    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             [H.A.S.C. No. 117-93]

                                    HEARING

                                       ON

                       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                      AND

                        OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED
                                     PROGRAMS

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBER, INNOVATIVE
                     TECHNOLOGIES, AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

                                       ON

                             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

                        INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, DIGITAL

                         DEVELOPMENTS, AND ARTIFICIAL

                         INTELLIGENCE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                  MAY 18, 2022

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    48-653                     WASHINGTON : 2023

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

                    Josh Stiefel, Professional Staff Member
                    Sarah Moxley, Professional Staff Member
                               Payson Ruhl, 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........................................................     3
    Langevin, Hon. James R., a Representative from Rhode Island,
      Chairman, Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and
      Information Systems............................................     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Sherman, John, Chief Information Officer and Acting Chief Digital
      and Artificial Intelligence Officer, Office of the Secretary of
      Defense; Dr. Kelly Fletcher, Principal Deputy Chief Information
      Officer, Office of the Secretary of Defense; and Margie
      Palmieri, Principal Deputy Chief Digital and Artificial
      Intelligence Officer, Office of the Secretary of Defense.......     4

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Langevin, Hon. James R.......................................    23
        Sherman, John................................................    26

    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...................................................    45

                       DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INFORMATION
       TECHNOLOGY, DIGITAL DEVELOPMENTS, AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR
                                FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
           Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and
                                           Information Systems,
                               Washington, DC, Wednesday, May 18, 2022.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:07 a.m., in
    room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. James R.
    Langevin (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN, A REPRESENTATIVE
    FROM RHODE ISLAND, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBER, INNOVATIVE
                 TECHNOLOGIES, AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

        Mr. Langevin. The subcommittee will come to order.
        I want to welcome everyone to today's ``Department of
    Defense Information Technology, Digital Developments, and
    Artificial Intelligence for Fiscal Year 2023'' hearing.
        Some housekeeping things before I give my official opening
    statement. We have obviously convened this as a hybrid hearing,
    so just to--for formality, 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
    attend 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 in
    communication--to communicate with staff regarding technical or
    logistical support issues only.
        Finally, I have designated a committee staff member to, if
    necessary, mute unrecognized members' microphones to cancel any
    inadvertent background noise that may disrupt the proceeding.
        With that, today we are joined by Mr. John Sherman, the DOD
    [Department of Defense] Chief Information Officer [CIO] serving
    concurrently as the interim Chief Digital and Artificial
    Intelligence Officer. He is joined by Ms. Margaret Palmieri,
    the Deputy Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer;
    and Dr. Kelly Fletcher, the Principal Deputy Chief Information
    Officer.
        I welcome our witnesses today.
        The position of the Chief Digital and Artificial
    Intelligence Officer is a new one at the Department of Defense,
    effective as of February. The CDAO will serve as the
    Department's senior official responsible for strengthening,
    integrating data, artificial intelligence, and digital
    solutions, and at its outset assumed responsibility for the
    three preexisting entities that our members will be familiar
    with--the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, or the JAIC;
    the Office of the Chief Data Officer; and the Defense Digital
    Service.
        While Mr. Sherman has appeared before us previously, he did
    so in his CIO capacity, and today marks the inaugural
    appearance of the CDAO in front of Congress.
        For as long as I have served on this committee, there has
    been a bicameral and bipartisan push to elevate the role
    technology plays in the Department and to disassemble the
    artificial stovepipes that exist within the sprawling
    bureaucracy.
        In bringing the CIO and CDAO together today, the committee
    is making clear precisely how important of a role of technology
    plays in warfare and that no single leader can manage it all.
    So from data to operationalizing artificial intelligence, to
    building resilience in our networks, these topics are just too
    vital to be foisted onto a single official's already full
    plate.
        So I here--I applaud the Department's leadership for taking
    this first step in creating the CDAO.
        Next comes that vital pivot when the Department moves from
    concept to execution. And as long--as the saying goes, the
    devil really is in the details. So the lion's share of the CDAO
    duties were previously held by the Chief Information Officer.
    The future success will depend in part on the clear delineation
    of responsibilities between the CIO and the CDAO.
        These are positions whose responsibilities will
    persistently sit adjacent to one another. It is critical that
    these lanes of the road are clear not only to one another, but
    [to] the Department, the rest of the executive branch,
    congressional oversight committees, and our international
    partners and allies.
        In addition to this delineation, I am eager to hear how the
    CDAO will organize its efforts. In inheriting three separate
    entities in the JAIC, Defense Digital Service, and the Chief
    Data Officer, the CDAO is poised to develop exciting new
    constructs and build expertise across teams that have
    previously been siloed.
        For instance, we have seen how critical good data
    principles are to building useful artificial intelligence
    models. Hence, it only stands to reason that the CDAO would be
    thinking about new ways to align the teams that had previously
    worked these problems in separate silos.
        So, finally, I hope to hear how both the CIO and the CDAO
    will be working with the services. While we finally have
    empowered CIOs within each of the military departments, there
    are not--there are not natural parallels for the CDAO. So will
    the CDAO's engagement with the services be directed at their
    CIOs or are there other more suitable positions for the CDAO to
    work with?
        There are many historical comparisons to show that all of
    the best efforts within the Office of the Secretary of Defense
    can be quickly stymied without commensurate efforts by the
    services.
        Again, I am excited to hear about all of these matters and
    more. But before proceeding, I want to remark briefly about Mr.
    Sherman and his CIO team. So here I want to stay that when he
    was with us last year, I put a spotlight on the frustration
    that the subcommittee was dealing with, specifically in
    transparency on the budget request and information technology
    matters with his office.
        So in the year since, under John's leadership, we have seen
    a remarkable transformation when it comes to transparency,
    increased responsiveness to congressional inquiries, and the
    timely delivery of products required by law.
        Too often it falls on Congress to point out the shortfalls
    or failings of the Department of Defense. But when deserved, we
    should also acknowledge its successes, and I commend John and
    his team for its track record over the last year, and I thank
    you for your efforts.
        So with that, I want to thank our witnesses for appearing
    before us today, and I will turn now to Ranking Member Banks
    for his remarks.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Langevin can be found in the
    Appendix on page 23.]

