[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