Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee 

on Tactical Air and Land Forces, 

Committee on Armed Services, House 

of Representatives 

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

March 2005 DEFENSE 

MICROELECTRONICS

DOD-Funded 

Facilities Involved in 

Research Prototyping 

or Production 

GAO-05-278 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-278.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Ann CalvaresiBarr at (202) 512-4841 or 

calvaresibarra@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-278, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Tactical Air 

and Land Forces, Committee on Armed 

Services, House of Representatives 

March 2005

DEFENSE MICROELECTRONICS

DOD-Funded Facilities Involved in 

Research Prototyping or Production 

The Department of Defense’s 

(DOD) ability to provide superior 

capabilities to the warfighter is 

dependent on its ability to 

incorporate rapidly evolving, 

cutting-edge microelectronic 

devices into its defense systems. 

While many commercial 

microelectronics advances apply to 

defense systems, DOD has some 

unique microelectronics needs not 

met by industry. Therefore, to 

maintain military superiority, DOD 

has the challenge of exploiting 

state-of-the-art commercial 

microelectronics technology and 

focusing its research investments 

in areas with the highest potential 

return for defense systems. 

Given the importance of advanced 

microelectronics to defense 

systems and the rapid changes in 

these technologies, you asked GAO 

to (1) identify and describe DOD 

and federally funded research and 

development center (FFRDC) 

facilities that receive funding from 

DOD for microelectronics 

production or research prototyping 

and (2) describe how DOD 

coordinates investments in 

microelectronics research. 

At the time of our review, eight DOD and FFRDC facilities that received 

funding from DOD were involved in microelectronics research prototyping 

or production. Three of these facilities focused solely on research; three 

primarily focused on research but had limited production capabilities; and 

two focused solely on production. The research conducted ranged from 

exploring potential applications of new materials in microelectronic devices 

to developing a process to improve the performance and reliability of 

microwave devices. Production efforts generally focus on devices that are 

used in defense systems but not readily obtainable on the commercial 

market, either because DOD’s requirements are unique and highly classified 

or because they are no longer commercially produced. For example, one of 

the two facilities that focuses solely on production acquires process lines 

that commercial firms are abandoning and, through reverse-engineering and 

prototyping, provides DOD with these abandoned devices. During the course 

of GAO’s review, one facility, which produced microelectronic circuits for 

DOD’s Trident program, closed. Officials from the facility told us that 

without Trident program funds, operating the facility became cost 

prohibitive. These circuits are now provided by a commercial supplier. 

Another facility is slated for closure in 2006 due to exorbitant costs for 

producing the next generation of circuits. The classified integrated circuits 

produced by this facility will also be supplied by a commercial supplier. 

DOD has several mechanisms in place aimed at coordinating and planning 

research conducted by the military services and defense agencies. One key 

mechanism is identifying defense technology objectives—the specific 

technology advancements that will be developed or demonstrated across 

multiple joint capabilities and technology areas. As of February 2004, there 

were almost 400 defense technology objectives; five of these were identified 

as microelectronics. DOD also collaborates with industry to review and 

assess special technology areas and make recommendations about future 

electronics and microelectronics research. 

Microelectronics Worker in Clean Room Processing Area 
Page i GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2 

Background 3 

DOD and FFRDC Facilities Receiving DOD Funding Have Varying 

Microelectronics Research and Production Focuses 7 

DOD Has Several Mechanisms for Coordinating Research 12 

Agency Comments 17 

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 19 

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 20 

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 21 

GAO Contact 21 

Acknowledgments 21 

Tables 

Table 1: Summary of DOD and FFRDC Facilities Receiving Funding 

from DOD with Research Prototyping or Production 

Capability through Fiscal Year 2004 11 

Table 2: Defense Reliance Process Planning Documents 13 

Figures 

Figure 1: DOD Budget Authority in Billions, by Major Category for 

Fiscal Year 2005 4 

Figure 2: Recipients of DOD Research and Advanced Technology 

Development Funds for Fiscal Year 2003 5 

Figure 3: Microelectronics Worker in Clean Room Processing Area 6 

Figure 4: DOD and FFRDC Facilities with Microelectronics 

Research Prototyping and/or Production Capabilities That 

Receive Funding From DOD 8 

Figure 5: Defense Reliance Process 14 

Figure 6: Defense Technology Objectives by Technology Area 16 

Contents 
Page ii GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Abbreviations 