      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, and thank you to the
    witnesses who are here with us today and for joining us on
    short notice.
        Mr. Sherman, as CIO for the Department of Defense, you are
    responsible for a significant number of programs--cloud
    adoption, IT [information technology] networks, data policies,
    spectrum management, cybersecurity, and more. All of these
    things are critical to the warfighter, and we don't take that
    lightly.
        Secure, effective technology can revolutionize how the
    Department conducts its business, but investments in IT
    infrastructure are necessary to do so.
        I am encouraged by the progress that you have made in the
    last year, but I fear there is still a long road ahead. I also
    have been disappointed in the delays to award contracts in the
    Joint Warfighter Cloud Capability program.
        I think the creation of the Chief Digital and Artificial
    Intelligence Officer was a wise move to help the Department
    better use and deploy AI at scale, but the value of that move
    won't be realized for months as Dr. Martell is not yet in
    place. With an enterprise as large and diverse as the DOD,
    modernization and security is a difficult task. You need the
    buy-in not just from the highest levels of the DOD but everyone
    who logs onto a DOD network.
        You also need a capable workforce to acquire and deploy it,
    as well as train the rest of the workforce on how to use it.
    Without strong investments, strategic vision, diligence in
    implementation, and accountability, we risk weakening the
    Department's security, which is unacceptable.
        I look forward to our conversation today about how to
    continue the progress that you have made and to expand upon it.
        And with that, thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you, Ranking Member Banks,
    for your remarks.
        As a point of order, while we have three witnesses joining
    us today, we will have Mr. Sherman deliver opening remarks, and
    during the question portion we will ask that he turn to his
    colleagues as he sees fit for remarks and answers.
        With that, I will turn it over to Mr. Sherman for 5 minutes
    of remarks. Your full statement can be submitted for the
    record, and I ask you to summarize your remarks for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Sherman, please proceed. We need to have your
    microphone on. Mr. Sherman, I can't hear you. Nothing yet.
        Okay. I am going to have to ask staff to intervene here and
    figure out the technical issues here.

    STATEMENT OF JOHN SHERMAN, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER AND ACTING
     CHIEF DIGITAL AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, OFFICE OF
    THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE; DR. KELLY FLETCHER, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY
    CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE;
        AND MARGIE PALMIERI, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY CHIEF DIGITAL AND
      ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF
                                DEFENSE

