Mr. Robert W. BakerMr. Robert W. BakerApril, 2004April, 2004

Deputy Director,Deputy Director, Plans & Programs, ODDR&EPlans & Programs, ODDR&E

The Defense S&T Budgetand Investment Focus

The Defense S&T Budgetand Investment Focus

DDR&E Priorities for CY 2004

Technical

• Support Transformation

– National Aerospace Initiative, Energy and Power Technologies, Surveillance and Knowledge Systems

– 6 QDR Operational Goals

• Support War on Terrorism

• Expand Outreach to Combatant Commands & Intelligence Community

Non-Technical

• Technology Transition

• National Security S&E Workforce

BA5 System Development & Demonstration ($19.3B)

BA4 Advanced Component Development & Prototypes ($15.3B)

BA3 Advanced Technology Development ($5.3B)BA2 Applied Research ($3.9B)

BA1 Basic Research ($1.3B)

Technology Base(BA1 + 2) = $5.2B)

Science and Technology(6.1 + 6.2 + BA3 = $10.5B)

FY05 RDT&E = $68.9B requested

(Budget Activity 1-7)

15% of RDT&E

BA6 RDT&E Management Support ($3.3B)

BA7 Operational Systems Development ($20.5.B)

Development(BA4 + BA5 = $34.6B)

(BA6 + BA7 = $23.8B)

($B)

FY05 RDT&E Budget Request

.0

.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Army Navy AF DARPA OSD Other DA

Basic Research (6.1) Applied Research (6.2) Adv Tech Dev (6.3)

Total FY05S&T= $10.5B requested

$ B

illio

ns

FY05 Budget Request DoD S&T

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Army Navy Air Force DARPA OSD/WHS

$ in

bill

ion

s

FY04 Req FY04 Appn FY05 PBR

Science & Technology Trends

0

20

40

60

80

100

Ops & Maint Procure/RDT&E S&TPer

cen

t o

f F

Y 2

005

Bu

dg

et R

equ

est

Arm

y

Na

vy

AF

78.6 63.2 55.4 19.6 35.4 43.0 1.8 1.4 1.6

Readiness Modernization Future

Technology InvestmentPercent of Overall Budget Request

Today’s Force

Next Force

Force After Next

Devolvement

• Total FY04 $ devolved to the Services: $333.6M • Devolvement was 3.3% of total DoD S&T FY04 PBR• FY05 Service funding support for devolved programs

remained solid

• To Army• Force Health Protection: $9.8M• DEPSCOR: $9.7M• Historically Black Colleges and Universities: $14.1M• University Research Initiative: $71.6M• Explosive Demilitarization Technology: $9.4M• Total Devolved to Army: $90.8M

Devolvement (Con’t)

• To Navy• University Research Initiative: $70.6M• In House Laboratory Independent Research: $2.2M • Total Devolved to Navy: $72.8M

• To Air Force• High Energy Laser

• Research Initiatives: $12.1M • Applied Research: $41.8M• Advanced Technology Demonstration: $10.9M

• High Performance Computer Modernization: $185.3M• University Research Initiative: $105.2M• Total Devolved to the Air Force: $170.0M

FY05 S&T Budget Facts

• Total FY05 PBR is $10.553B — $322M greater than FY04 request

• Less than FY04 Appropriated Budget of $12.21B

• Notes on FY 05 Budget:• DoD goal was a 2-year budget with program stability

– Only major change to S&T budget was creation of J-UCAS ($284 M in PE0606400D8Z)

• Continued Growth in Joint Experimentation (Navy Pass through; $151M (FY04) to $167M (FY05))

• Services account for 51% of total S&T Dollars (about same as FY04 with out Devolvement)

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

FY

90

FY

91

FY

92

FY

93

FY

94

FY

95

FY

96

FY

97

FY

98

FY

99

FY

00

FY

01

FY

02

FY

03

*

FY

04

FY

05

FY

06

FY

07

FY

08

FY

09

$ in

mil

lio

ns

/ F

Y04

Co

nst

ant*

Appropriated

President’s Budget Request (FY05)