DMEA Defense Microelectronics Activity 

DOD Department of Defense 

FFRDC federally funded research and development center 

NSA National Security Agency 

SPAWAR Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command 

S&T science and technology 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
Page 1 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

March 11, 2005 

The Honorable Curt Weldon 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Tactical Air 

 and Land Forces 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Advanced microelectronics are an enabling technology for many U.S. 

defense systems. Satellites and communications equipment, for example, 

are reliant on advanced microelectronics that must meet stringent military 

requirements such as withstanding radiation and extreme-temperature 

environments, operating for longer periods of time, and performing at 

higher power levels. The Department of Defense’s (DOD) ability to provide 

superior capabilities to the warfighter is dependent on its ability to 

incorporate rapidly evolving, cutting-edge microelectronic devices into its 

defense systems. While many commercial advances are applicable to 

defense systems, DOD has some unique microelectronics research and 

production needs not met by industry. Therefore, to maintain military 

superiority, DOD faces the challenge of exploiting state-of-the-art 

commercial microelectronics technology while focusing DOD research 

investments in areas with the highest potential return for defense systems. 

Given the importance of advanced microelectronics to DOD’s defense 

systems and the rapid changes in these technologies, you asked us to 

(1) identify and describe DOD and federally funded research and 

development center (FFRDC)1

 facilities that receive funding from DOD for 

microelectronics production or research prototyping and (2) describe how 

DOD coordinates investments in microelectronics research. 

We visited and toured all DOD and FFRDC facilities identified by DOD as 

having capability to produce or prototype microelectronics, interviewed 

 1

FFRDCs meet some special long-term research or development needs of the government 

and are operated, managed, and/or administered by either a university or consortium of 

universities, other not-for-profit or nonprofit organization, or an industrial firm, as an 

autonomous organization or as an identifiable separate operating unit of a parent 

organization. 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

facility officials, and obtained documentation to describe each facility. We 

interviewed the Executive Staff of the Defense Science and Technology 

Reliance process and other DOD officials and obtained and reviewed 

applicable documentation to determine how DOD coordinates investments 

in microelectronics research. Because microelectronics is a part of a much 

broader area of research, we looked at DOD’s overall research 

coordination in addition to microelectronics-specific areas. We performed 

our review from November 2003 to January 2005 in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. 

At the time of our review, eight DOD or FFRDC facilities that received 

funding from DOD were involved in microelectronics research prototyping 

or production—three focused solely on research, three primarily focused 

on research but had limited production capabilities, and two focused 

solely on production. The research conducted ranged from exploring 

potential applications of nonsilicon materials in microelectronic devices to 

developing a process to improve the performance and reliability of 

microwave devices. Production efforts generally focused on devices that 

are used in defense systems but not readily obtainable on the commercial 

market, either because their requirements are unique and highly classified 

or because they are no longer commercially produced. One facility that 

focused primarily on research but which produced microelectronic 

circuits for DOD’s Trident program closed on October 31, 2004. Officials 

from the facility told us that without the funds from the Trident program, 

operating the facility became cost prohibitive. These circuits are now 

provided by a commercial supplier. Another facility—which produces 

classified integrated circuits—is slated for closure in 2006 because it 

would cost an estimated $1.7 billion to produce the next generation of 

integrated circuits. These circuits will also be supplied by a commercial 

supplier. Additional changes to other facilities could occur pending the 

review of DOD’s Base Realignment and Closure Commission. 

DOD has several mechanisms in place aimed at coordinating and planning 

research conducted by the Air Force, Army, Navy and defense agencies. 

One key mechanism is annually identifying defense technology 

objectives—the specific technology advancements that will be developed 

or demonstrated across multiple joint capabilities and technology areas. 