        Mr. Sherman. Chairman Langevin, all right, it looks like we
    are hot now.
        Mr. Langevin. We have got it. Yes. Please proceed.
        Mr. Sherman. Thank you very much, sir.
        Good morning, Chairman Langevin, Ranking Member Banks, and
    distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the
    opportunity to testify before you today. As you noted, with me
    is Dr. Kelly Fletcher, our Principal Deputy Chief Information
    Officer, who can help provide insight on our resources and
    budget, among other topics; and Ms. Margie Palmieri, our Deputy
    Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer, who will
    help me speak on the standup of this exciting new office.
        Chairman Langevin, I would first like to thank you for your
    past 22 years----
        Mr. Langevin. Mr. Sherman, if you can please pause for a
    minute. We are having some technical difficulties here.
        Mr. Sherman. Okay. We are hot again.
        Chairman Langevin, I would first like to thank you for your
    past 22 years of public service to our Nation. Your leadership
    has positively impacted all of the Department of Defense from
    the civilian workforce to our women and men in uniform.
        I appear before you today as the DOD CIO and the Acting
    CDAO. With your support, we have made strong progress since I
    testified before you last June, and I look forward to updating
    the subcommittee on our achievements and the recent
    establishment of the CDAO.
        Moreover, as we discuss investments today, I want to assure
    you that both the CIO and CDAO budgets are fully informed by
    the President's vision, policies, and strategies, including the
    Interim National Security Strategic Guidance and the
    Department's National Defense Strategy.
        The Department has made significant strides to unlock the
    power of its data, harness AI, and provide digital solutions to
    the joint force. Going forward, there is a need for stronger
    alignment to accelerate decision advantage and generate
    advanced capabilities for our warfighters as we face China as a
    pacing challenge, an increasingly aggressive Russia, and as our
    adversaries adapt to technology innovation.
        In December 2021, Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks
    established a CDAO to serve as the Department's senior official
    responsible for strengthening and integrating data, AI, and
    digital solutions across the defense enterprise. Integrating
    the standalone data and AI organizations into the CDAO is a
    multi-step process that began on the 1st of February and will
    reach full operating capability on the 1st of June.
        While the DOD CIO will continue to lead core infrastructure
    functions, including cybersecurity, cloud, transport, and
    networks, the CDAO will help set requirements and provide
    strategy, policy, and governance of data, analytics, and AI.
    This office will provide enterprise-level infrastructure and
    services that enable efforts to advance adoption of these
    critical areas.
        The CDAO will work closely with our team in CIO and other
    components within the Department to ensure mission success. As
    the CDAO focuses on organizing and carrying out their mission,
    I will continue my attention as a CIO on enterprise-level
    priorities, such as cybersecurity, cloud computing, software
    modernization, and warfighting command, control, and
    communications, or C3.
        We have been able to move forward in these areas through
    robust governance and teamwork, to include with the military
    departments. In cybersecurity, I am committed to ensure
    protection of the Department of Defense Information Network, or
    DODIN, implementing zero trust, hardening the SIPRNet [Secret
    Internet Protocol Router Network], addressing 20-plus years of
    technical data on our systems, securing the defense industrial
    base, and enhancing our cyber and digital talent.
        Of course, cloud computing remains a fundamental component
    of the Department's global IT infrastructure. To that end, I
    will ensure that we provide modern enterprise cloud
    capabilities to enable everything from software modernization
    to enhanced user experience at every classification level.
        Finally, turning to C3, I remain driven to modernize our
    positioning, navigation, and timing, or PNT, capabilities; lead
    the Department on the electromagnetic spectrum operations, or
    EMSO, development; move forward on 5G while ensuring DOD
    equities remain protected, and also providing economic
    opportunities for U.S. industry, strengthening transport, and
    ensuring national leader command capabilities.
        In closing, I thank this subcommittee for its consistent
    and dedicated support in these and countless other areas. It
    would truly not be possible without your strong partnership and
    guidance.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning, and
    we look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Sherman can be found in the
    Appendix on page 26.]
        Mr. Langevin. Very good. Mr. Sherman, thank you very much
    for your remarks.
        With that, we will now proceed with questions. Each member
    shall be recognized for 5 minutes, beginning with myself.
        With that, Mr. Sherman, can you speak to the efforts
    underway, not only to define the role and responsibilities of
    the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer but also
    to account for and revise historical policies and directives
    that may designate or outline roles for the CIO, which may now
    more appropriately be handled by the CDAO.
        Mr. Sherman. Yes, sir. I will start with this, and then
    turn to Ms. Palmieri for some amplifying comments. We have had
    a robust effort underway since IOC on the 1st of February to
    bring the new organization together, identifying leaders,
    ensuring employees know where they go in the new structure, and
    really getting the most synergy out of this new AI, data,
    digital services alignment together with this.
        A lot of work, sir, has gone into this in terms of defining
    roles, getting our workflow together, and using real-world
    opportunities such as with the operation supporting the Ukraine
    crisis to bring things like the Advana team to bear, to
    supporting U.S. Transportation Command and U.S. European
    Command. So real-world operations to drive the way ahead on
    that.
        Additionally, working with the Director of Administration
    and Management, or DA&M, at the Pentagon under Mr. Mike Donley,
    former SECAF [Secretary of the Air Force], doing all of the
    pick and shovel work, updating the policies, updating the
    paperwork that identified CIO previously on some areas, to put
    CDAO in the right parts of the documentation, and then also
    looking at things like the finances in terms of some of the
    former historical relationship with the Joint AI Center and
    DISA [Defense Information Systems Agency], and so on, and
    making sure we do the blocking and tackling to align and
    empower the new CDAO organization.
        And, sir, with that, I would like to turn to Ms. Palmieri
    briefly, and hopefully your mic is hot there. If not, I will
    give you mine.
        Ms. Palmieri. Let's see. Yep. Thank you, sir, for the
    question. As part of the CDAO standup, we have established a
    governance working group, and they are looking through over 40
    different foundational documents that reference either the
    preexisting organizations before CDAO or other roles and
    responsibilities that CDAO is taking over. And so we are
    looking at holistically and looking at governance specifically
    in all the different working groups in the Department.
        I think we found about 21 that had oversight on some of our