In FY03, includes$323M allocated to Def Emergency Response Fund S&T in a separate DoD transfer account

DoD S&T—Macro Scale

* Then Year FY05-09

DoD S&T Programs as Percentage of S&T Budget

Historical InvestmentPBR only (FY05)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

FY

90

FY

91

FY

92

FY

93

FY

94

FY

95

FY

96

FY

97

FY

98

FY

99

FY

00

FY

01

FY

02

FY

03

*

FY

04

FY

05

FY

06

FY

07

FY

08

FY

09In

ve

stm

en

t a

s %

of

S&

T B

ud

ge

t

6.1 6.2 6.3

%

*FY03 includes DERF & NPR funding

Planning Documents are a Key Element of Strategy Implementation

Integrated Annual Defense S&TPlanning Process

Budget

&

POM

Defense S&T Strategy

Defense S&T Strategy

Basic ResearchPlan

Basic ResearchPlan

Joint WarfightingS&T Plan

Joint WarfightingS&T Plan

Service/Agency S&T Plans

Service/Agency S&T Plans

QuadrennialDefenseReview

QuadrennialDefenseReview

Joint OperationsConcepts

Joint OperationsConcepts

TARA

REVIEW

TARA

REVIEW

*

Defense TechnologyArea Plan

Defense TechnologyArea Plan

Web Site:https://dstp.dtic.mil/

392 DefenseTechnology

Objectives (DTOs)

S&T Strategy and Plans

Defense Science and Technology Defense Science and Technology Strategy and PlansStrategy and Plans

• Defense S&T Strategy (Being Updated)

• Basic Research Plan (6.1) - BRP -(Biennial)

• Defense Technology Area Plan (6.2, 6.3) - DTAP - (Biennial)

• Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan - JWSTP (*Annual)

• Defense Technology Objectives (DTO) Volume that supports JWSTP and DTAP (Annual)

A Strategic plan guiding new technology development built around Basic Research Areas

Basic Research Plan (BRP)

BRP-- A strategic plan to link longer term research to broad, revolutionary warfighter capabilities

• Basic Research Areas

– Physics

– Chemistry

– Mathematics and Computer Science

– Electronics

– Materials Science

– Mechanics

– Terrestrial and Ocean Sciences

– Atmospheric and Space Sciences

– Biological Sciences

– Cognitive and Neural Science

Defense Technology Area Plan (DTAP)

JSFJSF

F-22F-22

• DTAP -- A detailed plan focusing DoD science on militarily significant technologies in specific functional areas

An agreement between the S&T Community and Acquisition Customers

Example: DTO AP.08 Fighter/Attack Propulsion

• Twelve technology focus areas in February 2003 edition:

• Provides a horizontal perspective across Service and Defense Agency efforts, thereby charting total DoD investment for a given technology area

» Air Platforms» Chemical-Biological

Defense» Nuclear Technology» Information Systems» Materials & Processes» Weapons

» BioMedical» Battlespace Environments» Sensors, Electronics and

Electronic Warfare» Space Platforms» Human Systems» Ground & Sea Vehicles

Defense Technology Area Plan

0 200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

2,000,000

Weapons

Space Platforms

Sensors, Electronics, & Electronic Warfare

Battlespace Environments

Nuclear Technology

Materials/Processes

Information Systems Technology

Human Systems

Ground and Sea Vehicles

Chemical/Biological Defense

Biomedical

Air Platforms

PBR 05

$ in Thousands

FY05 Defense Technology Areas

Required annually by Congress on 1 March“a plan for ensuring that the science and technology program of the Department of Defense supports the development of future joint warfighting capabilities identified as priority requirements”

An agreement between Joint Warfightersand S&T Community

JWSTP-- Focus to blend emerging technology into warfighter needs

Joint Warfighting S&T Plan (JWSTP)

