) to us 4 years ago, some very
significant work there and something that I believe will
underpin what we go forward with in the future.
Senator Cochran. Thank you very much for that overview and
for the contributions that we are making across previously
established boundaries in this missile defense area. There is a
great deal of collaboration going on, and I commend all of the
panel for the work you are doing to make sure we have the most
modern capabilities to protect the security interests of our
country and for your sharing of that information from time to
time as we visit with you and review the budget request for the
next fiscal year.
We are constrained because of the allocations, but your
testimony helps us make the best choices in my view, and we
should pay very careful attention to what you say to us about
these very serious and important issues.
Thank you for your good work.
Senator Durbin. Senator Shelby.
Senator Shelby. Thank you.
We all have this chart, which Senator Durbin mentioned in
his opening statement, at the hearing that Senator Mikulski
called the other day, and a lot of us were there. It is
disturbing the trend line going in the wrong direction on
biomedical research, but it is also going the wrong direction
in basic research.
For the record, could you translate that into real dollars?
The trend line is bad. And China and what they are doing in
investing in the future will bode well for them, maybe not for
the rest of the world. But if you could translate this into
dollars, that would be good for the committee, I believe,
rather than just percentages.
I would like to direct my first question to Dr. Prabhakar.
DARPA's involvement in the creation of the Internet is well
known and well documented. Thank goodness. Thus, it comes as
little surprise that the birthplace of the Internet is also
leading the way in developing innovative mechanisms to protect
that domain from cyber warfare attacks, which is a big concern
of the business community, of the Pentagon, everything in
today's world.
It is my understanding, Doctor, that DARPA is currently
working to develop a cyber warfare program, which would allow
DOD to create platforms to plan for and counter cyber warfare
just as it would for kinetic warfare. Whatever you can talk
about here in open session, would you please update this
Committee on Appropriations on the status of Plan X and, more
broadly speaking, how important is sustained funding for
DARPA's cybersecurity efforts to this country?
Dr. Prabhakar. Thank you, Senator Shelby.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, cybersecurity I think
is one of the core foundations as we become increasingly
reliant on information. I think we are all familiar with the
challenges that our businesses and our national security
enterprise face because of cyber attacks that are happening on
a constant basis, some driven by nation states, some driven by
organizations, and some just individuals because so many
individuals around the world have at their fingertips now the
ability to participate in this domain, for better or for worse,
often for better, but sometimes unfortunately for worse.
We think that that cyber environment in which we are in a
conflict today, that that is going to continue to escalate.
Much of the conversation has been about computers and networks.
Those are important to keep secure. But, of course, all of our
embedded systems are also highly vulnerable. One of our
researchers a couple years ago showed that they could hack the
speedometer on a car. So if a speedometer on a car is
vulnerable, then I think it is a good thing to realize that all
of our embedded military systems are also vulnerable.
Everything has a computer in it today.
So Plan X is a foundational cyber warfare program that we
are building to allow us to have the visibility and the
understanding of cyberspace so that we can start to deal with
how cyber warfare is happening today and where it will be in
the future. We think it is going to become integral to the
kinetic warfighting of the future.
We want to give our senior decision-makers the ability to
see what is happening in cyberspace, to plan actions, to be
able to predict collateral effects, to avoid affects that they
want to make sure do not happen, and then to do battle damage
assessment. Those are the core capabilities.
Senator Shelby. Is this one of DARPA's top priorities?
Dr. Prabhakar. Across our portfolio, it is a high priority.
As you know, what we do at DARPA needs to be a balanced
portfolio. Maintaining the security of our information systems
is one of those high priorities.
Senator Shelby. Doctor, it is my understanding that I am
getting into the long-range anti-ship missile. It is my
understanding that on April 22, a few weeks ago, DARPA
demonstrated five key technologies to the Secretary of Defense
at the Pentagon. Among the five technologies exhibited was
DARPA's long-range anti-ship missile which seeks to pierce
through advance air defense systems and engage enemy warships
from a long range, which is smart.
Could you discuss the importance of continuing to fully
fund development of the long-range anti-ship missile? And what
is the capability as far as leaping ahead here?
Dr. Prabhakar. This was a project that DARPA began about 5
years ago in response to what we heard from the Pacific Fleet,
basically their concern about being out-sticked, not having the
range for anti-ship missile capabilities, particularly in the
Pacific theater. We rapidly put together a program that
culminated with successful flight tests for the DARPA stage of
the research. Those flight tests were last fall. And the work
that is now going on with DARPA's funding is in fact wrapped up
for that program because we have successfully shown those
flight tests.
What is happening now is a joint DARPA and Navy effort to
try to get from that flight test to operational capability as
rapidly as we can. Because it is an urgent known requirement
for the Navy, it is something that we are hoping that the Navy
will be able to get across the finish line very quickly.
Senator Shelby. Ms. Miller, could you just for a moment,
for the record here today, speak to the importance of providing
adequate funding--and that is part of what this hearing is
about--to field new weapon technologies like the Army's missile
and rocket advanced technology, how important that is to the
service that is down the road, the Army particularly?
Ms. Miller. Obviously, I believe it is very important for
the Army to have robust funding in our air and missile defense
capabilities at AMRDEC (Aviation and Missile Research,
Development, and Engineering Center) down in Huntsville, also
PEO (Program Executive Office) Missiles and Space. We have a
pretty solid program in the Army's science and technology
portfolio. We have taken a slight dip in that particular
technology area, but that is not a deliberate decision not to
fund that. That was the completion of a successful program in
our extended area protection system, a missile development
capability. And so we have completed that. And as we go into
the next 2015 through 2019, we start to pick up with counter
UAS (unmanned aircraft systems) capability development.
Senator Shelby. Could you also speak to the proposed high
energy laser demonstrator and what this potentially could do?
Ms. Miller. Absolutely. For the Army, the Space and Missile
Defense Command is leading all research in high energy lasers.
This is a capability that all of the services co-funded--the
development of solid state laser capability under the High
Energy Laser Joint Technology Office. And then each one of us
has taken that capability and is demonstrating it in an
operational context.
For the Army, we have been working out at WSMR (White Sands
Missile Range) and doing some tests there. We have just
recently gone with the Navy to test this at Eglin and see how
the laser operates in that kind of environment because the Army
pretty much is anywhere in the world and we need to make sure
that it works in our capacity. It has been very successful
against mortars and UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicle). It is
slated to go into a program of record, our integrated fire
protection system, in the 2022 timeframe.
Senator Shelby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Durbin. Senator Collins.
Senator Collins. Thank you.