    issues. We have been able to streamline those in the near term
    and take them down, actually reducing the level of bureaucracy
    around some of these issues and getting some more clarity on
    them.
        Thanks.
        Mr. Langevin. Very good. Thank you.
        So in my opening remarks, I noted questions about how the
    DOD CIO and the CDAO will collaborate together and deconflict
    their work with the military services. So can you elaborate on
    that more? Can you speak to your initial thoughts on this
    matter, and specifically who the right interlocutors are within
    the military departments for the CDAO?
        And, you know, if it is the services' CIOs, then how can
    the CIO and the CDAO proactively think through how to minimize
    the potential for OSD overload given the service CIO's
    relatively small size?
        Mr. Sherman. Yes, sir. So as a first step is to capitalize
    on the very well-established relationships we already have
    through CIO channels, as you note, sir, with the services and
    MILDEP [military department] CIOs, to be able to use our
    established governance processes, the teaming we have,
    certainly not to overload them, but to use the very well-
    established processes we have in place. Matter of fact, we were
    doing something this week on coordinating some material with
    the CIOs.
        The other thing, the Chief Data Officers who work for the
    service CIOs have a very established relationship on the data
    side of things through data governance councils that we can tap
    into.
        Now, with the AI aspect, this is probably an area that we
    need to reinforce. There is a lot of AI going on in the
    services under the military departments, that we have some
    established governance there, much of which goes through the
    CIOs but not all of it, and that is an opportunity for us and
    we need to tighten that up as well.
        So, in a nutshell, working through the CIO so far has given
    us a successful ingress point. But when Dr. Martell gets here,
    working with Ms. Palmieri, these are the--this is an area that,
    as we really get up on our skis with this, need to refine a
    bit, ensuring, as you note, sir, that we don't overload a
    process and that we are getting to the right humans in each of
    the components to get the answers we need on whether it is
    operations or responsible AI or unlocking the power of the
    data.
        Margie, would you add anything to that?
        Ms. Palmieri. No. I think that hits it very accurately. I
    think the other piece about this is, you know, mission owners
    are across the Department and not just within the data or CIO
    lane. And so a lot of the work that Mr. Sherman talked about
    that we have been able to do in support of Ukraine has been
    with the Joint Staff, J4, and the logistics community or with
    EUCOM's [U.S. European Command's] team on logistics.
        And so the partnerships with the mission owners is also
    very critical, and I think we will--we have gotten great
    support from people that want to use data and analytics as we
    work the broader issues through the CDAO and CIO channels.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you for those answers.
        I am going to hold. I have additional questions. Hopefully
    we will get to a second round or I will submit them for the
    record.
        But for right now, I want to yield to Ranking Member Banks
    for his questions.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few years ago,
    Vladimir Putin proclaimed that ``Artificial intelligence is the
    future. Whoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become
    the ruler of the world.''
        While there have been some useful but limited AI programs,
    such as Project Maven, that have gotten to some scale and now
    transition, the DOD still needs a scalable enterprise
    capability for the integrated deployment of AI technologies for
    joint warfighting missions.
        Ms. Palmieri, what are your plans as Deputy CDAO to
    accelerate, scale, and transition an AI-enabled warfighting
    capability?
        Ms. Palmieri. Yes, sir. Thanks for the question. Part of
    the [inaudible] of the CDAO is to look at both the enabling
    infrastructure, the analytic tools, and the tools that people
    will use to develop AI, and then the responsible AI ethics and
    testing and evaluation processes to make sure that the United
    States is doing this in accordance with established ethical
    considerations.
        So much of our budget in the fiscal year 2023 cycle and
    fiscal year 2022 cycle is focused on bringing that core
    enabling enterprise capability, so that includes the computing
    platform, the tools, and then the data policies that will
    enable us to access different data from across the Department
    to really bring that together and enable either analytics or
    ultimately artificial intelligence to be able to support
    decisionmakers with decision advantage.
        And so one of the key initiatives under that is the
    Secretary--the Deputy Secretary of Defense's AI and Data
    Acceleration initiative, or AIDA. This is an area where we have
    put significant investment in both talent and money to go out
    to the combatant commanders and some of the principal staff
    assistants inside of the Department in charge with business
    operations and support them with experts, digital experts, data
    experts, as well as bringing some of our established
    capabilities.
        In Advana, this is our business health system, and in
    Project Maven on the AI side, and scale that up to combatant
    commanders more broadly, share those lessons across COCOMs
    [combatant commands], and then bring that back to identify the
    barriers that we have to enable across the Department.
        Mr. Banks. Very good.
        Mr. Sherman, as I mentioned in my opening statement, I am
    concerned by the delays in awarding contracts for the JWCC. Has
    the Department considered using a rolling date for compliance
    for providers instead of one set date, the end of December?
        Mr. Sherman. No, sir. We have not considered a rolling
    date, but I can assure you getting this right and getting this
    done by the end of this calendar year is among my very top
    priorities.
        Sir, I think you are referencing we had--when I rolled this
    out, when I was the acting last year, that we were aiming for
    April for an award date, but part of this--and I will own this
    here--was we haven't done this at this scale, and when we had--
    did the initial review, that we had four vendors make the cut,
    that we had estimated too quickly on the date.
        So December, working with the team between our team in CIO,
    DISA, Washington Headquarters Services, with support from
    Acquisition and Sustainment, with all of the advice on the
    procurement experts, and the way we are proceeding with the
    awards aiming for December, but, sir, we recognize this is
    critically important. We appreciate the committee's support
    here recognizing with the JEDI [Joint Enterprise Defense
    Infrastructure] cancellation and how important this is for the
    CDAO efforts, for Joint All-Domain Command and Control, and so
    much of what we are doing for warfighting.
        So, sir, I will assure you we are getting--we are getting
    after this with alacrity.
        Mr. Banks. Can you talk a little bit more about the task
    order process that you envision for JWCC?
        Mr. Sherman. Yes, sir. The way that we are going to do
    this, there will have to be on each of--depending upon how many
    vendors do make the cut on this, to be able to have--there will
    be individual task orders that will have to go in, but the
    upshot of what we did learn from JEDI was a process that our