February 2003 JWSTP JWCOs

• Information Superiority

• Precision Engagement

• Combat Identification

• Air and Missile Defense

• Military Operations on Urbanized Terrain

• Focused Logistics and Sustainment of Strategic Systems

• Dominant Maneuver

• Electronic Warfare

• Counterproliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

• Combating Terrorism

• Protection of Space Assets

• Hard and Deeply Buried Target Defeat

• Warrior Readiness

Capabilities-Based Planning

“A central objective of the Quadrennial Defense Review was to shift the basis of defense planning from a “threat-based” model that has dominated thinking in the past, to a “capabilities-based” model for the future. This capabilities-based model focuses more on how adversaries might fight, rather than specifically whom the adversary might be or where a war might occur. It recognizes that it is not enough to plan for large conventional wars in distant theaters. Instead the United States must identify the capabilities required to deter and defeat adversaries who will rely on surprise, deception, and asymmetric warfare to achieve their objectives.”

---Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, September 30, 2001

Foreword to the Quadrennial Defense Review Report

Capabilities-Based Planning(Role of Science and Technology)

• Joint Staff instruction for implementing capabilities-based planning– Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System

(JCIDS) - CJCSI 3170.01C, June 24, 2003

“Science and Technology. The priorities of joint warfighting capabilities established through the JCIDS process should serve to inform the science and technology community and focus the development efforts of the community as specified in the Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan.”

• The JCIDS process provides an opportunity for the S&T community to be more involved much earlier in the process

Old

New Process

New

Systems

Requirements

Bottom up, stovepiped

Department

Systems

Requirements

Bottom up, stovepiped

Integrated by Combat. Cdrs.

Joint Operating ConceptsJoint Functional

ConceptsIntegrated Architectures

Strategic Policy Guidance

Joint Capabilities

Service OperatingConcepts/Capabilities

Capabilities DrivenSystems Driven

Joint Functional Concepts

BATTLESPACE AWARENESS

Collect and analyze battlespace information

COMMAND AND CONTROL

Develop alternatives and disseminate orders

FORCE APPLICATION

Cause effects on the enemy

PROTECTION

Prevent an enemy’s effect on us

FOCUSED LOGISTICS

Sustain and support the force

JO TNI

S TA FFCH IE FS OF

Feb. 2004 Joint Warfighting Science & Technology Plan

Joint Integrated

Architecture

Joint Integrated

Architecture

…5 Joint Functional Concepts, Each Representing Both Near

and Far Term Capability Needs

…5 Chapters in JWSTP, Each Aligned With Joint Functional

Concepts

Battlespace Awareness

Command and Control

Force Application

Protection

Focused Logistics

Joint Warfighting

S&T Plan

Joint Warfighting

S&T Plan

PendingDevelopment

PendingDevelopment

DDR&E implemented a new process for FY2005- more closely aligned with Functional Capability Boards

Completely Redone in

FY05 - 5 Chapters Vice 13

Completely Redone in

FY05 - 5 Chapters Vice 13

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Joint FunctionalConcepts

FY05 Funding ($ in millions)

Feb. 2004 JWSTP DTO Funding

Command & Control

Protection

Focused Logistics

Force Application

Battlespace Awareness

Total FY05 Investment: $840M

• Microsats• Multifunctional Sats.

• 2 Stage-to-Orbit• 1st Stage Air Breathing• 2nd Stage Rocket

• Single Stage-to-Orbit

• Suborbital Vehicles• Strategic Strike• Fast Transport• Time Critical Targets

National Aerospace Initiative

Hypersonics

Access To Space

Space Technology

Total NAI Investment Portfolio, PB-05 ($M)

Service/Agency

FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09

Air Force $637 $645 $744 $829 $856

Navy $28 $28 $32 $40 $40

Army $110 $85 $110 $106 $102

DARPA $298 $239 $245 $261 $263

TOTAL $1,073 $997 $1,131 $1,236 $1,261

FY02 FY12

Power Nee

ds

Power and Energy Technologies

POWERGENERATION

• Fuel Cells & Fuel Reforming

• Novel Power

ENERGY STORAGE

• Batteries• Capacitors

POWER MANAGEMENT& CONTROL

• Switching & Conditioning

• Power Transmission & Distribution

• Thermal Management

FUEL CELL

New Operational New Operational CapabilitiesCapabilities

Electric Warship

Warrior

High Power Microwave

Space Based Radar

Hybrid/Electric Combat Vehicle

Electric/Hybrid Weapons

More Electric Aircraft

Electric Warship

Total EPTI Investment Portfolio, PB-05 ($M)