MALARIA VACCINES

Dr. Rauch, I agree with the chairman's observation about
the important contributions the Department of Defense has made
to medical research. Oftentimes we think of traumatic brain
injury where the Department has played such an important role.
But the Department has gone beyond that and contributed in
important ways in other areas such as infectious diseases. I
was interested to read that the military infectious disease
research program states that infectious diseases such as
malaria historically cause more casualties when our troops are
deployed to tropical regions than does enemy fire.
Could you give us an update on efforts by the Department of
Defense to develop a vaccine that would be effective against
malaria?
Dr. Rauch. Yes, ma'am.
First of all, you are quite correct in that in the deployed
force, there is a lot of morbidity associated with infectious
diseases. Very true. And that is why we have an infectious
disease research program that is dedicated to actually
protecting our forces as they go into an endemic infectious
disease area. Most concerning are infectious diseases such as
malaria, dengue fever, and the diarrheal diseases. These are
things that we really focus on.

VACCINE RESEARCH EFFORTS

With respect to malaria, we partner with the Gates
Foundation and also with private industry to mature these
products along. There is one product that was really developed
and the preclinical work was done at Walter Reed Army Institute
of Research. It came out of that tech base, was picked up then
by GlaxoSmithKline. And those are phase III trials that are
being conducted, and it is really showing about 50 percent
efficacy in protection.
Now, you may say, oh, 50 percent. Can we do better than
that? Malaria is a very, very challenging parasite. It is very
agile. It is very flexible. You think you have it one time, and
it changes. It is very agile. And so it is very much a
challenge to come up with an efficacious medical countermeasure
or vaccine. But those results from the phase III trial are
very, very promising.
There is also a candidate that is coming out of the Navy
lab that is also very promising. So partnering with NIH in this
area shows a lot of Federal leverage to tackle this problem.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Admiral Klunder, oftentimes it is small businesses that
come up with the truly innovative products, and I can see Ms.
Miller nodding in agreement as I say that. But it can be very
difficult for a small business to comply with the cost of
submitting a bid, with changing specifications, with rescoping
of projects. And I want to give you an example from my home
State.