    Hosting and Compute Center team, HACC, up at the DISA
    headquarters came up with to be able to expedite this, so users
    do not have to take an incredibly long time to compete task
    orders against whichever kind of best athlete cloud they want
    to use.
        It is called ATAT [Account Tracking and Automation Tool],
    is what they call it. So we do have an established process
    there to use these IDIQ [indefinite delivery, indefinite
    quantity] contracts, but to be able to have expedited task
    orders to depend on what the workload and mission is for that,
    sir.
        Mr. Banks. Okay. Just a couple more questions. Can you
    provide an example of a commercial technology solution that the
    Department has adopted that has been successful?
        Mr. Sherman. I think we have had plenty. I think a lot of
    is in the cybersecurity realm, sir. I will start there, but I
    could go to others, such as with Comply-to-Connect, such as
    what we are doing for endpoint security, such as what we are
    doing on software-defined networks, not only for security
    matters but on areas like 5G.
        I think there is a number of areas on command and control I
    could go into on spectrum hitting on that that have been
    commercial technologies we have been able to use, and cloud
    already exists extensively in the Department at the service
    level, such as with Cloud One, cARMY, Black Pearl in the Navy.
    There has been a lot of commercial innovation there, and as
    well as with software, quite a bit of commercial software usage
    across the Department.
        My job as CIO is not only to encourage and cultivate that
    but to make sure we can make this work at an enterprise level,
    such as with JWCC, such as supporting CDAO. But, sir, there
    have been a number of key technologies we have rapidly
    integrated and employed for our warfighter and other support.
        Mr. Banks. Just one final question. Our national security
    depends on resilience across the defense industrial base [DIB].
    I know you know that because your office has rightfully taken
    on an increased role in this arena. How are you leveraging AI
    to grapple with the size and scale of the DIB attack surface
    and the speed at which we need to identify and remediate
    vulnerabilities?
        Mr. Sherman. So that is one area that with the CDAO now
    standing up that I want to work with Dr. Martell and work with
    Ms. Palmieri on. I can tell you at an unclassified level there
    are--some of this is we work with our colleagues at CYBERCOM
    [U.S. Cyber Command] and NSA [National Security Agency]
    employing AI capabilities to be able to get after some of this.
        But this is an area, as we look at big data platform, as we
    look across an enterprise--now you are talking about DIB, not
    the DODIN, so I need to make sure I focus my remarks on that.
    These are areas that we look at the 220,000 companies in the
    DIB, and particularly as we look at cyber maturity model
    certification employment, I want to make this understandable
    and usable, particularly to small and medium businesses.
        So while not [inaudible], we are looking at areas to where
    we can possibly use some government cloud capabilities to be
    able to put data in from these companies if we can do this
    properly and with the proprietary considerations to be able to
    help these companies out where we can run analytics and lessen
    the burden on the small and medium-sized companies out across
    the United States and not make this too cumbersome on them.
        So this is an area we need to work on, sir, but it is
    definitely on my radar to do so.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank the Ranking Member.
        The chair now recognizes Mr. Moulton for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Moulton. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like
    to pick up with Ms. Palmieri. In answering your questions to--
    the questions of Ranking Member Banks, you mentioned that when
    you bring forward new AI capabilities you have to ensure their
    employment meets our ethical norms and standards. This is, of
    course, exactly what we would expect.
        But do you believe that our adversaries adhere to the same
    ethical standards?
        Ms. Palmieri. Yes, sir. Thanks. Not in all cases. We know
    that there are nations that do not respect the privacy of
    citizens and do not necessarily use that information that they
    get in a way that meets our ethical principles.
        Our five ethical principles are that we use AI responsibly;
    that we take steps for it to be equitable, which means we
    minimize unintended consequences associated with our
    capabilities; that our methods are traceable. This means that
    we can audit them. We know how the AI was developed. It is
    reliable, that there are well-defined use cases and we know
    what the AI is good at and what it is not good at, and we have
    a testing and assurance cycle associated with that. And that it
    is governable, and that we know that it does its intended
    functions, and if it doesn't do those intended functions, we
    can either deactivate the system or take it offline.
        Those are very important to us. We are working on a
    responsible AI strategy right now in the last few weeks of
    coordination across the Department, where we are going to take
    those principles and actually put them into implementation
    action and so----
        Mr. Moulton. I will tell you that, I mean, as fellow
    Americans, we certainly agree with those ethical standards, and
    this is what we would expect of you and of us. But I think it
    is patently obvious to all of us that China and Russia, our
    principal adversaries, are not going to adhere to these
    standards. They don't, and we can see this playing out in
    Ukraine every day.
        And, therefore, their AI won't as well. I am confident that
    their AI is being trained to do heinous things or at the very
    least pay little regard for civilian casualties and collateral
    damage, which will almost certainly make their AI more deadly
    and effective.
        Everything you just described is the right thing to do, but
    there are constraints on these AI weapons. So in an AI versus
    AI battle, they will have a massive advantage because they
    won't constrain their weapons in the ethical ways we do. So the
    point that I am making is that we have to do work on developing
    an international agreement to codify these standards, so it is
    not just us who are following them, and then we at least have
    some hope of ensuring our adversaries' worst instincts are at
    least to some degree constrained.
        Now, not every nation abides by the Geneva Convention, but
    we know across the world that it does matter and it does help.
    So just as when the world came to terms with the horrors of
    chemical weapons in World War I, and the Geneva Convention was
    the result, I think this is a second Geneva Convention moment.
        Now this is not your responsibility. I get that this is
    the--basically falls under the State Department. But I don't
    think enough people in State appreciate how important this is.
    And as one of the leaders in our government on the use and
    employment of AI, I would strongly encourage you to help mount
    an effort to work on this broader problem.
        Do you have any comments on that?
        Ms. Palmieri. Yes, sir. Absolutely. In fact, we have a
    partnership for defense organization right now with 16 nations.
    They include our Five Eyes partners, many of our partners out
    of NATO, and some others like Israel, Finland, Sweden. This is
    absolutely an interest area of all of those nations that we
