Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 1 Summary The Office of Naval Research (ONR) administers the science and technology (S&T) programs of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. In 2001, ONR designated naval engineering (NE) as a National Naval Responsibility (NNR). This designation stemmed from a recognition that the NE enterprise is essential to innovations in naval platform capabilities and warrants special attention because no other governmental organization or commercial interest could be expected to continually support all of the NE research and development (R&D) needed to sustain and further many naval-specific capabilities and interests. The NNR-NE program was established to ensure that the Navy has a robust and focused research community with access to the experimental facilities and other R&D infrastructure needed to advance the state of the art and to generate an adequate pipeline of new scientists and engineers in the S&T disciplines essential to the capabilities and performance of the Navyâs fleet and operational forces. To ensure that the research, workforce pipeline, and R&D infrastructure investments of each of its NNR programs are aligned with evolving Navy needs and have the appropriate completeness, breadth, and depth, ONR requires that each program undergo an independent, external review every 5 years. This study report is the product of a second independent review of the NNR-NE. The first one, also conducted by a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (the National Academies) committee, was completed in 2011 while the NNR-NE was still in its formative stages. In the interim, much has changed in the S&T landscape relevant to the multidisciplinary NE enterprise and in the operational environment and demands of the Navy for future ships and other sea platforms critical to ensuring the nationâs maritime superiority. In commissioning this study, ONR officials expressed a desire for succinct, actionable advice to inform the changes that will be needed in the NNR-NE to achieve its mission in this fast-evolving S&T environment and in response to new operational paradigms. They emphasized the importance of ensuring that the NNR-NE furthers the priorities established in the Naval R&D Framework, which demands technology-focused, integrated research portfolios that account for the future force attributes necessary for the Navy and the Marine Corps. The Naval R&D Framework and other strategic documents of the Department of the Navy emphasize the advancement of naval platforms and systems of platformsânot only shipsâin accordance with the Navyâs interest in a distributed operational concept. These new mission realities were characterized by the ONR officials who briefed the committee as providing a charter for change to the NNR-NE. The practice of naval engineering permeates the full naval enterprise, from the earliest stages of research and development to the design and construction of the sea platforms overseen by the Navy systems commands, the execution by industry and naval depots of midlife platform repair and modernization, and the end of life disposal process. The NNR-NE consists of several program areas intended to ensure that adequate investments are made and sustained for advancing the basic research, talented and skilled workforce, and R&D infrastructure needed to sustain and strengthen this practice and to meet the future Navyâs critical requirements for the integration of platforms and platform systems. In asking for this review of the unclassified elements of its program, ONR specifically asked whether the NNR-NEâs scope and performance, as pursued through the programâs three âpillarsââinvestments in research, the current and future workforce, and R&D infrastructureâare consistent with the current practice of naval
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 2 engineering and responsive to the Navyâs critical NE needs related to both its traditional and future manned and unmanned sea platforms. Informed by its discussions with ONR officials and its review of the Naval R&D Framework, the study committee came to appreciate how the demands on the NNR-NE have been changing and expanding as the scope of naval engineering has been growing. U.S. naval capability has always lied in the platforms that are deployed and the personnel that design, build, and operate them. Each new or upgraded platform creates different challenges and demands for innovation expansion, for instance, to reduce manning, provide quieter and faster operations, accommodate new weapon and sensory systems concepts, and accelerate design, build, and acquisition cycles. As the Navy migrates to a more heterogeneous, distributed force, it will require multiple platform typesâconsisting of large and small surface combatants and unmanned vehiclesâthat can collaborate and integrate into deployed capabilities. In this distributed and networked architecture, platforms will remain central to the operational and combat effectiveness of the Navy, but create demands for innovations such as those that will increase modularity, reconfigurability, and connectivity. The NE enterprise will be expected to deliver these innovations by exploiting technological developments from across the S&T spectrum. In short, the committee came to recognize that even as the definition of platform changes and expands, the platform remains central to naval superiority and will be the forcing function for innovations that will depend increasingly on developments from an expanding array of S&T fields. Thus, even