As of February 2004, there were almost 400 defense technology objectives; 

five of these were identified as microelectronics. DOD also periodically 

collaborates with industry to review and assess special technology areas 

and make recommendations about future electronics and microelectronics 

research. 

Results in Brief 
Page 3 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Microelectronics focuses on the study and manufacture of micro devices, 

such as silicon integrated circuits, which are fabricated in submicron 

dimensions and form the basis of all electronic products. In DOD research, 

microelectronics extends beyond silicon integrated circuits and cuts 

across scientific disciplines such as biological sciences, materials 

sciences, quantum physics, and photonics. DOD research also covers 

many different types of materials, devices, and processes. For example, 

DOD service laboratories conduct research in materials other than silicon, 

such as gallium nitride, indium arsenide, and silicon carbide—materials 

that could provide higher performing or more reliable devices to meet 

DOD needs. 

DOD’s overall budget authority for fiscal year 2005 was approximately 

$400 billion. About $69 billion, or 17 percent of the overall budget, was 

directed toward research and development activities.2

 The vast majority of 

this funding goes to development programs for major systems such as the 

Joint Strike Fighter and the Space Based Infrared System High. About 

$5.2 billion, or about 1.3 percent of the overall budget, was directed 

toward research (see fig. 1). Because DOD tracks funding by funding 

category, not by specific technology area, the microelectronics portion of 

this funding category cannot be broken out. 

 2

Research is the systematic study directed toward fuller scientific knowledge. Development 

is the systematic application of knowledge directed toward the production of useful 

materials, devices, and systems. Development categories range from advanced technology 

development, including prototypes and scaled models, to operational systems 

development. 

Background 
Page 4 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Figure 1: DOD Budget Authority in Billions, by Major Category for Fiscal Year 2005 

DOD research and technology development is conducted by universities, 

DOD laboratories, industry, and other organizations.3

 Universities and 

DOD laboratories are primarily involved in research. Once a new device is 

proven and has potential application for DOD, the technology is 

transferred to industry to further develop and ultimately produce and 

integrate into defense systems. These organizations may collaborate on 

microelectronics projects through various arrangements, such as 

cooperative research and development agreements and collaborative 

technology alliances. Figure 2 shows the distribution of DOD research and 

advanced technology development funding by performing organizations.4

 3

Other organizations include nonprofit institutions, international organizations, and 

FFRDCs. 

4

Fiscal year 2003 is the most recent data available on the distribution of funds by 

organization. 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Dollars in billions

Source: DOD.

106

141

75

64

Research (5.2)

Military

personnel

Operations and

maintenance

Procurement

Research and

development
Page 5 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Figure 2: Recipients of DOD Research and Advanced Technology Development 

Funds for Fiscal Year 2003 

Note: Data from National Science Foundation, Federal Funds for Research and Development, 

Volume 51 (Washington, D.C.: March 2004). 

a

Basic research is directed towards greater understanding of fundamental aspects of phenomena 

related to long-term national security needs without specific applications to processes or products. 

b

Applied research translates promising basic research into solutions for broadly defined military needs 

that are short of system development. 

c

Advanced technology development involves development of subsystems and components and 

efforts to integrate subsystems and components into system prototypes for field experiments and/or 

tests in a simulated environment. 

Microelectronics production and research prototyping require specialized 

equipment and facilities. To prevent flaws in production, microelectronic 

devices are produced in clean rooms where the air is constantly filtered, 

and temperature, humidity, and pressure may be regulated. Clean rooms 

are rated according to a federal standard. For example, a class 1000 clean 

room has no more than 1000 particles larger than 0.5 microns in a cubic 

foot of air, while a class 100 clean room has no more than 100 particles. 

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Dollar in billions

Universities

DOD laboratories

Industry

Other

Source: National Science Foundation.

0.8 0.7

0.2 0.1

0.5

2.0 2.0

0.2 0.3 0.3

1.6

3.2

Basic researcha Applied researchb Advanced 

technology 

developmentc
Page 6 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

The people who work in clean rooms wear special protective clothing that 

prevents workers from contaminating the room (see fig. 3). 