SMALL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES

A small Maine shipyard built a prototype vessel for the
Navy and for Special Forces and ultimately won a contract to
build an advanced rescue craft for the military. And one of the
challenges--the greatest challenge for this small business--was
not building the high-tech vessel. It knew how to do that. But
it was dealing with the expense of recurring costs associated
with dealing with a very complex procurement process. What
happened in this case is this small business submitted a bid at
great cost to the business in response to the Navy's RFP
(request for proposal) to supplement or replace the Mark V
Special Operations Craft, only to watch the Navy change its
mind, rescope the project, and publish a second new RFP. And
for a big company, that would not be a problem. For a small
company, it forced this firm to abandon the project due to the
complexity, difficulty, and expense of completely redoing its
bid.
So what has happened is the Navy has now lost a competitor
for a project despite the fact that this small firm
demonstrated in building a prototype that it could perform
exactly the kind of work that the Navy wants.
So my question for you is how does the Navy ensure that you
do not inadvertently exclude small businesses that do not have
the kind of resources that a large defense contractor has to
rebid on a contract when the Navy changes its mind.
Admiral Klunder. Thank you, Senator Collins.
I am not 100 percent involved in the details of that
acquisition process, but I am familiar with it. And I offer two
thoughts.
One is we absolutely love the innovation that comes out of
small businesses. As a matter of fact, on the railgun system
that I have down at Dahlgren we developed, 80 separate
companies were involved in the development of that. That is big
and small. So I promise you I love working with small
businesses. As a matter of fact, in 3 weeks here in the
beginning of June, we are having our Navy Opportunity Forum to
address specifically small businesses, and that is here in DC.
So I will reach out.
But on this specific company, because I do know about the
issue at hand, I would like to offer that what I have done is,
even though I know that process may have had some holes in it
in terms of the complications and complexity you described, I
have gone back and looked at that technology because there may
be things we are going to do in the future, not necessarily a
spec ops Mark V, but maybe connectors as we work with the
Marine Corps, getting from sea to shore. I am looking at some
of those technologies, I am going to reach out to that company,
ma'am.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Durbin. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you to all of you this morning. Very interesting.
I wanted to ask a couple questions here about HAARP, the
High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program. Several of you
at the table have a little bit of a piece here. As you know,
this is located up in Alaska. It is currently funded by the Air
Force research lab. It was formerly funded by the Office of
Naval Research. One of the prime customers is DARPA, which is
currently running experiments at the facilities there. So
questions to several of you this morning.
I am told by the president of the University of Alaska that
the Air Force has pulled its support for the facility and they
are taking steps to demolish it or take it down this summer. He
is making the argument that there are other opportunities for
us, and he is trying to find a path where the university might
be able to take title to the facility.
I would like to start with you, Dr. Prabhakar. I understand
that a lot of folks here on the committee probably do not
understand what HAARP does. I think most Alaskans do not really
know what HAARP does or why the agency is involved in it. So a
very brief explanation and then a more direct question. Would
you be disappointed or would you lose something if HAARP were
to go away?
Dr. Prabhakar. Senator Murkowski, as I think you know, one
of our programs has been using the HAARP facility for the
research that it is pursuing, and my understanding is that we
did get value out of that interaction.
The ``P'' in DARPA is projects, and we are not in the
business of doing the same thing forever. So very naturally as
we conclude that work, we are going to move on to other topics.
So it is not an ongoing need for DARPA despite the fact that we
had actually gotten some good value out of that infrastructure
in the past.
Senator Murkowski. Understood.
Then to Dr. Walker and Mr. Shaffer--Dr. Walker, your agency
is currently running the facility. I have mentioned that it is
our understanding through the president of UAF that the plans
are to move forward and demolish the facility this summer. So
the question to you is, is that accurate? Can you explain why?
And then perhaps to both you and Mr. Shaffer, is there any
benefit in exploring a potential relationship with the
University of Alaska to perhaps take over the HAARP?
Dr. Walker. Thank you, Senator.
The Air Force has gotten great value out of HAARP in the
past. We took it over from the Navy and managed it and actually
did a number of experiment campaigns up there and have finished
our work that we are interested in doing up there. We are
moving on to other ways of managing the ionosphere, which the
HAARP was really designed to do, was to inject energy into the
ionosphere to be able to actually control it. But that work has
been completed.
The Air Force has maintained the site for other Government
agencies to use for several years now, and with DARPA
completing their project, that is our last Government customer
that we have in the site.
We have put out a call Governmentwide for other agencies
that had interest in managing the site or taking it over,
including going out to academia and seeing if there was an
interest there. And we have gotten interest from the university
in Fairbanks. However, the interest that we have is that they
will run it if we fund it, which is unfortunately in this
fiscal environment we are in right now, this is not an area
that we have any need for in the future and do not see that it
would be a good use of Air Force S&T funds in the future. So
our position has been that if there is not somebody who wants
to take over the management and the funding of the site, then
the Air Force has no future need, and that we do plan to do a
dismantle of the system in the future after we make appropriate
notifications.
Senator Murkowski. When you say in the future, do you
anticipate that it would be this summer then? Or would there
perhaps be more time for the university to try to figure
something out?
Dr. Walker. We would prefer to start this summer. We would
like to get the critical equipment out of the site before the
winter. The harsh winter in Alaska does lead to a very costly
winterization to maintain the site, and we would like to avoid
that if we can.
Senator Murkowski. Mr. Shaffer, if you have any comments on
that.
Mr. Shaffer. Yes, ma'am.
So I am torn on this because my background is as an
atmospheric scientist, and I think the facility is just a
world-class facility.
That said, we have worked very hard with the Air Force,
with the Office of Science and Technology Policy over the last
18 to 24 months to find another sponsor for this because, as
you have heard the other people at the table, we, the
Department, have gotten the research value out that we need for
the facility. We have also worked with the University of Alaska
Fairbanks to get some other person to pick up the long-term,
just pure scientific research that HAARP offers the promise of.
But with all the other issues and problems and challenges
facing the Department at this time, we just do not see that
that investment over a long-term period is where we would
prioritize our investments.
So we have been working with other agencies, trying to get
agencies like the National Science Foundation, Department of
Commerce who runs the National Ocean and Atmospheric
Administration, to pick up the HAARP facility. No one else
wants to step up to the bill, ma'am.
Senator Murkowski. Let me ask you one final question here,
Mr. Shaffer, and this is regarding small modular reactors. In
the report language with the National Defense Authorization Act
last year, DOD was directed to carry out an assessment of small
modular reactors of 10 megawatts or less. As energy sources for
our forward operations, I have always thought that this made a
lot of sense, particularly in some of our remote areas. We have
got Eielson Air Force Base up north that could clearly benefit
from a reliable energy security that nuclear power could
provide. But you need it on that smaller scale.
Are you considering such domestic deployment operations for
SMRs?
Mr. Shaffer. We have been in discussion with the folks who
are selling that particular technology. What we cannot get
over, ma'am, is the sticker shock. There are a lot of other
issues, but the sticker shock of the initial investment. So by
the time you would do environmental impact statements and all
the rest, even to put in a small nuclear reactor, every time I
have looked at it, the bill has been around $1 billion. That is
a lot of money in the current fiscal environment.
I think I would speak for everybody at the table. As
technologists, we think the technology offers tremendous
promise, but getting past all the regulatory and all the other
things that would constrict us to putting in a new nuclear
reactor just makes it a very, very hard thing to work our way
through.
I was in Eielson last summer. I understand exactly the need
for that type of capability, but we will need some help. And
frankly, it is kind of the Department of Energy's ball to carry
in many ways.
Senator Murkowski. Well, and it is something that I think
many of us are involved with here, trying to figure out how you
can expedite that permitting process, how we can work to reduce
those costs. But you are correct. We are probably still a ways
away. I appreciate your perspective on it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Durbin. Thanks, Senator.
The last question, I know I asked too many for a short
period of time, was about the coordination of different
agencies in areas like biomedical research. It is my
understanding that the NIH and DARPA and others are doing the
BRAIN Initiative. What I am trying to get is some assurance,
and I think I am going to get it that at the outset, there is a
coordination of effort and resources so that we do not waste
any time or money.
Dr. Prabhakar. Yes. Sorry. Let me just speak specifically
to the BRAIN Initiative, and then, Terry, please dive in.
Absolutely, yes. We have had a lot of very good dialogue
with NSF and NIH in particular on the BRAIN Initiative.
Here is how we think about it, if this is useful to you.
NSF and particularly NIH have built this phenomenal research
foundation through the investments that they have made in
biomedical research over many, many years. What we want to do
at DARPA and our programs are doing today is building real
technology capabilities out of some specific areas of new
insights in brain function research. And it is a very good
interplay. Our investment is very small compared to the
neuroscience investment over many decades at NIH, but I think
it is a time when there is a huge opportunity to build real
technical capability.
Senator Durbin. Is the same thing true of other areas in
our appropriations bill where we are kind of specifying a line
item different areas of medical research? Can the same be said,
Dr. Rauch?
Mr. Shaffer. Senator, let me take this and then I will let
Terry talk about his specific area.
We have been concerned for a number of years about better
coordination of the programs. As you see here, we have three
services, a number of agencies doing research in every area.
Over the last 18 months, we have put in place a structure that
took the best of what we had previously to coordinate our
activity in 17 areas. That process is called Reliance 21,
Communities of Interest. So in 17 areas where multiple agencies
have an investment, we have the senior executive or senior
leader who is responsible for investment of money coordinate
their program with the other components because everybody wants
to get the maximum out of their ability.
One of these 17 areas--we actually adopted a body that was
there before called ASBREM (Armed Services Biomedical Research
Evaluation and Management), and I will turn it over to Terry
because Terry is one of the co-chairs of ASBREM with my
director for biomedical sciences. They actually do the
coordination of the biomedical research area.
Terry.
Senator Durbin. I want to thank you for a new acronym.
Go ahead.