though the NE enterprise is inherently multidisciplinary, it will need to become even more inclusive of, and attentive to, developments across the S&T spectrum. It will also need to become the integrator of these developments for NE applications. The NNR-NE, in turn, will need to ensure that the Navyâs unique and critical platform requirements are met through a combination of support for NE research that would not otherwise get done, a robust and diverse NE workforce and R&D infrastructure, and the translation and integration of applicable advancements from other technological domains. . Through the series of actions recommended next, the committee proposes positioning the NNR-NE to become the driver of future naval force capability, guided by a strategic framework for making choices about how best to pursue the programâs three pillarsâsupporting research, the workforce, and R&D infrastructure. That strategic framework, outlined in Box S-1 and explained below, calls for ONR to make explicit choices about the naval-critical capabilities that the NNR-NE should focus on, or âown,â and how it should exercise this ownership through the combined functions of leading, leveraging, and monitoring across the three pillars. BOX S-1 Lead, Leverage, and Monitor: A Strategy for NNR-NEâs Mission Fulfillment Leadâwhere the National Naval Responsibility for Naval Engineering (NNR-NE) program assumes lead responsibility for ensuring the vitality, performance, and desired outcomes of the NE field in meeting naval-unique interests and capabilities. This responsibility would include, but not be limited to, providing intellectual leadership in particular science and technology (S&T) subjects that are vital to the Navyâs NE needs.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 3 Leverageâwhere NNR-NE relies on partners within and outside the Office of Naval Research to advance the state of the art to a point where the program can adapt the technical advances to meet NE interests or even contribute to an expansion in the state of the art for application to the NE enterprise. Leveraging activities may range from co- funding S&T activity to program coordination. Monitorâwhere NNR-NE maintains âsituational awarenessâ of the emerging state of the art across a broad front. Not a passive task, monitoring can be viewed as involving the periodic study of emergent areas of technical interest to consider whether they warrant Lead or Leverage investments. SUPPORTING AND INTEGRATING NAVAL-CRITICAL RESEARCH There is a growing imperative for expanding the NNR-NEâs reach to S&T areas outside the traditional expanse of naval engineering. The rapidly changing S&T landscape is radically transforming what is possible and needed for the future Navy. Because the NNR-NE can only address a slice of the technological spectrum through its direct investments in research, a strategic approach is needed for expanding the programâs reach and thrust. For this purpose, the committee recommends that ONR adopt a âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework for prioritizing, programming, and integrating NNR-NEâs research investments. This framework should be used to not only guide decisions about critical naval engineering interests that require NNR-NEâs direct research support, but also to identify S&T from outside the program that can be leveraged to meet these critical interests. Application of this framework implies that the NNR-NE exercise leadership not only by ensuring that its naval-critical âleadâ capabilities are being furthered by its R&D investments, but also by being attuned to developments in an array of S&T domains and leveraging relevant technology from some and monitoring progress in others. Through its leveraging function, the program may make targeted R&D investments to increase the naval applicability of S&T developments from outside the traditional NE domain. Its role in monitoring S&T developments implies a level of engagement and attention that is sufficient to know whether an early-stage and potentially disruptive development may be a candidate for such targeted, leveraging investments. In this regard, leveraging and monitoring should not be viewed as secondary activities, but as functions central to the programâs mission. When applied to S&T topics, the âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework can provide a basis for setting priorities within the NNR-NE S&T portfolio. It can also guide ONRâs choices about when and how to change the content, reach, and connections of its NNR-NE S&T portfolio to meet changing platform innovation needs and concepts. Indeed, as it periodically reviews its S&T portfolio to make these choices, NNR-NE should adopt a platform-centric approach to identifying innovation needs, challenges, and opportunities. Informed by the promise of the technologies that it leads, leverages, and monitors, NNR-NE should be anchored by a strategic vision of naval platforms 20 to 30 years out. This expanded concept of NNR-NE leadership, however, should not imply that the program will no longer assume a central role in sustaining basic research in the naval-critical, core areas. While many technical areas will have a bearing on a naval-critical NE capability, in
