[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 117-35]
HEARING
ON
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022
AND
OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBER, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES, AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
ON
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY,
POLICY, AND PROGRAMS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2022: FOSTERING A
ROBUST ECOSYSTEM FOR OUR TECHNOLOGICAL EDGE
__________
HEARING HELD
MAY 20, 2021
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
45-555 WASHINGTON : 2021
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBER, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES, AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island, Chairman
RICK LARSEN, Washington JIM BANKS, Indiana
SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York
RO KHANNA, California MO BROOKS, Alabama
WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts MATT GAETZ, Florida
ANDY KIM, New Jersey MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania, STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
Vice Chair C. SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
JASON CROW, Colorado BLAKE D. MOORE, Utah
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan PAT FALLON, Texas
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York
Bess Dopkeen, Professional Staff Member
Sarah Moxley, Professional Staff Member
Caroline Kehrli, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Banks, Hon. Jim, a Representative from Indiana, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information
Systems........................................................ 5
Langevin, Hon. James R., a Representative from Rhode Island,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and
Information Systems............................................ 1
WITNESSES
Baldwin, Kristen J., Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
for Science, Technology, and Engineering, Department of the Air
Force.......................................................... 10
Johnson, Joan ``JJ,'' Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Research, Development, Test and Engineering, Department of the
Navy........................................................... 9
McQuiston, Barbara, Acting Under Secretary of Defense for
Research and Engineering, Office of the Secretary of Defense... 6
Perconti, Dr. Philip, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Research and Technology, Department of the Army................ 8
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Baldwin, Kristen J........................................... 68
Johnson, Joan ``JJ''......................................... 56
Langevin, Hon. James R....................................... 31
McQuiston, Barbara........................................... 35
Perconti, Dr. Philip......................................... 46
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Fallon................................................... 102
Mr. Franklin................................................. 93
Mr. Langevin................................................. 93
Mr. Moore.................................................... 101
Mr. Morelle.................................................. 97
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY, POLICY, AND PROGRAMS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022: FOSTERING A ROBUST
ECOSYSTEM FOR OUR TECHNOLOGICAL EDGE
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and
Information Systems,
Washington, DC, Thursday, May 20, 2021.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 12:04 p.m., in
room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. James Langevin
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES LANGEVIN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
RHODE ISLAND, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBER, INNOVATIVE
TECHNOLOGIES, AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Mr. Langevin. I would like to welcome members who are
joining today's hearing remotely.
Members who are joining remotely must be visible on screen
for the purposes of identity verification, establishing and
maintaining a quorum, participating in the proceeding, and
voting.
Those members must continue to use the software platform's
video function while in attendance, unless they experience
connectivity issues or other technical problems that render
them unable to participate on camera.
If a member experiences technical difficulties--okay, the
microphone is now on? All right. Very good. So with that did
you get the--okay. Very good.
I'm going to begin with the--just the technicals about the
remote hearing and then we'll continue on.
I'd like to welcome members for joining today's joint
hearing remotely. Members who are joining remotely must be
visible on screen for the purposes of identity verification,
establishing and maintaining a quorum, participating in the
proceeding, and voting.
Those members must continue to use the software platform's
video function while in attendance unless they experience
connectivity issues or other technical problems that render
them unable to participate on camera.
If a member experiences technical difficulties, they should
contact the committee staff for assistance. The video of
members' participation will be broadcast in the room and via
the television, internet feeds.
Members participating remotely must seek recognition
verbally and they are asked to mute their microphones when they
are not speaking. Members who are participating remotely are
reminded to keep the software platform's video function on the
entire time they're attending the proceeding.
Members may leave and rejoin the proceeding. If members
depart for a short while for reasons other than joining a
different proceeding, they should leave the video function on.
If members will be absent for a significant period or
depart to join a different proceeding, they should exit the
software platform entirely and then rejoin if they return.
Members may use the software platform's chat feature to
communicate with staff regarding technical or logistical
support issues only.
I've designated a committee staff member to, if necessary,
mute unrecognized members' microphones and to cancel any
inadvertent background noise that may disrupt the proceeding.
Finally, the chair recommends members--the chair reminds
members of the committee that they're required to observe
standards of courtesy and decorum during committee proceedings.
This requirement includes the responsibility to protect
public safety and health, particularly, during a pandemic.
Members, staff, and attendees are required to wear masks at all
times in the hearing with the following exception.
A person who is attending this proceeding in person may
remove his or her mask briefly following recognition by the
chair for the purposes of speaking into a microphone. Any
person who removes his or her mask for this purpose must
replace it at the conclusion of his or her recognized remarks.
The chair expects all members, staff, and attendees to
adhere to this requirement as a sign of respect for the health,
safety, and well-being of others. The chair views the failure
to adhere to this requirement as a serious breach of decorum.
So with the technical readings out of the way, we're going
to get going with the hearing and with that, I'd like to
welcome everyone to this hearing today on the Department of
Defense's fiscal year 2022 strategy, policy, and programs for
science and technology.
While we, unfortunately, do not yet have the President's
budget request for this year, this hearing will provide an
important opportunity to examine the Department's efforts to
maintain the United States competitive technological edge in
the face of great power competition.
I would like to thank Ranking Member Banks for working with
me to organize this hearing and thank our witnesses for joining
us.
And before us today we have Ms. Barbara McQuiston, Acting
Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering; Dr.
Phillip Perconti, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for
Research and Technology; Ms. Joan ``JJ'' Johnson, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of the Navy [for] Research, Development,
Test, and Engineering; and Ms. Kristen Baldwin, Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and
Logistics for Science, Technology, and Engineering.
So I welcome all of our witnesses and I thank you for your
contributions to our national security. Following the open
portion of the hearing, the subcommittee will reconvene in a
closed classified members-only session in the CVC 200 with
representatives from DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency] and the military services research entities.
In today's strategic environment, the United States
historic military and economic competitive advantage is not
guaranteed. We are no longer competing against technologically
inferior adversaries.
Instead, we face persistent and dangerous challenges from
highly capable and advanced great power competitors who seek to
undermine the status quo of U.S. leadership and global power.
Maintaining U.S. dominance in all warfighting domains
requires robust investment, innovation, and talent development
across America's science and technology enterprise.
We must lay the groundwork today for the threats of
tomorrow by investing in DOD [Department of Defense] science
and technology programs across the research laboratories,
academic institutions, and industry partners that collectively
bring a whole-of-society approach to maintaining the United
States technological edge.
While our witnesses cannot speak about specific funding
levels today, I am interested to hear their perspectives on the
future of the Department's S&T [science and technology]
funding.
So the core of our technological edge is our early basic
and applied research. This is the science that lays the
foundation for cutting-edge technology 20 to 30 years down the
road.
So we have seen with the COVID-19 pandemic just how
critical this early research is. The messenger RNA, or mRNA,
COVID vaccines that we have today were catalyzed by defense
research investments 5 to 10 years ago, long before the current
pandemic. Indeed, the first coronavirus vaccine to start human
testing came from a DARPA investment in Moderna.
DARPA's ability to substantially contribute to our Nation's
response to pandemics is the product of more than a half a
century of DOD S&T funding. If we wait to invest in science
only when crisis is upon us, then we are setting the Nation up
for failure and we cannot allow that to happen.
So despite the importance of DOD-funded research and
development, the Department's S&T budget buying power has
effectively shrunk in the past decade. Cuts are often made to
these important early research accounts to prioritize more
near-term efforts in technology development.
Yet, our rivals are committed to concerted S&T funding,
thinking it will undermine U.S. leadership. We cannot expect to
compete with them if we keep shortchanging our research
accounts.
I hope that the President's budget will reflect serious
investments in S&T. Our men and women in uniform deserve
nothing less.
Indeed, our greatest assets as a nation is our people. We
must cultivate our science and technology workforce. We must
promote STEAM [science, technology, engineering, art, and
mathematics] education at early ages to expose individuals of
all backgrounds to the world of science, engineering, and math
in hopes that they will pursue an education and career in
critical emerging technologies.
We must also train the existing workforce in machine
learning and computer science, and change hiring authorities so
that the Department can rapidly hire top STEAM talent.
We must also make it easier, not harder, for international
researchers in our universities to stay in the United States.
The committee has prioritized workforce development through the
last several National Defense Authorization Acts and encourages
the Department to continue to promote STEAM education;
adequately fund DOD research laboratories; partner with
academia, including Historically Black Colleges and
Universities and Minority-Serving Institutions; and diversify
the defense innovation base through partnerships with small
businesses.
This will ensure that we have an S&T workforce and
innovation base comprising the best talent that reflects the
diversity of our Nation.
Bottom line, great power competition is also a race for
talent. We cannot afford to lose this top talent to our
adversaries, and I'm determined, and I know the subcommittee is
determined, that we won't.
Further, the U.S. Government, academia, and the private
sector must foster mutually beneficial relationships to
encourage innovation within the Department of the Defense. We
must remember that Silicon Valley got its name from government
investments in research and development and participation with
academic institutions, which in turn grew new technology and
encouraged technological talent to spin out innovative
companies to put their research into practice.
Then the Department bought the products of those new
companies, which kept them alive to continue their work. Today,
to support the transition of mostly academic research into a
sustainable technology and across the ``valley of death,'' the
Department must figure out how to be a buyer of cutting-edge
market products, even if just for research use in labs and
academia at the moment.
Our national security technology enterprise must grow in
accordance with our American values, those rooted in a free,
open, and democratic society. We must develop and apply
technology ethically, engage with our partners and allies in a
free and open research environment, and promote a culture of
innovation and risk taking.
The Department must lean forward and not be afraid to fail.
I called it smart failure. When we learn from our failures, we
can make progress.
Pushing boundaries, challenging bureaucracy, and expediting
the development of critical defense technologies are key to
remaining competitive and agile in an increasingly complex
strategic environment.
So with that, I again want to thank our witnesses for their
participation in today's hearing and their concerted focus on
supporting the Department's S&T efforts.
I'll now turn to Ranking Member Banks for his opening
remarks. Before I do that, I know that there's been a change in
ranking members recently and I just want to thank
Representative Stefanik for her years of collaboration and
commitment to the subcommittee.
I know she's on to other responsibilities now, but she'll
stay as a member of the subcommittee. But I thank her for
extraordinary work and commitment and to leadership on this
subcommittee. As I said, I look forward to working with her as
a member of the subcommittee.
And I welcome Mr. Banks as the new ranking member. You have
big shoes to fill, Mr. Banks, but I know you're up to the
challenge and I look forward to work with you as a partner and
as we collaborate together on behalf of the country to
effectively improve our national security.
I yield to the ranking member.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Langevin can be found in the
Appendix on page 31.]
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM BANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM INDIANA,
RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBER, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES,
AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that warm welcome.
I'm excited about this new assignment and I intend to fill
those big shoes and working with you, and you have an
incredible reputation in having served here for four and a half
years. It's really a privilege to serve alongside you in this
endeavor.
It's my pleasure to join this subcommittee as the new
ranking member. The work of this subcommittee is extremely
important, as today's hearing highlights.
Our warfighting capabilities are contingent on our ability
to modernize the Department of Defense and to recruit and equip
our men and women in uniform with the most effective and secure
technologies.
This mission cannot wait. Our adversaries and near-peers
are focused on beating the U.S. using every tool available to
them, legal or not, to modernize their militaries.
They are heavily investing in emerging technologies by
pouring money into research and development, recruiting top
scientists, and by stealing our intellectual property.
Whether it is artificial intelligence, quantum science,
hypersonics, directed energy, biotechnology, 5G, or cyber, we
must lean into developing, procuring, and deploying these
technologies, and developing new ones in order to compete, but
more importantly, to maintain our superiority.
The battlefield now spans boundaries and time. Our
adversaries can use these emerging technologies to bring the
theater to our shores, not just in the future but today.
We must--we would be foolish to ignore this threat. We must
invest and plan for the short, mid, and long term in order to
stay on the leading edge and defend and secure our homeland.
This means that we need the President's budget to
prioritize science and technology, directing the Department to
invest in the tools necessary for modern conflict and laying
out a strategy to do so.
We must also enable the Department to get the innovations
they need regardless of if they come from a large or small
company. The men and women of our Armed Forces are key. We need
to train and equip our troops to use these new technologies as
well as retain and recruit the scientists that we need to
develop it.
I look forward to working with Chairman Langevin, the
Department, industry, and our troops to ensure that the United
States maintains our superiority.
Thank you to our witnesses for being here today. I look
forward to our discussion and working together to advance this
mission.
Thank you once again. I yield back.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Ranking Member Banks, and we will
now turn it over to our witnesses for their opening statements,
followed by a question and answer period.
Ms. McQuiston, you are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF BARBARA McQUISTON, ACTING UNDER SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE
Ms. McQuiston. Thank you.
Mr. Langevin. Am I pronouncing your name correctly?
Ms. McQuiston. McQuiston, yes.
Mr. Langevin. Okay. Very good.
Ms. McQuiston. Good afternoon, Chairman Langevin, Ranking
Member Banks, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for
providing the opportunity to address you today.
Research and Engineering [R&E] serves as the chief
technology officer for the Department of Defense with
responsibility to ensure technology superiority for our forces.
We believe investments in science and technology,
innovation, rapid modernization, experimentation, and fielding
of technology today will pay dividends tomorrow.
As both Secretary Austin and Deputy Secretary Hicks have
stated, the People's Republic of China is the pacing challenge.
We must meet that challenge by investing in both science,
technology, and fielding disruptive capabilities at both speed
and scale.
In doing this, innovation will be our asymmetric advantage.