    have started with, but absolutely take your point on a broader
    effort, and that is worth pursuing. Thanks.
        Mr. Moulton. I mean, this is one of the principal
    recommendations that came out of the Future of Defense Task
    Force that Representative--Ranking Member Banks and I co-
    chaired.
        And, look, ultimately, if you do this right, we are not
    only doing the right thing in terms of humanity, but we are
    figuring out ways that we do this to our advantage, because I
    think, as I have just described, we are at a disadvantage right
    now because our adversaries will not be so constrained.
        I had another question coming from the results and the
    recommendations of our Future of Defense Task Force report on
    the need to update our acquisition process for this new era of
    technology where we are not just acquiring hardware but
    acquiring software. And our acquisition system is really not
    built to acquire software. It is a different animal.
        We won't have time to answer that question right now, but
    that is something that I would like to take for the record and
    look forward to your response.
        Mr. Chairman, with that I yield back.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Mr. Moulton.
        Mr. Franklin is now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our
    witnesses for being here today. Actually, my line of
    questioning was going to be right along with what
    Representative Moulton was starting to get into there with the
    acquisition process.
        And, Mr. Sherman, I notice in your testimony you talked
    about the CDAO offering five decentralized procurement vehicles
    for rapid AI delivery and purchasing of key AI services and
    enabling tools, a mouthful but sounds like a lot of new ways to
    try to improve this process.
        We know, as has already been noted, AI is so integral to
    the future, our future success, it cuts across all areas of
    DOD, but the struggle is, how do we innovate fast enough to
    keep up with the threat? And we don't have--traditionally, our
    acquisition system just is not tailored to that.
        I would love for you to take the time that I have here to--
    you and your team--maybe expand on these five different
    vehicles and help us understand that this is a good thing and
    we are not just creating more bureaucracy.
        And particularly for small businesses, because I speak with
    a lot of them who have great ideas, but it is just so difficult
    to navigate the process that by the time they could get
    something to market it has already passed them by.
        Mr. Sherman. Sir, I will start with that and then turn to
    Ms. Palmieri and Dr. Fletcher for amplifying comments. Software
    acquisition and working on that, of course, it is both within
    the CIO and CDAO realm to be a driver for that, but it really
    is going to be a team effort, working with Acquisition and
    Sustainment, Research and Engineering, with our colleagues in
    the military departments and services. But to use the
    authorities that Congress has already granted us in terms of
    how we can use kind of different approaches to this, but also
    how we think differently about employing software, acquiring
    software, developing software ourselves, moving to development,
    security operations, DevSecOps, approaches, leveraging open
    source software, and moving at pace; as you have noted, sir, to
    not have historic ways of coming at this but to be able to move
    at high speeds.
        And then, really, what I see sitting up at OSD, there is so
    much innovation occurring within the Department, in the
    military services, at the commands, to jump on that, not try to
    recreate the will but elevate that. And there has been so many
    great examples we have seen.
        Out at the very tip of the spear, too, out in--out at the
    sub-unified commands, and so on. So that is one thing we are
    trying to do is not over-govern this but take these great
    examples of this.
        And looking from the acquisition optics, sir, as I
    mentioned earlier on Ranking Member Banks' question about small
    and medium businesses, this keeps me up a lot, making sure not
    to take away from the ``bigs,'' but those companies out--all
    throughout the United States and not to have high barriers of
    entry, where we can get their products, their capabilities into
    the system quickly. So this is a priority for me as CIO.
        If I can, I would like to turn to Ms. Palmieri briefly from
    the CDAO optic on the five areas, sir, you were noting.
        Margie.
        Ms. Palmieri. Yes, sir. First of all, thank you very much
    for section 808 in the NDAA [National Defense Authorization
    Act] that gave acquisition authority to the JAIC. That is now
    inherited by CDAO. We owe an implementation plan to Congress
    which will come this summer on how we are going to go after
    that.
        But the five vehicles that the JAIC created were
    specifically focused on the areas of data and AI, all with an
    agile approach, and this idea that organizations outside of
    CDAO could come and leverage these contracts, these enterprise
    contracts.
        And so real briefly, the first one is at Tradewinds. It is
    another transaction agreement which gives us a very agile
    approach to focus on mission capabilities. We have about 63
    percent of those awardees right now that are either small
    business or non-traditional defense contractors.
        There is another one for data readiness, that's
    specifically on data engineers, data labelers. This one is
    really great because you can customize the different
    performance work statements based off of your needs, and we see
    about 50 percent of those awardees right now being small
    business or non-traditional.
        There is a vehicle on test and evaluation that provides
    simplified acquisition procedures for test and evaluation, and
    we have about, you know, 40 or so--about 50 percent small
    business versus large business there.
        We have a contract vehicle for acquiring contract talent to
    support AI development, six vendors on that one. It is
    relatively small now--all small businesses--but we have a lot
    of interest there, and so we are looking at how to scale up
    that vehicle.
        And then the last one is a commercial solutions offering,
    which is generally no money involved, but it allows businesses
    across the board to come in and pilot or demo their
    capabilities on government data, which is a huge asset to small
    companies. The government is able to provide feedback on their
    capabilities, and they get access to our data to test out their
    ideas.
        We have about 4,000 different companies that are eligible
    for those types of contracts, and then we are doing more with
    outreach and partnering with non-profits to try to do a better
    set of market research on who is out there, so we are not just
    going to the same vendors.
        Mr. Franklin. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Mr. Franklin.
        Mr. Moore is now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Moore. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, witnesses, for
    being here. Thanks for your context. I think we can all agree
    that artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming our world,
    even sometimes without our knowledge. Industry is on the cusp
    of some very key scientific breakthroughs. These will disrupt
    our daily lives, and disruption in a good way should be
    celebrated.
        Autonomous vehicles, smart homes, all this type of stuff,
    this is going to be ubiquitous. And while much of it gives us
    something to look forward to, there is an inherent risk that
    can be mitigated if the United States--if we are the global