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 4 only a few of them can, or should, the program own the responsibility to shape and sponsor the basic research needed to further that capability. The committee therefore recommends that NNR-NE maintain a strong focus on basic research in its lead core areas. This NE research should continue to be viewed as the key building block for the future Navy. ONR has long recognized the vital role of NNR-NE in supporting a portfolio of basic research, which is now focused on the following six technical areas relevant to naval-critical capabilities and interests: ï· advanced naval power, ï· hydrodynamics, ï· propulsors, ï· ship structural reliability, ï· control and automation, and ï· ship design. However, in considering these six technical areas according to the âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework, the committee observed that one of them, âControl and Automation,â consists largely of tests being performed on an automated surface vessel without supporting any basic research or unique new S&T. Additionally, the committee began to question whether an emphasis on âautomationâ could detract from the programâs attentiveness to developments from the more encompassing and promising field of âautonomy.â In the case of autonomy, however, a great deal of relevant S&T is being advanced in other domains, making it a strong candidate for NNR-NE leveraging and monitoring for opportunities to further the naval-critical capability of platform control. The array of research needs relevant to platform control, however, extends beyond an interest in autonomy, and is accompanied by a host of research needs related to the Navyâs critical interest in platform maneuverability (e.g., to understand the complex coupled platform motions when performing dynamic maneuvers and control in challenging environments). Accordingly, the committee believes that ONR should replace âControl and Automationâ as a core area of NNR-NE research with âPlatform Control and Maneuverability,â a more encompassing interest and one that requires research in many technical areas in addition to automation and autonomy. While autonomy is a technical area vital to the future of naval operations, considerable research investments are being made in autonomous systems and related fields, such as robotics, elsewhere within the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) (including other parts of ONR) and the commercial sector. In this instance, it would be appropriate for NNR-NE to track and seek opportunities to leverage these other efforts to further the Navyâs critical interest in platform control and maneuverability. Finally, in considering the platform as the forcing function, or driver, of innovation, the committee began to question whether the six technical areas that currently comprise the NNR- NEâs core are being pursued in a manner that is sufficiently integrated at the platform level and with an adequate focus on the affordability that will be needed for innovation deployment. Even as the six specific elements of NNR-NEâs core research portfolio may change over time, the need to integrate at the platform level and the prospect of affordability will remain ongoing concerns. Therefore, the committee recommends that âplatform innovations integration and affordabilityâ be added as a new core NNR-NE S&T area for the specific purpose of
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 5 creating and managing broad platform and multi-platform challenges and designed to identify S&T gaps and opportunities across the technology spectrum. BUILDING THE FUTURE NAVAL ENGINEERING WORKFORCE Being the lead in furthering naval-critical NE capabilities also implies that NNR-NE is responsible for sustaining and developing the S&T workforce and research infrastructure needed for those capabilities, as the three âpillarsâ must function together to ensure that the programâs NE responsibilities are met. Therefore, ONR should apply the âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework for guiding its NNR-NE education and workforce development priorities and programs. The NNR-NEâs mission is to ensure that the NE workforce possesses the requisite talent and skills to meet the future Navyâs NE needs. The program envisages NE workforce development along a continuum from grade school to college and university programs to professional development. Its efforts to build the NE workforce are therefore designed to be holistic and progressive, starting with inspiring science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) interest in grades Kâ12, providing naval engineering experiential learning opportunities, encouraging training and education in community and 4-year colleges, supporting graduate studies and university research, and providing professional development opportunities. The NNR-NEâs efforts to promote naval engineering may be paying dividends, as evidenced by the growing number of graduate and post-doctoral students supported by the program. Indeed, this positive development could have its roots in NNR-NEâs efforts to interest Kâ12 students in STEM and to inspire undergraduate students to pursue advanced degrees in naval engineering. However, it may also be reflective of the broader upward trend in the number of individuals entering relevant STEM fields to create a larger body of interested and capable candidates for NNR-NE support. Unfortunately, impact metrics are not available for assessing the validity of inferences about the long-term effects and value of the NNR-NEâs STEM and experiential learning investments. Therefore, to inform its investment choices, ONR should perform periodic assessments of the effectiveness of NNR-NE workforce development programs, such as faculty summer fellowships, student internships, and centers for innovation, in connecting faculty and students with Navy challenges and problems. The