The United States is leading the world in innovation, but other
nations are moving quickly to close that gap. To maintain the
advantage, DOD must identify technologies that will impact the
battlefield and quickly develop those technologies into
fieldable capabilities.
S&T investment now are tomorrow's solutions. As mentioned
earlier and seeing from my previous time in government at
DARPA, early research in vaccines led to the development of
mRNA technology, enabling today's COVID-19 vaccines.
This shows the tremendous impact DOD investments achieve,
not just for our military but for our Nation as a whole. To
continue this track record of success and guarantee a strong
tomorrow, DOD must reaffirm its commitment to science,
technology, and innovation.
R&E is committed to meeting Secretary Austin's priorities
in defending our Nation, taking care of people, and succeeding
through teamwork.
R&E supports our scientists and laboratories, creating new
frontiers with leading-edge science, developing the workforce,
and expanding STEM education opportunities.
We will support opening career paths for our Nation's STEM
workforce for both national security and economic security.
DOD's commitment to basic research is also imperative.
R&E's Multidisciplinary University Research Initiatives
program, MURI, funds basic research using multiyear university
grants aimed at addressing DOD's hard problems and training its
next generation of researchers.
We're looking for the best and the brightest from all
disciplines. Programs like Minerva expand how DOD is seeking to
engage with scholars from the social sciences to improve
national defense. Programs like Viceroy, where partnerships
with academic institutions teach cyber skills to DOD employees,
helping to prepare the workforce for today and tomorrow's
challenges.
For the United States to lead the world in creativity,
science, and academics, we must expand DOD partnerships with
universities, including HBCUs [Historically Black Colleges and
Universities] and minority-serving institutes, and invest in
strengthening these institutes.
We must do more to attract the best talent to DOD from
everywhere. There's no doubt that a workforce that looks like
all of America will better contribute to a stronger national
defense.
Along with investing in basic research, cultivating
diversity, and developing tomorrow's workforce, we're fostering
an innovative culture through experimentation and testing.
Innovation is key to drive changes across the military. The
recent creation of the Innovation Steering Group by Deputy
Secretary Hicks and chaired by R&E will identify opportunities
and gaps to facilitate innovation across the Department.
DOD can draw from innovation across from the services and
capture innovation from all sectors of the economy. Small
business, start-ups, and other disruptive entities offer
significant contributions to the future of technology.
For this investment, the rate of return is high. For small
business, we have a 22 to 1 return on investment. A recent
study reported that over the previous 23 years, DOD's
investment of $14.4 billion resulted in an economic impact of
$347 billion to the U.S. economy with $28 billion of sales
generated to the military.
To leverage this engine of innovation, DOD's Small Business
and Technology Partnerships recently announced a list of 137
critical research topics to solicit solutions to DOD
challenges.
DOD creates new frontiers in S&T and plays an important
role maturing early-stage technology. De-risking technology in
advanced manufacturing can have a multiplier effect attracting
commercial investment, opening new markets, and moving
technology forward.
DOD plays a strong role in shaping the future of
technology, supporting rapid investment, offering enormous
benefits to the warfighter, and creating significant benefits
to both our national and economic security now and in the
future.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. McQuiston can be found in
the Appendix on page 35.]
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Ms. McQuiston.
Dr. Perconti, you're now recognized.
STATEMENT OF DR. PHILIP PERCONTI, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
THE ARMY FOR RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Dr. Perconti. Yes. Chairman Langevin, Ranking Member Banks,
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for your
continued support and for this opportunity to discuss Army
science and technology.
The 17 Army labs and centers spearheaded by the Army
Futures Command, AFC, are working with academia and industry to
develop new technology for near- and mid-term modernization and
performing exciting new research to discover and unlock
knowledge that will enable yet-to-be-imagined warfighting
capabilities for the far term.
We're transforming the Army S&T business model. We're
moving away from walled silos of excellence to a model that
emphasizes the importance of early collaboration and frequent
communication across the enterprise.
Under the joint leadership of the Assistant Secretary of
the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology, and the
commanding general of AFC, we are collaborating in
unprecedented ways.
For example, the AFC's Team Ignite initiative in Army
scientists and engineers are changing the way warfighting
concepts and requirements are envisioned, which, in turn, are
shaping longer term research projects and goals.
Using competitively awarded cooperative research programs,
we're maximizing the exposure of academic and industrial
partners to the requirements and acquisition communities as
soon as possible, driving innovation through increased
understanding.
Army scientists and engineers are working closely with the
best and brightest from across the Nation as early as possible
in the discovery and innovation cycle.
For example, the AFC Artificial Intelligence Center,
located at Carnegie Mellon University's National Robotics
Research Center, allows university and Army personnel to work
side by side to address Army challenges in AI [artificial
intelligence] and autonomy.
America's strength is derived from its ability to bring
together a diverse group of people with their thoughts and
their ideas. The Army simply cannot accomplish its mission
without the skills and contributions derived from providing
access to all Americans.
We use our basic research and our small business innovative
research portfolios to the fullest extent possible to
facilitate such access.
For the Historically Black Colleges and Universities and
the Minority-Serving Institution communities, we have started
two new initiatives to expand research capabilities and build
lasting partnerships--a focused prize competition for students
and faculty, and a faculty immersion program.
Likewise, we're reshaping the Army's interaction with non-
traditional small businesses using SBIR [Small Business
Innovation Research] and prize authorities to simplify the
process. Recent SBIR topics has seen a tenfold increase in
submissions, some with up to 200 firms per topic.
Thank you in advance for your continued support of the SBIR
program.
As the Army Chief Scientist, I work very closely with AFC
to build a balanced science and technology portfolio. Our
portfolio supports the S&T needed for signature modernization
priorities while simultaneously supporting research for
fundamental long-term change by ensuring that at least 25
percent are applied research and advanced technology
development and 100 percent of our basic research resources go
to such projects.
Thank you for your continued support of direct hiring,
innovative research, and lab revitalization authorities. These
congressionally provided special authorities are heavily relied
upon by Army labs to build an S&T workforce that is diverse,
competent, and highly educated, and to maintain world-class
research facilities and equipment.
For example, last year, our labs brought on 600 civilian
employees--that's 58 percent of our scientists and engineer
hires--using direct hire authority.
Also, last year the Army started 82 projects for laboratory
revitalization and recapitalization. This $64 million
investment was 45 percent of the Army's total under the section
2363 authority.
Projects with greater scope are needed, but the $6 million
cost limitation in section 2805(d) for laboratory
revitalization hinders our ability to support them. An increase
in this limitation should be considered.
Army S&T is strongly supported by the Army senior
leadership, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and
Congress. So far, the Army continues to hold the S&T budget top
line at zero percent real growth.
I, for one, hope this trend continues, and I am very
grateful for this subcommittee's continued support. Predictable
and consistent funding is absolutely essential for the Army to
achieve persistent modernization, and science and technology is
modernization's foundation.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Perconti can be found in the
Appendix on page 46.]
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Dr. Perconti.
Ms. Johnson, you are now recognized to summarize your
statement.
STATEMENT OF JOAN ``JJ'' JOHNSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
THE NAVY FOR RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND ENGINEERING,
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Ms. Johnson. Chairman Langevin, Ranking Member Banks, and
distinguished members of the Cyber, Innovative Technologies,
and Information Systems Subcommittee, good afternoon and thank
you for the opportunity to address the science and technology
investment strategy of the Department of the Navy and the Naval
Research and Development Establishment.
The Department of the Navy wholeheartedly thanks the
Members of Congress for the authorities granted for workforce,
mission execution, and capability development and delivery.
These authorities have been particularly beneficial to the
Department of the Navy, enabling us to recruit and build a
diverse workforce of mission-focused experts, to accelerate
technology development, and to apply innovative methods for
effective management and mission execution at our warfare
centers and laboratories.
The Department of the Navy has widened membership of the
Naval Research and Development Establishment and expanded the
network of innovation organizations both to increase
collaboration and to accelerate technological innovation.
In addition to the Office of Naval Research, the Naval
Research Laboratory, the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory
and our 15 warfare centers, the Naval R&D Establishment also
includes 5 university affiliated research centers, federally
funded research and development centers performing naval work,
and the Naval Postgraduate School.
Additionally, through NavalX's 15 Tech Bridges, the
Department of the Navy is growing a geographically broad
network of partners comprised of local industry, academia,
small business, and other government entities focused on
delivering solutions to key operational problems and service
needs.
The Department of the Navy's ongoing investment in people,
tools, technology, and infrastructure enables continuous
learning, collaboration, agility, and cutting-edge capability,
and ensures the preservation of national security and the
resilience of future naval power.
I welcome you to visit our warfare centers, laboratories,
and academic partners around the country to see firsthand the
capability and capacity of the Naval R&D Establishment.
I'm honored to have the opportunity to testify before you
and look forward to your questions.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson can be found in the
Appendix on page 56.]
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Ms. Johnson.
Ms. Kristen Baldwin, you are now recognized for your
statement.
STATEMENT OF KRISTEN J. BALDWIN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
THE AIR FORCE FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND ENGINEERING,
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Ms. Baldwin. Chairman Langevin, Ranking Member Banks, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to provide testimony on the implementation of the
Department of the Air Force science and technology strategy and
our continued efforts to respond to the warfighter faster,
while simultaneously developing the future force.
The Department of the Air Force has fully embraced the
National Defense Strategy objectives. Our Nation continues to
face a complex set of current and future security challenges,
and rapid proliferation of global technology means the speed at
which we change must increase.
The Air Force and Space Force must be ready to compete,
deter, and win. The Department of the Air Force S&T portfolio
provides broad-based enabling and enduring investments
addressing near-, mid-, and far-term capabilities and a focused
transformational component that matures game-changing
technologies for transition.
We have established a Transformational Capabilities Office
to lead this part of the portfolio, fueled by emergent
technology, competitive business practices, and executed with
urgency and risk acceptance.
Within the transformational portfolio are a select number
of programs designated as Vanguards. Designed from the start as
collaborative teams from S&T, acquisition, operations, and test
communities, Vanguards couple multiple budget activities to
bridge the gap between S&T and acquisition.
Further transformational opportunities exist in the space
domain. Though we have long recognized the importance of space
superiority, the Air Force Research Laboratory [AFRL] has taken
new steps to demonstrate its commitment to both the Air Force
and the Space Force as independent services.
AFRL remains united as one lab supporting two services.
This will enable problem solving across multiple domains,
multiple disciplines, and cross-cutting solutions.
The Department of the Air Force continues to expand and
strengthen partnerships with universities, industry, and other
government organizations. We leverage these resources as well
as talent, and have both bolstered our relationship with non-
traditional industry.
Since partnering AFWERX with our Small Business Innovation
Research Center of Excellence, we have awarded over 2,000
contracts worth $700 million to 1,400 small businesses, with
over 75 percent of these being new partners to the Air Force.
Our SBIR contracts are also attracting matching funds, and
performers are receiving follow-on investments at a ratio of $5
for every SBIR dollar that we invest.
Competition for world-class talent requires agile processes
to recruit, hire, and retain personnel. We make great use of
the authorities Congress has provided to the S&T community. In
particular, direct hiring authority and enhanced pay authority
allow accelerated hiring and use of executive recruitment firms
for hard-to-fill positions.
We have been able to fill over 20 leadership positions with
top-notch talent in cutting-edge areas including communications
and networking, modeling and simulation, microelectronics, data
analytics, and autonomy.
Every day we seek opportunities to achieve future
operational dominance through investment in our scientific
priorities, including artificial intelligence, biotechnology,
cyber, quantum, microelectronics, hypersonics, and others.
Technology horizon scanning enables us to strategically
invest and build complementary efforts with our partners. We
foster and value partnerships in manufacturing technology as
well.
Domestic producibility and human capital to engineer and
integrate technologies is critical to delivering modernized
capabilities.
The Department of the Air Force continues to push the
boundaries of modern technology while improving the science for
tomorrow. Our digital transformation strategy is adopting
technology into acquisition practice as well.
Thank you for your strong support of the Air Force and
Space Force science and technology, the authorities that you've
provided, and this opportunity to testify.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Baldwin can be found in the
Appendix on page 68.]
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Ms. Baldwin.
We will now turn to member questions. I'll recognize myself
and then turn to the ranking member.
Let me start, if I could, with Ms. McQuiston. Congress'
goal for the breakup of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, or ATL, was to create
an Under Secretary of Research and Engineering that would be
the Department's science and technology visionary and the one
with the time and the ability to look past the horizon into the
future.
So, Ms. McQuiston, do you think that we are achieving this
goal? Why or why not?
Ms. McQuiston. First of all, thank you very much for your
support for R&E.
I think it's incredibly important to have a chief
technology officer, to have science and technology right at the
table with all the strategic decisions that are being made and
feeding into the entire DOD process.
So right now, I believe that we are working very hard to
make sure that that is happening. With the support of the
Secretary and the Deputy Secretary, science and technology have
a strong voice and a strong action and responsibility within
the Department of Defense.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you.
And likewise then, Ms. McQuiston, I want to talk to NDS
[National Defense Strategy], the tech annex.
In its final report, the National Security Commission on AI
made a case that to maintain military technological
superiority, the DOD must have an integrated technology
strategy that prioritizes resources for critical capability,
enabling technologies to solve the operational challenges
outlined in the National Defense Strategy, and they suggest
that such a strategy should be realized as a technology annex
to the NDS.
So I wanted to ask you, would a technology annex help the
Under Secretary for Defense for Research and Engineering work
with the services to focus the Department's attention and
efforts on next-generation science and technologies?
