I think we have learned a lot over the years about the complexity of counterinsurgency operations.

We have heard that DOD is considering moving this panel out from under your oversight to the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. Would it be beneficial to the labs to do that?

I would be in favor of balancing that a bit more across the 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 spectrum.

Affordability is now a key driver for weapons systems.

We are in the process right now of evaluating the cost and schedule impacts associated with a number of the cost pressures.

The whole idea is to accelerate the production of a viable technology for moly-99 use in the United States in 2016.

But in our fiscal year 2013 authorization bill this committee asked NNSA to supply a long-term plan for the life of the program on facilities and costs you will incur to obtain the plutonium feedstock.

I understand that last year NNSA cancelled the facility that will supply the plutonium feedstock to the fuel assembly building.

Do you support the objectives of developing such program metrics?

So after a number of years of trying to move forward on this, we are extremely excited that finally we are seeing some concrete progress.

Historically it appears to some of us that laboratories are at or near the bottom of these MILCON requests.

it is our understanding that the Army has an ongoing study in the wake of the Decker-Wagner report looking at, among many other things, how Army S&T should be managed and how the laboratories can best be organized for the future needs of…

an alarming level of bureaucratic business practices hindering the conduct of basic research.

On behalf of the subcommittee, I thank you each and every one of you for your testimony today and, in particular, your service to our country.

How do you measure the performance of DOD laboratories?

Do you have concerns about Russia and the other Soviet states actually maintaining the equipment over the long-term?

That transition is to be completed, what date did you say?

The 5-year budget profile for this program is reduced further in fiscal year 2014 to $47 million, and then it increases to $64 million in fiscal year 2017.