Service/Agency

FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09

Air Force $29 $34 $33 $37 $38

Navy $93 $83 $101 $103 $99

Army $72 $107 $111 $147 $140

DARPA $97 $80 $64 $48 $22

TOTAL $291 $304 $309 $335 $299

Surveillance & Knowledge Systems

• High Bandwidth Communications / Information Assurance

• Sensors and Unmanned vehicles (Robotics, UAVs, etc.)

• Information / Knowledge Management Systems• Cyber Warfare

Total SKS Investment Portfolio, PB-05 ($M)

Service/Agency

FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09

Air Force $254 $276 $306 $296 $303

Navy $215 $227 $229 $217 $221

Army $175 $216 $220 $193 $184

DARPA $342 $306 $332 $348 $354

TOTAL $986 $1025 $1087 $1054 $1062

QDR Operational Goals

• Critical Transformational Capabilities– Protect Bases of Operations– Conduct Information Operations– Project and Sustain US Forces– Deny Enemy Sanctuary– Conduct Space Operations– Leverage Information Technologies

Linking S&T to Transformation Study: Findings Based on FY04 BES

• Approximately 80% of the DoD S&T program is invested in QDR Transformational Operational goals

• Remaining 20% includes Basic Research & other enabling technologies– Advanced Electronics– Materials– Medical Programs– Environmental

Restorations– Dual Use S&T– Life Cycle Extension

Investment in QDR Transformational Operational Goals

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Deny Enemy Sanctuary Project /SustainProtect Bases Leverage ITInfo Systems Space SysBasic Research (unbinned) TOP LINE

$K

Scientist & Engineering PhD’s

15,000

17,000

19,000

21,000

23,000

25,000

27,000

29,000

1992 15-Jun 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

S&E (Produced in US) S&E (US Cit)

Year

EstimatedTotal

Bill

ion

s o

f 87

$

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 20001970196519601955

U.S. Gov. – NonDoD

U.S. Commercial

DoD

E.U. and Japan

Source: Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Technology Capabilities of Non-DoD Providers; June 2000; Data provided by the Organizationfor Economic Cooperation and Development & National Science Foundation

U.S. and Worldwide Research Base

Source: American Physical Society - APS News August/September 2000

TheWarning

66%33%

Physical Review & Submission of Technical Papers

U.S. No Longer Leads the World in the Generation of New Scientific Knowledge

Quick Reaction Special Projects (QRSP)

• Defense Acquisition Challenge Program - Primarily for Industry- Provides opportunities for inserting innovative and cost-saving

technology into acquisition programs - Funds for the test and evaluation of proposed technology, not

implementation

• Technology Transition Initiative – For Government S&T Community - Establishes a Technology Transition Council- Jump starts selected components/subsystems into systems- Bridges the “Valley of Death”

• Quick Reaction Fund – CTTF/Force Protection - Provides flexibility to respond to emergent DoD needs within

budget cycle- Takes advantage of technology breakthroughs in rapidly

evolving technologies- Completion of projects within a 6-12 month period

QRSP Funding Profile (PE 0603826D8Z)

FY05 PBR($ Millions)

FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09

Current PB-05 Funding Request

46.566* 64.389 89.927 90.408 92.111 94.143

Defense Acquisition Challenge

Program

17.793 21.463 29.976 30.136 30.704 31.381

Technology Transition

Initiative

13.251 21.463 29.976 30.136 30.704 31.381

Quick Reaction Fund

15.522

21.463 29.976 30.136 30.704 31.381

* Appropriated Value

Summary

• Strong S&T investment will enable Transformation

• DoD S&T budget remains a “good news” story– Budget requests up about 35% (then year

dollars) under current Administration– DoD S&T program is largely aligned to

support Transformation Operational Goals– S&T Enterprise has reacted quickly to the

Global War on Terrorism