Figure 3: Microelectronics Worker in Clean Room Processing Area 

The equipment found at research facilities and at production facilities are 

similar but are used for different purposes. Because research facilities 

focus on developing new device concepts, materials, and processes, the 

equipment is set up for flexibility because it is used for different 

experiments to prove concepts and validate theories. Once a technology is 

sufficiently developed, a small quantity is prototyped in a production 

environment to prove the design. Production facilities are set up to 

produce higher volumes of microelectronics and have more automation 

and multiple sets of equipment to increase productivity. 

Source: Defense Microelectronic Activity.
Page 7 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

At the time of our review, eight DOD and FFRDC facilities that received 

funding from DOD were involved in microelectronics research prototyping 

or production. Three military facilities focused solely on research; three 

primarily focused on research but had limited production capabilities; and 

two focused solely on production (see fig. 4). 

DOD and FFRDC 

Facilities Receiving 

DOD Funding Have 

Varying 

Microelectronics 

Research and 

Production Focuses 
Page 8 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Figure 4: DOD and FFRDC Facilities with Microelectronics Research Prototyping and/or Production Capabilities That Receive 

Funding From DOD 

Note: MIT Lincoln Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories are FFRDCs. 

The three military facilities provide basic and applied research covering a 

wide spectrum of microelectronic devices and materials. For example, the 

Naval Research Laboratory facility is conducting basic research on the 

potential application of nonsilicon materials in microelectronic devices. 

Through its applied research, the Air Force Research Laboratory facility 

Air Force Research Laboratory

Sensors Directorate

Dayton, Ohio

MIT Lincoln Laboratory

Solid State Division

Lexington, Mass.

National Security Agency

Special Processing Laboratory 

Ft. Meade, Md.

Army Research Laboratory

Sensors and Electron Devices 

Directorate

Adelphi, Md.

Naval Research Laboratory

Electronics Science and Technology 

Division

Washington, D.C.

Sandia National Laboratories

Microelectronics Development 

Laboratory

Albuquerque, N.M.

Space and Naval Warfare Systems 

Command (SPAWAR)

Integrated Circuit Fabrication Facility

San Diego, Calif.

Defense Microelectronics Activity 

(DMEA)

Sacramento, Calif.

Research only

Research with limited production capability

Production only

Source: GAO based on DOD data.
Page 9 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

developed a process to improve the performance and reliability of 

microwave devices needed for military radar and communications 

systems. This technology was ultimately transferred from the Air Force to 

various contractors and used in a number of systems, including the Joint 

Strike Fighter. The Army Research Laboratory facility conducts both basic 

and applied research, primarily on multifunction radiofrequency, 

optoelectronics, and power conversion. 

Three other facilities also conduct research but can produce prototypes or 

limited numbers of devices if commercial sources are not available. For 

example, the Lincoln Laboratory’s facility—which primarily focuses on 

applied research in sensing and signal processing technologies—has 

developed components for the space-based visible sensor because no 

commercial source was available to meet this DOD need.5

 Sandia’s facility 

primarily focuses on research and design of radiation hardened 

microelectronics.6

 However, because the number of commercial producers 

able to meet the radiation requirements of the Department of Energy and 

DOD has dwindled to two suppliers, Sandia maintains limited in-house 

production capability to fill near-term critical needs. According to Sandia 

officials, they have not been called upon to produce microelectronics for 

DOD in recent years. The SPAWAR facility, which recently closed, 

primarily conducted research on radiation-hardened microelectronics, but 

at one time produced these devices for the Navy’s Trident missile system. 

When production of these devices was transferred to a commercial 

supplier, the facility maintained capability to produce microelectronics as 

a back-up to the commercial supplier. 