Ms. McQuiston. Next-generation science and technologies are
going to be incredibly important to lead innovation with the
warfighter and modernization.
We need to actually move ahead on that very quickly in
order to rapidly develop and insert technology within the
services to the warfighter.
Having a technology annex would be able to, again,
emphasize the fact that science and technology plays that
critical role.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you.
Next, I wanted to ask of you, Ms. McQuiston, or anyone that
would like to also chime in, we hear often of the ``valley of
death,'' the inability to scale quickly, rapidly innovate, and
to be agile in our research and fielding of capabilities.
How do you believe the planning, programming, budgeting,
and execution process should be changed to encourage more
iteration and innovation? Is it time for a larger look at the
budgeting process?
Ms. McQuiston. Well, we have just kicked off, as I
mentioned before, with Deputy Secretary Hicks and chaired by
R&E, the Innovation Steering Group, and I'm looking for
opportunities to take success cases and cases where we failed
at innovation and fielding technology and moving science
forward, and also cases where things are very challenging so
that we can identify those gaps of opportunity and then address
them across the organization.
So people, process, and technology is going to be what
we're looking at for inserting innovation across the board. I
do believe that there is already sort of the culture and the
mind-set realizing that technology and--can have its own sort
of tailored approach to how you need to look at acquisition.
So software, for instance, being more agile and being able
to have adaptation and development for quick insertion would
require looking at the--how you finance that and how you move
the program forward.
So that would be a very different scenario than hypersonics
as far as how you would structure the program. But it's
important to be thinking about these things from day one and to
actually look at what process and tailoring these processes to
that activity, and I know there's probably a lot of
opportunity. We're working within the--currently the
flexibilities that we have been given and we appreciate that.
But I'm sure as we identify more opportunities we will
actually communicate that, going forward. And I will defer to
any of my sister services here if they have any examples they'd
like to bring up.
Dr. Perconti. Well, sir, I think one question that I would
really like consideration for is having, as part of the
process----
Mr. Langevin. Can you move the microphone closer?
Dr. Perconti. Okay. Sorry.
Having as part of the process the ability to do year of
execution and, perhaps, year of execution minus one, resources
that could be leaned toward or put into innovation rather than
having to deal with a very long cycle time of 2 years for
planning and programming, et cetera.
It would be wonderful to have more flexibility,
particularly within the laboratories, to be able to quickly
ramp up on ideas and technology that are important to us.
When I was the Army Research Laboratory director, we knew
we had to start up and ramp up, critically, 5 years before the
program was actually put into the budget.
The way we did it was through 2363 funding, my director's
ability to manage year of execution research. That enabled us
to jump-start it. It would be very, very interesting to be able
to have a larger amount of resources that could go to that.
Of course, the issue is always if you're trying to do
something year of execution wise to make sure that Congress is
well informed of where we're going and what we're doing with
those resources.
So I think you also have to add more reporting, perhaps
quarterly or otherwise, to come back to Congress and describe
to you where we're going and what--how our priorities are
changing sooner rather than later.
Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you.
Ms. Baldwin. If I can just add a few comments on to my
colleague, Dr. Perconti.
Mr. Langevin. Yeah. Microphone.
Ms. Baldwin. As--just to add on a few points to what Dr.
Perconti said, you know, time is of the essence when you're
thinking about innovation. We would agree. I would agree that a
study of the planning, program, budgeting, and execution system
is warranted.
We have done so much to study acquisition procedures,
procedures in our S&T, to try to make change and accelerate
change. Flexibility, not only within the year of execution but
across different budget activities and types.
What we're finding in the Air Force is as we try to cross
the valley of--bridge the valley between technology and
acquisition, it really benefits greatly if you can partner and
collaborate early from the get-go between technologists as well
as production entities and sustainment activities, all separate
budget accounts.
And so flexibility to move and partner with budget accounts
is of great importance. The ability to make shifts and,
perhaps, to divest as we understand and identify risk and seek
to move on is also--is also very important, and I think joint--
if there's more opportunities to incentivize joint activities
would be of great interest.
Thank you.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just to add on to my colleagues' comments, maybe less about
the the PPBE [planning, programming, budgeting, and execution],
but some of our flexibilities would include, I believe, more
opportunities as we're working with small business and non-
traditional partners to create, I would say, small
experimentation environments where we can very rapidly bring in
modeling and sim [simulation] environments, other technologies,
and demonstrate operational relevance at a fairly small scale.
I think that can demonstrate some early capability, which
will, again, tighten that connection between the technology
community and the resourcing community.
So I believe that part of the investment is to create a
sandbox, if you will, where we're able to vet technologies from
non-traditional and small companies as well as our own at a
very rapid pace.
Thank you.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you. And my last question--then I'll
turn to the ranking member--I want to talk about the workforce.
In section 229 of the fiscal year 2020 NDAA [National
Defense Authorization Act], Congress directed the Under
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to assess,
diversify, and strengthen the research and engineering
workforce of the Department.
With your experience in both the private and government
sides of the science and technology arena, and this is directed
to Ms. McQuiston, can you tell us about your perspective on how
the Department is doing in nurturing a diverse and inclusive
S&T workforce, aspects that are vital to producing novelty and
innovation?
And what must the Department do to strengthen its workforce
so that it can face the challenges coming over the horizon and
when will we be receiving the Department's section 229 report
with your implementation plan?
Ms. McQuiston. Yes, I would say that there is a lot more
work that needs to be done, especially in STEM and special
science education and in recruitment of diversity for the
workforce.
So we need to enhance civics education and we need to
diversify our workforce within Research and Engineering. So,
again, looking at what we have from the sections 234 and 229,
both a pilot program on enhanced civics education, that report
is due out the first year after the full first year of
circulation, so that one will come a while later.
But 229 is--the plan is due out August 31st of this year,
and 252, the master plan for RDTE [research, development, test,
and evaluation] infrastructure, is due out June 30th.
So at this point in time, those are heading for that
timeline, and then we're reviewing the National Security
Commission on Artificial Intelligence, and so we're looking at
that extensive report and many recommendations it made and as--
and putting it into the National Defense Strategy and
addressing those challenges.
But we have got a lot of work ahead of us.
Mr. Langevin. You do. You've got a lot of work ahead and
this is going to be a priority for the subcommittee. We really
do need to strengthen and diversify our workforce. Again, it's
all about the people.
We can have really great technologies and development in
the world. But without the people, we're going to be--we're
going to be challenged.
Ms. McQuiston. And from the standpoint of looking at, you
know, government and recruiting talent, we need more emphasis
within universities and recruitment opportunities and research
within the laboratories, and then we also need workforce
incentives to create opportunities for that workforce and be
able to develop it for the long term for government service and
defense service.
Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you very much.
I yield to the ranking member for questions.
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. McQuiston, what is the Department--the Department's
strategy and the Biden administration's strategy to engage with
smaller start-up companies to foster greater innovation?
Ms. McQuiston. Oh, we have supported the SBIR program,
which has been quite long-lasting and quite good, and we would
like to continue the SBIR, STTR [Small Business Technology
Transfer] program.
But we're looking at innovation relative to a variety of
new companies that we want to work with. So we have the
innovation centers that are working on fielding--DIU, the
Defense Innovation Unit, is working directly with start-up
companies and new technologies to field and demonstrate the
technology for the services.
I think we should continue with that innovation sort of
mind-set, and being able to have a commercial mode of operation
so that we can demonstrate technology and very quickly adapt it
to fieldable technology.
We want to increase the exposure of companies that are not
normal traditional DOD providers so that we can capture the new
ideas.
But to do that we have to work at a commercial pace. You
know, oftentimes, like we were saying before, government
timelines--you know, the cost of time is huge.
You can't take a small start-up company and give them--you
know, leave them alone for months and expect to capture that
technology for the services in a timely way.
We need to really keep our pace up and our support up with
the company so that we can capture the technology for our
national and economic security.
Mr. Banks. So that sounds great, and part of our job is to
hold you accountable for making all of those things happen.
But is there a pivot in there somewhere? Is there something
different that we're doing--that we haven't done before? Or is
there a change in focus, a new plan underway to do better?
I mean, it's my sense and the sense of many that we have
fallen behind. So how are we--how are we going to catch up?
Ms. McQuiston. And as I mentioned before, in the Innovation
Steering Group, we're actually capturing where the sort of non-
traditional aspects of success have been and then looking at
identifying the gaps of opportunities so that we can roll it
forward throughout the agency.
But it is a cultural mind-set that also has to change, so
processes and people and actually opening up the discussion so
that we can capitalize and become a much more fluid and dynamic
organization.
Mr. Banks. I appreciate that. Have you read Representative
Moulton and I's Future of Defense Task Force report that was
published last year?
Ms. McQuiston. I apologize. I have not seen that yet.
Mr. Banks. We'll get you a copy of it.
Ms. McQuiston. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Mr. Banks. Because we spent the better part of all of 2020
digging into exactly this subject and published a--the rare
unicorn on Capitol Hill, a bipartisan--totally bipartisan
effort about ways that we could foster greater innovation in
the defense space, and it's something that we'd like to come
and present to you and talk more about it.
Ms. McQuiston. I actually would be very open to that and
would look forward to it.
Mr. Banks. I'd like to talk with the rest of you about DIU
and some of your efforts within each of the branches, and I'll
start with the Navy because that's where I like to--as a Navy
guy that's who I'll start with.
So, Ms. Johnson, what is the DIU doing for you and how does
the DIU interact with NavalX? Is it working or where can we
improve that bureaucratic structure?
Ms. Johnson. Ranking Member Banks, thanks for the question.
So the Navy right now--as an example, the Navy's got 46
commercial contracts for prototypes with DIU. So we are working
on, I would say, what's really valuable for us is that DIU is
connecting the Department of the Navy with, again, the
commercial sector, in particular, and some non-traditional
partners who may have already advanced technologies and they're
ahead of us. So we can lift and leverage rather than starting
from scratch.
NavalX and the Tech Bridges are relatively new, but they
are advancing quickly. So those connectors, NavalX and DIU,
from my perspective, are starting to become and should become
stronger partners because they--I'd say they have somewhat
similar goals in terms of getting to other parts of the
commercial sector and making it much easier for those companies
and those businesses to do business with the Navy.
So we're continuing to press with DIU. Again, we have got
about a 70 percent increase in terms of our contracts with DIU
over the prior year.
So we're pressing and we're making those connections with
NavalX. So I'd say we're still in somewhat nascent stages, but
we are making forward progress.
Mr. Banks. That sounds pretty good. Sounds like good
progress. How about the Air Force?
Ms. Baldwin. I think in two ways. We have Air Force
projects directly with DIU and that's been terrific, and some
in the areas of cyber and we have also been successful in
transitioning some space technology efforts with DIU but also
between our AFWERX and now, more recently, just announced last
December stood up a SpaceWERX entity.
It becomes very important that we can communicate very
regularly because we are all reaching out to a common, you
know, commercial and maybe venture--you know, small business
world.
And so we meet--our AFWERX and SpaceWERX team meets
regularly not only with DIU but also with NavalX and with Army
Future Center and the others to really--and that's something
that we want to continue to improve that and exchange data.
You know, it takes time to make sure that we have all of
the proposals and the awareness and we're not bidding on the
same thing. That's what we have got to make sure that we don't
do.
We don't want to do duplication. We want to be very
complementary. So we're making excellent strides, and that's
where we're going to continue to grow.
Mr. Banks. Good. So if someone asks you, why do we need
AFWERX if we have DIU, how would you--how would you answer
that?
Ms. Baldwin. So DIU has a budget and a--sort of a capped
budget and they're out to partner with the particular services.
AFWERX is a way to leverage our Small Business Innovative
Research programs. So that's one example of a partnership.
AFWERX also is launching AFWERX Prime programs, and so what
it is, is there's sort of an opportunity to grow and mature
like sort of in the SBIR program Phase I, Phase II, and then
Phase III if you get follow-on.
Now we have added through AFWERX a Prime program where we
actually can partner with emerging commercial industry base
that are--that are just burgeoning sectors but with--if there's
a dual-use opportunity, if we can leverage a little bit,
invest, and then they can invest with us, there's a real
opportunity for growth, not only in capability for the
warfighter but in our domestic industry base.
Mr. Banks. Before I move to the Army, how are things going
at Kessel Run?
Ms. Baldwin. I'm sorry? For the----
Mr. Banks. Before I move to the Army, how are things going
at Kessel Run?
Ms. Baldwin. Excellent. So our implementation of software,
DevSecOps and Agile practices, is a prime part of our digital
transformation strategy that I mentioned.
We have grown our software factories over the last just
small number of years. We now have 16. They're coordinated by
our Platform One DevSecOps program.
It is now the DOD enterprise capability for DevSecOps and
we also are seeing industry partners now making use of this
government capability enterprise software development
environment.
So that Kessel Run activity is just growing and expanding
just the way it should and we now have over a hundred programs
engaged in DevSecOps and Agile software programming, you know,
through this Platform One and over 700,000 end users.
So it's going very well. Thank you.
Mr. Banks. You know, I'm often confused by the Army in a
lot of ways, but is the equivalent of NavalX and AFWERX Army's
Future Command--Futures Command, or is there a different
apparatus that would be the equivalent?
Dr. Perconti. So the Army Futures Command is a very large
command. There is a small subsection called the Army
Applications Laboratory, which is a direct report to the CG
[commanding general] of AFC General Murray, and under the Army
Applications Lab that's the big, I would say, initiative AFC
has to get after non-traditional vendors.
So there's been a reasonable amount of interaction between
DIU and the Army Applications Lab, particularly with the
sharing of databases of non-traditional partners.