assessments should be supported by reporting metrics that track career outcomes and paths. Because naval engineering is multidisciplinary, it shares the same workforce pipeline as many other technical and engineering fields. Faced with high demand for needed engineering and technical expertise, and competition for skilled workers by many other S&T domains, the NE enterprise cannot become complacent. It must look for opportunities to expand and target its reach to attract students and workers who remain underrepresented in STEM fields. For this reason, NNR-NE should emphasize the importance of engaging individuals from underrepresented groups to maximize the talent pool when developing and expanding programs aimed at inspiring students and recruiting workers to the naval engineering enterprise. The recruitment and retention of NE professionals can be further challenged by the need for security clearances for new hires. The difficulty of recruiting in an environment that demands security clearances is a DOD-wide problem; however, ONR may be able to ease the problem, at
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 6 least marginally, for recruiting to the NE enterprise. ONR should consider innovative means to expedite the final stages of recruitment of STEM professionals engaged in naval engineering, such as by providing funding for newly hired personnel to train and work productively on unclassified projects while awaiting facility access clearances. Even when its workforce-related budget limits the scope of efforts it can lead, the NNR- NE can make targeted investments to capitalize on the education and workforce programs of others, making them aligned with and relevant to the needs of the NE enterprise. As a logical place to start, ONR should use NNR-NE funds to leverage the STEM education and workforce programs that already exist in the U.S. Department of the Navy and the U.S. Department of Defense, such as the National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship and Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation Scholarship-for- Service Programs, as a means of increasing participation by naval engineers and naval architects in accordance with the importance of these disciplines to the Navy and DOD. SUSTAINING A VITAL R&D INFRASTRUCTURE Success in furthering the R&D âpillarâ of the NNR-NEâas well as the S&T workforce development pillarârequires an infrastructure of experimental facilities and modeling and simulation resources. NNR-NE investments in the maintenance, invigoration, and advancement of this physical and computational infrastructure can therefore be critical to meeting the future Navyâs unique NE needs. However, because NNR-NE does not own, manage, or program the capital investments made in much of this infrastructure, especially the large-scale experimental facilities, it must be astute in finding ways to ensure its availability and suitability for conducting and integrating needed R&D. Accordingly, ONR should use the âlead, leverage, monitorâ framework to guide NNR-NEâs efforts to ensure the availability and suitability of the naval engineering R&D infrastructure. NE R&D continues to require experimental infrastructure, even as the requisite types of infrastructure may be changing. This report identifies a number of challenges that NNR-NE faces in ensuring the availability and suitability of the needed infrastructure, including cost and access constraints. While NNR-NE supports the design and development of R&D infrastructure at the smaller scale (often in university settings), the nature of NE research can often require large- scale infrastructure with unique capabilities. Comprehensive solutions will therefore be needed to overcome the cost and access constraints of large-scale facilities and explore ways to leverage the many other existing experimental assets both within and outside the NE domain. As a first step in the development of such solutions, ONR should undertake a thorough inventory and assessment of naval engineering testing infrastructure needs and capabilities, large and small, in the Navy, elsewhere in DOD, at universities, in the private sector, and at institutions abroad. The inventory and assessment should consider options for making greater use of relevant testing infrastructure from within and outside DOD, including the assets of other government agencies. ONR needs to be systematic in its choices about when and how it should lead, leverage, and monitor for the purpose of ensuring that the adequate experimental infrastructure is available for the NE enterprise. Accordingly, ONR should develop a comprehensive plan for increasing the availability and utilization of needed S&T experimental infrastructure, including making large-scale facilities more affordable to NNR-NE researchers and smaller-scale facilities less redundant and more open to shared use.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 7 ENSURING THE PROGRAMâS ENDURING SUCCESS Many of the findings from this review reflect positively on ONRâs execution of the NNR-NE, suggesting that a number of individual program elements are performing as intended to sustain and develop the nationâs NE capacity for the benefit of the Navy. At the same time, the review surfaced challenges to the longer-term health of the NE enterprise and the impact of the NNR- NE programânotably, technology developments and innovations across a wide range of S&T fields have evolved the NE enterprise; increased competition for STEM talent in a technology- driven economy threatens the quality and quantity of the future NE workforce; and the U.S.