Two facilities focused only on production—one on leading edge 

technology and one on lagging edge technology.7

 NSA’s microelectronics 

facility focuses on producing cryptographic microelectronics—devices not 

readily obtainable on the commercial market because of their unique and 

highly classified requirements. DMEA fills a unique role within DOD by 

providing solutions to microelectronics that are no longer commercially 

 5

The prototypes were demonstrated on the Midcourse Space Experiment satellite. 

6

Sandia primarily operates for the Department of Energy; in fiscal year 2003, only about 

1 percent of Sandia’s microelectronics research funding came from DOD. 

7

According to DOD officials, “lagging edge” technology generally refers to unprofitable 

process lines for fabricating technologies that are abandoned by commercial firms. 
Page 10 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

available.8 DMEA acquires process lines that commercial firms are 

abandoning and, through reverse-engineering and prototyping, provides 

DOD with these abandoned devices. In some cases, DMEA may produce 

the device. 

The type and complexity of research conducted or device produced 

largely determines a facility’s clean room class and size and its equipment 

replacement costs.9

 For example, to produce cryptographic electronics, 

NSA has a 20,000 square foot class 10 clean room facility. In contrast, the 

Naval Research Laboratory conducts research in a 5,000 square foot class 

100 clean room facility, with some class 10 modules where greater 

cleanliness is required. In general, research does not require state-of-theart equipment to prove concepts, and tools can be purchased one at a time 

and are often second-hand or donated. 

Table 1 summarizes the eight facilities’ microelectronics focus, clean room 

class and size, and equipment replacement costs. 

 8

While DOD typically supports defense systems for many years or decades, 

microelectronics have limited product life cycles. 

9

Replacement costs generally include the equipment for clean room processing, testing, 

characterization, and materials growth used primarily for microelectronics. 
Page 11 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Table 1: Summary of DOD and FFRDC Facilities Receiving Funding from DOD with Research Prototyping or Production 

Capability through Fiscal Year 2004 

Facility Microelectronics focus 

Processing clean 

room (class: size) 

Equipment

 replacement costa

Research only

Air Force Research Laboratory, 

Sensors Directorate 

Dayton, Ohio 

Applied research: sensors 

(radiofrequency, electro-optical); 

automatic target recognition and sensor 

fusion 

100: 6,000 sq. ft. 

10: modules 

$13 million

Army Research Laboratory, Sensors 

and Electron Devices Directorate 

Adelphi, Md. 

Basic and applied research: multifunction 

radiofrequency electronics, 

optoelectronics, power conversion 

100: 10,000 sq. ft. 

10: 4,800 sq. ft. 

$42 million

(includes $9 million for 

materials growth 

equipment)

Naval Research Laboratory, 

Electronics Science and Technology 

Division 

Washington, D.C. 

Basic research: wide bandgap, narrow 

bandgap, group IV materials 

100: 5,000 sq. ft. 

10: modules 

$20-$30 million

Research with limited production capability 

MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Solid State 

Division 

Lexington, Mass. 

Applied research: sensors, signal 

processing 

Production: experimental sensors and 

imagers not commercially available 

100: 10,000 sq. ft. 

10: 8,100 sq. ft. 

$40 million

Sandia National Laboratories 

(Department of Energy), 

Microelectronics Development 

Laboratory 

Albuquerque, N.M. 

Basic and applied research: microscale 

and acoustic sensors, radiation-hardened 

applications 

Production: backup radiation-hardened 

producer to BAE Systems and Honeywellc

1: 12,500 sq. ft. $250 millionb

SPAWAR, Integrated Circuit 

Fabrication Facility (closed October 

31, 2004) 

San Diego, Calif. 

Applied research: radiation-hardened 

circuits, radiofrequency/analog mixed 

signal 

Production: backup radiation-hardened 

producer to Honeywell due to similar 

processes 

100: 7,900 sq. ft. 

10: modules 

$30 million

Production only 

National Security Agency (NSA), 

Special Processing Laboratory 

Fort Meade, Md. 

Production: cryptographic electronics 10: 20,000 sq. ft. $1.7 billiond (phasing out 

the Special Processing 

Laboratory in 2006) 

Defense Microelectronics Activity 

(DMEA) 

Sacramento, Calif. 