And, you know, there are--there are problem sets that the
Army Applications Lab [AAL] is attacking that are, you know,
more near term within 1 to 2 years, of course, but are very,
very ripe for innovation using non-traditional activities.
We just started a big initiative with non-traditionals for
autoloaders for our new howitzer that's coming online from
ammunition.
So that is a big activity coming out of the AAL with
interaction from DIU to get hold of those non-traditional
vendors so they can be exposed to opportunities we have.
But it's a--it's a new idea. You know, AFC is only 3 years
old now. So this idea of having a central innovation
laboratory, if you will, very close to the headquarters is
something we are really trying to experiment with and build up.
Mr. Banks. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Ranking Member.
Mr. Larsen is now recognized.
Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
So the first question I have is for Ms. McQuiston. There's
currently a pause in the Defense Federal Advisory Committee on
boards including for Defense Science Board and Defense
Innovation Board during a 6-month review.
These are really important boards. What's your
recommendation for the vision of these two boards going
forward, and when will that pause end?
Microphone, please.
Ms. McQuiston. I've always appreciated the Defense Science
Board in the past, and we used them quite a bit at DARPA. So I
look forward to seeing it going forward in some portion to feed
into our strategic----
Mr. Larsen. In what role--well, what role will you play--do
you play in ending the pause?
Ms. McQuiston. R&E will be looking at what we need to do to
answer any questions or work on the strategy of reconstituting
the boards. So we will be actively engaged in advocating that.
Mr. Larsen. And what questions will you be asked?
Ms. McQuiston. I want to make sure that we understand
strategically how the boards will operate and be fed in and how
quickly they can be reconstituted.
Mr. Larsen. For all of you--I only got 5 minutes. This not
a problem, not a complaint. I'm just--I'm telling you I got 5
minutes as a not chair and not ranking.
So really quick, I need you to just address the fiscal year
2020 NDAA, which directs the Secretary to develop an
infrastructure master plan.
And can you quickly give me--I'll start here at the Air
Force and work down--just the state of the research labs and
what you need to ensure lab and test facility infrastructure.
Air Force.
Ms. Baldwin. Yes. As you are probably aware, the state of
our infrastructure, our bases, are, on average, 50 years old
and so--and they--and revitalization of our infrastructure
laboratory is essential, not the least--for the least reason
for it to attract and retain our world-class talent.
And so we regularly compete for MILCON [military
construction] projects. The MILCON process requires us to
compete across an entire base. On average, it takes about 10
years to receive a MILCON project.
So in the interim, we are to--for an S&T project to be
approved and then implemented--so in the interim we use the
FLEX-4 authority that was granted that allows us to provide--do
minor MILCON projects to really focus on improving our lab
infrastructure.
And as my colleague mentioned in his opening remarks, we
are very supportive of if their--the ceiling, which is
currently $6 million per project, could be raised. We would be
very supportive of that.
Mr. Larsen. All right. That's good.
Navy. Thank you. Sorry.
Ms. Johnson. Thank you. Actually, my answers would be
consistent with Ms. Baldwin's. So I have nothing to add.
Mr. Larsen. No, I'm giving you a chance.
Ms. Johnson. Again, we--it's the MINCON [minor military
construction], we have already talked about raising that
authority--is going to be critical for us. And, of course, 2363
has been great in terms of infrastructure as one of the four
areas we can invest in.
So nothing further to add, sir.
Mr. Larsen. All right.
Army.
Dr. Perconti. Yes, sir. So I'm a big advocate for my
colleagues' comments on raising the limit on 2805(d). I'll give
you a number. It's $6 million now. I think it should go to $12
million. I absolutely believe that's important.
There's been some discussion about, well, why can't you
take MILCON, using other authorities, up to $150 million, I
think--why can't you use those resources and put it in your
RDT&E budgets to do so.
And for me, as a former lab director, that's a big issue
because if I have to take money out of my programs to fund my
infrastructure, then I'm doing less research. Then I'm not
looking forward. I'm really focused on building infrastructure.
So I would much rather see us take advantage of these other
authorities, like the 2363 initiative, like the raise in the
ceiling of 2805(d). That would be very, very helpful.
Mr. Larsen. All right.
Ms. McQuiston, just a curve ball a little bit on this same
set of issues.
When will be--when will we be receiving the Department's
section 252 report with the master plan?
Ms. McQuiston. The 252 report right now is due June 30th.
So that's--I believe we're on target for that.
Mr. Larsen. Okay, it's due June 30th. So you're telling me
that we will----
Ms. McQuiston. We'll submit the plan no later than June
30th. That's what I have from the detail that I looked into.
Mr. Larsen. Okay. All right. That's great. A lot of times
those deadlines that we give the Pentagon come and go.
Ms. McQuiston. Yeah. I'm sure----
Mr. Larsen. Does it say--does it say 2021?
Ms. McQuiston. 2021.
Mr. Larsen. Okay. All right.
Ms. McQuiston. I got it. And if there's any concern, I will
get right back to you on that.
Mr. Larsen. I appreciate that. Thank you.
Yield back.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Mr. Larsen.
Mrs. Bice is now recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My first question--thank you for the witnesses being here--
is the Department increasingly engaging with universities
beyond basic research and more into applied research, such as
through the UARC [university affiliated research center]
programs?
Ms. McQuiston. I'm sorry, could you ask that again? I was a
little confused on this question.
Mrs. Bice. Sure. Are you all--is the Department engaging
with universities beyond basic research and more into applied
research using the UARCs, the university affiliated research
centers?
Ms. Johnson. I'll go ahead. The answer is yes. In fact,
with the UARCs not only are we engaging in applied research,
but we're also actually engaging with UARCs for prototyping and
rapid development within the Department of the Navy.
Mrs. Bice. If you could, if the Air Force and Army could
also elaborate on that.
Ms. Baldwin. We have made a great use of partnering with
universities. We engage with UARCs from across the Department
of Defense that are in existence, and then also, more
frequently now we are--we are creating partnerships with
universities through consortium and other vehicles such as
education partner agreements.
We--for an example of our recent university consortium is
with Space. We have got over 60 universities engaged and we
will be working with them on--in awarding a number of grants
this summer, and we're also working with these--with the
University Partnership Program to help to--for training and
education for the future Space Force guardians.
Dr. Perconti. For the Army, each of our UARCs have budget
in the applied research category, you know, 6.2. So that is an
annual thing for us.
Also, importantly, we have expanded across the Nation,
really, into university engineering centers where focused
research is being done not necessarily by professors but by
research staff within those engineering centers.
So it's very, very important for us to take advantage of
that. We actually view that as a major recruiting tool for us
because if you can--if you can hook up a professor from a
department with a research staff at an engineering center with
employees or students who want to work there and be together,
then they understand what your Army problems are.
They understand what opportunities there are, and they
absolutely have an opportunity to get some funding for research
and for study. So that combination of professor, research
staff, government employee, and potential student hires has
been very, very powerful.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you.
Ms. McQuiston. I'll add that for R&E--and I apologize for
not hearing the question correctly--we are looking at
university hubs and we have actually pulled several together in
hypersonics that are also looking at applied aerodynamics.
We have an AI center, the participation of Carnegie Mellon,
and autonomy in Texas A&M. But I believe that we can broaden
that--broaden that participation as well with HBCUs and
minority institutes and actually creating more of these virtual
centers, both for cyber and other applied technologies. I think
that should be in the forefront of some of the investments that
we make.
Mrs. Bice. Perfect. I'd love to have a conversation with
you about that very thing in the future.
My last question is, I am part of the Supply Chain Task
Force that's been meeting for the last couple of months, and we
talk a lot about workforce.
So my question is, what are the challenges that the
Department faces in recruiting and retaining talent, and how
can we address that?
Ms. McQuiston. Well, recruiting and retaining talent is
going to be a critical focus of what we need to do to stay
modernized and pursue the science and technology that we need
to do.
As I mentioned before, offering opportunities for expanding
research and scholar work that could be done within the
laboratories, and also looking at opportunities for recruitment
and retention of people that we need to--in the new science
areas that we need to really target and embrace.
So I look at investing in those areas and modernizing. As
we mentioned before, we really need to invest in the facilities
and encourage this use to cultivate that next generation.
Dr. Perconti. Yeah, I would just say, very quickly, that if
you're going to retain scientists and engineers, you have to
allow them to do science and engineering, and oftentimes, we
hire people into the government and they spend 4 years, 6
years, 8 years, getting degrees and we make them contract
monitors.
And that's a real, I think, dilemma for us culturally. We
have to really fix that, and if we can then I think the
opportunities to retain people will go way up. The likelihood
will go way up.
Mrs. Bice. Thank you. My time has expired so I will yield
back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Mrs. Bice.
Mr. Moulton is now recognized.
Mr. Moulton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. McQuiston, as the ranking member mentioned, I co-led
the Future of Defense Task Force last year, and a key issue we
highlighted was the importance of international partnership in
the context of setting common ethical standards for the use of
technology.
We talk a lot about the development and deployment of
emerging technologies. I know that that is your focus. But it
is equally if not more important for us to think about how
these technologies are used.
One thing we determined is that there is not enough
development of operational concepts for technology before we
just try to get the next toy. We need to figure out how we will
use the technology and then determine, okay, we have this
particular operational concept, this particular need, what's
the technology that we need to fulfill that mission.
There's, of course, a terrible first mover advantage for
countries that don't care about the ethical use of technology
and are willing to deploy it without concern for human rights
or third-order effects.
So when China collects massive amounts of biometric data
and uses it to track and abuse its Uighur population, it is
setting a precedent for biotechnology use and shaping the
global standard by default.
So if we don't have these conversations about global
technology standards very early on, then the global community
will default to whatever low ethical bar another country might
set.
If we then come into the game late and set a higher ethical
bar, then we're at a strategic and tactical disadvantage as
well.
So I know that this conversation often falls to OSD Policy
or State Department. But the R&D community seems uniquely
positioned to spot potential ethical use issues early and
detect development process, which, again, is something that we
identified as key.
So what role do you think the R&D community can play--the
R&D community can play in shaping these ethical standards of
use further down the road?
Ms. McQuiston. Well, I think it's really important right
now to be looking at emerging and disruptive technology as a
wargaming exercise and to be able to develop concepts in which
they could be used, and those concepts have to look at risks
and threats.
So yes, I agree we need to work with our allies and
partners and put together these future concepts, but we need to
understand how they could be used, too, when we look at AI,
when we look at a lot of our information technology.
As I said before, that we need to look at it from both
sides of the fence and also assess the science and technology
environment around these capabilities.
So mission engineering, threat forecasting, and modeling
and simulation and greater tools for analysis will better feed
this sort of space that we need to consider for how we operate
our technology and keep us in the forefront and proactive.
Mr. Moulton. I mean, I think that piece is absolutely key,
keeping us in the forefront and proactive. And the point I
would leave you with is, though it may not feel like your
responsibility to lead this effort, I think the R&D community
is an essential contributor to this process.
So State Department needs to do its part. OSD Policy needs
to do its part. We are pushing all those entities to do more
here because we're very concerned about losing the race to
China, not just in tech development but in operation, in
ethical use of these standards, and it's critical that we don't
lose that race. Continuing----
Ms. McQuiston. At R&E we have--oops, I'm sorry.
Mr. Moulton. Sorry. Go ahead, Ms. McQuiston.
Ms. McQuiston. At R&E we have advanced concepts and we have
SAIC [Science Applications International Corporation] looking
at sort of the threat space as well, and we will continue to do
that because as a chief technology officer, that's part of
understanding what the enabling technologies can create from
the standpoint of joint capabilities and joint threats that we
have.
Thank you.
Mr. Moulton. So just one more question on international
partnerships, because military R&D partnerships can become
tricky when we're trying to leverage partners' expertise while
also keeping certain capabilities shielded from the outside
world.
And whether we like it or not, we are not leading in every
tech field right now. So some of our allies have technology or
research that we could benefit from.
I know that there are many R&D efforts that genuinely
shouldn't be shared beyond the Department. But it seems like
too often that's just the default position.
Where can the Department do a better job of reaching out to
its allies and building those R&D partnerships, and is there
anything Congress can do to facilitate that?
Ms. McQuiston. Well, I believe that reaching out to our
allies is going to be critically important because, as you
said, we do not own a technology.
It's actually--the rate at which it's being developed and
moving ahead we need to stay in front of and actually be
leading edge, which means working with our allies in that.
Being able, I think, to have international partnerships is
key and forming them, and also being able to identify the
critical technology and how we need to protect it within these
agreements.
But being able to do that in a timely way is going to be
important as well.
Mr. Moulton. Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
yield back.
Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Mr. Moulton.
Mr. Moore is now recognized.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Chairman, and I'm going to continue
on with Representative Moulton--in that line of questioning,
and just try to take it a little bit, one step further and
allow for additional time on it. It's something that I have
here as well just, you know, really trying to focus on.
You know, our country's capacities for innovation is
limitless. Our scientific and technological prowess, you know,
needs to be always on the forefront. So I'm eager to continue
this growing work in the S&T ecosystem through, you know, the
public and private sector.
But let me continue on with that questioning just getting
it to the program of record, right, developing it and using
allies. But what--are DOD research organizations working with
the Defense Innovation Unit and any other related organizations
to help transition and promote those technologies into program
of record?
And then you can add in anything else with respect to
recommendations on how to improve this process.
And this is for Ms. McQuiston, actually. Sorry, I didn't
clarify that.
Ms. McQuiston. Thank you. Yes, I believe we need to have a
culture of innovation. When we originally talked about AFWERX
and a lot of the things going on within my sister services for
looking at fielding and testing and experimentation, being able
to capture those models and having it organic within the
services, I think, is important.
