Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

Chairman and Distinguished Committee Members, I am honored to appear before your Committee today to address your questions regarding the management and oversight of the Department's Chemical and Biological Defense Program. I am Dr. Anna Johnson-Winegar, the Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Chemical and Biological Defense.

As requested by the committee, I will address three topics: (1) how DoD's management structure coordinates and integrates the Services chemical and biological defense efforts, (2) specific responsibilities of all DoD agencies involved in the program, and (3) the strategic plan for highlighting performance and results rather than program activities and resources as required by the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, Public Law No. 103-160, Section 1701 (50 USC 1522), mandates the coordination and integration of all Department of Defense chemical and biological (CB) defense programs. This law provides the essential authority to ensure the elimination of unnecessarily redundant programs, to focus funds on DoD and program priorities, and to enhance readiness. The continued support of Congress will ensure the successful implementation of the program.

Public Law 103-160 (Section 1701) directs the Secretary of Defense to take concrete management and oversight actions:

• Assign responsibility for overall coordination and integration of DoD chemical and biological defense (CBD) (non-medical and medical) research, development, and acquisition (RDA) programs to a single office within OSD.
• Exercise oversight of the programs through the defense acquisition board (DAB).
• Improve jointness of the program.
• Designate the army as executive agent for DoD to coordinate and integrate RDA programs of all Services.
• Submit funding requests for CBD RDA in the DoD budget as a separate account. Funding requests may not be included in the service budgets.
• Submit an annual report to congress concerning chemical and biological defense readiness and plans to improve the program.

The Department has successfully implemented all Public Law 103-160 (Sec. 1701) requirements. The implementation of the public law has provided the catalyst for major improvements in the Chemical/Biological Defense Program (CBDP); it has led to increased cost effectiveness, greater jointness, improved execution of the program, and more robust funding for chemical and biological defenses. With a consolidated management structure and continuing emphasis on joint requirements and joint developmental programs, the Department is fielding significant quantities of new and improved equipment.

In my role as the Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Chemical and Biological Defense - DATSD(CBD) - I serve as the focal point within the Department for the CBD Program. In this position, I am responsible for the oversight, coordination and integration of CB defense medical and non-medical acquisition efforts, and for providing the specific guidance for planning, programming, budgeting, and executing CB defense programs.

One of my responsibilities is to serve as the Executive Secretary for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Chemical and Biological (CB) Defense Steering Committee. The OSD CB Defense Steering Committee provides direct oversight of the DoD Chemical and Biological Defense Program in accordance with Public Law 103-160. The CB Defense Steering Committee is composed of the following members (See also figure 1):

(1) Director, Defense Research and Engineering,

(2) Director, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA),

(3) Director, CB Defense Directorate, DTRA, (DTRA(CB)),

(4) Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Chemical and Biological Defense,

(5) Joint Staff (J-5), Deputy Director for Strategy and Policy

In addition, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Threat Reduction participate on the steering committee as non-voting members.

The CB Defense Steering Committee is overseen by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics. The Steering Committee provides the fiscal and programming guidance to the Joint NBC Defense Board (JNBCDB) to develop the Program Objectives Memorandum (POM). The Joint NBC Defense Board forwards POM Preparation Instructions to the subordinate groups, which review the validated requirements and build the POM strategy recommendations.

The CBDP is divided into six commodity areas, with each commodity area being managed by one of the Services in accordance with a Joint Service Agreement, as follows:

Commodity Area Commodity Area Manager

Contamination avoidance Army

Individual protection Marines Corps

Collective protection Navy

Decontamination Air Force

Medical defense Army

Modeling & Simulation Navy

These commodity areas correspond to projects under the budget program elements. There is also a program budget element to support program management and oversight, user testing, and doctrine development in accordance with the Joint Service Agreement and in compliance with Public Law. The Joint Service Integration Group is the principal steering group that oversees the coordination and integration of Service and Commanders-in-Chief (CINCs) requirements and priorities for research, development, test & evaluation (RDT&E) and procurement. The Joint Service Materiel Group is the principal steering group that manages the execution of RDT&E materiel development efforts to ensure that program risk is mitigated across commodity areas, and the ongoing efforts are complementary but not duplicative.