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, EVALUATION, AND MANAGEMENT

Dr. Rauch. Well, sir, it is not a new acronym. It has been
around for a while, but we continue to refine it.
The ASBREM is really a mechanism to assure coordination
across the Department. It is one mechanism to assure
coordination of medical research across the Department. We
actually have a liaison officer from Health Affairs that is
actually assigned over to DARPA to make sure that DARPA and DHP
programs are coordinated. I mean, that is an investment on our
part.
You know, the National Research Action Plan really sets the
foundation particularly in the area of mental health research
to assure coordination. There is hardly a day that goes by that
I am not talking or emailing with my colleague over at the VA,
Tim O'Leary, or with Tom Insel at NIH or his staff about the
different projects that we have ongoing in mental health
research.
Every year for the last 4 years, we have held joint
portfolio R&As, review and analyses, where the DOD program is
presented in combat casualty care research and TBI and psych
health research and infectious diseases and operational
medicine and rehabilitation. The VA presents their program at
the R&A. The NIH presents their program at the R&A. It is fully
transparent. It enables us to see in a coordinated fashion the
state of science that we are funding with our Federal dollars.
And it enables us to determine where the gaps are, Federal
gaps, and how we can correct those gaps or invest in those
gaps. It informs our next upcoming investments.
One last thing, sir, and I have to make a point. What comes
out of these, in addition to what comes out of these portfolio
reviews, is joint initiatives. Last year, the DOD and the VA
co-funded two major consortia, one for PTSD and one for
traumatic brain injury. When I say co-funded, I mean the VA put
up their intramural program dollars that went to the awardee on
the VA side, and we put up DHP (Defense Health Program) R&D
dollars that went to the awardee on the academic side. Their
consortia is at the University of Texas Health Science Center
in San Antonio. That is the one for PTSD. The co-investigator
is Terry Keane up at Boston VA. The one for traumatic brain
injury is David Sifu down at VCU (Virginia Commonwealth
University) who also has an appointment with the VA in
Richmond. These are 5-year consortia, a 5-year period of
performance. The first time we have ever done this together
with the VA.
We do something very similar with NIDA (National Institute
on Drug Abuse) in terms of putting out joint program
announcements where DOD will fund research on drug abuse, as
well as NIDA.
So we cost share. You can see that in combat casualty. I
mean, I can go on and on and on.
Senator Durbin. Thank you for that.
Dr. Rauch. Your time is precious.
Senator Durbin. Thank you.
Do any of my colleagues have any follow-up questions?
Senator Shelby.
Senator Shelby. I have a couple of questions for Admiral
Klunder.

HIGH-POWER DENSITY WATER JET DEVELOPMENT

Admiral, in the area of Office of Naval Research, it is my
understanding that ONR delivered a new high-power density water
jets to the Freedom variant of a littoral combat ship, LCS.
Could you please provide an update of that testing, and what
that will do?
Admiral Klunder. Yes, Senator, thank you.
And again, I offer that that work was done from a
consortium of larger and small businesses. So that is very
important to us.
Senator Shelby. Why is it important to you?
Admiral Klunder. We feel that if we are going to stimulate
the economy and the industrial base----
Senator Shelby. No. I mean why the water jet----
Admiral Klunder. Oh, the water jet, certainly. Well, not
only the ship itself but the fuel efficiency that we derive was
incredibly impressive. We are not talking about one or two
extra percentages. We are talking almost around 10 percent of
fuel efficiencies we get out of this water jet. And again, I am
a physicist. So there is a little bit of flow dynamics. But the
point is we were able to test that, fabricate it with help in
your great State. And then when we implemented that on the
ship, it is now working.
I would offer manufacturing, industrial base. We have a
problem. How can we make it better, more fuel efficient? We
injected with the industrial partners--performers and we will
deliver that I think in a reasonably fair amount of time, which
is on our ships now.