But DIU and capturing the--all the different relationships
that we can have commercially and looking across joint
operations and joint technology, and then working aggressively
to get it into the services and being able to field the
technology is going to be critical.
So it's time. Time, time, time is going to be very
important to keep track of and actually, again, get ahead of
the planning and the financing so we don't have any of these
companies fall into the ``valley of death'' but we actually are
able to move swifter in fielding and--in demonstrating and
fielding this technology.
Mr. Moore. Excellent. Thank you.
You know, we have talked about it a lot. I maybe mention it
every time we're on a Cyber Subcommittee. As we see the
battlefield moving away from physical and into the cyber
domain, I think it is incredibly important--incredibly
important to provide this to our warfighter.
With that same respect, what's the long-term vision for the
Defense Innovation Unit and with respect to any immediate plans
to expand beyond current ops so not just partnering and
finding, you know, synergies among others, but is there any
chance we expand offices?
Mr. Langevin. Microphone.
Ms. McQuiston. Sorry. I know we're looking to be able to be
in critical areas where technology and commercialization is
happening. Right now, we're putting together plans and
strategies to feed into the budgeting process.
So I look forward to talking with DIU and seeing where
their future plans are.
Mr. Moore. Excellent.
And just a final question for Ms. Baldwin. Hill Air Force
Base is in my district. It's got an annual economic output of
approximately $4.5 billion, and small businesses are making up
a larger percentage of our northern Utah defense and aerospace
economy, something that I, you know, I believe we need to be
promoting.
I think they're innovative. I think they're nimble. There's
really good opportunities for small business. How are you
optimizing the--those opportunities of the Small Business
Innovation Research program and Small Business Technology
Transfer program to develop and transition technology into
current programs?
Ms. Baldwin. We care deeply about those businesses and our
relationships as well, and I can give you an example of we
kicked off a challenge--a challenge opportunity with AFWERX in
the area of trusted systems design a couple years ago and
attracted a great number of small businesses from Utah as well
as from across the Nation.
So, deeply important to us, and by coupling those
activities through a phased approach where we have an
opportunity to award a small contract initially as that proves
out and demonstrates capability, we have follow-on
opportunities through three phases.
By that third phase, we're investing enough resources and
getting leverage dollars that allow those businesses to really
gain ground and then transition--have the opportunity to
transition to program.
So it's a model that we're proving out very well.
Thank you.
Mr. Moore. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
Are there any members who have not been recognized that
would like to ask questions?
[No response.]
Mr. Langevin. Okay. Hearing none, I want to thank our
witnesses for their testimony and the members for their
questions.
Members may have additional questions that they will submit
in writing and we'd ask that you respond to those questions as
expeditiously as possible.
With that, I want to, again, thank our witnesses for the
extraordinary work that you're doing. It's just so important
that we keep our eye on the ball here, we continue to
strengthen the S&T and the R&D ecosystem.
This is vitally important to the future of our national
security, the future of our warfighters, and without the right
attention and support and progress, our enemies and adversaries
will make that progress and we can't allow that to happen.
So with that, this portion of the open hearing stands
adjourned and we will reconvene now for the classified portion.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 1:22 p.m., the committee proceeded in closed
session.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
May 20, 2021
=======================================================================
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
May 20, 2021
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
May 20, 2021
=======================================================================
QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. LANGEVIN
Mr. Langevin. Last year Minerva, the social science program that is
vital to cyber and terrorism research, was zeroed out. We had to
restore $17M in funding. Has R&E decided to prioritize this type of
research this year?
Ms. McQuiston. The advancement and application of social Science is
important to the Department's mission. The Minerva Research Initiative
is a unique approach to basic social science research in areas of
importance to national defense. The Department included $4M in the
Fiscal Year 2022 president's budget request to support the Minerva
Research Initiative, and it is the Department's intention to make
budgeting for social science research a priority in FY23 and beyond.
Minerva has provided valuable capabilities to the Department in the
past and I have every expectation that it will continue to do so in the
future.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. FRANKLIN
Mr. Franklin. Each branch has its respected form of small business
innovation research (SBIR); how can we streamline the process and
encourage efficiency and competition?
Ms. McQuiston. DOD is committed to streamlining and modernizing the
processes of its Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small
Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. My office oversees the
participation of 16 DOD Components in the Department's SBIR/STTR
programs, and a key part of that mission is to develop policy to
streamline and modernize program processes. My office holds regular DOD
SBIR/STTR Program Manager's meetings with the intent of fostering
coordination and de-confliction across the Components and providing a
forum for collaboration of best practices for outreach, contracting,
and program improvement. Another example of one of our recent efforts
to modernize and streamline the program is the replacement of our
legacy portal, which was at the end of its useful life and could not
operate within a secure environment. My office awarded an SBIR Phase
III to develop the Defense SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal (DSIP), which
offers a suite of tools to enable the Department to better manage the
program and provides new administrative capabilities we have not had
before.
Mr. Franklin. How can we assure the necessary level of information
security is being maintained (ie CLASSIFIED information) with partnered
institutions/universities without creating a negative impact on
innovation
Ms. McQuiston. The Department must be judicious in applying
information security requirements in a manner that does not stifle
innovation with our partners in industry and universities. Because
there are more categories of information than just classified or
unclassified, we must use a tiered approach to information security so
that we can secure information about our most sensitive capabilities
while still allowing collaboration in the early stages of research.
Some of our most innovative ideas come from unclassified fundamental
research which has very few security protocols associated with it.
For fundamental research, we require that researchers operate in a
transparent manner that is in keeping with academic norms of research
integrity. Once specific military applications or national security
concerns are identified in research, that research may be regarded as
controlled unclassified information (CUI). For CUI, the Department may
choose to fund a DOD lab to continue the work, or DOD may choose to
continue funding a university with capabilities to provide additional
security measures; in such a case, the university is willing to accept
restrictions on people and publications, as well as to adopt
information technology security measures. R&E is currently working with
The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment to finalize the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification
standards which would serve to protect any Controlled Technical
Information (such as CUI) from cyberattacks or other means of
collection by adversaries.
Mr. Franklin. Many of you have expressed your respective branches
investing in STEM programs for students; how many of those students are
being retained in our Federal workforce?
Ms. McQuiston. The Department has a variety of workforce
initiatives in STEM education, especially at the postsecondary levels,
mainly in the form of fellowships, scholarships, and internships.
The best example of how the Department has been able to transition
and retain those students into the federal, and specifically DOD
workforce, is through the Science, Mathematics, and Research for
Transformation (SMART) Scholarship Program. The SMART program awards
highly competitive scholarships-for-service to undergraduate and
graduate students in 21 STEM academic disciplines and hires the
students, upon graduation, into DOD's workforce.
Since the program inception in 2006, SMART has awarded 3,367
scholarships to students pursuing undergraduate and graduate degrees in
STEM disciplines. SMART has transitioned a total of 2,277 students into
the DOD workforce. To date, the program has a 91% success rate of
students completing, or on track to complete their service commitment.
Mr. Franklin. Each branch has its respected form of small business
innovation research (SBIR); how can we streamline the process and
encourage efficiency and competition?
Dr. Perconti. The Army's Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
program is nested within the broader Department of Defense (DOD) SBIR
program; and is executed in concert with each individual DOD
Components' programs. While the Army SBIR program is focused on Army
modernization and Army PEO/PM capability gaps, the overarching
construct and requirements for the program are dictated by the Small
Business Administration and the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense
for Research and Engineering (OUSD, R&E) Small Business and Technology
Partnerships Office. The Army is looking forward to taking full
advantage of the simplified processes implemented by OUSD(R&E),
including a common submission portal and proposal requirements to
streamline the SBIR process while encouraging efficiency and
competition across the small business community.
Mr. Franklin. How can we assure the necessary level of information
security is being maintained (ie CLASSIFIED information) with partnered
institutions/universities without creating a negative impact on
innovation
Dr. Perconti. While we are very mindful of avoiding any negative
impacts on innovation and having meaningful partnerships with academia,
the Army is supportive of DOD efforts to obtain relevant authorities
that would allow us to collect and analyze sufficient information on
research performers and thereby evaluate potential conflicts of
interest and conflicts of commitment prior to grant award and
periodically thereafter. We believe a whole of government approach is
required to truly tackle the problem--e.g., sharing grant/cooperative
agreement award information across funding agencies (DOD, DOE, NSF,
NIH, etc.) and/or creating mechanisms that would allow for sharing
adverse information across agencies.
Mr. Franklin. Many of you have expressed your respective branches
investing in STEM programs for students; how many of those students are
being retained in our Federal workforce?
Dr. Perconti. The Army appreciates the Committee's continuing
support of the Army Educational Outreach Program (AEOP). The AEOP
offers students and teachers a collaborative, cohesive portfolio of
Army-sponsored STEM programs to engage, inspire and attract the next
generation of STEM talent via kindergarten through college programs and
provides insight into DOD STEM careers. In FY20, AEOP successfully
pivoted to all virtual (due to COVID) with 18,000 students and
teachers across the county. 90% of alumni indicated interest in
pursuing a STEM career and 59% indicated interest in pursuing an Army/
DOD STEM career. In FY21, we have expanded the AEOP apprenticeships to
include postgraduate and postdoctoral fellowship programs, further
strengthening the pipeline from our STEM outreach programs to potential
future federal employment. The DOD Science, Mathematics, and Research
for Transformation (SMART) scholarship-for-service program provides a
combined education and career opportunity to students pursuing STEM
degrees. The SMART program is highly valued for attracting, recruiting,
and retaining early-career high impact scientists and engineers, and
allows Army laboratories to shape education and training for incoming
employees. In FY2019 and FY2020, Army laboratories sponsored 147 SMART
scholars. Since the SMART program was initiated in 2006, the Army has
sponsored 1,013 SMART scholars at the Army laboratories and technical
organizations. Of those, 377 (37%) remained as Army employees when
their service obligation ended.
Mr. Franklin. Each branch has its respected form of small business
innovation research (SBIR); how can we streamline the process and
encourage efficiency and competition?
Ms. Johnson. The SBIR/STTR program is a critical tool in our
acquisition tool kit to smartly engage with American small business,
quickly identify technology solution opportunities, swiftly develop
those opportunities into scalable solutions, and rapidly deploy those
solutions to the warfighter.
To optimize effectiveness of the SBIR/STTR investment portfolio,
the Department's SBIR program has undergone a reengineering effort to
reduce the burden on both industry and the acquisition community while
enabling agility to exploit emerging and innovative technology
opportunities and quickly deliver necessary technologies to the Fleet
and Force. The primary objectives of the new program are to incubate a
broader base of ideas, accelerate the best ideas to operational
demonstration, and bridge operational prototypes to high-value outcomes
for the Fleet/Force.
Mechanisms to support the new objectives include broader topics,
streamlined proposal submission processes, accelerated evaluation and
award decisions, faster payments to awardees, and contracting to
support technology development through rapid capability fielding. These
mechanisms are being introduced through multiple pilots, such as the
Advanced Development and Acquisition of Prototype Technology (ADAPT)
and NAVY Technology Acceleration (both now underway), to develop and
validate best and better practices.
NavalX is shepherding new companies into funded opportunities with
the DON, including the SBIR portfolio. The DON SBIR program office also
hired a Commercialization Manager to assist with SBIR transitions in
2020. The Commercialization Manager has been hosting a series of
roundtables with Tech Bridge coordinators and regional SBIR leads to
determine ways to further generate opportunities for the industrial
base. These initiatives include a Navy-wide common transition resource
site for SBIR companies; and a regional ``menu'' of equipment, labs,
and services related to testing and evaluation. These will be supported
by the Tech Bridges in close partnership with the DON SBIR program
office.
Mr. Franklin. How can we assure the necessary level of information
security is being maintained (ie CLASSIFIED information) with partnered
institutions/universities without creating a negative impact on
innovation
Ms. Johnson. Cleared Defense Contractors (CDCs) are subject to the
National Industrial Security Program codified in 32 CFR Part 117
effective February 24, 2021. Accordingly, the physical, information,
network, and personnel security at CDCs are subject to regular
inspections, as well as continuous government Cybersecurity Service
Provider monitoring. These third-party DOD entities are the foundation
for ensuring that CDCs adequately protect classified information.
Regarding partnerships with Universities and Small Businesses, the
effectiveness of security procedures relies on a shared understanding
of the specific research requiring protection. Protectable research
includes information deemed critical by the Navy due to potential
military application, as well as patents and intellectual property
owned by the performer. These procedures rely on the expertise of
government personnel and University and Small Business subject matter
experts- this active collaboration results in the identification of
research information requiring protections for the benefit of all
research participants.
The Office of Naval Research (ONR) is developing standards for
evaluating cost and benefit calculations associated with international
collaboration. To the greatest extent possible, these standards are
intended to be communicated to performers (both established and
prospective) at Universities and Small Businesses to facilitate a clear
understanding of circumstances ONR recognizes as potential risks to
research integrity and undue influence.
ONR is hiring a Director of Innovation Protection Policies. This
new position focuses on understanding the international research
innovation environment, and proactively disrupting malign foreign
intent with respect to capital investment. The Director of Innovation
Protection Policies collaborates extensively with the Navy Industrial
Base Integration and Security Office focused on foreign investment
mitigation. Additionally, NavalX is partnering with the Foreign
Investment Tiger Team (FITT) and NCIS to draft and distribute
cautionary information regarding the business and national security
risks of taking investment from adversarial groups.