- based experimental infrastructure for NE is at risk of eroding due to a smaller number of researchers having to bear the high-cost of operating and maintaining physical facilities. These challenges will create important choices for ONR as it prioritizes its NNR-NE research, workforce, and infrastructure investments. Carried out for each of the three pillars (see Table S-1), the committee found the âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework to be promising as a guide for strategic choices, and believes the same analytic tool can, and should, be used by ONR for making choices both within and across the NNR-NE portfolio. Used in this way, the framework can signal to NNR-NE program leaders when they should reallocate resources among the three pillars and also when they should seek high-level support from ONR to supplement pillar resources. The committee therefore recommends that ONR adopt a âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework for the strategic programming, prioritization, and integration of NNR-NE investments both within and across the research, workforce, and R&D infrastructure pillars. TABLE S-1 Example Application of the âLead, Leverage, and Monitorâ Framework Within and Across the Three Pillars of the National Naval ResponsibilitiesâNaval Engineering Program (NNR-NE) Lead Leverage Monitor Research and Development ï· Platform hydrodynamics ï· Platform structures and materials ï· Platform propulsion ï· Platform power ï· Platform systems design ï· Platform control and maneuverability ï· Platform innovations integration and affordability ï· Autonomy and robotics ï· Data science and artificial intelligence ï· Advanced sensors ï· Cybersecurity ï· Communications ï· Power systems and power electronics ï· Advanced materials and manufacturing ï· Multidisciplinary design optimization ï· Humanâmachine interface ï· Quantum science and computing ï· Alternative energy resources ï· Undersea resource utilization and extraction ï· Nanotechnology ï· Biomaterials ï· Synthetic biology ï· Cognitive science ï· Climate change Workforce ï· Inspire naval engineering education and attraction of talent ï· Sponsor naval engineering experiential learning and ï· Navy and Department of Defense (DOD) scholarships, fellowships, and ï· Developments in STEM outreach and training programs in the United States and overseas
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 8 training via university grants that include undergraduate and graduate students ï· Sponsor K-12 programs and other outreach programs relevant to NE ï· Sponsor student internships at relevant Navy and DOD facilities ï· Sponsor NE faculty internships and sabbaticals at relevant government (and possibly industry) facilities internships toward naval engineering education ï· Industry internships ï· Government and industry faculty sabbaticals in NE relevant settings ï· United States and international STEM competitions reflecting future NE challenges ï· Technology developers external to the DOD, including international sources, with a view to keeping training programs supported by the Office of Naval Research up to date, as well as identifying potential experiential learning opportunities Infrastructure ï· User group of academic researchers using Warfare Center infrastructure ï· Consortium of NNR-NE university facilities ï· Warfare Center facilities ï· Commercial sector test centers ï· Private and other government infrastructure ï· DOD high-performance computing ï· Test capabilities and access provided by international facilities As the NE enterprise changes, driven by new S&T developments and changing naval operational concepts, the âlead, leverage, and monitorâ construct can also be used by ONR to assess NNR-NEâs progress and accomplishments to inform needed changes at a strategic, program-wide level. Such assessments, however, will require that NNR-NE develop more impact metrics that are tracked on a multi-year basis, such as workforce retention statistics for NE students, researchers, and practitioners as opposed to simple measures of output or activity (e.g., number of papers published, number of graduate students funded). Ideally these impact metrics would be accompanied by leading metrics, such as the number of undergraduate students choosing majors in NE and related disciplines, to provide an earlier indication of program successes, opportunities, and challenges. The âlead, leverage, and monitorâ construct will aid future external reviews of the NNR- NE. Indeed, as the technological landscape changes at an increasingly faster pace, this also implies that such external reviews should be conducted on a commensurate time scale if the results are to be used to inform decisions about needed changes to the program. Therefore, the committee recommends that ONR consider leveraging a body of diverse experts to serve in a periodic advisory capacity. Ideally, the full NNR-NE portfolio, including its classified elements, would be reviewed at intervals of no more than 3 to 4 years using the framework described above. This review body would ideally consist of individuals from the S&T community, the systems commands and operational Navy, and the platform-building and platform systems sectors to bring a range of expertise and perspectives on S&T capabilities, operational and workforce needs, and the transition of innovations to naval platforms. Given an understanding of evolving Navy needs, this multidisciplinary group could assess and enhance NNR-NE research in a variety of ways on varying S&T time scales.