JOINT HIGH SPEED VESSEL RAMP DEVELOPMENT

Senator Shelby. This came about, as you mentioned, by some
broad research working with others. Right? And businesses.
Admiral Klunder. Yes, sir. And again, I think that was a
great partnership from funding from ONR but also with local
businesses.
Senator Shelby. In another area, the joint high speed
vessel ramp you are familiar with the Office of Naval Research
completed a demonstration of a new lightweight ramp for the
Navy's joint high speed vessel earlier this month. Could you
discuss that and how you are going to implement this? And what
will it do for you--do for us?
Admiral Klunder. Sure. And again, I think for those that
are not familiar with the joint high speed vessel, this is a
very affordable, high speed vessel. It has lots of modular
space in it. And why do I emphasize that? Because that vessel
can now be used for multiple, multiple missions. We could use
it to connect marines to go inland. We could use it potentially
to put other kind of systems on there that may be spur of the
moment, new threats as they come about.
But to do that and to make sure it is truly multimission,
we needed it to have a very effective ramp. And that ramp has
been tested quite well. As I represent not only the Navy but
the Marine Corps, the Marine Corps is very interested in that
ramp and how it may be implemented on JHSV or other modular
ships we are building as MLP. I think you are familiar with
that ship also, Senator.

JOINT HIGH SPEED VESSEL ATTRIBUTES

Senator Shelby. Admiral, can you explain briefly what the
joint high speed vessel will mean for us in the Navy?
Admiral Klunder. Thank you, Senator.
Well, not only will it be a ship that can move very fast
and very efficient on fuel, but again, it can carry a number of
marines. It could actually put potentially a new weapons
system----
Senator Shelby. And be heavily armed too, could it not?
Admiral Klunder. Yes, sir.
And we can put it anywhere in the world quite quickly.
Right now we have built--there is a number of those through
the acquisition process that are being built and fielded. And
as a matter of fact, this July we are going to bring one into
San Diego and put the railgun on it to show the public.
What I think really is important, as we continue to work
with this ship and figure out different missions, it can really
be used around the globe. It is not particular to one part of
the globe. We could put it anywhere in the world and that is
really part of its----
Senator Shelby. So the Navy and Marine Corps are very
pleased with what----
Admiral Klunder. I would say we are fully embracing it,
Senator. Thank you.
Senator Shelby. Thank you.
Admiral Klunder. Yes, sir.
Senator Cochran. Mr. Chairman, could I ask unanimous
consent to submit two questions to Dr. Walker and Admiral
Klunder for the record?
Senator Durbin. Without objection.
Senator Murkowski.

ARCTIC SENSOR DEVELOPMENT

Senator Murkowski. Mr. Chairman, very briefly. I know we
have got a vote that has just started.
But I wanted to just bring up very quickly with you, Dr.
Prabhakar, I have mentioned, as cabinet members have come
before different panels before us, my interest in making sure
that this administration is advancing our national interests in
the Arctic. And I have been somewhat disappointed with some
lackluster implementation plans, but I have been very
encouraged by DARPA's Assured Arctic Awareness initiative. I
know that you have got some data that is coming back that you
have been collecting out in the region. I am hoping that you
are getting some early indication of good value coming out of
that and, again, that you are really committed in moving
forward in this initiative that I think is critically important
not just for the State of Alaska, not at all, but truly for the
entire Nation. So, first of all, I thank you for what DARPA is
doing, but I would just encourage you to push a little harder
on it.
Dr. Prabhakar. Thank you very much for the comment, Senator
Murkowski. And you are right. This is a national issue. The
Navy has got its hands full with the oceans that we already
know and a whole new ocean is appearing before our eyes in the
Arctic, and the conditions there are very interesting, dynamic,
and challenging. I too am looking forward to seeing what we are
going to learn from our initiative.
Senator Murkowski. Do you know when that might be coming
out?
Dr. Prabhakar. I know that we are still in the process of
getting the data back.

ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

Senator Murkowski. I will look forward to----
Dr. Prabhakar. Yes, same here.
Senator Murkowski [continuing]. Having some collaboration
on that. Thank you.
Admiral Klunder. Senator, could I just--since I am in the
Navy and the Arctic means a lot to us. And thank you, working
with DARPA. I am not sure if we are all aware of it. Just this
March we put another level of sensors off the Beaufort Sea off
your great coast, and that was done in March. And we are going
to measure that summer retreat of the marginal sea ice, and we
are actually going to come up to Deadhorse Bay and Prudhoe Bay
here in July to add some more sea gliders and wave gliders to
complement that exercise.
Senator Murkowski. Great.
Admiral Klunder. So we are doing a fair amount of research
and development up there to truly understand the environment
because we think it is so important, Senator.
Senator Murkowski. We appreciate that. Thank you, Admiral.
Senator Durbin. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Alan Shaffer
Questions Submitted by Senator Daniel Coats
Question. Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Crane has become
widely recognized across the Department of Defense, and within the
Federal Lab System for re-thinking and pioneering Technology Transfer.
Currently, the Research Directorate within Assistant Secretary of
Defense--Research & Engineering (ASD-R&E) and the State of Indiana are
collaborating around Crane's successes to demonstrate how a lab's
innovation can be used to increase the lab's mission effectiveness. Is
this model something that can be shared and exported?
Answer. Yes. Leadership of NSWC Crane designated Technology
Transfer (T2) as a command priority in 2005 and invested in their
Office of Research & Technology Applications (ORTA), the group
responsible for leading and implementing the local T2 program. Crane's
ORTA, recognized as one of the best within the Department of Defense,
initiated a strategic effort to work as appropriate with Indiana's
academic and business communities as well as local and state government
organizations. The best example of T2 success is found in the creation
of the Battery Innovation Center located near NSWC Crane. This is a
nexus for new power technologies needed by the military while
concurrently developing products for the commercial marketplace.
Question. Are there any future structure changes required and
strategy alterations to leverage what has been demonstrated in Indiana?
Answer. Congress has provided all of the needed authorities for an
effective Department of Defense Technology Transfer (T2) Program; no
additional authorities are required at this time. A number of Defense
laboratories, with support from the Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Research and Engineering) (ASD(R&E)) Defense Laboratories Office, have
accelerated their local T2 programs.
Question. What is DOD's strategy for leveraging intellectual
capital for enhanced mission effectiveness and economic development?
Answer. The ASD(R&E) Defense Laboratories Office participates in
the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP) Lab-to-
Market initiative as well as the Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) to
broaden the government-academia-industry T2 network. Lessons learned
and opportunities for DOD's labs to participate in a national T2
environment are promulgated to the Defense labs' ORTAs for
consideration and implementation. A T2 guidebook has been written and
distributed to the defense labs. When ASD(R&E) learns of other
laboratory's T2 successes, the experiences and processes are shared
across the entire Department lab system.
______