A Medical Program Sub-Panel (MPSP) has been implemented as part of the Joint Service Integration Group. The MPSP is chaired by the Commander, Army Medical Department Center and School (AMEDDC&S). The purpose of the MPSP is to identify medical program needs and requirements as developed by the AMEDDC&S, CINCs, Services, Joint Staff, the Armed Services Biomedical Research Evaluation and Management (ASBREM) Committee, and other users. The MPSP coordinates, integrates, and prioritizes all user requirements input. It provides the consolidated, integrated, and prioritized list of medical CB defense requirements to the Joint Service Integration Group (JSIG). The JSIG then submits an integrated list of medical and non-medical requirements to the JNBCDB. The JSIG provides comments but makes no changes to the list when submitting the medical requirements to the JNBCDB. The JNBCDB and the OSD NBC Defense Steering Committee may make changes to the medical or the non-medical requirements and priorities list.

The Secretary of the Army is the Executive Agent responsible to coordinate, integrate, and review all Services' CB defense requirements and programs. The Secretary has delegated this responsibility to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, who along with the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, co-chairs the Joint NBC Defense Board. The military departments' acquisition organizations execute the individual CB defense programs according to Service and DoD directives.

The Services have established procedures to ensure that individual Service-unique requirements are identified and integrated within a Joint framework for effective development and acquisition of chemical and biological defenses. The Services' acquisition organizations manage individual CB defense efforts in accordance with Service and DoD Directives.

In support of the DoD Chemical and Biological Defense Program, four defense agencies play key roles: (1) the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, (2) the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, (3) the Defense Logistics Agency, and (4) the Defense Intelligence Agency.

The 1997 Defense Reform Initiative established the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). The management, direction and funds execution of the Chemical and Biological Defense Program were transferred to the Chemical/Biological Defense Directorate under DTRA, which plays a key role in the conduct of this program. As part of the management role, the Director, CB Defense Directorate within DTRA (DTRA/CB) serves as the chairman of the Joint Science and Technology Panel for Chemical and Biological Defense. In this role, he coordinates all Service science and technology base activities to ensure they respond to CINC and Service priorities for Joint Future Operational Capabilities. DTRA/CB also provides direction to the DTRA Comptroller, in conjunction with DATSD(CBD), for the execution of CBD funds.

DARPA is charged with seeking breakthrough concepts and technologies. DARPA's Biological Warfare Defense Program complements the DoD CB Defense Program by anticipating threats and developing novel defenses against them, and pursuing the development of technologies with broad applicability against classes of threats. DARPA invests primarily in the early, technology development phases of programs, with rapidly decreasing involvement in the succeeding stages that lead to system development. The CB Defense Program has programmed funding to facilitate the transition to acquisition of any demonstrated DARPA technologies that meet warfighter needs. DARPA is represented on the Joint Science and Technology Panel for Chemical and Biological Defense to ensure coordination of efforts. DARPA coordinates with the Chemical and Biological Defense Program through participation in the Technology Area Review and Assessment, which provides independent scientific review of technology base programs.

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and the Army Materiel Command (AMC) are the item managers, or National Inventory Control Points, for the vast majority of chemical and biological defense items in all four Services. They are responsible for industrial base development, acquisition, and storage of wholesale peacetime and sustainment wartime stocks. They process procurement actions and, if requested, store chemical and biological defense materiel for the Services with funds provided by the Services. The Joint NBC Defense Board, through the Joint Service Materiel Group, provides coordination and integration based upon the input of all Services and CINCs. DLA and AMC will continue to provide services such as raw data collection, inventory control, and a distribution infrastructure. Consumable chemical and biological defense items are managed by the Services and the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) in accordance with Title X responsibilities of the Services and their responsibility to manage their own operations and maintenance funds. Under the provisions of Title X of the FY95 Defense Authorization Act, Service Secretaries are responsible for, and have the authority to conduct, all affairs of their respective departments including supplying, training, and maintaining equipment. For research, development, and acquisition programs, the existence of defense-wide (rather than Service-specific) funding accounts has ensured the joint integration of chemical and biological defense programs. In contrast, no defense-wide funding mechanism exists for the chemical and biological defense logistics area. Each Service must program and budget for the sustainment and acquisition of equipment funded through operations and maintenance (O&M) accounts. Because of this, the joint chemical and biological defense community is limited to tracking the status of DoD chemical and biological defense logistics readiness and sustainment program and making recommendations to correct funding shortfalls.