ONR provides clear and concise guidance for handling classified and
controlled unclassified information, that is shared with non-government
partners using codified written agreements, such as Cooperative
Research and Development Agreement, which delineates parameters for
information sharing and protection. These agreements discuss
expectations and outcomes, to include clauses for ramifications if the
agreement criteria is not adhered. Further, the DD Form 254, Contract
Security Classification Specification, is used to convey government
security requirements to their non-government partners when performance
dictates access to classified information. This document lays out the
specific types of protected information that the Cleared Defense
Contractors can have access to and any contact/agreement specific
criteria for the protection of that information. Both agreements and
the Contract Security Classification Specification help alleviate
ambiguity while empowering the non-government entity to manage their
classified holdings.
Mr. Franklin. Many of you have expressed your respective branches
investing in STEM programs for students; how many of those students are
being retained in our Federal workforce?
Ms. Johnson. The DON warfare centers and the Naval Research
Laboratory (NRL) engage in robust programs of STEM education and
outreach for students and educators from kindergarten through graduate
school. The students we inspire today to pursue STEM may well become
members of our workforce of tomorrow, or participants in the many
academic and industrial partnerships that apply their creativity to
solve naval challenges for the Navy of the future. NAVSEA's STEM
educational outreach efforts resulted in 106 programs in FY 2020,
involving a total of 2,003 technical team members across the enterprise
and 35,000 engagement hours. The programs reached 63,000 students and
2,000 teachers--and all in spite of the coronavirus pandemic. Programs
include SeaGlide, SeaPerch, RoboNation, Major League Hacking, Submarine
races, science fair judges, etc.
There are a number of successful student programs that DON
organizations utilize to attract top students that do not have the
mandatory hiring requirement like the DOD Science, Mathematics, and
Research for Transformation (SMART) program. Students also participate
in the following programs: STEM Student Employment Program (SSEP),
Pathways, Naval Research Enterprise Intern Program (NREIP),
Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Institutions
(HBCU and M/I) summer internship program, Science and Engineering
Apprentice Program (SEAP), Volunteers, and Post-Secondary Student
Program.
Students can also participate in multiple programs. For example,
Mr. Reese Koe is an early career data scientist working for the Naval
Surface Warfare Center (NSWC), Port Hueneme Division, who started as a
SEAP intern, then became an NREIP intern, and then was accepted as a
SMART scholar. He has Bachelor of Science degrees in mathematics and
physics and a Master's degree in information and data science.
Dr. Corey Bergsrud, an engineer at NSWC Crane Division, has seen
the benefits of STEM programs from both sides of the equation. A
participant in the NREIP and SMART Scholarship programs, Bergsrud has
supported a variety of internship programs, including SEAP, NREIP,
SMART, STEM Student Employment Program (SSEP), and National Security
Innovation Network (NSIN) X-Force Fellows, since joining the command
full-time in 2016.
SMART has become a preferred method for recruiting and growing
talent in critical areas. Each year additional naval facilities request
approval to select students. Of the 1,949 students in the portal for
possible selection in 2020, 56 percent have listed a participating
naval facility as either their first, second, or third preference site
selection. Most of the SMART scholars (77 percent) remain past their
service commitment. In FY 2020, 25 percent of NRL's permanent science
and engineering hires came from these student programs.
Mr. Franklin. Each branch has its respected form of small business
innovation research (SBIR); how can we streamline the process and
encourage efficiency and competition?
Ms. Baldwin. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) ensures strong
linkage between the Air Force Office of Small Business Programs, the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Research, and Engineering,
and the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) and Small Business
Technology Transfer (STTR) Office, and engages in DOD-level events and
activities that facilitate branch collaboration and SBIR/STTR process
improvements. Additionally, AFWERX participates regularly in
Government-wide events, such as the Small Business Administration (SBA)
National SBIR Week and SBA TechConnect SBIR/STTR Fall Innovation
Conference, which are excellent sources of best practices and teaming
opportunities. The DAF has implemented organizational and process
improvements to the SBIR/STTR program and AFWERX to institutionalize
innovation. The AFWERX AFVentures program is recognized as a model for
attracting greater private sector investment in defense technologies.
AFVentures instituted a SBIR/STTR Open Topic opportunity for small
businesses that has broadened competition and increased the number of
non-traditional small business performers. This opens the aperture for
the DAF to consider more diverse avenues to more quickly and
efficiently bring solutions to bear on military mission challenges. For
FY18 and FY19, the Open Topic program resulted in 2,299 SBIR/STTR
contracts awarded to over 1,400 companies.
Mr. Franklin. How can we assure the necessary level of information
security is being maintained (ie CLASSIFIED information) with partnered
institutions/universities without creating a negative impact on
innovation
Ms. Baldwin. The Department has well established controls in place
to ensure the security of classified information, including procedures
that enable industrial and academic institutions to partner through use
of appropriate facilities, equipment, and networks. Protection of
controlled unclassified information and intellectual property is of
significant concern. It is important to have a balanced, surgical
approach to information protection that ensures appropriate control of
critical technology, while retaining the ability for broad engagement
with the commercial and global technological and innovation community.
The Department of the Air Force is implementing DOD policy and guidance
associated with the protection of critical technical information,
including making use of supply chain risk management, industrial
security, operational security, insider threat reporting, and cyber
security practices to mitigate risk of adversary exploitation. To
minimize unnecessary disruption, practices are implemented in a risk-
based fashion, guided by critical program and technology priorities. We
are collaborating with DOD and federal agencies to increase awareness
of exploitation tactics and expand threat information sharing.
Universities and businesses are making it a point to be aware of
security risks and are engaging with the Department on best practices
for research security and integrity. Active awareness and information
sharing are key to the protection of technology.
Mr. Franklin. Many of you have expressed your respective branches
investing in STEM programs for students; how many of those students are
being retained in our Federal workforce?
Ms. Baldwin. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) conducts more
than 3,000 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) outreach
events per year, leveraging local, state, and federal organizations to
reach nearly 125,000 students and teachers across the country. The most
successful programs have been the Palace Acquire (PAQ) program with
approximately 82% retention, Science, Mathematics and Research for
Transformation (SMART) scholarships with approximately 70% retention,
and the Premiere College Internship Program (PCIP) with approximately
58% retention. These programs are used by both the Air Force and the
Space Force and provide students with valuable workplace experience
which can lead to a Federal civilian professional career in STEM. The
Department is exploring ways to better track and increase retention of
these students in the STEM pipeline. This is one benefit we expect to
achieve from recently established Pathways, and Leadership, Experience,
Growing Apprenticeships Committed to Youth (LEGACY) programs. These
programs are designed with incremental STEM growth in mind, from K-12
junior apprentices to undergraduate apprentices and follow on
internships, allowing students and the Department to benefit from a
continued relationship. Following initial success in the Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base locality, we are now seeking broader
implementation of these programs.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. MORELLE
Mr. Morelle. What more can we do to engage with small businesses
and harness their talents and capabilities?
Ms. McQuiston. The DOD Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/
Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program has served as an
excellent mechanism to engage with small businesses and harness their
talents and capabilities. DOD invests nearly $2B annually through the
SBIR/STTR programs, which harness the innovation of domestic small
businesses and accelerate the introduction of their pioneering
technologies into the Department. But the DOD needs to do more to
facilitate the transition of these efforts into programs of record,
fielded systems, or to other customers within the Federal government. I
will continue to champion SBIR/STTR projects and empower my team to
help find DOD customers for SBIR/STTR technologies capable of providing
our warfighters with new and disruptive capabilities.
Mr. Morelle. Research institutions play a critical role in
attracting and developing the brightest minds who then dedicate their
careers to solving our most challenging problems through innovative
solutions--these great minds keep the U.S. on the global stage as
leaders of innovation.
What type of investments in future technical talent should the
Department be making? What STEM programs should be better supported and
how?
Ms. McQuiston. A strong future technical workforce requires
bolstering domestic talent development and recruiting and retaining
foreign talent. It requires a comprehensive approach that anticipates
and responds to DOD STEM workforce needs in the near-, mid- and long-
term. Domestically, we must invest in early STEM education, support
technical talent throughout their careers, and increase outreach to
underrepresented groups. DOD needs to continue to invest in and find
ways to encourage increased focus on K-16 STEM education and outreach.
Specifically, this means engaging students and educators in meaningful
STEM experiences, serving students who are military-connected and
underrepresented in STEM, engaging the active DOD S&E workforce in STEM
education efforts, and addressing the barriers that continue to hinder
underrepresented groups from STEM education success. DOD also needs to
continue to invest in programs that support graduate students and post-
doctoral fellows. An example of where DOD can improve is by expanding
the young investigator program to support additional post-doctoral
fellows and creating more grant opportunities for undergraduate and
graduate students in areas of importance to the Department.
Additionally, DOD should continue to emphasize and prioritize outreach
to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Minority
Serving Institutions (MIs) and programs like Defense Established
Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (DEPSCoR) which may be
leveraged to develop talent that has not traditionally engaged with the
Department of Defense.
Mr. Morelle. What more can we do to engage with small businesses
and harness their talents and capabilities?
Dr. Perconti. The Army recognizes the need for small business
technology and ingenuity to prepare the Army for the future. The Army
is leveraging all available statutory authorities by connecting small
businesses with Army Acquisition Professionals using cohort and
transition broker team models to connect small businesses performing
research and development to Army Program Managers (PMs) with well-
defined needs. These models reduce the barrier to entry through hands-
on explanation of some of the more challenging aspects of working with
the Army for proposal submission, which can often seem like an
insurmountable bureaucratic process. More importantly, these models are
yielding more predictable, reliable, and cost effective pathways for
technology adoption by helping small businesses focus on Program
Executive Officer (PEO)-identified capability gaps, and identifying
tech insertion points and funding opportunities. The Army's strategy
for the portfolio, including alignment with Army Modernization
priorities, focuses on PEO/PM transition and private sector market
growth opportunities that will build a mutually-beneficial portfolio
for both the Army and the private sector.
Mr. Morelle. Research institutions play a critical role in
attracting and developing the brightest minds who then dedicate their
careers to solving our most challenging problems through innovative
solutions--these great minds keep the U.S. on the global stage as
leaders of innovation.
What type of investments in future technical talent should the
Department be making? What STEM programs should be better supported and
how?
Dr. Perconti. The Army must continue to invest in STEM education to
ensure a continuing supply of the next generation of scientists and
engineers, and leverage the special workforce authorities at the
laboratories to invest in our STEM workforce and continue investing in
our laboratory infrastructure to ensure the Army remains an attractive
venue for a long-term and impactful scientific career. Army
laboratories compete with a highly competitive private sector to build
and maintain the Army's STEM workforce. Collaborations with university
professors and students are essential to ensure development of diverse,
best-in-class American STEM talent. The Army cannot accomplish its
mission without the skills, dedication, and contributions derived from
providing access to all Americans. The Army's Basic Research portfolio
of investments is utilized to the fullest extent possible to facilitate
such access, expanding research capabilities, and building lasting
partnerships. For more than 50 years, the Army has supported a wide
range of educational opportunities in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM) for our youth, college and graduate students, as
well as our valued teachers. Since 2004, these highly efforts were
consolidated under the Army Educational Outreach Program (AEOP) which
offers a collaborative, cohesive portfolio of Army-sponsored STEM
programs to engage, inspire and attract the next generation of STEM
talent via kindergarten through college programs and provides insight
into DOD STEM careers. AEOP strategically funds programs that maximize
student and teacher access to unique DOD assets to support the Army's
STEM education priorities, including STEM literate citizenry, STEM
savvy educators, and a cohesive, coordinated, and sustainable STEM
education outreach infrastructure across the Army. AEOP programs
prioritize the participation of underrepresented and underserved
communities in STEM fields to curate a diverse, agile and highly
competent STEM talent pool representative of the nation's demographics
to tackle the nation's most challenging problems.
Mr. Morelle. What more can we do to engage with small businesses
and harness their talents and capabilities?
Ms. Johnson. To improve the SBIR process for small businesses, the
DON applies best practices learned from Technology Acceleration and
Accelerated Delivery and Acquisition of Prototype Technology (ADAPT)
pilots to the DON SBIR/STTR Programs. In FY 2021 the Navy is scaling
better practices developed during the pilots by including participation
from firms with majority ownership in part by adopting simplified
proposal requirements (50 percent shorter), including broad topics, and
making larger first Phase I payments 66 percent faster. Scaling these
practices will encourage greater participation from a broader variety
of innovators and will facilitate accelerated evaluations and awards,
both of which will result in meeting a greater number of Naval needs
faster.
DON continues to recognize efficiencies from the Focused Contracts
Center, established in 2016, consistently making Phase I awards in 45
days and Phase II awards in 150 days. Historically, DON SBIR/STTR Phase
III awards have accounted for about one-half of all commercialization
in the DOD SBIR/STTR Programs. On average, the Department funds and
awards over $500M in Phase III annually, with FY 2020 being a highly
successful year for Phase III awards, nearing almost one billion
dollars.
In addition to optimizing the SBIR program, the DON has seen an
increasing number of small businesses getting awards through Other
Transactional Authority Consortia, Broad Agency Announcements, and
Prize Challenges. The Prize Challenge Authority is proving more
accessible to non-traditional companies who have not received contracts
with the Navy or Marine Corps before. Prize Challenge authorities offer
flexibility of process and solicitation criteria and do not require an
accounting system that is government compliant before the selection
process. Additionally, Tech Bridges have been working internally to
capture best practices and proliferate the use of these authorities in
partnership with ONR.