Questions Submitted to Dr. Arati Prabhakar
Questions Submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein
Question. Is DARPA planning to continue development of robotic arms
and associated robotics capabilities for the advancement of in-space
satellite servicing and to conduct an in-orbit demonstration of these
capabilities?
Answer. Yes. DARPA recognizes the strategic importance and the
commercial potential of in-space satellite servicing and is developing
the required capabilities on a priority basis. DARPA is developing
robotic arms and associated robotics capabilities developed under
DARPA's Phoenix program into an in-orbit demonstration program with
multiple capabilities. The in-orbit program will validate capabilities
in geostationary earth orbit of high strategic importance for new
Department of Defense (DOD) concepts as well as high commercial
potential (e.g., satellite inspection, repair, and in-orbit assembly).
The multimission demonstration spacecraft would be designed for an
extended mission lifetime, enabling follow-on operations by a
commercial space contractor after successful completion of a test and
demonstration phase by DOD.
Question. Is DARPA planning to continue the advancement of the
``Payload Orbital Delivery System'' and to demonstrate this capability?
Answer. Yes. MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates and Space Systems
Loral are currently under contract to continue engineering and
integration planning in order to deliver a flight-qualified unit to
host a Payload Orbital Delivery (POD) System on a commercial satellite.
This capability will provide an alternative low-cost and high-tempo
delivery of mass to geostationary orbit for DOD. During the ongoing
technical development of the flight hardware, DARPA will continue to
evaluate future opportunities to host and fly the POD concept on a
commercial satellite.
Question. Without having a DOD office for satellite servicing, what
approaches is DARPA considering for the transition of these critical
capabilities to ensure their availability to our DOD stakeholders?
Answer. DARPA embraces opportunities for transition. While
transition is most directly accomplished through the Services, it can
also be accomplished by advancing the technologies through our
performers. Proof of the technology coupled with the push to industry
often results in benefits to the DOD in the future.
______

Questions Submitted by Senator Daniel Coats
Question. With the growth of emerging threats to the
microelectronics supply chain, some of which have recently been
discovered by NSWC Crane, what is DARPA doing to ensure that its
advanced technical assessment capability such as the DARPA IRIS
(Integrity and Reliability of Integrated Circuits) Program is being
transitioned to labs such as Crane?
Answer. In order to ensure that the advanced technical counterfeit
component mitigation capabilities developed at DARPA are transitioned
to the most effective labs at the completion of these programs, DARPA
engages likely transition partners as government team members during
their actual execution. Personnel from the transition partners,
including Crane, actively work on this program, even to the point of
having badge access to the DARPA facility. In this way, critical
informed feedback and required application boundary conditions may be
incorporated into the required deliverables from the outset of the
program.
In the case of NSWC Crane, the Indiana lab's hardware assurance
team is widely recognized as a national center of expertise, one of the
only two or three true centers of competence in the country for
mitigating threats to DOD's supply chain. DARPA MTO and its program
managers involved in hardware assurance are fortunate to have access to
the experience and insight which NSWC Crane, Indiana brings to the
programs it helps support. Specifically, Brett Hamilton, an expert in
anti-counterfeit technology from Crane, is intimately involved in the
program, has DARPA badge access, and works hand in hand with the
program manager in execution of the program. The technology developed
by DARPA performers is frequently transitioned to Crane. Examples
include chip imaging techniques for electrically probing and
visualizing the behavior of unknown circuits.
Question. NSWC Crane is part of a ``Virtual Lab'' consortium
providing support to DARPA's IRIS (Integrity and Reliability of
Integrated Circuits) Program. What are the benefits to this type of
arrangement? How can this ``Virtual Lab'' be leveraged to provide a
more proactive approach to dealing with emerging threats to
microelectronics and the supply chain? Do you have any plans to visit
NSWC Crane?
Answer. The ``Virtual Lab'' concept conceived by DARPA in
collaboration with government sponsors benefits the Nation and its
hardware assurance research by leveraging the unique, powerful know-how
that each lab such as NSWC Crane, Indiana has developed. By offering
these skills under the support of a single organization, the practice
of multiple critical capabilities is drawn into a single community.
Providing a unified access to these centers of competence allows the
community to focus on extending its prowess and eliminating costly
duplication of effort. The equipment is highly specialized and
therefore impossible to replicate across the country everywhere it
would be needed. By forming the virtual organization, we are able to
multiply the impact of the transition of each of these outputs.
The Virtual Lab will continue to be leveraged, as the Senator
indicates, by proactively anticipating new threat space and developing
the means to detect and mitigate these new concerns. Core competencies
transitioned to lead Virtual Lab partners such as Crane will continue
to be used to detect and collect counterfeit components for study,
identifying new modes of hardware compromise being attempted. Examples
of items transitioned include powerful laser-based imaging capabilities
which allow the community to reveal electronic device characteristics
which up to now were not accessible for reverse engineering.
DARPA's program manager for assuring hardware integrity visits NSWC
Crane often, and briefs his agency leadership on emerging trends and
the prowess we have responded with. The critical work for this program
is performed as a close engagement between the program manager and the
engineers at Crane. DARPA also hosted a DARPA young faculty awardee
meeting at Crane where faculty and designers from across the country
came to see their facilities including the anti-counterfeit related
work. The Director of the Microsystems Technology Office, which runs
the TRUST, IRIS and SHIELD programs is on loan from Purdue University
as an IPA and gets back to Indiana regularly to meet with current and
former students, many of which are at NSWC Crane.
______