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) provides the CBDP with continually updated reports and threat assessments tailored to the needs of our program. DIA coordinates with all DoD intelligence organizations and with organization throughout the intelligence community. The CBDP continues to be a threat-driven program, not technology-driven. The threat drives the user to identify requirements, and the capability needed, which in turn forms the basis for requirements for the RDA community. Threat reports provided by DIA assess the impact of weapons on how we fight. These assessment lead to requirements generated to meet user identified materiel shortcomings. Requirements in the form of Mission Needs Statements and Operational Requirement Documents are generated by the joint user community under the leadership of the Joint Service Integration Group. The result is that our programs and technologies are driven by validated threat assessments and user mission requirements, not by technologies.

In its August 1999 report (NSIAD 99-159, 16 Aug 99), the General Accounting Office (GAO) recommended that a performance plan for the CB Defense Program should be developed and based on the outcome-oriented management principles embodied in the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). The initial response to this recommendation was provided in the introduction of the DoD Chemical and Biological Defense Program Annual Report to Congress, March 2000.

The introduction of this report outlines the broad mission, vision, values, and goals of the DoD CBDP. These statements provide linkage with the overall mission and vision of the Department of Defense and provide the framework for the development of a performance plan consistent with GPRA principles. To complete the performance plan, the CBDP is in the process of developing performance goals and performance measures. These goals and measures will be stated along with the development of the CBDP Program Strategy Guidance and incorporated into key planning, programming, and budgeting documents. A Performance Plan will be completed during calendar year 2000 and included in the next annual report to Congress.

Developing the correct performance measures is critical to the development of a successful performance plan. As GAO noted, it may take years to develop a sound set of performance measures (GAO-GGD-96-118, June 1996, p. 23.) Consequently, we view the performance plan as a living document that will be updated annually. The initial plan will focus on establishing explicit and outcome-oriented goals linked to warfighters' ability to survive, fight, and win in a CB environment, and on identifying quantitative or qualitative performance measures that can be used to assess progress toward goal achievement.

The initial performance plan will be limited in scope to providing performance measures for research, development, and acquisition (RDA) programs. The scope will be limited to RDA programs because these are the programs for which the CBDP has direct oversight. Performance measures for RDA programs will supplement program management information on the cost, schedule, and technical performance. In the future, the performance plan will be expanded in scope to incorporate non-RDA CB defense activities that are critical to the success of U.S. forces. These additional activities may include: (1) operations and maintenance funds of the Services, which are used to support fielding and sustainment of selected chemical and biological defense equipment items, training, and doctrine development, and (2) DARPA Biological Warfare Defense research projects. In the future, the performance plans will improve by (1) providing the results of performance measures over time, (2) reviewing existing performance measures and developing improved or more appropriate measures and, (3) demonstrating the relationship between performance measures.

There will be a need for a variety of performance measures within the performance plan. No single measure in any one area may be adequate, and by itself a single performance measure may be uninformative and may be misleading. However, when the measures are viewed together over a period of time, the value of the measures as a management and oversight tool becomes apparent. Within the Chemical and Biological Defense Program, the performance plan may provide an effective management tool to measure - and hence manage - balance among the various areas. Following are areas within chemical and biological defense RDA which performance measure may demonstrate balance.

• Procurement (current force) vs. Advanced Development (near-term force) vs. Science and Technology (Next generation force).

Sample performance measures:

• Total funding within each budget area
• Number of transitions (actual and planned)
• For science and research programs: Independent expert review panel(s) of quality, relevance, accomplishments, and plans.

• Systems integration: Contamination avoidance vs. Protection vs. Force sustainment

Sample performance measures:

• Total funding within each commodity area
• Number of systems fielded within each commodity area
• Medical vs. non-medical programs
• Detection & warning systems vs. individual protective ensembles

• Combined performance measures (using information from the above areas):

Sample performance measures:

• Current chemical detector vs. Future chemical detector -
  Comparison of characteristics:
• Number/types of agents detected
• Programmability for new agents
• Detection sensitivity
• False alarm (rates and causes)
• Time to detect
• Quantification of agent concentration
• Size/weight/volume
• Cost per unit
• Ease of use
• Communication/Alarm
• Schedule/availability

Programs are in place to respond to user needs and shortfalls. Oversight and management of the DoD CB Defense Program continue to improve. Significant progress has been made in implementation of management initiatives required. The Department is on the right track for progress in fielding needed improved CB defense equipment to our forces. The continued support of Congress and implementation of current plans will continue to improve joint force readiness.