Sustainment prototyping and production: 

Provides DOD-wide microelectronics 

solutions for sustainment issues (when 

parts are no longer commercially available) 

100: 5,500 sq. ft. 

5-10: modules 

$12 millione

Source: GAO based on information provided by each facility. 

a

These are self-reported data from each facility. 

b

Higher equipment replacement cost is due to a requirement to maintain production capability. 
Page 12 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

c

BAE Systems and Honeywell recently received capital funding under the Defense Production Act, 

Title III Program to assist in technology upgrades for their fabrication facilities that produce radiationhardened devices. 

d

This figure includes facility and equipment upgrade costs. 

e

DMEA has lower equipment costs because it uses older technologies and buys used, less expensive 

equipment. 

Since we began our review, the SPAWAR facility closed on October 31, 

2004, making Sandia the only backup to the two remaining commercial 

radiation-hardened suppliers to DOD. Officials from the facility told us 

that without funds from the Trident program, operating the facility became 

cost prohibitive. Further, NSA’s microelectronics facility is slated for 

closure in 2006. NSA estimated that it would cost $1.7 billion to upgrade its 

equipment and facility to produce the next generation of integrated 

circuits. NSA is contracting with IBM to take over production of the 

microelectronic devices produced at its facility. Part of the contract costs 

includes security requirements for IBM to produce classified circuits. 

There may be changes to other facilities pending the review of the Base 

Realignment and Closure Commission for 2005.10 As a result of prior 

commission recommendations, the Army constructed a new facility to 

consolidate Army specialized electronics research into one location. 

DOD has several mechanisms in place aimed at coordinating and planning 

research conducted by the Air Force, Army, Navy, and defense agencies. 

In electronics and microelectronics research, DOD works with industry to 

review special technology areas and make recommendations about future 

research. 

DOD’s Defense Reliance process provides the Department with a 

framework to look across science and technology (S&T)11 efforts of the 

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Defense Threat Reduction 

Agency, and the Missile Defense Agency as well as the Army, Navy, and Air 

Force. Each service and defense agency updates its own S&T plans with 

the needs of each organization in mind. The Defense Reliance process is 

 10The Base Realignment and Closure Commission is periodically established to review DOD 

facilities, including laboratories, for potential closure or realignment. The National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Pub. L. No. 107-107 § 3001 (2001)) established the 

commission for 2005. 

11S&T includes basic and applied research and advanced technology development. 

DOD Has Several 

Mechanisms for 

Coordinating 

Research 

Defense Reliance Process 

is the Central Mechanism 

for Coordinating Research 

across DOD Organizations 
Page 13 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

intended to improve coordination and determine if the overall DOD S&T 

vision and strategy are being met. The Defense Science and Technology 

Strategy document is updated periodically to provide a high-level 

description of what the science and technology programs aim to 

accomplish. The Defense Reliance process includes the development of 

three planning documents, which taken together provide a near-, mid-, and 

long-term look at DOD specific research needs (see table 2). 

Table 2: Defense Reliance Process Planning Documents 

Plan Description 

Basic Research 

(Updated biennially) 

Presents DOD’s objectives and investment strategy for DODsponsored basic research performed by universities, industry, 

and service laboratories. 

Joint Warfighting 

Science and 

Technology 

(Updated annually) 

Looks at the applied research, advanced technology 

development, and advanced concept technology 

demonstration portions of the services’ and defense agencies’ 

science and technology plans to ensure that the S&T program 

supports priority future joint warfighting capabilities. 

Defense Technology 

Area 

(Updated biennially) 

Presents DOD’s objectives and the applied research and 

advanced technology development investment strategy for 

technologies critical to DOD acquisition plans, service 

warfighter capabilities, and the Joint Warfighting Science and 

Technology Plan. It also takes a horizontal perspective across 

service and defense agency efforts, thereby charting the total 

DOD investment for a given technology. 

Source: DOD Defense Reliance Executive Staff. 

