Defense Science Board Recommends 3% of DOD Budget
for S&T
The budget cycle never really stops. As Congress voted on the final
FY 2003 Defense Department appropriations bill last week, the Pentagon
continued its work on the FY 2004 request that will go to Congress early
next year. An input to this request may be a recently issued report
by the Defense Science Board reaffirming their earlier recommendation
that 3% of DOD's budget be allocated to S&T spending. Last month,
however, a top Pentagon official cast doubt on using a "percentage
number" for setting S&T spending. This latest study, "The
Defense Science Board 2001 Summer Study on Defense Science and Technology,"
was forwarded to DOD in mid- June, and recently became available. The
DSB is an independent committee that provides advice to the Secretary
of Defense.
This is not the first time the DSB has reviewed how much money DOD
should spend on S&T. A late1990s DSB study recommended that 3.0%
of the department's budget be spent on the 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 programs.
The Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review Report issued last fall made
the same recommendation. The Summer Study reaffirms the 3% level:
"There is no magic formula to determine the optimum
level of S&T funding. Several recent studies have addressed [this]
issue. In its report, 'Defense S&T for the 21st Century' (1998),
the DSB . . . recommended an S&T funding level equivalent to 3
percent of the total DoD budget. This figure is in keeping with the
research and development budgets of various commercial industries,
in terms of the percentage of sales spent on research and development."
The recent Summer Study continues, "The task force agrees that
3 percent is a reasonable funding level. DoD leadership has concurred
in recent testimony to Congress. Furthermore, support appears to exist
within DoD and on Capitol Hill for achieving this level based upon
historical DoD S&T budgets. Therefore the task force recommends
that the Secretary of Defense achieve and sustain the 3 percent S&T
funding level (of top-line DoD budget), recommended by the prior DSB
study."
This 226-page report made many recommendations about improving the
conduct of defense S&T. Nanotechnology was featured as an example
of a promising technology. The study is on the Board's web site at http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/sandt.pdf
At a Pentagon briefing last month Stephen Cambone, Director for Program
Analysis and Evaluation, agreed that S&T investment is a major Administration
priority, and expressed concern that some service branches have sought
to reduce their S&T funding. Cambone sees problems with funding
S&T as a percentage of DOD's budget, which fluctuates in response
to defense procurement. If S&T can be "bought" "at
a more efficient rate," should not the spare dollars go into procurement,
he asked. In addition, Cambone cautioned, a falling defense budget would
lead to a decline in S&T spending. That is when, he stated, S&T
programs should ramp up. "So percentages are tough," Cambone
concluded.
Major decisions about the Pentagon's budget will be made around Thanksgiving.
The last two Bush Administration defense S&T requests were 2.7%
of the DOD request. Congress increased that to 3.2% for FY 2003; last
year the S&T appropriation was 3.1% of the total.
Richard M. Jones
Media and Government Relations Division
American Institute of Physics fyi@aip.org
(301) 209-3095