We are working hard to take full advantage of the authorities we
have. We do have issues when it comes to colors of money. If Congress
would pilot a flexible funding line for innovation that was colorless,
the DON could take advantage of more innovation. Private investors do
not have the same restrictions when it comes to funding talent and
future capabilities, and can fund from seed to commercial product,
quickly. Companies like Uber were paid for their ideas and ability to
execute, pivoting quickly as they engaged with potential customers. The
vision was transportation accessible for all, and the product was
iterated on to become the hardware and software solutions that
continues to expand, today. A line of colorless money would enable us
to similarly foster and adopt innovation.
Mr. Morelle. Research institutions play a critical role in
attracting and developing the brightest minds who then dedicate their
careers to solving our most challenging problems through innovative
solutions--these great minds keep the U.S. on the global stage as
leaders of innovation.
What type of investments in future technical talent should the
Department be making? What STEM programs should be better supported and
how?
Ms. Johnson. In order to meet the scientific and technical
challenges of tomorrow, we must continue to build and grow a continuous
pipeline of STEM students today. Not only must we sustain Naval STEM
efforts in the long-term but we must create new STEM opportunities
focused on underrepresented students in STEM to increase diversity,
equity and inclusion so that the next generation of STEM professionals
is representative of the face of America. One of the challenges today
is that there is significant variability across the DON with regards to
management of and participation in STEM education and outreach
initiatives. In particular, STEM education and outreach is often seen
as a collateral duty for STEM coordinators at our naval facilities. Our
scientists and engineers are often volunteering their time to
participate in STEM events. Sustaining our efforts is not sufficient.
We need to significantly grow our STEM efforts to reach
underrepresented students in STEM and increase diversity in STEM. We
need to examine this at the national level and execute at both the
national and local levels. The Naval STEM Coordination Office is
pursuing new STEM diversity efforts via Historically Black Universities
and Colleges and Minority Institutions. Our naval laboratories, warfare
centers, and facilities are focused on outreach to underrepresented
students in their local communities. Across the DON, we need
consistency in expectations of our STEM programs, allowing for
customization at the local level. We also need long-term sustained
resources for our STEM coordinators and scientists and engineers to
deliver trusted STEM education and outreach efforts in their
communities. We need to set STEM goals for command leadership to meet
throughout the course of their tour and we need to find ways to
incentivize our scientists and engineers to participate in STEM
efforts. STEM outcomes are often not immediate, but these long-term
investments will deliver the diverse, talented STEM pipeline that is
critical to the United States and the Department of the Navy.
Specifically, issue a policy that STEM outreach efforts can use the
virtual platforms that are used by the schools to further engagements.
Currently, the DOD and DON have restrictions in place on virtual
platforms for security purposes, but this often hinders STEM outreach
to local communities. This is particularly important as we reach beyond
our normal commuting area and into underserved/rural communities.
Furthermore, to hire students who are studying outside of the
laboratory's geographic location, activities could fund travel and per
diem which can be costly. Increased synergy with HBCUs and other
universities with underrepresented students and regional organizations
whether they are academia, economic development corporations or
regional chapters, (e.g. Society of Women Engineers) can yield
significant return on investment in the development of STEM pipelines
and workforce development.
Lastly, our DON STEM education and outreach efforts are directly
dependent on the Department of Education's ability to develop a robust
foundation in mathematics and the sciences that we can build on.
The following are ways the STEM program can be better supported.
Undergraduate research projects are an effective and
affordable means to have students solve Department relevant problems,
build and apply their technical capability, and educate them on
Department careers. Creating a program to compete, award and support
Department mentor engagement would foster a strong technical pipeline
ready to hit the ground running.
Internships (SEAP & NREIP) are valuable methods of
educating and recruiting future qualified workforce. The Warfare
Centers provide funding to augment the allocation to ONR. Additional
allocation to ONR to support internships, including summer living
stipends, above the current allocation would prove beneficial.
Incentivize the use of programs in collaboration with one
another. For example, award a Summer Faculty or Postgraduate Fellowship
in tandem with an NREIP student award to a faculty-student pair from an
HBCU/MI institution to better strengthen collaboration, success and
continued engagement beyond the summer work.
Mr. Morelle. What more can we do to engage with small businesses
and harness their talents and capabilities?
Ms. Baldwin. The Department of the Air Force has established a
number of efforts to better access emerging technologies from our
nation's small businesses.
The Department of the Air Force participates in pitch day
events, industry day events, and Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) conferences to
engage small businesses to harness their talents and capabilities
toward Air Force and Space Force capability needs.
AFWERX instituted a SBIR/STTR Open Topic opportunity for
small businesses that has broadened competition and increased non-
traditional small business performers. In FY18 and FY19, the Open Topic
program resulted in 2,299 SBIR/STTR contracts awarded to over 1,400
companies with 75 percent of the recipients being new partners.
AFWERX hosts collider events the last week of each month
which bring together hundreds of small businesses with members of the
Department to facilitate ``collisions'' that lead to deal-flow for
companies and solutions for the Department. These events can be in-
person or virtual, and rotate between locations and technology focus
areas.
Mr. Morelle. Research institutions play a critical role in
attracting and developing the brightest minds who then dedicate their
careers to solving our most challenging problems through innovative
solutions--these great minds keep the U.S. on the global stage as
leaders of innovation.
What type of investments in future technical talent should the
Department be making? What STEM programs should be better supported and
how?
Ms. Baldwin. The Department of the Air Force (DAF) considers
attracting and developing future talent a priority. We have identified
a number of targeted future science and engineering workforce skill
priorities based on the National Defense Strategy and recognized talent
needs. Engineering talent areas include cybersecurity engineering,
software, digital engineering, data science, and computer modeling; and
technology areas include hypersonics, directed energy, artificial
intelligence, biotechnology, and microelectronics. Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math (STEM) K-12 programs are an important component
to building the workforce of the future. The DAF conducts more than
3,000 STEM outreach events per year, leveraging local, state, and
federal organizations to reach nearly 125,000 students and teachers
across the country. The Department also engages universities and
research institutions to advance technology maturity, while also
introducing students and graduates to the Air Force and Space Force.
These activities include senior capstone design projects focused on DAF
challenges, fellowships for promising U.S. scientists to pursue
doctoral degrees in critical research areas, and programs to support
scientists and engineers who have recently received Ph.D. or equivalent
degrees. Future partnership programs should continue to be pursued,
targeting technology modernization priorities.
The Department of the Air Force has a variety of STEM programs for
students that create an avenue for future science and engineering (S&E)
talent. The most successful programs have been the Palace Acquire (PAQ)
program with approximately 82% retention, Science, Mathematics and
Research for Transformation (SMART) scholarships with approximately 70%
retention, and the Premiere College Internship Program (PCIP) with
approximately 58% retention. These programs are used by both the Air
Force and the Space Force and provide students with valuable workplace
experience which can lead to a Federal civilian professional career in
STEM. The Department is exploring ways to better track and increase
retention of these students in the STEM pipeline. This is one benefit
we expect to achieve from recently established Pathways, and
Leadership, Experience, Growing Apprenticeships Committed to Youth
(LEGACY) programs. These programs are designed with incremental STEM
growth in mind, from K-12 junior apprentices to undergraduate
apprentices and follow on internships, allowing students and the
Department to benefit from a continued relationship. Following initial
success in the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base locality, we are now
seeking broader implementation of these programs.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. MOORE
Mr. Moore. I am interested in learning how to ensure the cutting-
edge innovation coming from R&D efforts efficiently transition into
programs of record. Few things disincentivize innovation more than
technologies and products languishing in the proverbial ``valley of
death'' in the acquisition process. Are DOD research organizations
working with the Defense Innovation Unit and other related
organizations to help transition and promote innovative technologies
into programs of record? And what recommendations do you have for this
committee to improve this process?
Ms. McQuiston. A number of DOD research organizations are currently
working with DIU to prototype, transition and scale innovative
technologies into programs of record. Some example projects follow:
Air Force Research Lab/DTRA/DARPA: DIU's Rapid Analysis
of Threat Exposure (RATE) project provides pre-symptomatic, early
warning of COVID-19 infection to cue earlier testing, isolation, and
testing. We collaborated with DARPA to deploy a technical demonstration
of localized data collection on a ship at sea (USS Portland), flowing
data entirely over DOD networks. We worked with AFRL to transition the
Independent Review Board from the Navy and continue to work with the
team on transitioning to a program of record.
Air Force Research Lab, NASA, and NRO AS&T: DIU's Quantum
Inertial Measurement Unit Experiment (QuIX) project to develop an
assured Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) alternative to GPS
for strategic space assets and potentially strategic air assets.
DARPA, Space Development Agency, and Air Force Research
Lab: DIU's Multi-Orbital Logistics project to develop an in-space
services and logistical capability for low cost, responsive access
beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO).
Air Force Research Lab and NRO AS&T: DIU's High Specific
Energy Storage project to create significantly higher endurance
batteries for powered space systems and sensors, which also has
subsequent applications for terrestrial operational energy requirements
and programs of record. DIU's Defense Engagement Team (DET) serves as a
bridge between DIU and the greater DOD and, in part, focuses on
educating DOD organizations about dual-use commercial technologies and
DIU's process to prototype and scale successful technology. The DET
also enables stronger connections between research organizations and
programs of record to ensure vetted technology has a path to
transition. More needs to be done to incentivize research organizations
and programs of record to ``buy what we can, build what we must.'' This
approach optimizes DOD resources to take advantage of buying higher TRL
technologies to provide more cost-effective and timely solutions to the
warfighter, while investing in building unique military capabilities
for the long term.
Mr. Moore. I believe that organizations like the Defense Innovation
Unit are the future of the DOD's expanding technological focus. As
warfare moves beyond the physical battlefield into cyber domains, it
will become increasingly important to incorporate America's
technological might into the warfighter. What is the long-term vision
for the DIU and are there any immediate plans to expand beyond their
current offices?
Ms. McQuiston. After five years, DIU continues to strengthen the
nation's security by increasing the military's adoption of commercial
technology. We support DIU's increasing contracting requirements to get
new and more technologies through a streamlined process. We also
support the development of a skilled, dual-hatted roster of National
Guard members and reservists who help DIU tap into technology
ecosystems around the country. DIU's six technology portfolios are
focused on areas critical to the Department's battlefield advantage
where the commercial sector is leading technological development:
Advanced Energy and Materials, Artificial Intelligence, Autonomy,
Cyber, Human Systems, and Space. Advanced Energy and Materials is DIU's
newest portfolio, established in October 2020. DIU continues to take
the pulse of dual-use commercial advancements alongside military needs
to inform the Unit's portfolio structure and priorities from software
and code, in the cyber domain, to hardware such as secure, trusted
small unmanned aerial systems. As DIU and other innovation entities
mature, we see stronger coordination and cooperation both at the
project level but also regionally, to tap into more of the accelerators
and startups this country, and our partners and allies have to offer.
Mr. Moore. Attritable aircraft, which provide fighter-like
capabilities at missile-like cost, have the potential to be a
substantial force multiplier for U.S. Air Forces in future theaters;
especially the Pacific, given the evolving airspace denial capabilities
of potential adversaries. Since the efficacy of these vehicles depends
on the ability to procure them in high volumes, minimizing cost for all
aircraft systems, not just the airframe, will be critical to creating a
viable program of record. As such, how is the Air Force ensuring that
low-cost subsystem technology, such as propulsion, matures at pace with
attritable airframes undergoing testing?
Does the operational risk to 5th Gen fighter aircraft increase in
future contested environments if we fail to field attritable systems
due to affordability?
Ms. Baldwin. There is consistent coordination and collaboration
among efforts developing low cost subsystem technologies and
development of attritable airframes, including coordination between Air
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), engine manufacturers, and attritable
airframe builders. The AFRL is executing a portfolio of initiatives to
advance attritable aircraft goals, including projects focused on the
development of low cost medium-scale engines, and power and thermal
management systems. Modeling, mission simulation, and analysis has
shown 5th Gen fighter aircraft teamed with attritable/reusable systems
experience increased survivability as well as combat effectiveness.
These analytical results persist when fully informed for blue and near-
peer adversary capabilities and with humans-in-the-loop. War gaming and
analysis also indicates attritable aircraft can be a force multiplier
in joint operations, including in stressing scenarios the joint force
may confront in a highly contested future operating environment.
Mr. Moore. In my district, Hill Air Force Base and the surrounding
defense community provides an annual economic output of $4.5 billion
with small businesses making up an increasingly larger share of
Northern Utah's defense and aerospace economy. How are you optimizing
the opportunities of the Small Business Innovation Research program and
Small Business Technology Transfer program to develop and transition
technology into current programs?
Ms. Baldwin. AFWERX is organized to monitor and manage the full
SBIR/STTR process lifecycle, including a focus on technology transition
and partnerships post-SBIR/STTR contract award. This is accomplished
through partnerships with Technology Directorates within the Air Force
Research Laboratory (AFRL), Air Force and Space Force acquisition
centers, Air Force Major Commands, and Space Force Field Commands to
coordinate transition goals and opportunities. AFWERX hosts collider
events each month which bring together hundreds of small businesses
with members of the Department to facilitate ``collisions'' that lead
to deal-flow for companies and solutions for the Department. These
events can be in-person or virtual, and rotate between locations and
technology focus areas. AFWERX Prime accelerates investment in emerging
dual-use technologies, including leveraging the SBIR/STTR process to
identify and scale research and development opportunities with matching
commercial investment. Building on promising companies introduced to
the DOD ecosystem with small Phase 1 SBIR investments, Prime provides
investment scaling, enabling quicker technology transitions into
programs.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. FALLON
Mr. Fallon. In 2020, the Air Force fielded an interactive VR engine
maintenance training system with the 58th Special Operations Wing at
Kirtland AFB to combat the lack of available on-base maintenance
training assets and enhance skills retention amongst MC and HC-130J
engine maintainers. The VR system, which simulates an engine for
students to practice maintenance procedures on, can provide critical
remote access to procedural instruction and has boosted training
retention since fielding.