    leader in AI, we can--we can mitigate the risk that is
    essentially going to come from this. And just don't trust other
    nations to properly fill this role.
        Mr. Sherman and Ms. Palmieri, welcome comments from either
    of you. America's greatest strategic advantage against near-
    peer competition, one of the major advantages is that we remain
    a country that--the world's number one destination for
    immigrants and a strong immigrant workforce. As long as
    talented people want to come here, and to innovate and start
    their businesses, the U.S. can't be beat.
        While primarily technology focused organizations, the CIO
    and CDAO require that people are proficient in policy,
    economics, ethics, data science, and the law. How do both
    organizations ensure they are optimally staffed, considering
    increased competition in recruitment and retention?
        Mr. Sherman. Thank you, sir. I will start with that, and
    then I will ask Ms. Palmieri to chime in.
        So, looking at digital and cyber talent writ large, which
    all is kind of coming together on this, both between CIO and
    CDAO, as I mentioned to this committee last year, recognizing
    talent is so critical. I launched a new cyber talent strategy,
    which we are aiming to publish in the August/September
    timeframe of this year, which will have a close nexus to CDAO.
        It is going to help us think differently about not only
    using the authorities this committee and the rest of Congress
    has granted to us on areas like cyber excepted service and also
    capitalizing on what we have done to think about our current
    workforce through the defense cyber workforce framework and
    using our 8140 policy series and doing all of this blocking and
    tackling behind the scenes work we need to do.
        But also, as we have a more dynamic workforce that is going
    to come in and out of government in a way that may not go to a
    30-year career, how do we compete with industry partners with
    whom we need to have a partnership on to be able to have
    digital advantage to very sophisticated adversaries as you note
    in a near-peer and peer competitor fight.
        So that is what we are doing from the CIO side. CDAO
    specifically is going to be looking at AI, data, and digital
    talent in that regard, so it is going to be a close partnership
    with CIO.
        So for that I would like to turn to Ms. Palmieri to talk to
    what we are doing on the CDAO front.
        Ms. Palmieri. Sure. Absolutely. So the CDAO, as it has
    brought together these different organizations across the
    Department, is about 200 to 300--it is about 250 people total,
    more than half of whom are technical in some way. They have
    digital services expertise, computer scientists, or some level
    of AI or data science background.
        And so I am actually very excited about where we are right
    now as an organization and the talent that we have in that
    organization. On the military side as well, we are leveraging
    existing communities like the operational research community,
    which is heavily data and analytic focused, but then we also
    have an element of our team that is specifically looking at
    talent management for the entire Department and how we go after
    talent management there, things like how we first train and
    educate our people to be, you know, data literate, but then
    also develop skills and developing analytic and AI skills as
    well.
        But then, also, how do we track them throughout the
    Department and work that into promotions and the things that we
    value for opportunities for leadership. Thanks.
        Mr. Moore. And can you also touch on, does the DOD and the
    intelligence community have adequate information about--
    obviously, we are in a--we are in an open setting, so it is not
    a classified setting, but do we have adequate information about
    the state of foreign military AI applications and the ways that
    those could be harmful to U.S. national security?
        And are we--and, more importantly, are we investing in ways
    to defend us and defend our Nation against these applications?
        Mr. Sherman. Sir, at a high level, as you noted, an
    unclassified session, I can say that working with our
    colleagues, and Intelligence and Security, in I&S under
    Honorable Moultrie, and with the intelligence community, this
    does remain a key topic and robustly focused on. That is what I
    can say with that.
        And in terms of working with adversary--or not working
    with, but defending against adversary capabilities, that is
    something that is very much on our radar, both on the CDAO
    side, but as I implement on the CIO side, things like zero
    trust cybersecurity and getting after technical debt that is
    critical, that is very much something we focus on.
        And our partnership with the intelligence community, for
    example, working with my colleague General Nakasone at NSA and
    CYBERCOM, is something that is very prominent in our
    discussion. So we do work on this a lot together.
        Mr. Moore. Awesome. Thank you.
        Thank you, Chairman.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
        Is Mr. Kim there?
        Okay. So that is our first round of questioning. I am going
    to go to a second round in concurrence with the ranking member.
    So with that, let me recognize myself.
        With regards to structuring the CDAO, can you speak to
    initial views on possible constructs, how much is notional at
    this point, particularly with the incoming CDAO? Mr. Martell is
    reportedly only a few, you know, weeks from starting, what are
    your thoughts on that?
        Mr. Sherman. Sir, our organization is pretty solid at this
    point. And, actually, it doesn't look terribly dissimilar from
    CIO where we have deputy CIOs. We have--in addition to Ms.
    Palmieri as the Principal Deputy CDAO, we have five deputy
    CDAOs organized functionally on areas like acquisition, policy,
    enterprise capability, warfighting support, and digital
    services. Those are the five, as well as a separate unit under
    Dr. Pinelis just looking at responsible AI, artificial
    intelligence.
        And then this is bringing these organizations together--CDO
    [Chief Data Officer], the Joint AI Center, Defense Digital
    Services--and then organizing functionally on these areas. We
    have already begun to do this with the officer, the employees,
    going to their new integrated units to get after some of the
    things Ms. Palmieri talked about on support to the Ukraine
    crisis.
        So actually, sir, we have a pretty well-honed organization
    now. We are still working on some final pieces of that, but the
    organization has come together. And, again, the point that Dr.
    Martell and Ms. Palmieri will be working is creating a team of
    teams.
        It is a new organization, breaking down some institutional
    barriers we had, bringing folks together, and we are seeing
    this, for example, with the AI and Data Accelerator, the AIDA,
    teams that Ms. Palmieri noted, supporting the commands and also
    back at the Pentagon.
        So the wheels are turning on this, and we do have a very
    strong foundation for the new organization.
        Margie, anything you would like to add?
        Ms. Palmieri. No. I think that is great. Thanks.
        Mr. Sherman. Thank you.
        Mr. Langevin. Very good. So I know we talked about cloud in
    some of the line of questions that you touched on. Is there
    anything else you want to do in terms of give us some sense of
    where we are to creating and shifting over to an enterprise
    cloud system, obviously, since, you know, the JEDI failure to
    execute, you know, to come up with a final decision there and