Questions Submitted to Dr. David Walker
Questions Submitted by Senator Mark L. Pryor
Question. Congress included language in the Fiscal Year 2014
Defense Appropriations Report encouraging the Air Force to invest in
next generation free space optical communications technologies for
secure, high-speed and high-bandwidth data transfer. How does the Air
Force plan to develop and demonstrate free space optical communication
technology for applications such as UAV-to-ground and other air-to-
ground and air-to-air applications?
Answer. The Air Force must exploit emerging technologies to improve
our ability to transmit the ever-increasing volume of Intelligence,
Surveillance and Reconnaissance data for processing, exploitation, and
dissemination. However, the fiscal constraints directed by the Budget
Control Act of 2013 limits our ability to invest in free space optical
communication technologies. The Air Force will continue to seek
opportunities for investment in promising technologies that will enable
us to maintain a decisive advantage in air, space and cyberspace.
Question. Recently, a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
award was made concerning free space optical communication technology
by the Air Force. What is needed beyond the SBIR to advance this
capability?
Answer. The SBIR is focused on free space optical communications
systems suited to fixed, geostationary satellite-to-ground and
building-to-building terrestrial communications capabilities. Further
development is needed to reduce the size, weight, and power of these
systems, particularly for remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) applications.
Utilizing free space optical communications for air-to-air links
requires a higher fidelity pointing, acquisition, tracking system.
Further research is also needed to expand the capabilities of current
point-to-point apertures to support multiple, simultaneous links for
networked configurations from a single aperture. Finally, single-
aperture, adaptive beam control is required to support dynamic aerial
mission execution at rapid, tactical operations tempos. The SBIR will
demonstrate a basic laser communications link suitable for static
applications, but these additional technology advancements are required
in order to support highly dynamic missions such as those conducted by
RPAs.
______

Question Submitted by Senator Daniel Coats
Question. Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane is the largest
multiservice, multidomain facility within the Department of Defense
(DOD) for Electronic Warfare (EW), EW sensors and electronics. What
plans does the Air Force's Science & Technology program have in fiscal
year 2015 to partner with NSWC Crane in the area of electronic warfare
to maximize the limited amount of EW resources? Do you have any plans
to visit NSWC Crane in the near future?
Answer. The Air Force Science and Technology program has a strong
and ongoing relationship with various elements at Naval Surface Warfare
Center Crane (NSWC-Crane). Both establishments recognize the importance
of collaboration in order to avoid duplication, to make efficient use
of funding, and to leverage the technology advancements each
organization develops.
The Air Force Science and Technology program encompass four main
areas of aircraft protections: Radio Frequency Electronic Warfare (RF-
EW); Electro-Optical/Infrared Countermeasure (EO/IRCM); Avionics
Vulnerability Assessments, Mitigations and Protections (AVAMP); and
Position, Navigation and Timing in Contested/Denied Environments.
The Air Force Science and Technology program interacts with NSWC-
Crane in three areas: RF-EW, EO/IRCM and AVAMP.
In the area of RF-EW, The Air Force and NSWC-Crane have worked
together on the Airborne Electronic Attack Analysis of Alternatives,
maturation of Next-Generation Jammer technology, and collaborative
development of the early generation of Digital Radio Frequency Memory
(DRFM) cards used for EW.
This collaboration is continuing in several forms today beginning
with miniaturized DRFM cards. For fiscal year 2015 NSWC-Crane will
fabricate these cards for Air Force to support ongoing research in
electronic attack and electronic support areas.
Cognitive EW is a growing interest area for the Air Force as we
address modern air defense threats that are software defined and
adaptive. The Air Force recently hosted a 6-month study on Cognitive EW
in Anti-Access/Area Denied (A2/AD) environments. NSWC-Crane (along with
other services) was a partner in this study to help develop a roadmap
for future research activities. Further, NSWC-Crane has invited the Air
Force to participate in the upcoming January 15, 2015 kick-off of their
Reactive Electronic Attack Measures (REAM) FNC project.
The Air Force and NSWC-Crane also partner on DARPA activities.
DARPA's Retroactive Array for Coherent Transmission (ReACT) awards are
jointly managed by Crane and the Air Force while the Adaptive Radar
Countermeasure (ARC) program is managed by the Air Force with NSWC-
Crane providing SME support
Future plans for collaboration include NSWC-Crane support for
distributed EW development and Air Force SME support to evaluate and
assess Next Generation Jammer technologies. Bottom line is that the Air
Force and NSWC-Crane RF EW collaborations are synchronized and mutually
supportive.
Within the EO/IRCM area the Air Force has a number of ongoing
collaborative efforts with NSWC-Crane beginning with their NICKEL Lab.
The Air Force counterpart is the Dynamic Infrared Missile Evaluation
(DIME) facility. The purpose of these facilities is to characterize
various EO/IR threats. The Air Force's EO/IRCM collaboration with Crane
has a rich history and is one that will only increase in the future
especially as EO/IR weapon systems become more advanced and capable.
The strongest collaborative effort within AVAMP is in the area of
Anti-Tamper which has been ongoing since the inception of the Secretary
of Defense's Anti-Tamper program. Anti-Tamper technology protects U.S.
critical information resident on weapons systems from loss due to
combat losses.
______

