A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers

A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers June 1995 OTA-BP-ISS-157 GPO stock #052-003-01420-3 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers, OTA-BP-ISS-157 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, June 1995). oreword he 104th Congress, like its recent predecessors, is grappling with the role of modeling and simulation in defense planning, acquisition, and training, a role that current and contemplated technological develop- ments will intensify. The Department of Defense (DoD) Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), some closely tied to defense modeling and simulation, are also a topic of recurrent congressional concern owing to their unique institutional status. The 104th’s emphasis on pri- vate sector solutions suggests that this Congress in particular will seek to address the FFRDCs. This Office of Technology Assessment Background Paper has been prepared to help Congress do so. The DoD FFRDCs trace their lineage to ad hoc, not-for-profit, university- based organizations created during World War II to address specific technological problems. Some performed studies and analyses on topics such as anti- submarine warfare, but the majority were laboratories engaged in the development of radar, the proximity fuze, and other war-winning weapons in- cluding nuclear weapons. These centers proved useful in bridging the orga- nizational, compensation-related, and cultural gaps between science and the military, and more were created during the Cold War. The laboratories contin- ued to predominate in some respects, but centers devoted to study and analysis grew and entered the public consciousness as “think tanks,” and other centers embarked upon a new role—system integration. In all three capacities, the Federal Contract Research Corporations (FCRCs), as they were then known, provided services that the federal government could neither create in-house or buy in the open market, either because of severe concerns regarding conflict of interest, the safekeeping of competitition-sensitive information, and other hazards of the open marketplace, or simply because the open market did not offer what was needed. In the present day, the for-profit world offers a fuller range of intellectual services than it did at the onset of the Cold War, and the centers’ federal government sponsors are precluded from assigning to an FFRDC work that could be done as effectively outside. Annual ceilings limit the total amount of De- fense department work done in the centers. For these and other reasons there remain only ten DoD FFRDCs, out of over 70 that have existed at one time or another. Yet the FFRDCs, by virtue of their long-term partnership with the federal government and their arm’s length relationship to their sponsors and to iii other businesses alike, continue to play a unique role in today’s rapidly chang- ing national security community. This role includes, but is by no means limited to, the centers’ decades long series of contributions to combat modeling and simulation. This Background Paper is the second of several publications in the OTA’s assessment of defense modeling and simulation, requested during the 103rd Congress by Representatives Ronald V. Dellums (Chairman) and Floyd Spence (Ranking Minority Member) of the House Committee on Armed Ser- vices, Senators Sam Nunn (Chairman) and Strom Thurmond (Ranking Minor- ity Member) of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, and Senators Jeff Bingaman (Chairman) and Bob Smith (Ranking Minority Member) of its Sub- committee on Defense Technology, Acquisition, and Industrial Base. Much seminal work in defense modeling and simulation has been, and is being, con- ducted at FFRDCs. In undertaking this assessment, OTA sought and received the assistance of a broad range of individuals and organizations. We gratefully acknowledge their contributions of time and intellectual effort. OTA also appreciates the coopera- tion and assistance of the Department of Defense. As with all OTA publications, the content of this background paper is the sole responsibility of the Of- fice of Technology Assessment and does not necessarily represent the views of our advisors or reviewers. ROGER C. HERDMAN Director iv dvisory Panel George Rathjens, Chair John Englund Duncan Miller Professor of Political Science President Senior Staff Massachusetts Institute of Analytic Services, Inc. MIT Lincoln Laboratory Technology Joseph P. Fearey Stuart H. Starr Donald Blumenthal Project Scientist for Corps Battle Director of Plans Consultant Simulation The MITRE Corp. Lawrence Livermore National Jet Propulsion Laboratory Laboratory Lawrence D. Stone Amoretta M. Hoeber