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 9 The committee is pleased to have had the opportunity to provide this second external and independent review of the NNR-NE. The 15 recommendations offered in this report, compiled in Box S-2, are intended to be constructive and to provide the succinct, actionable advice that ONR needs to support its efforts to ensure that NNR-NE achieves its vital mission in a fast-changing S&T and operational environments. BOX S-2 Report Recommendations Research and Development Pillar (Chapter 3) 3-1: Platform innovations integration and affordability should be added as a new core National Naval Responsibility for Naval Engineering (NNR-NE) science and technology (S&T) area for the specific purpose of creating and managing broad platform and multi-platform challenges and designed to identify science and technology gaps and opportunities across the technology spectrum. 3-2: ONR should replace âControl and Automationâ as a core area of NNR-NE research with âPlatform Control and Maneuverability,â a more encompassing interest and one that requires research in many technical areas in addition to automation and autonomy. 3-3: The Office of Naval Research (ONR) should adopt a âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework for prioritizing, programming, and integrating NNR-NEâs S&T investments. This framework should be used to not only guide decisions about critical naval engineering interests that require NNR-NEâs lead support for S&T, but also to identify S&T from outside the program that can be leveraged to further these critical interests. 3-4: As it periodically reviews the coverage, relevance, and linkages of the S&T that it leads, leverages, and monitors, NNR-NE should adopt a platform-centric approach to identifying innovation needs, challenges, and opportunities. Informed by the promise of the technologies that it leads, leverages, and monitors, NNR-NE should be anchored by a strategic vision of naval platforms 20 to 30 years out. 3-5: NNR-NE should maintain a strong focus on basic research in its lead core areas. This NE research should continue to be viewed as the key building block for the future Navy. Workforce Pillar (Chapter 4) 4-1: ONR should perform periodic assessments of the effectiveness of NNR-NE workforce development programs, such as faculty summer fellowships, student internships, and centers for innovation (e.g., the Center for Innovation in Ship Design and Centers for Innovation in Naval Technologies), in connecting faculty and students with Navy challenges and problems. The assessments should be supported by reporting metrics that track career outcomes and paths. 4-2: ONR should use NNR-NE funds to leverage the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and workforce programs that already exist in the U.S. Department of the Navy and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), such as the National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship and the Science, Mathematics and
PREPUBLICATION COPYâUncorrected Proofs 10 Research for Transformation Scholarship-for-Service Programs, as a means of increasing participation by naval engineers and naval architects in accordance with the importance these disciplines to the Navy and DOD. 4-3: ONR should consider innovative means to expedite the final stages of recruitment of STEM professionals engaged in naval engineering, such as by providing funding for newly hired personnel to train and work productively on unclassified projects while awaiting facility access clearances. 4-4: When developing and expanding NNR-NE programs aimed at inspiring and recruiting students and workers to the naval engineering enterprise, ONR should emphasize the importance of engaging individuals from underrepresented groups to maximize the talent pool. 4-5: ONR should apply the âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework for guiding its education pipeline and workforce priorities and programs. Research and Development Infrastructure Pillar (Chapter 5) 5-1: ONR should undertake a thorough inventory and assessment of naval engineering testing infrastructure needs and capabilities, large and small, in the Navy, elsewhere in DOD, at universities, in the private sector, and at institutions abroad. 5-2: ONR should use the âlead, leverage, monitorâ framework to guide NNR-NEâs efforts to ensure the availability and suitability of the naval engineering R&D infrastructure. 5-3: ONR should develop a comprehensive plan for increasing the availability and utilization of needed S&T experimental infrastructure, including making large-scale facilities more affordable to NNR-NE researchers and smaller-scale facilities less redundant and more open to shared use. Summary Advice (Chapter 6) 6-1: ONR should adopt a âlead, leverage, and monitorâ framework for the strategic programming, prioritization, and integration of NNR-NE investments both within and across the R&D, workforce, and infrastructure pillars. 6-2: ONR should consider leveraging a body of diverse experts to serve in a periodic advisory capacity. Ideally, the full NNR-NE portfolio, including its classified elements, would be reviewed at intervals of no more than 3 to 4 years using the framework described above. This review body would ideally consist of individuals from the S&T community, the Systems Commands and operational Navy, and the platform-building and platform systems sectors to bring a range of expertise and perspectives on S&T capabilities, operational and workforce needs, and the transition of innovations to naval platforms. Given its understanding of evolving Navy needs, this multidisciplinary group could assess and enhance NNR-NE research in a variety of ways on varying S&T time scales.