Question Submitted to Rear Admiral Matthew L. Klunder
Question Submitted by Senator Daniel Coats
Question. Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) Crane has become
widely recognized across the Department of Defense, and within the
Federal Lab System for rethinking and pioneering Technology Transfer.
Currently, the Research Directorate within Assistant Secretary of
Defense--Research & Engineering (ASD-R&E) and the State of Indiana are
collaborating around Crane's successes to demonstrate how a lab's
innovation can be used to increase the lab's mission effectiveness.
What future role do you see for the Navy's Warfare Centers for both
innovation and economic development? Do you see a leadership role for
the Office of Naval Research and/or the Naval Research Laboratory in
this process as the Navy's premier Research and Development
organizations?
Answer. The Chief of Naval Research coordinates thousands of
partnerships across the Department of the Navy's Research Enterprise
which includes the naval warfare centers and the naval systems
commands. These efforts are aligned with the nine focus areas of the
naval Science and Technology strategy. Where appropriate, the field
activities, including the warfare and system centers, team on
technology transfer initiatives. The primary mission of these
activities is to support the naval community with materiel solutions.
Each R&D activity has a technology transfer office that stimulates
economic benefit through technology transfer and cooperative
development. Not only do the nature of the NSWC Crane's intellectual
property and products set the stage for greater-than-average technology
transfer opportunities, they have developed methods that are looked at
as best practices across the Naval Enterprise.
______

Questions Submitted to Mary Miller
Questions Submitted by Senator Mark L. Pryor
Question. Congress is very supportive of research work at the
Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to develop silicon
carbide wide band gap power electronics and has provided funding to the
Army specifically to increase Manufacturing Readiness Levels for
silicon carbide power electronics and support domestic supply chain
development. What is the Army's ``roadmap'' or plan for transitioning
silicon carbide power electronics into Army systems?
Answer. With the addition of the referenced congressional silicon
carbide special interest funding, the Army's silicon carbide starting
material, power devices, and power packaging programs have been moving
the technology toward commercial and custom power devices with higher
efficiency, greater reliability, and lower cost. The resulting power
devices and power module technology are being transitioned to 6.3
(Advanced) Technology Development demonstration programs sanctioned by
Program Executive Office Ground Combat Systems with the end goal of
transitioning the technology to combat vehicle programs of record.
These programs are focusing on power generation, power distribution,
and electrified propulsion systems implemented with silicon carbide
power devices rated at the lower voltage range of 1.2 to 3.3 kV and
vehicle survivability systems such as electro-magnetic armor
implemented using silicon carbide devices rated at 15 kV. Technology
Readiness Level 5/6 demonstrations are planned for fiscal year 2016 to
fiscal year 2019 through the Combat Vehicle Prototyping Program with
transition to Paladin Integrated Management Program in fiscal year
2016, the Future Fighting Vehicle in fiscal year 2021, and Stryker and
Bradley Modernization Programs in fiscal year 2022.
Question. How will the Army allocate and execute silicon carbide
research funds appropriated in fiscal year 2014 taking into account the
better outlook for technology transition and domestic supply chain
development for low voltage applications?
Answer. In fiscal year 2013, an additional $13 million was added by
Congress for silicon carbide research. Of this $7.6 million and $3.1
million was used to increase Manufacturing Readiness Levels (MRL) for
starting material, power devices, and power packaging rated at the
lower voltages (1.2-3.3 kV) for power generation, power distribution,
and electrified propulsion systems and at the higher voltages (10-24
kV) for electronic survivability systems, respectively. With the
referenced fiscal year 2014 funding of $10 million, the Army plans to
apportion the research similarly with about $7 million funding power
electronics rated at lower voltage and about $3 million funding the
higher voltage applications. With the fiscal year 2013 special interest
funds we started efforts with two external partners (United Silicon
Carbide Inc. and Monolith Semiconductor Inc.) that are using fully
depreciated 6'' diameter silicon foundries for fabrication of their
silicon carbide power device designs to take advantage of highly cost-
effective excess silicon processing capability. Further, with the
fiscal year 2013 funds we refocused work at a current partner (Arkansas
Power Electronics Inc.) to include power packaging technologies for
high-temperature silicon carbide power devices rated at the lower
voltage range (1.2- 3.3 kV). We will continue efforts with these
external partners using the fiscal year 2014 special interest funding
as well as add at least two new external partners to further increase
MRL levels and broaden the tech base of the supply chain. The Army will
continue to coordinate with the Department of Energy to ensure that
both agencies' programs with common external partners are leveraged to
provide maximum benefit to the government.
______

Question Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
Question. The University of Maine has developed a ``bridge in a
backpack'' for constructing short- to medium-length bridges in the
field with very light-weight materials. Soldiers or Marines can
literally carry the materials needed to build a bridge on their backs
without having to use heavy equipment or large crews.
What research is the Army conducting to reduce the logistics
footprint necessary to conduct expeditionary operations, from small
items to larger infrastructure such as bridges?
Answer. Army Science & Technology has a wide variety of research
efforts that aim to reduce the Army's logistics footprint. A few
examples include Modular Protection Systems which provide easily
assembled, rapidly deployed force protection in austere environments;
virtual contingency base planning tools which reduce operations,
support, and resupply costs; and highly efficient field waste water
systems that reduce potable water demand and waste water production at
contingency bases.
Many of our efforts in reducing our logistical footprint are
underpinned by advanced materials science research, a high priority
initiative in Army Basic Research. The Army's Materials by Design
within the advanced materials science research initiative is a paradigm
shift for the development of new classes of materials. This could
result in greatly reduced weight for protection materials, much higher
energy density for batteries, and more efficient, longer lasting
electrical components.
______

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator Durbin. Thank you to our panel for the testimony
today. We are going to pursue this topic at the next level
which is called appropriations. So we will try to help. Thank
you very much for being here.
[Whereupon, at 11:21 a.m., Wednesday, May 14, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]