    now we are moving into something hopefully similar but without
    the challenges and protests and all of that. But anything you
    want to add there?
        Mr. Sherman. Sir, only that--just to amplify what I said.
    This is so critical. Sir, you brought this up from here and
    your position. We have gotten that message loud and clear. And
    also, not only would--not having protests, but a multi-cloud/
    multi-vendor approach, which is more consistent with industry
    standard at this time.
        And then, once we have the procurement completed, using it,
    using the capabilities, using the tasking mechanism that
    Ranking Member Banks asked me about for the task orders, and
    really having something that spans the entire enterprise, from
    the continental United States to the tactical edge, and having
    that compute capability to support warfighting needs as well as
    AI and other needs on that with world-class capabilities from
    U.S. vendors, which I really do see as a national advantage for
    the United States, whether it's in an INDOPACOM [U.S. Indo-
    Pacific Command] scenario or EUCOM or anywhere else, to get
    this in place and really figure out all the capabilities.
        And this will be a little bit of a journey of learning,
    same as our intelligence community partners are doing in their
    multi-cloud environment with whom we are working closely on
    lessons learned and how that is working. So this is critically
    important, sir.
        Mr. Langevin. Good. Well, it is a higher priority for me
    and the subcommittee, and I know it is for you. So I look
    forward to following the progress on this over time.
        If I could, over the last few years, the cybersecurity
    maturation model certification, or CMMC, received significant
    public attention. However, in the last year, we haven't heard
    much about the program's development. So can you please update
    us on where CMMC stands and how it is progressing?
        Mr. Sherman. Yes, sir. I will make one brief comment, and
    then I would like to turn to Dr. Fletcher because she has been
    instrumental in helping guide this. We realize we are at what
    is called CMMC 2.0, which we launched last fall after the
    initial startup of this.
        One of my main goals as CIO is to make sure this is
    rationalized, understandable, and back to the earlier points
    that Representative Franklin and others brought up about small
    and medium businesses all across the U.S., to make this
    understandable, so this is not overly burdensome, but also is
    able to protect the controlled unclassified information, CUI
    data, in contracts.
        Dr. Fletcher, would you like to add to that, please?
        Dr. Fletcher. Yes, sure. Thank you, sir. So right now we
    are reworking the rules. So there is a lot of work happening,
    but it is behind the scenes. Those rules will go to OMB [Office
    of Management and Budget], and then they will be available for
    public comment in March of 2023. So folks will have the
    opportunity to say, you know, this is onerous or this is about
    right. And then we may see CMMC in contracts as early as summer
    of 2023.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Langevin. Thank you, Dr. Fletcher. Appreciate that.
        So for my final question, I am concerned that the
    Department is not adequately focusing on electromagnetic
    spectrum operations. I think it's a concern for many. The
    fiscal year 2022--I am sorry, the 2022 NDAA required the
    Department to designate a senior official to be responsible for
    the electromagnetic spectrum superiority strategies
    implementation plan.
        Can you tell us, what is the status of that implementation
    plan and the leadership structure? And what barriers do you see
    to the strategy's successful implementations?
        Mr. Sherman. Yes, sir. So within CIO, we took the baton on
    this from Joint Staff last fall in terms of being the overall
    integrator and lead in the Department. But as you note, EMSO,
    electromagnetic spectrum operations, is so critical for near-
    peer and peer competitor fights, as we potentially have to
    ready our forces to fight in highly contested environments--
    that we haven't had to do for many years--and also, bringing
    together the electronic warfare community and the spectrum
    operations community into a very necessary integration.
        So to your question, what we are doing from our Deputy CIO
    for Command and Control, Communications, as the overarching
    lead on this, to make sure we are looking at governance,
    funding, standards, very important as we are working with this,
    but this is a team of team efforts, very diverse here.
        Working with the services, the weapons platform leaders and
    owners, and then, for example, working with U.S. Strategic
    Command. I was just talking to Admiral Richard about this very
    topic last week about how we need to be hand in glove working
    together, given his combatant command responsibility on this.
        So, sir, we have moved out on this. We are setting the
    governance structures in place and making sure that we have all
    the different wheels turning. This will--this necessarily can't
    be hypercentralized, but we do need someone to quarterback
    this, which will be us. But it is going to require extensive
    coordination, to include with Joint Staff as well, to make sure
    all of these different pieces--and, again, the marriage of EW
    [electronic warfare] and spectrum operations--which I don't
    think we have really ever quite done at this level--get fully
    implemented.
        Mr. Langevin. Very good. I appreciate that, and thank you
    for those answers and the testimony here today. Those are the
    questions that I had at this point.
        So with that, let me just thank you, Mr. Sherman, Ms.
    Palmieri, and Dr. Fletcher. Appreciate the work you are doing
    on behalf of the men and women of DOD and the warfighting
    effort. We are working hard together on these issues. Look
    forward to future and further conversation and engagements.
        And with that, I believe that there are no further
    questions from members. If that is correct, I will stop here.
    And as of now, the hearing stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:02 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  May 18, 2022

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                  May 18, 2022

    =======================================================================
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                                  May 18, 2022

    =======================================================================

                        QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. FALLON

        Mr. Fallon. How are the offices of the CIO and CDAO working to
    expand access to 5G on military installations? What can be done to
    speed up these efforts?
        Mr. Sherman, Dr. Fletcher, and Ms. Palmieri. The office of the CIO
    is currently working with OUSD R&E in their lead role for 5G to
    transition the responsibility of implementation oversight to the Office
    of the CIO by 1 October 2023, in accordance with FY21 NDAA Section 224.
    The Office of the CIO is engaged in the DOD 5G Cross Functional Team
    (CFT) as the principal organization responsible for 5G Policy and
    Enterprise Infrastructure Programs to deploy secure and interoperable
    5G Wireless Networking across all DOD departments and agencies. The
    coordinated and concurrent actions that would have the greatest impact
    to reduce the timeline to establish 5G communications on military
    installations would be to consider increased funding to the Services
    for transition and implementation.

                                      [all]