Given the applicability of this technology across multiple
turbomachinery applications and all military branches, does the
Department have a plan to proliferate VR Engine Maintenance training
more broadly across the DOD? How can the Department ensure this
powerful VR technology is not branch-segmented? For instance, made
available to Air Force C-130Js units but Marine Corps KC-130Js units--
both of which fly similar aircraft.
Ms. McQuiston. As the complexity of weapons systems increase and
legacy weapon systems age, new and innovative technologies and
processes must be continuously integrated into the DOD's sustainment
enterprise, to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of providing
materiel availability to U.S. warfighters. Making sure that our
aircraft maintainers and personnel with similar complex maintenance and
engineering responsibilities have readily available opportunities to
enhance their skill set and be ready to perform their jobs when needed
is critical to the readiness of our military. I look forward to
supporting the development of these and similar sustainment
technologies and finding ways to incorporate new capabilities such as
VR engine maintenance across the force while deconflicting any
potentially duplicative programs.
Mr. Fallon. From the R&E vantage point, what are the most
significant challenges in transitioning technologies to your A&S
counterparts to bridge the proverbial ``valley of death''? Is it
authorities, funding, organizational structures, culture?
Ms. McQuiston. Transitioning cutting edge technologies into
material solutions for our warfighters in a timely and resource
efficient way has been, and is among the most pressing challenges the
Department faces.
As the rate of innovation and technology advancement accelerates,
it becomes increasingly difficult to assess, understand, and be
confident in the level of maturity that a particular technology will
achieve in the 2-year POM cycle. It's exceedingly difficult to have
accurate foresight in this regard and plan it into a POM.
Another specific challenge is related to testing. The Department
needs to get better at making sure that the technologies we're
developing and testing in the lab also get testing in environments more
relevant to the conditions in which they are intended to function.
Testing data and feedback from potential end users is also extremely
valuable to collect and have in the early stages of solution
development. This will undoubtedly give program managers more
confidence in adopting those technologies into their programs of
record.
I look forward to working with Congress and discussing ideas to how
to bridge this ``Valley of Death'' and ensure that the capabilities we
are delivering to the warfighters are using the best that today's
technology has to offer.
Mr. Fallon. What are some specific examples of what you are doing
to bridge the issue of the ``cost of time'' and ``valley of death''?
Ms. McQuiston. Time is a finite resource and finding ways to use it
as efficiently as possible presents the Department with an opportunity
to gain a strategic advantage over our competitors and adversaries.
Specifically, the Department needs to get faster at incorporating
today's cutting-edge technologies into prototypes and transition and
scale them into programs of record that will deliver transformational
capabilities to our warfighters. DIU and DARPA for instance are working
on efforts with other DOD research organizations on several projects
intended to shorten the timeline from concept to prototype to
capability.
One of the hardest but simplest things the Department can do to
bridge the issue associated with the ``cost of time'' and overcoming
the ``valley of death'' is that we can incorporate some of the best
practices from our private sector colleagues who have learned that
moving on quickly, away from something that is not working, saves
resources that can be invested in solutions that have better chances of
success. This is not to suggest that the Department shouldn't accept
risk when there is the potential for substantial reward, but it needs
to be done in a smart way and the Department needs to be prepared to
adjust quickly when risk becomes hindrance.
Mr. Fallon. From the R&E vantage point, what are the most
significant challenges in transitioning technologies to your A&S
counterparts to bridge the proverbial ``valley of death''? Is it
authorities, funding, organizational structures, culture?
Dr. Perconti. There are two significant challenges for
transitioning technology from the Research and Engineering (R&E)
community to Acquisition. The first is aligning technology maturation
in R&E with the developmental timeline of the Acquisition Program of
Record. The second is aligning Acquisition funding to take the R&E
developed technology across the valley of death and incorporate it into
the program of record for further development and integration.
Additionally, from the Army science and technology (S&T)
perspective, the challenge to bridge the proverbial ``valley of death''
is multifaceted and includes culture, S&T understanding of Acquisition,
and the Acquisition of S&T by Army Program Executive Offices. From a
culture perspective, the S&T and innovation portfolio requires a
strategic focus on PEO/PM transition points and private sector market
growth opportunities, nested within alignment to Army Modernization
priorities. Further, focusing on Army problems and the future fight,
researchers need to understand how the Army acquires new capability/
warfighter technologies, while balancing research and engineering
decisions on how we fight, how we procure technologies and systems, and
how we sustain equipment. On the receiving end, Acquisition
professionals need to understand how research works, be engaged in the
development process, and relay need and how a technology might be used/
sustained back to the researcher.
Mr. Fallon. What are some specific examples of what you are doing
to bridge the issue of the ``cost of time'' and ``valley of death''?
Dr. Perconti. The Army is leveraging all statutory authorities and
flexibilities to bridge issues relating to the cost of time and valley
of death for the Army's technology acquisition programs.
For instance, for the Technology Maturation Initiative (TMI)
program, the Army has restructured the leadership of the program to be
hands-on on the development, oversight, execution, and transition of
the projects. ASA-ALT is working with Army S&T and the PEOs to partner
every project from inception/building the vision and scope, running the
projects, and transition to ensure engineering decisions are both based
on technology and requirements/changes of the programs of record. The
project teams include the SMEs from both S&T and PEOs and each project
includes both prototype deliverables and a transition commitment (with
planned funding) upon successful evaluation of the prototypes/
deliverables from the TMI project.
TMI is focusing on three categories of projects to bring
technologies across `the valley of death'. The first is Supersystem
projects addressing technologies that span multiple programs of record,
PM/PEOs, or no one program of record owns the requirements of use of
the advanced technology. The second category is emerging technology to
take on higher risk technologies then PEOs/PM are currently planning on
their critical path. These higher risk technologies bring increased
capability and/or lower cost addressing PoRs documented requirements.
The third category is out of cycle/disruptive technologies that quickly
emerged from traditional or non-traditional sources, that can be
applied to solve PoR requirements.
The Army's Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program is
also in the midst of a significant culture and operational pivot,
including instilling a coherent strategic underpinning for the
portfolio, alignment with Army Modernization priorities, focus on PEO/
PM transition and private sector market growth opportunities to build a
mutually-beneficial portfolio (for both the Army and the private
sector). Predictable, reliable, and cost effective pathways for
technology adoption help small businesses focus on PEO-identified
capability gaps, and identify tech insertion points and funding
opportunities to expedite and prioritize transition opportunities to
program executive offices, minimizing the cost of time and valley of
death.
Mr. Fallon. From the R&E vantage point, what are the most
significant challenges in transitioning technologies to your A&S
counterparts to bridge the proverbial ``valley of death''? Is it
authorities, funding, organizational structures, culture?
Ms. Johnson. Successful transition of technology from a field-ready
prototype or demonstration to an operationally relevant, sustainable
capability involves numerous challenges. Contributors to those
challenges include varying expectations between the S&T and program of
record communities relative to what is required for transition; cost of
transition; time required to mature technology; and the fact that some
technology doesn't develop as needed.
S&T investments typically produce a representative model or
prototype system, tested in a relevant environment, but not a
qualified, certified ``production ready'' system, which places
significant risk on a potential transition partner to carry the
relatively low-maturity technology forward with many unknowns. We need
to do a better job of developing viable transition plans that allow
technologies originating from S&T efforts to seamlessly flow into
acquisition program of records. Developing robust transition plans
would increase the likelihood that resources will be made available to
fund the technology maturation efforts needed to increase the
Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and demonstrate the operational
relevance of prototype technologies. If done well, this would reduce
the cost, schedule, and technical risk associated with transition and
thereby increase the probability of successful transition to a program
of record.
Mr. Fallon. What are some specific examples of what you are doing
to bridge the issue of the ``cost of time'' and ``valley of death''?
Ms. Johnson. The DON has several efforts to help address challenges
associated with the ``valley of death.'' One of the efforts is
advancing opportunities of NavalX Tech Bridges. NavalX Tech Bridges
connect, reinforce and sustain acceleration ecosystems across the DON.
Over the past year, this network generated more than 20,000
connections, $50 million in projects such as Prize Challenges and SBIR
projects, and enabled more than 126 different projects in subjects like
artificial intelligence and machine learning; 5G-enabled technologies;
advanced materials and manufacturing; maintenance and sustainment;
autonomy; and data management. NavalX signed 11 partnership
intermediary agreements in order to bring more trusted third parties to
perform due diligence on innovation markets. By guiding, empowering,
and connecting our workforce and growing connections and partnerships
with the private sector, we will enable the naval team to accelerate
emerging technology discovery, development, and delivery.
Also, the DON is decomposing the NAVPLAN to further inform the S&T
communities thereby addressing some of the challenges associated with
the ``valley of death.'' The NAVPLAN is Navy's direction for readiness,
lethality, capacity, and sailor development. The identification of 16
Strategic Objectives ensures alignment and consistent messaging for the
Naval research industrial base and the resource sponsors, offers the
opportunity to move faster, and opens the innovation space. With
alignment comes a more effective and efficient way to meet the
capability needs of the DON.
Rapid evolution of new technologies allows earlier insertion in the
execution schedule. Contracting mechanisms, such as the Other
Transaction Authority (OTA), have expanded the vendor base and
increased its ability to prototype new technologies from the private
sector. It also allows more rapid evaluation of technologies.
Additionally, the Naval Warfare Centers and Naval Research
Laboratory are using their 10 Sec. 2363 funding to demonstrate and
experiment with new technologies before presenting them to programs of
records. We also use events like the Advanced Naval Technology
Exercises (ANTX) to test and evaluate capabilities before technology
insertion. ANTXs are designed to identify technologies that can be
transitioned to the warfighter within 12 to 18 months. Through the
collaboration of industry, academia, and government R&D organizations,
ANTXs provide an environment for the warfighter to assess the
operational utility of technical innovations as well as a forum for
informational exchanges and risk reductions for larger Fleet/USMC
exercises. Most importantly, an ANTX allows innovative and non-
traditional industry partners to demonstrate their technologies and
concepts in near-operational environments and get direct feedback from
naval scientists, engineers, Sailors and Marines. In addition to the
NavalX efforts, which look into the external technical innovation
ecosystem to identify and partner with industry and academia to
accelerate the development and movement of external technologies into
Navy programs, the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) and other Navy labs
are also looking inward to the existing Navy and broader Federal
investments into homegrown technology development. For example, with
over 1200 active patents, a growing array of trade secrets protected
under the authority of Section 801 of Public Law 113-66, and many
additional technologies and capabilities aside from that specific
intellectual property, NRL is looking to find ways to better protect
and leverage the Government's investments in its own strong technical
base. Through those efforts, NRL (and other Navy labs) partner with
programs such as FedTech's Defense Innovation Accelerator, putting
internally-developed technologies in the hands of motivated U.S.
entrepreneurs to assess commercial viability of technologies facing the
``valley of death,'' and if appropriate, partner to move those
technologies into industry to create products and services to benefit
both the U.S. public and the warfighter.
Mr. Fallon. From the R&E vantage point, what are the most
significant challenges in transitioning technologies to your A&S
counterparts to bridge the proverbial ``valley of death''? Is it
authorities, funding, organizational structures, culture?
Ms. Baldwin. The ``valley of death'' between technology and
programs of record is real and is a continuing struggle. Bridging it
requires multiple organizations and stakeholders working
collaboratively in development planning activities that facilitate
transition of promising technologies into programs of record to deliver
warfighting capabilities. Development planning within the Department of
Air Force (DAF) has achieved historic success integrating requirements,
technology, analysis, planning, programming, and acquisition
organizations to inform research, development, test, and engineering
investments with decision quality information and provides a foundation
for future programs of record. The DAF continues to normalize these
processes to facilitate this integral post-laboratory, pre-program of
record development planning work essential to crossing the ``valley of
death.''
Mr. Fallon. What are some specific examples of what you are doing
to bridge the issue of the ``cost of time'' and ``valley of death''?
Ms. Baldwin. The Department of Air Force technology transition
program invests in a portfolio of prototyping and experimentation
initiatives executed by the Strategic Development Planning and
Experimentation (SDPE) office to bridge the ``valley of death.'' For
example:
Global Lightning is integrating new apertures and
communication equipment into a number of specific weapon systems (e.g.,
AC-130, KC135) and assessing operational utility of resilient space-
based highbandwidth connectivity. Based on these operational utility
assessments several additional weapon systems within the Air Force and
the Navy are seeking to integrate this capability.
Rapid Dragon is determining operational utility and
competitive advantage of palletized munitions to deliver mass quickly
to the fight. Real-world data from experimentation activities compress
the time it would normally take to develop and field this capability.
Recent flight test results have drawn interest across the Air Force and
the DOD to develop an initial capability for cargo aircraft, using
existing long-range munitions.
Base Defense experimentation efforts are aimed at
evaluating the operational utility and competitive advantages of
directed energy weapons (DEW) and kinetic effects in a layered defense
against cruise missiles. As a result, DEWs have recently been fielded
in theater to assess real-world applications with Combatant Commands
(COCOMs).
Autonomous Attritable Aircraft Experiment (AAAx) is
determining operational utility and competitive advantage that
artificial intelligence (AI) can provide against peer and near-peer
adversaries. This effort accelerates transition of AI technology across
the ``valley of death'' by directly informing an acquisition strategy
to field these systems with maximized impact