Senior Vice President Jerome Bracken President Metron, Inc. Adjunct Professor of Operations AMH Consulting Research Jack Thorpe Yale University John D. Kettelle Corporate Vice President Consultant Science Applications Edward C. Brady International Corp. Managing Partner Frank Lanza Strategic Perspectives, Inc. President and Chief Operating Verena S. Vomastic Officer Research Analyst David R. Cheriton Loral Corporation Institute for Defense Analyses Professor of Computer Science Stanford University Creve Maples Jordan Weisman Principal Investigator President Paul K. Davis Sandia National Laboratory Virtual World Entertainment Corporate Research Manager The RAND Corporation Jed Marti ___________________ Senior Computer Scientist *Deceased June 5, 1995. Col. Trevor N. Dupuy* Sarcos Research, Inc. President The Dupuy Institute Note: OTA appreciates and is grateful for the valuable assistance and thoughtful critiques provided by the advisory panel members. The panel does not, however, necessarily approve, disapprove, or endorse this background paper. OTA assumes full responsibility for the background paper and the accuracy of its contents. v roject Staff Peter Blair ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF PRINCIPAL STAFF Assistant Director Jacqueline Robinson Boykin Brian McCue Industry , Commerce, & Office Administrator Project Director International Security Division N. Ellis Lewis Michael Callaham Alan Shaw Administrative Secretary Senior Analyst Program Director International Security and Space Program Don Gallagher Darian Unger Secretary Intern (April - August 1994) CONTRACTORS Christopher Lawrence Arlington, VA Elizabeth Sheley Alexandria, VA Linda Voss Arlington, VA vi C ontents Summaryl A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers 7 ■ FFRDC Nomenclature 10 ■ Categories 12 The Development of the Research Centers 12 ■ Establishment of Operations Research Centers at the End of World War II 14 ■ Establishment of Laboratories at the End of World War II 17 ■ Formalization of FFRDCs 18 ■ Conclusion 20 The Growth of Research Centers from the Korean Conflict to the early 1960s 20 ■ Army 20 ■ Navy 22 ■ Air Force 23 ■ Office of the Secretary of Defense 26 ■ Conclusion 27 Conflict and Transition for the Research Centers in the 1960s to Mid-1970s 27 ■ Social Changes 27 ■ Criticisms of Federal Research Centers 28 ■ Conclusion 33 The Emergence of Unified Policy Regarding DoD FFRDCs 33 The Transition to the Present 35 Profiles of the Existing DoD FFRDCs 37 ■ Study and Analysis Centers 39 ■ Laboratories 44 ■ Engineering and Technical Direction Centers 47 vii APPENDICES A List of Current FFRDCS for FY 1995 49 B Number of Federal Research Centers Each Year 51 C List Of All Identified DoD Federal Research Centers 53 D Ceiling Limits for FFRDCs 57 E Abbreviations 63 REFERENCES 65 viii ummary etween the onset of World War II and 1991, more than 70 centers were created that came to be known collectively as Department of Defense (DoD) Federally Funded Re- search and Development Centers (FFRDCs). The maxi- mum in existence at any one time was 43, in 1972. An ongoing sequence of DoD reviews has affirmed a continuing need for some FFRDCs. Other FFRDCs have been either discontinued because they were no longer required or, far more commonly, decer- tified as FFRDCs and allowed to continue, whether on a not-for- profit basis or not, without the FFRDC mantle. Currently, there are 10 DoD FFRDCs. These can be categorized as study and analysis centers, systems engineering and integration centers, and laboratories. DoD study and analysis FFRDCs have had a special role in combat modeling and simulation. Their history over the past 50 years is the focus of this background paper, which forms part of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) study of defense modeling and simulation. To provide perspective, some information on other DoD FFRDCs is included. FFRDCs, formerly called Federal Contract Research Centers (FCRCs), grew out of the semi-academic laboratories and research groups created by the federal government for defense research during World War II. In some cases the lineage traces all the way back to the war. The Massachusetts Institute of Techno- logy’s (MIT’s) wartime Radiation Laboratory led to the peace- time Lincoln Laboratory, at first a federal research center, then an FCRC, and finally an FFRDC. The Navy’s wartime Operations Research Group eventually turned into the Center for Naval Anal- |1 2 | A History of the Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers yses. In still other cases, the lineage is collateral: very different salary levels and to a wider belief the RAND Corporation and the Institute for De- that federal centers were

Load more