The planning documents present the DOD S&T vision, strategy, plan, and 

objectives for the planners, programmers, and performers of defense S&T 

and guide the annual preparation of the defense program and budget. 

Figure 5 illustrates the relationship between the planning documents and 

overall reliance process. 
Page 14 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Figure 5: Defense Reliance Process 

Note: Defense technology objectives identify a specific technology advancement that will be 

developed or demonstrated. 

Science and technology efforts are planned and funded through service 

and defense agency plans. To obtain a perspective across DOD, a portion 

of the service and agency efforts are represented in the various Defense 

Reliance planning documents. DOD’s goal is to have about half of the 

investment in service and agency efforts12 represented in defense 

technology objectives.13 According to DOD officials, this goal is aimed at 

balancing flexibility—which services and defense agencies need to pursue 

research that is important to their organizations—with oversight and 

coordination. DOD officials stated that looking at a portion of the efforts 

provide an adequate perspective of the S&T research across the services 

and defense agencies to help ensure the goals of DOD’s S&T strategy are 

 12Efforts pertain to applied research and advanced technology development projects. 

13The actual percentage fluctuates from year to year as defense technology objectives are 

completed and new ones are added. DOD officials estimate that approximately 36 percent 

of its funded projects in 2004 were represented in defense technology objectives. 

Basic

Research

Plan

Budget and 

program 

documents

Technology 

area review

and 

assessments

Defense

Technology 

Area

Plan

Joint 

Warfighting 

S&T Plan

Defense technology objectives

Service/

agency S&T 

plans

Defense

S&T

Strategy

Source: GAO based on DOD data.
Page 15 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

being met. These projects are generally considered high priority, joint 

efforts, or both. 

Two key components in the Defense Reliance process are the defense 

technology objectives and technology area review and assessments. 

Defense technology objectives are intended to guide the focus of DOD’s 

science and technology investments by identifying the following 

• objectives, the specific technology advancements that will be developed or 

demonstrated; 

• payoffs, the specific benefits to the warfighter resulting from the 

technology advancement; 

• challenges, the technical barriers to be overcome; 

• milestones, planned dates for technical accomplishments, including the 

anticipated date of technology availability; 

• metrics, a measurement of anticipated results; 

• customers sponsoring the research; and 

• funding that DOD estimates is needed to achieve the technology 

advancements. 

Both the Joint Warfighting and Defense Technology Area plans are 

comprised of defense technology objectives that are updated annually. In 

its 2004 update, DOD identified 392 defense technology objectives —130 in 

the Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan across five joint 

capabilities, and 262 in the Defense Technology Area Plan across 

12 technology areas. Microelectronics falls within the sensors, electronics, 

and electronic warfare area. There are 40 defense technology objectives in 

this area; five were identified as microelectronics (see fig. 6). However, 

according to DOD officials, research relating to microelectronics is not 

limited to these five defense technology objectives because 

microelectronics is an enabling technology found in many other research 

areas. For example, research in electronic warfare is highly dependent on 

microelectronics. 

Defense Technology Objectives 

and Technology Area Review 

and Assessments 
Page 16 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Figure 6: Defense Technology Objectives by Technology Area 

Defense Technology Area

Plan technology area

Sensors, electronics and 

electronic warfare

Battlespace environments

Biomedical 

Chemical and biological

defense

Ground and sea vehicles

Human systems

Information systems 

technology

Materials/ processes

Nuclear technology

Air platforms

Space platforms

Weapons

Total

Defense 

technology 

objectives as of 

February 2004

40

6

22

28

11

31

35

27

7

16

13

26

262

Sensors, electronics, and

electronic warfare

(Number of defense technology objectives)

Electronics

(20)

Electronic 

warfare

(6)

Sensors

(14)

Radio frequency

 components

(4)

Threat warning

(1)

Radar sensors

(3)

Electro-optical 

technology

(5)

Self-protection

(4)

Electro-optical 

sensors

(2)

Electronic 

integration

technology

(5)

Control

(1)

Acoustic sensors

(3)

Electronic 

materials

(1)

Automatic target 

recognition

(3)

Microelectronics

(5)

Integrated 

platform 

electronics

(3)

1. High-density, radiation-resistant microelectronics

2. Advanced lithography 

3. Narrow-bandgap antimonide-based compound semiconductors 

4. Nanomechanical array signal processors 

5. Revolutionary space electronics technologies

Source: DOD.
Page 17 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

To provide an independent assessment of the planned research, DOD uses 

Technology Area Review and Assessment panels. DOD strives to have a 

majority of the Technology Area Review and Assessment team members 

from outside DOD, including other government agencies, FFRDCs, 

universities, and industry. Most team members are recognized experts in 

their respective research fields. The Technology Area Review and 

Assessment panels assess DOD programs against S&T planning guidance, 

defense technology objectives, affordability, service-unique needs, and 

technology opportunities; and provide their assessments and 

recommendations to the Defense Science and Technology Advisory 

Group. 

For the electronics research area, additional industry and university 

insight is obtained through the Advisory Group on Electron Devices. DOD 

established this advisory group to help formulate a research investment 

strategy by providing ongoing reviews and assessments of governmentsponsored programs in electronics, including microelectronics. The 

advisory group is comprised of experts representing the government, 

industry, and universities, who provide DOD with current knowledge on 

the content and objectives of various programs under way at industry, 

university, and government laboratories. 

Periodically, the advisory group conducts special technology area reviews 

to evaluate the status of an electronics technology for defense 

applications. The advisory group also serves as a bridge between 

electronic system and component developers within DOD by establishing 

regular, periodic interactions with system program offices, industry 

system developers, and government and industry components developers. 

We provided a draft of this report to DOD for review. In its response, DOD 

did not provide specific written or technical comments (see app. II). 

We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional 

committees; the Secretary of Defense; and the Director, Office of 

Management and Budget. We will make copies available to others upon 

request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on the GAO 

Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

Other Coordination 

Mechanisms for 

Electronics Research 

Agency Comments 
Page 18 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Please contact me at (202) 512-4841 if you or your staff has any questions 

concerning this report. Major contributors to this report are listed in 

appendix III. 

Sincerely yours, 

Ann Calvaresi-Barr 

Director 

Acquisition and Sourcing Management 
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Page 19 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

To identify and describe DOD and FFRDC facilities that receive funding 

from DOD for microelectronics production or research prototyping, we 

visited all eight facilities identified by DOD as having capability to produce 

or prototype microelectronics. Using a set of structured questions, we 

interviewed officials at each facility to determine their microelectronics 

focus, clean-room and equipment characteristics, and types of research, 

production and/or research prototyping the facility provides. We also 

obtained and analyzed supporting documents and toured the facilities. We 

did not include in our scope universities or commercial firms that also 

conduct DOD research and have microelectronics facilities. 

Because microelectronics is a part of a much broader area of research, we 

looked at DOD’s overall research coordination in addition to 

microelectronics-specific areas. To determine how DOD coordinates its 

research investments, we interviewed officials from the Executive Staff of 

the Defense Science and Technology Reliance process; the Office of the 

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology (Space 

and Sensor Technology); and the Advisory Group on Electron Devices. We 

also obtained and reviewed DOD’s defense research planningdocuments—including the Basic Research Plan, the Defense Technology 

Area Plan, Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan, and the 

Defense Technology Objectives document. We also met with Defense 

Advanced Research Projects Agency officials to discuss their role in 

sponsoring DOD research and development activities. In addition, at the 

DOD service laboratories that we visited, we obtained information on 

microelectronics related research projects. 

We performed our review from November 2003 to January 2005 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 20 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 
Appendix III: GAO Contact and 

Staff Acknowledgments 

Page 21 GAO-05-278 Defense Microelectronics 

Anne-Marie Lasowski, (202) 512-4146 

In addition to the individual named above, Bradley Terry, Lisa Gardner, 

Karen Sloan, Hai Tran, Brian Eddington, and Steven Pedigo made key 

contributions to this report. 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgments 

(120300) 
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER