Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
285790769
label
Science & Technology [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285790769
contentType
document
title
Science & Technology [2]
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
04296-002
collections
Records of the Economic Policy Council (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Olin Lewis Wethington Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285790769
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
9b6200663d65cf6c
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2005-0336-F
2005-0336-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Economic Policy Council
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
OA/ID Number:
04296
Folder ID Number:
04296-002
Folder Title:
Science & Technology [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
13
28
4
2
APR-04-1991 14:49 FROM UNDER SEC OF TECHNOLOGY
TO
94567739
P.02
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE
OFFICE
OF THE
DELIVE
AMERICA
SECRETARY
STATES
OF
NEWS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20230
Contact: Michael Baum
G 91-8
(301) 975-2762
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MOSBACHER ANNOUNCES ELEVEN
GRANTS TO ADVANCE KEY INDUSTRIAL
TECHNOLOGIES
Commerce Secretary Robert A. Mosbacher today announced the
granting of the first awards under the Commerce Department's new
Advanced Technology Program (ATP), which he said could lead to
the birth of revolutionary products and processes in key U.S.
industries and help boost the country's trade and
competitiveness.
Eleven new research and development programs have been
selected for funding under the ATP in fundamental industrial
technologies including improved manufacturing techniques for
electronics (such as x-ray lithography); optical recording; a
variety of hardware and software technology for computers; high-
temperature superconductivity; machine tool control; and novel
laser designs.
Mosbacher said, "Nearly half of these projects are proposed
by industrial consortia--partnerships between large and small
companies that were formed to work on solutions to key
technological barriers in their industries. The remainder of the
proposals are from individual corporations.
"This demonstrates the new spirit of cooperation that I see
between industry and government, between industry and academia,
and within industry itself--a spirit that the Advanced Technology
Program was designed to foster."
The awards will provide approximately $9 million in first-
year grants to initiate nearly $100 million in research and
development programs over the next 5 years. More than half of
the cost will be paid by sponsoring firms, Commerce Department
officals said.
(more)
APR-04-1991 14:49 FROM UNDER SEC OF TECHNOLOGY
TO
94567739 P.03
2
"The programs we have selected for this round of ATP grants
have the potential to spawn revolutionary new products and
processes in several key industries," Mosbacher said.
"Driven by industry's insight into the international
marketplace, tools like the Advanced Technology Program offer an
appropriate and powerful framework to achieve our common goal:
developing the leading technologies that the world has come to
expect from U.S. companies. We feel we've made a very good
beginning on a program that promises to be an important tool for
boosting U.S. competitiveness and trade," Mosbacher added.
Administered by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST), an agency of Commerce's Technology
Administration, ATP provides grants to private industry to
support the development of precompetitive, generic technologies
with significant commercial promise.
The program provides incentives for research and development
on fundamental technologies that underlie a broad range of
potentially important commercial products, but does not support
the development of actual products. The program is open to both
individual companies and joint ventures.
The next solicitation for ATP proposals is expected in the
late spring, department officials said.
- 30 -
EDITORS NOTE:
A complete list of proposals selected for funding is
attached. Dollar amounts represent the first-year grant
requested by the proposer and not necessarily the final
value of the grant.
3/5/91
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT"
ladger
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE ADMINISTRATION'S HPCC PLAN
(1) General.
S. 272 (the Gore bill) has a number of general, yet severe flaws. These flaws are
shared by its House counterpart, H.R. 656 (the Brown bill).
0
S. 272 consists of unwarranted intrusions into and micromanagement of
Executive Branch policy-making, budgetary, and administrative functions.
"lead" caneget
0
S. 272, which is largely unchanged from a version introduced two years ago,
fails to recognize any progress the Administration has made since 1989. By
castol
mandating development of a Plan that is inconsistent with the Administration's
vr
FY 1992 HPCC plan, S. 272 would force the Administration to rewrite its
current plan to conform to the legislation. This would set back the HPCC
initiative by at least 1-2 years.
0
By ignoring the '92 plan and imposing its own requirements on FCCSET and
the agencies, S. 272 distorts the priorities and program components identified
in the Administration's plan, limits future flexibility, and impedes
and
implementation of the plan.
0
S. 272 mischaracterizes the role of the federal government in the HPCC
initiative, creating the impression that the federal government will be
constructing and operating its own network, rather than facilitating access to
goals, statement
commercial networks. Furthermore, S. 272 assigns to federal agencies certain
activities, such as "ensuring" access and providing information services, that
may be best left to the private sector, regional networks, or other entities.
outh all agness to
notes to agreement agreesand FLYET.
0
S. 272 frequently assign$ responsibilities to FCCSET and the agencies that are
(inappropriate) beyond their charters, and inconsistent with the Administration's
FY 1992 plan. Furthermore, some of the legislative mandates lie outside the
jurisdiction of the Senate Commerce Committee.
0
S. 272 authorizes funds to only three of the eight agencies currently involved in
the Administration's initiative, thereby distorting the sense of collaboration and
"fair play" that currently exists among the agencies. In addition, the
designation of "lead agencies" for certain activities is wholly inappropriate.
Furthermore, S. 272 imposes additional requirements on the agencies without
providing sufficient authorizations to support even those activities already
identified by the Administration in its '92 plan.
0
S. 272 imposes numerous, duplicative, and onerous reporting requirements on
FCCSET and OSTP.
0
The cumulative effect of this legislation would be the diminishment of the
Administration's progress, leadership, and management in the area of HPCC.
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT"
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
(2) Specific problems
Below are specific areas of concern regarding S. 272 (and often shared by H.R. 656):
Sec. 2. Findings and Purpose
0
Sec. 2(a)(5) makes reference only to the 1989 OSTP HPCC report, but ignores
development of the FY 1992 plan and other progress made to date.
0
Sec. 2(a)(4) states that "improved interagency coordination, cooperation, and
planning could enhance the effectiveness of (current agency HPCC) programs."
Given the omission of any reference to the '90 and '92 plans, this statement
offends the ongoing efforts to achieve such coordination and planning.
0
Sec. 2(b) (like many others in the bill) implies that federal activities alone are
necessary to help ensure continued U.S. leadership in HPCC, instead of
recognizing that the federal role should be limited to that of a catalytic,
collaborative research activity. This section should be rewritten to emphasize the
importance of contributions by and collaboration with industry, academia, and
other entities.
Sec. 4. National High-Performance Computing Program
0
Sec. 4 adds a new, seventh title to the OSTP organic act to require development
of an HPC Plan. This entire section legislatively micromanages the entire
FCCSET process, imposes inappropriate responsibilities on FCCSET, and
interferes with Executive Branch policy-making, budgetary, and administrative
prerogatives.
0
Sec. 701(a)(1) of the new title calls for development and implementation of an
HPC Plan, with no mention of the '92 plan or any other Administration activity.
Given the prescriptive requirements of the new Plan (described below), this
language would require that the Administration's plan be rewritten to conform to
the legislative mandate.
0
Sec. 701(a)(1) mandates that the President, through FCCSET, submit the Plan to
Congress. In effect, this makes FCCSET responsible to Congress and infringes
on the President's authority to manage FCCSET activities.
0
Sec. 701(a)(2) mandates specific requirements in the Plan, including more detailed
descriptions of the agency activities, such as "acquisition and operating expenses
for computers and computer networks." When taken with other sections of the
bill, these requirements distort the actual HPCC program and require that the '92
plan be rewritten to conform to these legislative mandates.
3
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT"
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
o
Sec. 701(a)(3) requires additional reports from FCCSET, including a summary of
federal HPC efforts for the preceding year, analysis of progress made toward these
objectives, and recommendations for additional legislation. This section imposes
a policy function on FCCSET that is beyond its charter and makes FCCSET
directly answerable to Congress. This section also adds yet another reporting
requirement on FCCSET.
o
Sec. 701(a)(4) requires that the Plan include descriptions of relevant activities of
various federal agencies, including some (DOC/NTIA, DOI/USGS, DOEd, and
DOA/NAL) that are currently not listed in the '92 plan. This requirement torques
the existing program and forces a rewriting of the Administration's '92 plan.
Furthermore, the addition of certain agencies implies that the federal government
will be operating its own network, rather than supporting a research activity. This
list also makes certain assumptions about the interests of various agencies in
HPCC that may or may not be valid.
o
Sec. 701(a)(4) would also have the effect of giving the Senate Commerce
Committee oversight over departments and agencies that are outside the
Committee's jurisdiction. These agencies are DOD/DARPA, DOE, HHS/NIH,
HHS/NLM, DOI/USGS, DOEd, and DOA/NAL.
o
Sec. 7(a)(5) requires that the Plan "take into consideration" activities of the
Library of Congress. This raises a potential separation-of-powers conflict between
the President and Congress, because the Library is not privy nor subject to
Executive Branch planning. Furthermore, this added requirement would again
require rewriting the current plan. Finally, this language implies that the federal
government will be operating its own network and will be responsible for ensuring
the Library's access.
o
Sec. 7(a)(6) imposes eleven further, detailed requirements on the Plan, which
would again require rewriting the '92 plan. In addition, some of these reporting
requirements - such as improvement, documentation, evaluation, and distribution
of federal and public-domain software, data bases, and information, as well as
recommendations for improving specific agency rules, regulations, and policies
affecting federal HPC activities -- are well beyond the scope of the FCCSET. This
section, like others in the bill, misrepresents the role of FCCSET and the
responsibilities of the agencies for policy and program implementation. Finally,
the cumulative burden of these reporting requirements will only detract from the
real work that needs to be done.
4
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
0
Sec. 7(a)(6)(I) lists specific Grand Challenges that should be addressed in the
Plan, including astrophysics, geophysics, engineering, materials, biochemistry,and
others. While these may be important fields, specific Grand Challenge activities
should not be legislatively mandated. This action would impede flexibility, impose
an improper role on FCCSET, and invite future legislative mandates.
0
Sec. 7(a)(7) requires that the Plan address security requirements and policies to
protect federal networks. Again, this mandate requires rewriting the '92 plan and
may be outside the scope of the FCCSET.
0
Sec. 7(b)(3) requires that FCCSET review agency budget submissions and then
make the results of such reviews available to OMB. These requirements are an
unacceptable and unwarranted intrusions into Presidential prerogatives.
0
Sec. 7(b)(4) directs FCCSET to coordinate with not only federal agencies but with
state agencies, and research, educational, and industry groups. This requirement
exceeds FCCSET's scope and fails to recognize the responsibilities of the agencies
for such activities.
0
Sec. 7(c) requires that OSTP establish an outside advisory committee for FCCSET
and specifies responsibilities of this advisory committee. This section invites
congressional oversight of the pending PCAST advisory panel, which infringes on
Presidential prerogatives.
0
Sec. 7(d) requires that agencies include HPCC components in their budget
submissions to OMB and that OMB review such submission in light of the
FCCSET Plan. These requirements is an unwarranted micromanagement of the
budgetary process between federal agencies and OMB and are largely duplicative
of current Executive Branch procedures.
Sec. 5. National Research and Education Network
0
Sec. 5 imposes separate reporting requirements and responsibilities on FCCSET
and certain agencies in connection to the NREN, one of four components of the
Administration's plan. By singling out one component for special consideration,
this section distorts the current program balance. Furthermore, this section
merely duplicates this section duplicates the planning requirements in Section 4
and imposes additional burdens on FCCSET and the agencies.
0
Sec. 5(a) requires that various agencies (including NSF, NASA, DOC, DOE, and
DOD) provide for "establishment" of the NREN by 1996. Again, this language
implies that the federal government will be constructing and operating its own
network. Furthermore, given the high-risk nature of this initiative, 1996 is a
target only and should not be mandated by law.
5
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT"
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
0
Sec. 5(a) states that the NREN shall link academic, governmental, and industrial
institutions in every state. While this is a laudable goal, the language implies that
the federal government will be responsible for providing for such access.
0
Sec. 5(a) states that NSF "shall act as lead agency in coordinating the
collaboration among Federal agencies contributing to deployment of the Network."
This mandate exceeds the bounds of the '92 plan, which does not use the phrase
"lead agency" anywhere in connection with the NREN or NSF activities. This
phrase also causes consternation among the agencies, which would be seen as
subject to control by NSF. Finally, this requirement is inconsistent with the bill's
previous requirement that FCCSET coordinate agency HPCC activities. (See
proposed amendment to OSTP organic act, Sec. 701(b)(1) above.)
0
By using the phrase "deployment," Sec. 5(a) implies that the federal government
will be constructing and operating its own network. Again, this mischaracterizes
the federal role, which is limited primarily to research and education.
o
Sec. 5(a) directs the federal agencies "to work with state and local agencies,
libraries, educational institutions and organizations, and private network services
in order to ensure that researchers, educators, and students have access to the
Network." Again, this language implies that the federal government will be
responsible for an activity that is best served by the private sector and academia.
0
Sec. 5(a) states that NSF "shall have primary responsibility for connecting colleges,
universities, and libraries to the Network." Again, this language implies that NSF
assume a role as "lead agency" for this activity, which is inconsistent with the '92
plan. Furthermore, this languages implies that NSF would be responsible for
ensuring that all such connections take place, regardless of the costs and roles of
the mid-level networks and private communications companies. Finally, this
language ignores the interests of other agencies, such as DOE and NASA, in
ensuring that their academic users have access to the NREN.
0
Sec. 5(b) states that the NREN shall provides users with "appropriate access" to
supercomputers and other resources. This language is more suitable for a
statement of purpose or findings, rather than a legislative mandate. The phrase
"appropriate access" can lead to any manner of legal mischief, especially if
language described above is interpreted as requiring NSF and other agencies to
ensure connections to the NREN.
0
Sec. 5(d) requires that establishment of the NREN stimulate private sector
competition, in accordance with certain specific requirements. Again, the word
"establishment" mischaracterizes the federal role. Furthermore, the list of
requirements may limit the flexibility of FCCSET and the agencies.
6
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT"
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
0
Sec. 5(e) requires that the NREN, to the extent practicable, provides access to
"libraries, research facilities, publishers, and affiliated organizations." Again, this
language could be taken to mean that the federal government will be responsible
for ensuring such that such connections are made. Furthermore, this continued
emphasis on access over the research and educational activities outlined in the '92
plan distorts the priorities outlined by the Administration.
o
Sec. 5(f) designates DOD, through DARPA, to be the "lead agency" for R&D in
fiber optics, switches, and protocols for the NREN. Again, this language distorts
the agency roles and requires that the '92 plan. Furthermore, the designation of
agency roles limits the flexibility of FCCSET and the agencies. Finally, the
designation of a "lead agency" tends to lead to consternation among other agencies,
which would be seen as subject to DOD's control.
o
Sec. 5(g) requires that FCCSET develop goals, strategies, priorities for the NREN,
consistent with Plan. Again, this would impose an improper policy-making role
on FCCSET and interfere with Presidential prerogatives. Furthermore, the
language fails to recognize the responsibilities of the agencies for these activities.
Finally, this requirement needlessly duplicates the Plan in Sec. 4.
o
Sec. 5(g)(1)(C) specifically requires that FCCSET "provide a mechanism to
coordinate Federal agencies and departments, States, and public and private
network service provides in deploying the Network." This language improperly
expands FCCSET's responsibilities beyond that of coordinating federal research
activities. Furthermore, this language conjures up images of federal control over
private network providers, which is clearly not a part of the Administration's plan.
o
In the same vein, Secs. 5(g)(1)(D), (E), and (F) require that FCCSET assume an
active role in oversight and management of the NREN, including developing
conditions for access. Again, these functions may exceed FCCSET's charter and
infringe on the responsibilities of the agencies and the private sector.
Furthermore, the language misrepresents the federal role toward the NREN.
o
Sec. 5(g)(2) requires that the President report to Congress on the NREN. This
language would make FCCSET directly responsible to Congress and is duplicative
of earlier reporting requirements.
0
Sec. 5(h)(1) directs NIST, DARPA, and NSF to develop common standards to
ensure interoperability and security for the NREN. This requirement may
contradict the agency responsibilities defined in the "Computer Security Act of
1981 (P.L. 100-235). Furthermore, the Senate Commerce Committee has no
jurisdiction over DARPA.
7
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT'
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
0
Sec. 5(h)(2) authorizes certain agencies to allow recipients of federal research
grants to use grant monies for networking expenses. This may be a major policy
decision that deserves greater review by the Executive Branch. Furthermore,
whatever the merits of the proposal, five of the agencies listed -- DOE, DOD,
DOI, DOA, and HHS -- are not within the jurisdiction of Senate Commerce.
0
Sec. 5(i) requires that the Director of OSTP, working through FCCSET, report to
Congress on various activities. This language makes the Director, currently an
Assistant to the President, directly answerable to Congress. In addition, some of
the issues to be addressed - commercialization of the NREN, user fees, copyright
protection, security and privacy issues -- are beyond the scope of OSTP and
FCCSET and may be unanswerable within the one-year time frame. Finally, the
language again tends to mischaracterize the federal role in the NREN.
Sec. 6. Role of the National Science Foundation.
0
Sec. 6, 7, and 8 focus on three of the eight agencies now participating in the
Administration's HPCC program. By focusing on only a few agencies (and
ignoring major players like DOE and DARPA), these sections distort the current
plan and erode collaboration among the agencies.
0
Sec. 6 establishes NSF's role in the HPCC initiative. The responsibilities
described therein are not consistent either with the '92 plan or NSF's own
programs and tend to limit the ability of FCCSET and NSF to adjust NSF's role
in the future. (In fact, this entire section infringes on FCCSET's responsibility
to identify and coordinate agency responsibilities, as mandated earlier in the bill.)
0
Sec. 6(a) directs NSF to expand its "traditional role in supporting" research and
educational activities, including "library and information sciences." This language
may detract from NSF's current priorities.
0
Sec. 6(a) directs NSF to "provide funding to enable researchers to access
supercomputers." Although NSF currently operates a small program to help
second-tier institutions connect to the Internet, this language, when taken with
earlier mandates, implies that NSF would be responsible for funding all such
connections. Clearly, this would be beyond NSF's role and budget. Furthermore,
the language does not allow NSF to terminate any existing connections program,
should they become unnecessary.
0
Sec. 6(b) directs NSF to promote development of certain information services,
including directories of users, data bases of unclassified federal data, access to
commercial information services, and others. These responsibilities may be
inappropriate for the federal government and certainly distort the priorities and
plans within the Administration's HPCC plan and NSF itself.
8
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT"
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
0
Sec. 6(b) directs the federal information services by provided in accordance with
"applicable law." The language is wholly unnecessary.
0
Sec. 6(b) also directs that adequate protection and, where appropriate,
remuneration be provided to holders of intellectual property. Since this language
is found in the NSF section of the bill, the language implies that NSF will be
responsible for providing such assurances, which is an inappropriate role for NSF.
o
Sec. 6(c) provides a five-year authorization for NSF's HPCC activities, including
a separate line-item for the NREN. The Committee must have intended these
figures to be increments above existing activities, since the figures are well below
those specified in the '92 plan. Nevertheless, this ambiguity should be resolved.
Also, Congress is now reviewing the authorizations for NSF, NASA, and NIST.
These would be more appropriate vehicles for authorizing any HPCC activity.
Sec. 7. The Role of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
0
In contrast to Sec. 6, Sec. 7 provides a very broad and brief description of NASA's
role in HPCC. Again, by focusing on one agency, the bill degrades contributions
made by other agencies. This language should also be amended to include support
for human resources.
0
Sec. 7 provides a five-year authorization for NASA's HPCC activities, which, again,
are well below those provided in the '92 plan.
Sec. 8. The Role of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
0
Sec. 8 states that NIST shall be responsible primarily for standards, guidelines,
measurement techniques, and test methods to ensure interoperability of networks
and to ensure security and privacy on the NREN. In addition, NIST shall be
responsible for benchmark tests and standards for HPC computers and software.
Again, this language implies a "lead agency" for NIST, which is inappropriate and
inconsistent with the current plan. This language also limits NIST's future
flexibility.
0
Sec. 8 provides a five-year authorization for NIST, which exceed the
Administration's current projections for NIST.
Sec. 9. Study on Impact of Federal Procurement Regulations
0
Sec. 9 requires that DOC report to Congress on impacts that federal regulations
have on the development of software development tools and techniques. No serious
problem here, except that it is yet another reporting requirement.
9
ANALYSIS OF S. 272, the "HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT
AND ITS IMPACTS ON THE CURRENT HPCC PLAN (cont'd)
Sec. 10, Miscellaneous Provisions.
0
Sec. 10(a) specifies that the bill would not apply to classified computer systems
or activities. This language was added at the insistence of the NSA.
0
Sec. 10(b) directs federal agencies, where appropriate, to procure prototype
supercomputers and subsystems to stimulate hardware and software development.
This appears to be consistent with the '92 plan.
104 STAT. 1598
PUBLIC LAW 101-510-NOV. 5, 1990
PUBLIC LAW 101-510-NOV. 5, 1990
104 STAT. 1599
development of such critical technology for the fiscal year
preceding the first fiscal year covered by the plan.".
(B) The executive committee shall meet at least six times each
10 USC 2508
note.
(b) APPLICABILITY.-The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
apply to annual defense critical technologies plans submitted after
year. (5) A member of the Board who is an officer or employee of the
March 1, 1991.
United States may not receive pay for service as a member, other
than the pay provided for the member's position as an officer or
42 USC 6686.
SEC. 822. CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES INSTITUTE
employee of the United States.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.-There shall be established a federally funded
(d) DUTIES OF THE INSTITUTE.-The Institute shall-
(1) survey the views of United States industry, colleges, and
research and development center to be known as the "Critical
universities, and Federal and State agencies, involved in re-
Technologies "Institute"). Institute" (hereinafter referred to in this section as the
search, development, or utilization of critical technologies on-
(A) each critical technology identified in the most recent
(b) INCORPORATION.-The Institute shall be incorporated as a non-
profit membership corporation.
biennial report of the National Critical Technologies Panel
established pursuant to section 601 of the National Science
(c) BOARD OF TRUSTEES.-(1) The Institute shall have a Board of
and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of
Trustees (hereafter referred to in this section as the "Board")
composed of 21 members as follows:
1976 (42 U.S.C. 6681); and
(B) each technology that the Institute considers critical
(A) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology
on the basis of its analysis of national and worldwide trends
Policy, who shall be Chairman of the Board.
in basic and applied research and development;
(B) The Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary's designee.
(2) on the basis of such views and analysis by Institute
(C) The Secretary of Energy, or the Secretary's designee.
(D) The Secretary of Health and Human Services, or the
personnel-
Secretary's designee.
(A) identify suitable near-term, mid-term, and long-term
national objectives for the research, development, and
(E) The Secretary of Commerce, or the Secretary's designee.
(F) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space
production capability of the United States with respect to
Administration, or the Administrator's designee.
such technologies; and
(G) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the
(B) prepare possible strategies for achieving the identified
Director's designee.
objectives, including a discussion of the appropriate roles of
(H) Four members appointed by the Director of the Office of
industry, colleges and universities, and Federal and State
Science and Technology Policy from among the members of the
agencies;
Federal Coordinating Council on Science, Engineering, and
(3) publish reports, as appropriate, discussing-
Reports.
(A) such national objectives and strategies; and
Technology (other than members of such council named in
subparagraphs (B) through (G)).
(B) progress in implementing such strategies and achiev-
(I) Ten members appointed by the members of the Board
ing such objectives; and
(4) at the direction of the Director of the Office of Science and
referred to in subparagraphs (A) through (H) from among rep-
Technology Policy. provide technical support and assistance
resentatives of industry and colleges and universities in the
United States.
regarding policy formulation to the committees and panels of
the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and
(2)(A) The term of service of members of the Board appointed
under paragraph (1)(H) shall be four years. except that of the four
Technology that are responsible for planning and coordinating
Federal Government activities that advance the development of
members first appointed, one shall be appointed for a term of one
critical technologies and sustain and strengthen the science and
year, one shall be appointed for a term of two years. one shall be
appointed for a term of three years. and one shall be appointed for a
technology base of the United States.
(e) SPONSORSHIP.-1 The Director of the Office of Science and
term of four years, as specified by the Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy at the time of the appointments.
Technology shall be the sponsor of the Institute.
(2) The Director and the Board shall enter into a sponsor agree-
Government
B) The term of office for each of the members of the Board
contracts.
ment consistent with the requirements prescribed by the Adminis-
appointed under paragraph (1)(I) shall be specified by the appointing
trator for Federal Procurement Policy that are generally applicable
members of the Board at the time of appointment.
C) Members of the Board mav be reappointed.
to sponsor agreements.
D) A vacancy in a membership of the Board appointed pursuant
(3) The sponsor agreement shall-
to subparagraph (H) or (I) of paragraph (1) shall be filled in the same
(A) require the Institute to perform such functions for the
Office of Science and Technology Policy as the Director of that
manner as the original appointment. A member appointed under
this subparagraph shall serve for the remainder of the unexpired
office may specify consistent with the requirements of subsec-
term of his predecessor.
tion (d): and
3) The Board shall meet at least twice each year.
(B) permit the Institute. subject to the concurrence of the
4XA) The Board shall have an executive committee composed of
Director. to perform functions for the member agencies of the
Federal Coordinating Council on Science. Engineering, and
the members referred to in subparagraphs (A) through (G) of para-
graph (1) and six of the members appointed pursuant to subpara-
Technology Policy.
(f) DEADLINE FOR CERTAIN ACTIONS.-The Director of the Office of
graph (I) of such paragraph.
Science and Technology Policy shall take such actions as may be
1600
PUBLIC LAW 101-510-NOV. 5, 1990
PUBLIC LAW 101-510-NOV. 5, 1990
104 STAT. 1601
necessary to ensure that, not later than 90 days after the date of the
"(2) direct the development and implementation of Depart-
enactment of this Act-
ment of Defense plans, programs, projects, and policies that
(1) the articles of incorporation for the Institute have been
promote the development and application of advanced tech-
appropriately filed;
nologies to manufacturing processes, tools, and equipment.
(2) the corporate bylaws have been adopted;
(3) the Board members have been identified or appointed, as
"§ 2513. National Defense Manufacturing Technology Plan
appropriate;
"(a) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary
(4) the initial officers of the Institute have been elected;
of Commerce and the Secretary of Energy, shall develop and imple-
(5) the first regular business meeting of the Board has been
ment a National Defense Manufacturing Technology Plan (hereafter
conducted; and
in this section referred to as the 'Plan'). Subject to the authority,
(6) the sponsor agreement referred to in subsection (e) has
direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense, the Under Sec-
been entered into.
retary of Defense for Acquisition shall perform the duty of the
(g) FUNDING.-(1) Subject to such limitations as may be provided
Secretary under this subsection.
in appropriation Acts, the Secretary of Defense shall make available
"(b) The Plan shall-
to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, out of
"(1) provide guidance (formulated in coordination with the
funds available for the Department of Defense, $5,000,000 for fund-
Department of Commerce and other relevant public and private
ing the activities of the Institute in the first fiscal year in which the
organizations) to the military departments and Defense Agen-
Institute begins operations.
cies and to the Department of Energy on the goals, priorities,
(2) There is authorized to be appropriated for the Institute for
and approaches to be taken in the defense manufacturing tech-
each fiscal year after the fiscal year referred to in paragraph (1)
nology program;
such sums as may be necessary for operation of the Institute.
"(2) provide a link between the manufacturing technology
SEC. 823. MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY
program and the industrial preparedness programs conducted
by the Departmen+ of Defense and similar and related activities
(a) IN GENERAL-Title 10, United States Code, is amended-
undertaken by government or the private sector, including
(1) by redesignating chapter 149 as chapter 150;
programs, projects and activities carried cut by the Secretary of
(2) by redesignating section 2511 as section 2521; and
Commerce pursuant to section 25 of the Act of March 3, 1901 (15
(3) by inserting after chapter 148 the following new chapter:
U.S.C. 278k) and section 5121(b) of the Omnibus Trade and
Competitiveness Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 2781 note);
"CHAPTER 149-MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY
"(3) contain an analysis of the role of manufacturing exten-
sion services in-
"Sec.
((A) improving the manufacturing quality, productivity,
"2511. Definitions.
technology, and practices of defense industry subtier suppli-
"2512. Management and planning.
"2513. National Defense Manufacturing Technology Plan.
ers; and
"2514. Research and implementation.
"(B) disseminating to such suppliers such Department of
"2515. Computer-integrated manufacturing technology.
Defense manufacturing concepts as best manufacturing
"2516. Concurrent engineering.
practices, product data exchange specifications, computer-
"2517. Manufacturing extension programs.
aided acquisition and logistics support, and rapid acquisi-
2511. Definitions
tion of manufactured parts; and
"(4) contain a description of how the Secretary of Defense will
"In this chapter:
coordinate with each Federal agency and department in im-
"(1) The term manufacturing technology means development
plementing the Plan.
of techniques and processes designed to improve manufacturing
"(c) In developing the Plan. the Secretaries referred to in subsec-
quality, productivity, and practices. including quality control,
tion (a) shall consider and use. as appropriate. reports and studies
shop floor management. inventory management and worker
conducted by Federal agencies and departments. the Office of Tech-
training. as well as manufacturing equipment and software.
nology Assessment. the National Research Council. the Defense
"(2) The term manufacturing extension programs means
Science Board. industrial associations and organizations. and other
publicly-chartered organizations and services to transfer tech-
entities.
nology and help modernize small manufacturers through re-
"(d) The manufacturing technology program conducted by the
search. education and training. and outreach activities.
Department of Defense may include only the projects and activities
that are covered by the Plan and any projects or activities that. as
2512. Management and planning
determined by the Secretary of Defense. have a higher priority than
The Secretary of Defense. acting through the Under Secretary of
the projects and activities covered by the Plan.
Defense for Acquisition. shall-
1) provide centralized Department of Defense policy guid-
"§ 2514. Research and implementation
ance and direction to the military departments and the Defense
"The Secretary of Defense. acting through the Under Secretary of
Agencies on all matters relating to manufacturing technology;
Defense for Acquisition. and in coordination with the Secretary of
and
Commerce. the Secretary of Energy. and other relevant Federal
FCCSET COMMITTEES*
*
The Committee Chairman's Point of Contact is the Committee
Executive Secretary unless specified otherwise.
May 14, 1990
EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CHAIRMAN:
Dr. Dallas L. Peck
U.S. Geological Survey
Department of the Interior
National Center, Mail Stop 101
Reston, VA 22092
Phone: (703) 648-7411
FAX : (703) 648-5470 or 4466
Secretary - - Linda Meadows
Point of Contact: Paul Dresler
Phone: (703) 648-4450
FAX: (703) 648-5470
VICE CHAIRMEN: Mr. Erich Bretthauer
Assistant Administrator for Research
and Development
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W., Room 913
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone: (202) 382-7676
FAX : (202) 475-9761
Secretary - Jane Ramsey
Point of Contact: Peter Preuss
Phone: (202) 382-7669
FAX: (202) 252-0106
Dr. Lennard Fisk
Associate Administrator for
Space Science & Applications
Code S, NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546
Phone: (202) 453-1409
FAX : (202) 426-0754
Secretary - Jean Durst
Point of Contact: Shelby Tilford
Phone: (202) 453-1706
FAX: (202) 755-2552
2
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBER:
Dr. Jack Fellows
Senior Budget Examiner for
Science and Space Programs
NEOB, Rm. 8001
Phone: (202) 395-3953
FAX : (202) 395-4817
Secretary - Alice Sheck
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: James B. Wyngaarden, M.D.
Associate Director for Life Sciences
Phone: (202) 456-6272
FAX : (202) 395-3261
Confidential Assistant - Margaret Quinlan
Point of Contact: Nancy Maynard
Phone: (202) 456-6202
FAX: (202) 395-3719
MEMBERS:
3
EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES
CHAIRMAN:
The Honorable James D. Watkins
Secretary
Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 7A-257
Washington, D.C. 20585
Phone: (202) 586-5534
FAX : (202) 586-7573
Scheduler - Katherine Hollis
Point of Contact: Peggy Dufour
Phone: (202) 586-7970
FAX: (202) 586-9988
VICE CHAIRMEN: Dr. Ted Sanders
Under Secretary
Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Room 4015
Washington, D.C. 20202-0500
Phone: (202) 732-4000
FAX : (202) 732-2896
Confidential Assistant - Nettie Clark
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Dr. Luther Williams
Senior Science Advisor
National Science Foundation
1800 G Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20550
Phone: (202) 357-9443
FAX : (202) 357-9725
Secretary - Betty Wong
Point of Contact: Luther Williams
Phone: same as above
FAX: same as above
4
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS: Mr. Joseph S. Hezir
Deputy Associate Director for Energy
and Science, NEOB, Rm. 8001
Phone: (202) 395-3404
FAX : (202) 395-4817
Secretary: Twanna Wiggins
Mr. Bernard H. Martin
Deputy Associate Director for Labor,
Veterans and Education, NEOB, Rm. 7025
Phone: (202) 395-3971
FAX : (202) 395-3910
Secretary: Diane Somers
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Dr. J. Thomas Ratchford
Associate Director for Policy
and International Affairs
Phone: (202) 456-7396
FAX : (202) 395-3719
Confidential Assistant - Ginny Rosell
Point of Contact: Sara Bowden
Phone: (202) 395-4626
FAX: (202) 395-3719
MEMBERS:
5
FOOD AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESEARCH
CHAIRMAN:
Dr. Charles E. Hess
Assistant Secretary for Science
and Education
Department of Agriculture
12th Street and Jefferson Drive, S.W., Room 217-W
Washington, D.C. 20250
Phone: (202) 447-5923
FAX : (202) 755-7842
Secretary - Dorothy Fones
Point of Contact: Michael Hoback
Phone: (202) 447-5035
FAX: (202) 755-7842
VICE CHAIRMEN: Mr. David C. O'Neal
Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals
Department of the Interior
18th and C Streets, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20240
Phone: (202) 208-5676
FAX : (202) 208-3950 or 5048
Secretary - Carol Purcell
Point of Contact: Piet deWitt
Phone: (202) 208-6224
FAX: (202) 208-3950 or 5048
Mr. James Benson
Acting Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner
Food and Drug Administration
Department of Health and Human Services
5600 Fishers Lane, Room 14-71
Rockville, Maryland 20857
Phone: (301) 443-2410
FAX : (301) 443-5930
Secretary - Kay Hamric
Point of Contact:
Phone:
-
FAX:
6
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Dr. Susan Offutt, Chief
Agriculture Branch
NEOB, Room 8025
Phone: (202) 395-3446
FAX : (202) 395-4941
Secretary: Charlotte Brown
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: James B. Wyngaarden, M.D.
Associate Director for Life Sciences
Phone: (202) 456-6272
FAX : (202) 395-3261
Confidential Assistant - Margaret Quinlan
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
MEMBERS:
7
LIFE SCIENCES AND HEALTH
CHAIRMAN:
James O. Mason, M.D., Dr.P.H.
Assistant Secretary for Health
Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W. , Room 716-G HHH
Washington, D.C. 20201
Phone: (202) 245-7694
FAX : (202) 245-6960
Staff Assistant - Jane Zopf
Point of Contact: Patricia Hoben
Phone: (202) 245-6135
FAX: (202) 245-6603
VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. David J. Galas
Associate Director for Health
and Environmental Research
Office of Energy Research, ER-70
Department of Energy (GTN)
Washington, D.C. 20545
Phone: (301) 353-3251
FAX : (301) 353-5051
Secretary - Becky Mathias
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Mr. David K. Kleinberg
Deputy Associate Director for
Health and Income Maintenance Division
NEOB, Rm. 7025
Phone: (202) 395-4922
FAX : (202) 395-3910
Secretary: Pamula Simms
8
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: James B. Wyngaarden, M.D.
Associate Director for Life Sciences
Phone: (202) 456-6272
FAX : (202) 395-3261
Confidential Assistant - Margaret Quinlan
Point of Contact: Rachel Levinson
Phone: (202) 395-4850
FAX: (202) 395-3719
MEMBERS:
9
PHYSICAL, MATHEMATICAL AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. Erich Bloch
Director
National Science Foundation
1800 G Street, N.W., Room 520
Washington, D.C. 20550
Phone: (202) 357-7748
FAX : (202) 357-9725
Secretary - Maydie Hughes
Point of Contact: Jane Stutsman
Phone: (202) 357-7611
FAX: (202) 357-7994
VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Charles Herzfeld
Director
Defense Research and Engineering
Department of Defense
Pentagon - Room 3E1014
Washington, D.C. 20301-3100
Phone: (703) 697-5776
FAX : (703) 693-7167
Confidential Assistant - Maggie Souleyret
Point of Contact: George Millburn
Phone: (202) 695-5036
FAX: (202) 693-5229
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Dr. Norine E. Noonan, Chief
Science and Space Programs Branch
Office of Management and Budget
NEOB, Rm. 8001
Phone: (202) 395-3534
FAX : (202) 395-4817
Secretary: Alice Sheck
10
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Dr. Eugene Wong
Associate Director for Physical Science
and Engineering
Phone: (202) 395-3902
FAX : (202) 395-3716
Confidential Assistant - Sally Sherman
Point of Contact: Karl Erb
Phone: (202) 395-5130
FAX: (202) 395-3719
MEMBERS:
11
TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY
CHAIRMAN:
Mr. J. Thomas Murrin
Deputy Secretary
Department of Commerce
14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Room 5840
Washington, D.C. 20230
Phone: (202) 377-4625
FAX : (202) 377-8610
Secretary - Dolores Buckley
Point of Contact: Robert White
Phone: (202) 377-1091
FAX: (202) 377-4498
VICE CHAIRMAN: Mr. J. R. Thompson, Jr.
Deputy Administrator
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Room 7137
Washington, D.C. 20546
Phone: (202) 453-1007
FAX : (202) 755-2568
Secretary - Evelyn Staples
Point of Contact: Carl Praktish
Phone: (202) 453-8309
FAX: (202) 755-3741
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Mr. Joseph S. Hezir
Associate Director for Energy and Science
NEOB, Rm. 8001
Phone: (202) 395-3404
FAX : (202) 395-4817
Secretary: Twanna Wiggins
12
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Dr. William D. Phillips
Associate Director for Industrial Technology
Phone: (202) 395-3125
FAX : (202) 395-3716
Confidential Assistant - Wanell Gale
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
MEMBERS:
13
INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
CHAIRMAN:
Ambassador Reginald Bartholomew
Under Secretary for
International Security Affairs
Department of State
2201 C Street, N.W., Room 7208
Washington, D.C. 20520
Phone: (202) 647-1049
FAX : (202) 647-0775
Point of Contact: Bob Carr
Phone: (202) 647-3526
FAX: (202) 657-0775
VICE CHAIRMEN: Dr. Fred Bernthal
Deputy Director
National Science Foundation
1800 G Street, N.W., Room 520
Washington, D.C. 20550
Phone: (202) 357-9425
FAX : (202) 357-9725
Secretary - Pat Dennis
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Dr. Philip Schambra
Director
Fogarty International Center
National Institutes of Health
Department of Health and Human Services
9000 Rockville Pike, Room 605 Building 38A
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
Phone: (202) 496-1415
FAX : (202) 480-3414
Secretary: Marge Dodds
Point of Contact: Gray Handley
Phone: (202) 496-5903
FAX: (202) 480-3414
14
OMB EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Daniel H. Taft
Deputy Associate Director
National Security and International
Affairs, Special Studies Division
NEOB, Room 10007
Phone: (202) 395-3285
FAX : (202) 395-3307
Secretary: Mary Jo Siclari
OSTP EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: J. Thomas Ratchford
Associate Director for Policy
and International Affairs
Phone: (202) 456-7396
FAX : (202) 395-3719
Point of Contact: Sara Bowden
Phone: (202) 395-4626
FAX: (202) 395-3719
MEMBERS:
15
PCAST MEMBERS
Dr. Norman Borlaug
Dr. Thomas E. Lovejoy
International Maize and Wheat
Assistant Secretary for External Affairs
Improvement Center (CIMMYT)
The Smithsonian Institution
Apartado, Postal 6-641
1000 Jefferson Drive, S.W.
Delegacion Cuauhtemoc
Washington, D.C. 20560
06600 Mexico D.F.
Dr. Walter E. Massey
Dr. Solomon J. Buchsbaum
Vice President for Research
Senior Vice President
and for Argonne National Laboratory
Technology Systems
The University of Chicago
AT&T Bell Laboratories
5801 Ellis Avenue
Crawfords Corner Road
Chicago, Illinois 60637
Holmdel, New Jersey 07733
Dr. John P. McTague
Professor Charles Drake
Vice President, Research
Department of Earth Sciences
Ford Motor Company
Dartmouth College
Scientific Research Laboratories Building
228 Fairchild
20000 Rotunda Drive
Hanover, New Hampshire 03755
Dearborn, Michigan 48121
Dr. Ralph E. Gomory
Professor Daniel Nathans
President
Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics
The Sloan Foundation
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
530 Fifth Avenue
725 North Wolfe Street
New York, New York 10111
Baltimore, Maryland 21205
Bernadine Healy, M.D.
The Honorable David Packard
Chairman, The Research Institute
Chairman of the Board
The Cleveland Clinic Foundation
Hewlett-Packard Company
9500 Euclid Avenue
1501 Page Mill Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44106
Palo Alto, California 94304
Dr. Peter Likins
Dr. Harold Shapiro
President
President
Lehigh University
Princeton University
Alumni Building No. 27
One Nassau Hall
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015
Princeton, New Jersey 08544-0015
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
IN THE PRESIDENT'S FY 1992 BUDGET
STATEMENT
OF
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
AND DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Throughout his first two years in office, President Bush has emphasized the
importance of research and development as a long-term investment in the future of
this nation. The Fiscal Year 1992 budget again translates the President's commitment
into action. It proposes to allocate $75.6 billion for research and development, an
increase of $8.4 billion, or 13 percent, over the amount appropriated for fiscal year
1991.
In the first year under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act -- at a time
when proposed expenditures above the level of inflation essentially have to be offset
against other spending this increase for research and development is a strong
statement of the Administration's priorities. It testifies to the President's belief that
we must continue to make the investments needed to ensure this country's leadership,
economic strength, and security into the 21st century.
Increases for major categories of R&D support are equally substantial. Basic
research would rise to $13.3 billion, an increase of $1 billion, or 8 percent, over 1991
levels. Applied research and development would go up 13 percent, to almost $60
billion. Funding for R&D facilities would rise 15 percent, to $3.54 billion.
I have often said during this past year that the United States, as a nation, is
underinvesting in research and development. This belief is widely shared in the
1
Administration and on Capital Hill. The increases proposed in this budget take steps
to address that underinvestment. The Administration will be working closely with
Congress, and with the scientific community and the public, to see that these
proposals are translated into appropriations.
The science advisor is the one who traditionally presents the R&D numbers to
you, but much of the credit for implementing the President's commitment to research
and development as an investment in the future must, of course, rest with the
agencies and with the Office of Management and Budget. In particular, OMB's
Director, Richard Darman, and OMB's four associate directors -- Robert Grady,
Thomas Scully, Robert Howard, and Janet Hale -- are stalwart supporters of R&D as
a source of economic growth and an improved quality of life for all Americans.
There are several new influences on this year's budget that bear emphasis.
Following its reorganization and revitalization a little over a year ago, the Federal
Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET) -- the
interagency forum of Cabinet secretaries, deputy secretaries, and the heads of
independent agencies that reviews, coordinates, and helps implement federal science
and technology policy organized special interagency programs in three high-priority,
cross-cutting areas of R&D. Those programs formed the bases for three extremely
important budget initiatives in the areas of high performance computing and
communications, global change, and mathematics and science education. I shall
briefly describe these three Presidential initiatives in a moment. Detailed reports
from these three FCCSET committees will be released at press conferences tomorrow.
In addition, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST) has been meeting monthly with the President and with senior members of
the White House staff for much of the last year. PCAST has helped to bring the
private sector's perspective to the federal science and technology policy process, and
the deliberations of this high-level group have had an important influence.
MAJOR INITIATIVES IN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The President's Fiscal Year 1992 budget provides continued support for a
broad range of federal R&D activities in areas such as basic research, energy,
agriculture, defense, industrial technology, biotechnology, space, and health. I want to
begin by emphasizing this ongoing and long-term investment. This support has given
the United States the strongest science and technology enterprise that has ever
existed. It is a testament to the public policy process in the United States -- and
ultimately to the American taxpayer and voters -- that this country has been willing
to make investments whose dividends we continue to reap. I trust that we will
continue to make these investments.
In addition, this year's budget contains a number of new initiatives and areas
of emphasis in science and technology. I shall discuss them in six broad categories:
basic research, technology development, defense research and development, space,
global change, and education and human resources.
2
Basic Research
Basic research accounts for less than 10 percent of all the research and
development done in the United States. But basic research -- and particularly the
large fraction of basic research done in universities and colleges -- is an indispensable
part of the nation's R&D enterprise. It provides the important fundamental
discoveries and concepts that lead to new products and processes. It also results in
the production of many of the highly trained scientists and engineers who will carry
today's science and technology into the future. And it has a very high social rate of
return through its effect on a wide variety of private sector activities. For example,
Professor Edwin Mansfield of the University of Pennsylvania, a distinguished
economist, has recently completed a detailed study that finds an average 28 percent
social rate of return on past federal investments in academic research.
The federal government now supports more principal investigators at
universities than ever before, reflecting real increases in the level of federal support
for academic research. However, the number of such researchers competing for funds
has increased even faster, which is largely a result of the emergence of exciting new
scientific opportunities and past successes in training high-quality doctoral-level
scientists and engineers. There has also been pressure to increase the size of such
individual investigator grants reflecting the increased complexity of science
(sophistication inflation) -- and to extend the duration of grants -- to promote
stability of support and to reduce the fraction of researchers' time and effort devoted
to paperwork rather than research. Both of these changes create inevitable out-year
mortgages. Such factors have caused the competition for available research funds at
agencies such as the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of
Health to become so great that the situation has become a matter of serious concern
to the research community in general.
Recognizing the many essential contributions of basic research, especially at
universities, to our national future, the Fiscal Year 1992 budget proposes actions in
several federal agencies designed to strengthen the individual and small group
investigator component of the scientific enterprise.
National Science Foundation The President has reiterated his commitment to double
the National Science Foundation's budget between 1988 and 1994. The budget
proposes an 18 percent increase -- over $400 million -- for NSF, bringing it to a total
of $2.72 billion. Support for the conduct of research, almost all of which is basic
research in NSF, will increase by $284 million, or 16 percent, to a total of $2.1
billion. In addition, the budget proposes a crucial $50 million initiative to improve
the research infrastructure by providing state-of-the-art instrumentation to university
researchers. As with research funding, support for this instrumentation will be
distributed on the basis of a competitive, merit-reviewed process, and it will be
matched at least 50:50 by nonfederal funds.
Part of the effort at NSF to strengthen the general science and technology base
involves specific programs. For example, interagency initiatives on global change and
high performance computing and communications will be funded within NSF at a
combined level of $333 million as part of the integrated national programs developed
3
by the relevant FCCSET committees. In addition, $456 million of NSF's budget, 23
percent more than in FY 1991, will be directed to mathematics and science education
as part of yet another new FCCSET coordinated interagency initiative, as discussed
separately below.
National Institutes of Health The National Institutes of Health are the premier
biomedical research establishment in the world. To further strengthen this vital
national asset, the President has proposed an increase of $334 million for basic
research, or 7 percent, to a total of about $5 billion. Total funding for R&D within
the Department of Health and Human Services is slated to rise $564 million, or 6
percent, to a total of about $10 billion. These totals allow for an increase of 9
percent in NIH's funding for research project grants awarded to individual
investigators, providing for a broad base of fundamental advances.
Within the NIH total, $110 million is allocated to the Human Genome
Program, with an additional $59 million in funding from the Department of Energy,
resulting in an overall increase for the program of 26 percent. This program
represents a coalescence and strengthening of the activity for many individual
investigators who have been working on a wide variety of different genes. By focusing
on the overall structure of human DNA and on determining the location and sequence
of the estimated 100,000 human genes, the program will allow researchers to develop
new diagnostic tests, new therapies, and new cures for a wide variety of human
disease. Knowledge of the human genome and those of model systems will also be an
invaluable resource throughout biomedical research and biotechnology.
Together, NSF and NIH support over half of the federally funded basic
research done in the United States, and over 75 percent of the federally funded basic
research done in universities. By focusing special attention on these agencies, the
Administration plans to strengthen the individual investigator and small group
research that remains the heart and backbone of American science and technology.
Other Agencies The budget calls for the Department of Energy to fund $1.76 billion
of basic research into biological, environmental, and basic energy science and into
nuclear and high energy physics. Funding for the Superconducting Super Collider,
which is included in the category of R&D facilities rather than basic research, is set
at $534 million for FY 1992. This total is $291 million above the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 1991 and will allow the SSC to proceed on schedule.
Another important initiative involves the Department of Agriculture. The
National Research Initiative, which is a merit-based competitive research grants
program open to investigators across the nation, is proposed to increase by 71
percent, to $125 million. This program will broaden the nation's science and
technology base through research in such areas as food safety, water quality, global
change, pest management, and farm income. The overall goals of the initiative are
improvements in the quality and nutrition of food, a safer environment, more rational
use of natural resources, and economically stabilized production systems.
Finally, basic research in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is
slated to rise by $262 million -- to a total of $1.96 billion -- largely reflecting
4
increases in space and environmental science. I shall come back to this area and to
research in the Department of Defense in a later section.
Technology Development for Economic Growth and an Improved
Quality of Life
Applied research and development activities funded by the federal government
fall into several broad categories. One is applied R&D that supports agency missions
in such areas as defense, health, energy, and space. Another is applied R&D aimed
at generic or enabling technologies that have many applications in the public and
private sectors. Because of the many benefits to be gained by supporting this work,
the budget provides increased funding for major areas of applied research and
development.
High Performance Computing and Communications One area of technology with
important applications throughout the public and private sectors is high performance
computing and communications. High performance computing represents the leading
edge for the entire computer industry, plays a growing role in fundamental scientific
research, and exerts significant leverage on other industries and government programs
by enabling design and production processes that require large amounts of computing
power.
The budget requests $638 million -- an increase of $149 million or 30 percent
-- for an interagency effort designed to extend U.S. leadership in all advanced areas
of computing and networking. The planning and integration have been done by the
R&D agencies under FCCSET's Committee on Physical, Mathematical, and
Engineering Sciences. A report entitled "The Grand Challenges" and program plan
will be released at a press conference scheduled by this FCCSET committee tomorrow.
The program is organized around four elements: the hardware needed for
future generations of computers and for broader, more convenient use of today's
technology; the user-friendly software that in many cases has become the determining
factor for fully exploiting high performance computers; a National Research and
Education Network that will not only link government, universities, industries, and
schools but also give access to the power of computer systems now on-line to small
businesses and other organizations that cannot economically justify their own stand-
alone systems; and the trained personnel who will be needed to make this vision a
reality. The overall goal of this coordinated interagency effort is to increase
performance of the most advanced computers and digital communications by at least
three orders of magnitude, creating a national system of high performance computing
and communications that, I believe, will change society as dramatically as did the
widespread application of the telephone.
Energy Technologies Another important area of technology development, particularly
given the events of the past few weeks and months, centers on targeted high-payoff
energy technologies. The budget proposes to spend about $900 million -- an increase
5
of 34 percent in R&D initiatives related to the National Energy Strategy being
developed by the Department of Energy. Areas of emphasis include displacing oil in
the transportation sector, improving energy efficiency in buildings and industry, and
advanced electricity regeneration and end-use technology.
These initiatives will be pursued, whenever possible, through collaborative, cost-
shared efforts among government, industry, and universities. In many cases, R&D
will be industry-led with cost sharing and a division of research activities among
industry, universities, and government labs. The formation of industry R&D consortia
will be encouraged wherever feasible. Together, these organizational arrangements are
designed to foster a new, more results-oriented approach to energy technologies.
Advanced Manufacturing and Materials The budget proposes to invest about $1.3
billion on advanced manufacturing and materials R&D, including over $1 billion for
research and development on advanced manufacturing technologies. About half of
this manufacturing R&D supports the procurement needs of government programs,
but the other half is focused specifically on generic manufacturing technologies. An
increase of 15 percent is proposed for civilian manufacturing R&D.
In the area of materials research and development, the budget proposes $84
million for a new initiative in the National Science Foundation intended to strengthen
the position of the United States in next-generation materials synthesis and
processing. Initially, two high-payoff areas will be emphasized: electronic and
photonic materials, and biomaterials.
Industrial Technology Within the Department of Commerce, and specifically within
the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Administration proposes a 15
percent increase, to a total of $248 million, to expand NIST's ability to perform
generic applied research and technology development and to address a rapidly
growing number of important standards and measurement issues. The increase will
allow NIST to conduct research and provide laboratory support for manufacturing
technologies, information technologies, and other emerging technologies that are
extremely important to the U.S. economy. In addition, the budget includes $36
million for the Advanced Technology Program to help fund industry-led high-risk
R&D on precompetitive technologies.
Aeronautics Previous federal support of aeronautics has contributed to the global
leadership of the U.S. aerospace industry, which now has a higher trade surplus than
any other sectors of U.S. industry. To extend this leadership, the budget proposes
$543 million for aeronautics research and development in NASA, an increase of 13
percent. The program will address, among other items, high-temperature engines,
issues associated with supersonic flight, and the aging of today's aircraft. In addition
to this work, the budget proposes $305 million for the National Aerospace Plane
(NASP), a joint NASA-DOD program, for technology development leading to a
decision on an experimental flight research vehicle.
6
Biotechnology Biotechnology has become one of the most exciting frontiers in science,
offering enormous potential in medicine, agriculture, and industry. In the budget, the
President has allocated $4.1 billion to support biotechnology R&D. Over 80 percent
of this amount is in the NIH budget, largely in the form of basic research, but 11
other agencies also support programs directly or indirectly related to biotechnology.
The budget's emphasis in this area is designed to maintain America's lead in this
rapidly growing field.
AIDS The total request for AIDS research within the federal government is $1.2
billion. Within NIH, research on HIV and AIDS is set at $851 million, an increase of
5.8 percent. A significant component of this budget supports the basic and applied
research necessary for the development of vaccines and new therapeutic and
diagnostic approaches. This continues to be a very high priority for the
Administration.
Research and Experimentation Tax Credit Finally, let me mention a related item that
does not directly involve federal outlays but has a key effect on our ability to secure
R&D investments in the future. For the past several years, Congress has been
renewing the research and experimentation tax credit on an annual basis, but it has
never made the credit permanent, and this has greatly diminished the credit's
effectiveness. The Administration is again calling on Congress to make the tax credit
permanent this year to help reverse the recent leveling-off of corporate R&D
investment and expand its scope.
National Security Research and Development
The superiority of the current generation of U.S. weapons, as demonstrated
rather dramatically by the Desert Storm activities, is a direct result of decisions made
in years past to harness American technical creativity in the development of military
systems of unparalleled performance and quality. Costly though some were, these
systems are currently saving the lives of many U.S. servicemen as well as countless
civilians. As the United States enters the 1990s, the strength of our basic and
applied research and development in the area of defense technologies must be
sustained.
The budget proposes an increase of over $5 billion, or 14 percent, to a total of
$43 billion for both the Departments of Defense and Energy to meet national security
R&D requirements. Major R&D efforts will include the Strategic Defense Initiative,
the B-2 bomber, the Advanced Cruise Missile, the SSN-21 attack submarine, and the
Advanced Tactical Fighter.
The President is also requesting $5.2 billion for the Strategic Defense Initiative,
including as a first priority the development of technologies associated with a
defensive system capable of providing Global Protection Against Limited Strikes
(GPALS). Such defenses will protect U.S. forces deployed overseas, U.S. friends and
allies, and the United States itself against accidental, unauthorized, or limited
7
ballistic missile strikes.
By far the largest portion of defense R&D still goes for hardware development
and the operation and support of development, test, and evaluation facilities. But
defense R&D also includes funds to support the defense technology base through
basic research (funded at $1 billion in 1992) and applied research (funded at $2.9
billion). While all defense R&D activities are directed toward current or future
defense needs, these activities also have valuable long-term economic benefits in the
civilian sector in such areas as supercomputers, advanced materials, and
manufacturing technologies, where the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) continues to play a very important role. National security-related
technologies have an important synergism with those in the civilian sector except in
certain highly specialized areas. Our goal is that of building on this relationship.
Space R&D
Over the past year the U.S. space program has been undergoing an intensive
and very healthy review, and as a result the program is undergoing important
changes. However, the benefits of exploring space remain unchanged -- the
commercial benefits, the science benefits, and, as OMB Director Darman has put it,
the spiritual benefits. Our standing as a world leader will continue to be measured,
in part, through the commitment we make to our exploration of the space frontier
This year's budget makes a very strong commitment to the scientific
components of the space program, in keeping with the report of the Advisory
Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program (the Augustine report). It
proposes $2.1 billion, an increase of 21 percent over FY 1991, for NASA's space
science programs, including astronomy, life sciences, planetary exploration, Earth
science, and materials research. This represents about 20 percent of NASA's total
budget, which is also in keeping with the Augustine Report.
NASA's proposed $15.7 billion budget also includes support for a Mission To
Planet Earth and a Mission From Planet Earth. The Mission to Planet Earth is a
vital component of the nation's overall integrated global change program, as described
below. It includes initial support for the Earth Observing System (EOS), which, for
the first time, will make simultaneous observations of the earth's surface by a whole
suite of complementary instruments. While the data stream from such an array will
be daunting, these data will provide a wealth of new and unique capability in areas
ranging over agriculture, coean productivity and pollution, climate change, forestry,
and much more.
The Mission from Planet Earth -- which includes Space Station Freedom and
the Space Exploration Initiative -- supports the goal of expanding the human presence
away from Earth and into the solar system. Continued development work on Space
Station Freedom is funded at about $2 billion. The Space Exploration Initiative is
funded at about $250 million, including activities in the Departments of Energy and
Defense, and as recommended in the Augustine Report is being planned on a "go-as-
you-pay" basis.
The budget also recognizes the critical importance of space transportation as
the foundation of all U.S. space activities. The budget proposes $350 million (split
8
evenly between DOD and NASA) to continue advanced rocket engine development and
to initiate a program that will culminate in the development of a new space launch
system. The program's goal is to provide new launch capability for a range of
payloads, including heavy-lift, that is both more capable and more cost-effective than
today's systems and that will benefit both unmanned and manned space activities.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program
For the past three years, FCCSET's Committee on Earth and Environmental
Sciences has been organizing the U.S. Global Change Research Program -- a
pioneering program designed to produce the scientific knowledge that world leaders
will need to address such issues as global climate change and ozone depletion. The
budget proposes a total of almost $1.2 billion -- an increase of 24 percent or $232
million -- for the program. This amount will virtually double the size of the program
since it was started in fiscal year 1990. Of this amount, roughly two thirds is
directed at space-based research, with the remainder focused on a wide range of
ground-based national and international research efforts.
Over the last year the CEES has developed a set of four integrating themes --
climate modeling and prediction, global water and energy cycles, global carbon cycle,
and ecological systems and population dynamics -- based on the scientific needs
identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A report on the FY
1992 program, entitled "Our Changing Planet," will be available at a press conference
tomorrow morning scheduled by the CEES. We expect this report to be an important
source of input to the international negotiations beginning today in Chantilly,
Virginia, that initiate the negotiations that will lead to a Framework Convention on
global change.
Science and Mathematics Education
Finally, let me mention one other FCCSET activity that has provided an
important input to this year's budget discussions. Over the past year, FCCSET's
Committee on Education and Human Resources, under the chairmanship of Secretary
of Energy James Watkins, has been examining the federal government's support of
science and mathematics education. Guided by the National Education Goals
established by the President and the nation's governors, the committee has developed
a strategy to maximize the effectiveness of the Federal contribution to American
science and mathematics education.
A report to be released tomorrow, entitled "By the Year 2000: First in the
World," lays out strategic priorities designed to meet the educational needs of the
country in this area. At the precollege level, which the report identifies as the highest
priority for action, the greatest need is to increase the supply of well-trained science
and mathematics teachers. Other areas of emphasis include improving curricula,
developing new educational technologies, and increasing student interest and
performance in science and mathematics, particularly among women and minorities.
Similar strategic priorities have been developed for undergraduate and graduate
9
education. It is important that in our efforts to correct a dismaying series of
problems at the precollege level we not lose sight of the importance of maintaining
our world leadership in graduate education.
The committee also presents, for the first time, a comprehensive interagency
overview of federal funding and programs that affect science and mathematics
education at all levels precollege, undergraduate, and graduate. The federal
investments in science and mathematics education are larger than previously
recognized: in fiscal year 1991, for example, the federal government spent $1.7 billion
expressly for science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education at all levels.
The FY 1992 budget proposes that the federal government increase this amount
by over 13 percent, to about $1.94 billion, as part of an integrated interagency effort
in science and mathematics education. Precollege education would receive the largest
increase $146 million, or 28 percent.
This report by Admiral Watkin's committee breaks new ground and will greatly
influence our national strategy in science and mathematics education. I would
encourage all of you to attend tomorrow's release of their report.
THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF OSTP, FCCSET, AND PCAST
TO IMPLEMENTING THE ADMINISTRATION'S SCIENCE AGENDA
Interagency Coordination Through FCCSET
Thus far I have noted the activities of three specific FCCSET committees that
were heavily involved in this year's budget process. But all seven of the committees
under the reorganized and revitalized FCCSET have activities ongoing, some involving
the budget, some on nonbudgetary issues. In the area of future budgets, FCCSET has
plans to update and extend the work that its committees have done to date. During
the coming year, we will consider adding other areas to the list of budgetary cross-
cutting analyses.
In areas less directly related to the budget, FCCSET committees are examining
a wide range of issues. Under the Committee on Life Sciences and Health, the
Biotechnology Research Subcommittee (formerly the Biotechnology Science
Coordinating Committee) is planning to review federal priorities in biotechnology and
is continuing to examine the scientific issues in biotechnology that influence regulatory
decision-making. Under the Committee on International Science, Engineering, and
Technology, a Subcommittee on International Cooperation with the European
Community has been developing principles to govern the new opportunties that will
accompany the unification of European markets in 1992. And under the full
FCCSET, an Ad Hoc Working Group on Risk Assessment has been established to
seek agency consensus on common principles that these agencies can apply in their
approaches to risk assessment.
These are only examples of the many areas in which FCCSET groups are
bringing a greater degree of coordination and coherence to federal science and
technology policy. But it bears emphasis that, by law, the members of FCCSET
committees are all government employees.
10
Private Sector Input
The President has also recognized the crucial role of the academic and private
sector in helping to assess R&D priorities through his creation of, and monthly
meetings with, his President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST). During its first year, PCAST has focused on three major issues -- science
and mathematics education, economic competitiveness, and global change and the
environment -- and has touched on a great number of other issues in science and
technology.
PCAST is now forming a panel on Technology and National Security. The
panel will concentrate on defining the elements of a forward-looking national security
science and technology strategy appropriate to a vastly changed world scene. Similar
panels in a variety of areas of particular importance to the President will be
established during the coming year.
Competitiveness
In addition to the activities of FCCSET and PCAST entities that I chair --
OSTP has a number of major projects under way. One deals predominantly with the
"T" in OSTP. Last September our office released a report entitled U.S. Technology
Policy, which laid out the goals and strategy of the Federal government's approach to
technology development and showed how they fitted into a comprehensive background.
In the near future, in response to a Senate request, we will release a document that
will build on this foundation, the first report of the National Critical Technologies
Panel. In addition, OSTP is working to establish the Critical Technologies Institute,
as directed by the Congress in last year's appropriations process, to assist in the
development of strategies that will follow up on the panel report in these critical
areas.
I would also mention, in this context, the work of an organization closely
related to OSTP, the National Critical Materials Council. The Council, of which I
am also chairman, is currently working on the 1990 report on a superconductivity
action plan, a critical materials report, and an advanced materials program plan as
requested by the Congress. These reports will be released in the near future.
International Science
OSTP's efforts in the area of international science and technology are designed
to help implement the Administration's domestic science and technology goals and
make science and technology a more integral part of U.S. foreign policy. Over the
next year I will be chairing three senior-level joint commission meetings with the
European Community, with the Soviet Union, and with Japan -- to review our
bilateral agreements in science and technology and to identify areas of mutual interest
and new challenges to international cooperation. Also, OSTP will be heavily involved
in a major international meeting for the science ministers of the OECD nations to be
held in the spring of 1992, a significant portion of which will focus on improving
11
international cooperation on large projects in the basic sciences.
National Security
The conflict in the Gulf, the dramatic developments underway in Eastern
Europe, and the continuing uncertainty in the Soviet Union presage far-reaching
changes in the international environment and in the security needs of the West. Key
OSTP concerns include the development and application of technology to support
changing defense and foreign policy requirements in such areas as defensive
technologies for chemical and biological weapons; intelligence collection, analysis, and
protection; and command, control, and communications capabilities. Also of concern
is the maintenance and effective application, throughout the civilian sector, of the
enormous national resource represented by the personnel, technology, and know-how
currently available in the nation's defense industries and laboratories -- capabilities
that will be vulnerable in a future marked by decreasing defense expenditures.
Personnel Appointments
Finally, it is clear that the R&D program is implemented by people, which is
why I am extremely enthusiastic about the President's nominations of Bernadine
Healy to be the Director of the National Institutes of Health and Walter Massey to be
Director of the National Science Foundation. I am also very pleased by the
President's nomination of D. A. Henderson to be OSTP's Associate Director for Life
Sciences. Dr. Henderson, who has most recently been the Dean and Professor of
Epidemiology and International Health at the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and
Public Health in Baltimore, will bring a broad range of experience in the biomedical
and behavioral sciences to OSTP. I am looking forward to the confirmation hearings
of all three of these individuals and trust that they will soon be helping to implement
the nation's science and technology policy.
That concludes my comments on the FY 1992 budget and issues of science and
technology in the Bush Administration. I would be happy to answer your questions.
12
OFFICE OF CABINET AFFAIRS STAFFING MEMORANDUM
Date: 2-12-91
Due by: 3:00 Friday, Feb15
Subject: OMB Clearance: technology admin authorization act
From: Holls Williamson
ACTION
CONCUR
FYI
ACTION
CONCUR
FYI
HOLIDAY
MCBEE
DANZANSKY
MCMUNN
ADAIR
PORTER
BUCHHOLZ
SCHALL
CASSE
SECHLER
EVANS
WETHINGTON
FARRAR
WILLIAMSON
GUNN
HEIMBACH
JACKSON
Comments:
Please review and provide
comments to me by 3:00 on
Friday, Feb, 15, manus.
02/12/91
16:56
OMB LRD/ESGG
001
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
IS Roga
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Washington, D.C. 20503
total
FEB 12 1991
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL MEMORANDUM
LRM #D-120
TO: Legislative Liaison Officer:
DEFENSE - Samuel T. Brick, Jr. - 697-1305 - 325
EDUCATION - John Kristy - 401-2670 - 207
ENERGY - Bob Rabben - 586-6718 - 209
INTERIOR - Pam Somers - 208-6706 - 329
JUSTICE - Grace Mastalli - 514-4606 - 217
STATE - will Davis - 647-4463 - 225
TREASURY - Richard S. Carro - 566-8523 - 228
CEA - Francine Obermiller - 395-5036 - 242
FEMA - George W. Watson - 646-4105 - 327
GSA - Lonnie P. Taylor - - 501-0563 - 237
NSF - Charles H. Herz - 357-9435 - 248
OPM - James N. Woodruff - 606-1424 - 331
OSTP - Damar Hawkins/Ken Yale - 456-6272 - 288
SBA - Michael P. Forbes - 653-7581 - 315
USTR - David Weiss - 395-3475 - 223
OGE - Jane Ley - 523-5377 - 261
SUBJECT: COMMERCE Draft Bill "Technology
Administration Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1992"
NOTE: A hearing on this subject is scheduled for
Tuesday, February 26th.
DEADLINE: FRIDAY FEB 15 1991
The Office of Management and Budget requests the views of your
agency on the above subject before advising on its relationship to
the program of the President, in accordance with OMB Circular A-19.
Questions should be referred to Constance BOWERS (395-3457),
the legislative analyst for this bill.
JAMES (for)
J. JUKES Juke
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
CC:
Don Gessaman
David Gold
Cora Beebe
Tom Dorsey
Barry White
Ken Schwartz
Bob Damus
Norine Noonan
Cyndi Vallina
Boyden Gray
02/12/91
16:57
OMB LRD/ESGG
002
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 10:32AM i
2023778151-
202 385 3108;# 4
DRAFT
Honorable Thomas S. Foley
Speaker of the House
of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Speaker:
Enclosed are six copies of a draft bill --
To authorise appropriations for the Department of
Commerce's Technology Administration for fiscal year
1992, and for other purposes.
together with a Statement of Purpose and Need, and a Section-by-
Section Analysis.
We have been advised by the Office of Management and Budget
that there is no objection to the submission of this legislative
proposal to the Congress and that its enactment would be in
accord with the program of the President.
Sincerely,
DRAFT
Robert A. Mosbacher
Enclosures
02/12/91
16:57
OMB LRD/ESGG
003
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 10:33AM ;
2028773151-
202 895 8109:# 5
A BILL
To authorize appropriations for the Department of Commerce's
Technology Administration for fiscal year 1992, and for other
purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled. That this Act
may be cited as the "Technology Administration Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1992."
TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION
Sec. 2. There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary of Commerce, hereafter referred to as the Secretary, to
carry out executive and analytical activities performed by the
Technology Administration, $4,936,000 for fiscal year 1992, which
shall be available for the following line items:
(1) Executive Direction, $1,628,000.
(2) Technology Policy and Commercial Technology Application,
$3,308,000.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
Sec. 3. There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary to carry out activities performed by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 1992, the
sums set forth in the following line items:
(1) Electronica and Electrical Engineering, $33,595,000.
(2) Manufacturing Engineering, $12,617,000.
(3) Chemical Science and Technology, $20,822,000.
(4) Physics, $26,475,000.
(5) Materiale Science and Engineering, $28,671,000.
(6) Building and Fire Research, $10,632,000.
(7) Computer Systems, $15,048,000.
(8) Applied Mathematics and Scientific Computing,
$6,088,000.
(9) Technology Assistance, $10,094,000.
(10) Research Support Activities, $37,798,000.
(11) Technology Development and Transfer Mechanisms,
$46,200,000.
02/12/91
16:57
OMB LRD/ESGG
004
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 :10:88AM ;
2023773151-
202 885 81091# 6
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Sec. 4. Funds may be transferred among the line items listed
in Sections 2 and 3 above upon notification of the Committee on
Commerce, Science and Transportation of the Senate and the
Committee on Science, Space and Technology of the House of
Representatives fifteen days in advance of any such transfer.
SALARY ADJUSTMENTS
Sec. 5. There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary for fiscal year 1992 such additional sums as may be
necessary to make any adjustments in salary, pay, retirement, and
other employee benefits which may be provided for by law.
AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATIONS
Sec. 6. Appropriations made under the authority provided in
this Act shall remain available for obligation, for expenditure,
or for obligation and expenditure for periods specified in the
Acts making such appropriations.
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
Sec. 7. Section 17 (f) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology
Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. S 37118 (f)) is amended to read
as follows:
"In order to carry out the program under this section, the
Secretary 18 authorized to seek and accept gifts from public
and private sources, to impose reasonable fees on applicants,
and, to the extent that additional sums are needed to cover
the full cost of the program, to use appropriated funds.
CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES
Sec. 8. Section 14 of the Act of March 3, 1901 (15 U.S.C.
$ 278d), is amended by striking "herein:" and all that follows,
and inserting in lieu thereof "herein."
RECOUPMENT
Sec. 9. Section 28(d) (7) of the Aot of March 3, 1901 (15
U.S.C. $ 278n (d) (7)), is amended to read as follows:
"(7) Each agreement with any business or joint venture that
receives contributions under this section shall specify a
test, as mutually agreed to by the Department and the
recipient, for determining whether the venture or project
shall be deemed to have been a commercial success and
providing that in such event there will be appropriate
recoupment to the Federal Government. Such recoupment shall
2
02/12/91
16:58
OMB LRD/ESGG
005
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 :10:34AM ;
2028773151-
202 395 81091# 7
not exceed the principal amount, with reasonable interest, of
any monetary grants provided to such recipient under the
Program. The Secretary shall issue regulations stating the
circumstances under which commercial success' will be found
and the general procedures and terms for recoupment in such
cases."
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS
Sec. 10. Section 18 of the Act of March 3, 1901 (15 U.S.C.
$ 278g-1) is amended by:
(1) deleting the period at the end of the first sentence,
and adding "I and to U.S. citizens for research and technical
activities on Institute programs." and
(2) adding at the end of that section the following:
"The Institute is also authorized to conduct an Undergraduate
Scholarship Program for the purpose of encouraging
undergraduate students to pursue scientific and technical
studies.".
Sec. 11. Section 17 of the Act of March 3, 1901 (15 U.S.C.
$ 278g) is amended by adding the following new subsection:
"(d) The Secretary is authorized to recruit and employ in
scientific and engineering fields at the National Institute
of Standards and Technology foreign nationals who have been
lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent
residence under the Immigration and Naturalization Act and
who intend to become United States citizens.".
STATE TECHNOLOGY EXTENSION PROGRAM
Sec. 12. Section 5121 5121(b) (b) (5) of the Omnibus Trade and
Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-418, Title v, 102
Stat. 1437) is amended by deleting "September 30, 1991." at the
and of the sentence and inserting in lieu thereof "two years
after eward.".
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
Sec. 13. Section 212 (a) (1) of Public Law 100-519 (102 Stat.
2594) is amended by adding a new paragraph (E) as follows:
"(E) Retain and use all earned and unearned monies heretofore
or hereafter received, including receipts, revenues, and
advanced payments and deposits, to fund all obligations and
expenses, including inventories and capital equipment.".
3
02/12/91
16:58
OMB LRD/ESGG
006
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-91 :10:34AM ;
2028773151-
202 885 3109:# 8
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO SEMATECH
Sec. 14. Section 273 (c) (4) of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (15 U.S.C.
$ 4603(c) (4)) and Section 5422(a) of the Omnibus Trade and
Competitiveness Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. $ 4603a(a)) are each
amended by substituting "Technology" for "Economic Affairs".
4
02/12/91
16:59
OMB LRD/ESGG
007
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 :10:85AM ;
2028778151-
202 385 8109:# @
STATEMENT or PURPOSE AND NEED
This legislation authorizes appropriations for fiscal year
1992 for the Department of Commerce's Technology Administration,
which was established by Title II of Public Law 100-519.
The Technology Administration consists of (a) the Office of
the Under Secretary for Technology, (b) the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy, the successor to the
Office of Productivity, Technology and Innovation, (c) the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, formerly the
National Bureau of Standards, and (d) the National Technical
Information Service. Because the latter is self-supporting, this
legislation authorizes appropriations only for the first three
units.
The Technology Administration provides a central point within
the Department for enhancing the role and contribution of
technology to U.S. competitiveness and economic security, It
works closely with business, federal agencies, state and local
units and other organizations. It manages a variety of
technology programs relating to technology policy; information
dissemination; basic and applied research in the physical
sciences and engineering; the development of measurement
techniques, test methods, standards, and related services; the
development and diffusion of manufacturing technology, and
performs generic and precompetitive research and development work
on new, advanced technologies.
Through these various activities, the Technology
Administration is able to provide industry with a wide range of
services aimed at enhancing its ability to commercialize new
technologies and to increase the productivity and quality of U.S.
products and services. Increasingly, it is directing its
attention to improving manufacturing quality, achieving shorter
production cycles, and reducing manufacturing costs.
The legislation, described more fully in the attached
section-by-section analysis, will ensure that all of the
Technology Administration's activities are adequately funded
during the period beginning on October 1, 1991 and ending on
September 30, 1992. In addition, it (1) expands NIST's
educational programs, broadens its hiring authority, and makes a
number of administrative improvements to certain programs,
including the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award; (2)
clarifies the availability of customer deposit accounts to fund
operating expenses at NTIS; and (3) transfers responsibility for
preparing certain reports relating to Sematech from the Under
Secretary for Economic Affairs to the Under Secretary for
Technology.
02/12/91
16:59
OMB LRD/ESGG
008
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 10:35AM ;
2023773151-
202 395 8109;#10
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Title.
This section provides that this Act may be cited as the
"Technology Administration Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1992."
Section 2. Technology Administration.
This section authorizes funds for the activities of the Under
Secretary of Commerce for Technology for fiscal year 1992.
Pursuant to organization order issued by the Secretary of
Commerce, the Under Secretary is the Department's principal
technology adviser to the Secretary and spokesperson for science
and technology matters and is also responsible for the overall
management and direction of the Technology Administration and its
three constituent components: the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Technology Policy, the National Institute of
Standards and Technology and the National Technical Information
Service.
This section also authorizes appropriations for the
activities of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy.
This officer is the Technology Administration's principal source
of technology policy advice and analysis. As such, it provides
the expertise necessary to support the Under Secretary, the
Assistant Secretary and other senior officials in their capacity
as members of major, policy-level fora, such as the Federal
Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology,
the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and
the President's Council on Competitiveness and Technology and the
Cabinet-level Economic Policy Council. It is also responsible
for managing a number of important technology programs,
including: the Japanese Technical Literature Program, the
Clearinghouse on State and Local Initiatives in Productivity,
Technology and Innovation, the Metric Conversion Program, the
National Medal of Technology, and the Federal Technology
Management Program. It is also responsible for coordinating
international science and technology policy issues within the
Department and for encouraging U.S. industry to learn about and
take advantage of foreign research opportunities.
Section 3. National Institute of Standards and Technology.
This section authorizes funds for the activities of NIST for.
fiscal year 1992 for eleven specified line items. These funds
will permit the Institute to meet its basic goals under its
Organic Act, as modified in 1988: aiding U.S. industry through
research and services, contributing to public health and safety,
and supporting the U.S. scientific and engineering research
communities.
02/12/91
17:00
OMB LRD/ESGG
009
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-91 :10:36AM ;
2023773151->
202 895 3109:#11
Paragraph 1 authorizes $33,595,000 for Electronics and
Electrical Engineering, which is conducted primarily by NIST'S
Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory. Through this
program NIST serves the U.S. electronics industry and its
customers by providing the measurement support that U.S. industry
needs to improve its competitive position. Measurement methods
from this program support the fundamental electronic technologies
of semiconductors, magnetics, and superconductors that underlie
all modern electronic systems; communications technologies
including optical fibers and microwaves) electrical power
systems; and electronic measurement instrumentation broadly.
Paregraph 2 authorizes $12,617,000 for Manufacturing
Engineering, which is conducted primarily by NIST's Manufacturing
Engineering Laboratory. Through this program, NIST provides
measurement methods, calibration standards and a technical
research base for interface standards and on-line quality
assurance. This enables U.S.-discrete parts industries to
develop more repidly and adopt automation and other advanced
manufacturing technologies. NIST supplies U.S. industry with
both the standards and measurement methods to support the current
eystem of quality control and aids the automation of U.S.
manufacturing by providing the information necessary to develop
standard "interfaces" between manufacturing systems.
Paragraph 3 authorizes $20,822,000 for Chemical Science and
Technology. NIST conducts fundamental investigations on
measurement-based phenomena related to the composition and
behavior of chemical and biochemical systems, while developing
and improving measurement capability and quantitative
understanding of the underlying physical principles of
measurement science. NIST develops new and improved measurement
methods and standards for high accuracy chemical analyses; serves
as the National Reference Laboratory, providing the underlying
scientific basis and engineering measurement techniques,
standards, data on key properties (thermophysical,
thermochemical, and kinetic), predictive methods, and calibration
and measurement services; and performs research on the structure
and behavior of atoms and molecules in isolation, in clusters,
and on surfaces. The messurement methods and reference materials
from this program provide the basis for uniform measurements in
the chemical, biochemical processing, clinical services,
instrument manufacturing, metals-producing, and emerging high
technology materials industries, as well as many Federal programs
related to environmental pollution, toxic substances, and health
services.
Paragraph 4 authorizes $26,475,000 for Physics. NIST
investigates the structure and dynamics of atoms and molecules,
singly and in aggregate, and establishes measurement methods and
standards for infra red, visible, ultra-violet, x-ray, gamma-ray,
electron, and neutron radiation. NIST develops and disseminates
2
02/12/91
17:01
OMB LRD/ESGG
010
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-91 10:37AM ;
2028773151-
202 385 8108:#12
national standards for time and frequency to meet critical
industrial needs in communications, (carrier frequency
calibration, synchronisation of data transmissions), for
electrical power (power flow monitoring, fault analysis), for
transportation (air traffic control, railroads, traffic lights),
and for navigation and position location (celestial navigation,
oil exploration), as well as for standards laboratories and many
military applications. NIST generates, evaluates, compiles and
disseminates atomic, molecular, optical, and ionizing-radiation
data in response to major national demands in areas such as
defense, energy, environment, space, health, lighting,
microelectronics, radiation, and transportation.
Paragraph 5 authorizes $28,671,000 for Materials Science and
Engineering, which is carried out primarily in the Materials
Science and Engineering Laboratory. Technological progress in
such diverse fields as electronics, construction, energy, and
transportation hinge on the development of advanced materials
with property and performance characteristics far superior to
materials used today. International competition related to
advances in materials will intensify. Annual U.S. shipments of
advanced materials and products made from them already exceed $70
billion. The NIST materials program emphasizes methods,
reference data and materials, and the scientific understanding of
the underlying chemical and physical basis of materials
properties.
Paragraph 6 authorizes $10,632,000 for Building and Fire
Research, programs conducted by the Building and Fire Research
Laboratory.
The Center for Building Technology is the national
construction research laboratory. It works cooperatively with
other public and private organizations to improve the usefulness,
safety and economy of constructed facilities and to increase the
productivity and international competitiveness of the
construction industry. It develops technologies to predict,
measure and test the performance of construction materials,
components, systems and practices. Its programs include
structural engineering, materials, mechanical and environmental
systems and computer integrated construction. Under the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, NIST is the principal
agency for research and support for the development of seismic
design and construction standards.
The Center for Fire Research is the foremost fire research
laboratory in the United States. It was established by the
Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 to reduce the
human and economic costs of unwanted fires by providing
scientific and technical knowledge on all aspects of fire for the
fire protection community. It investigates the scientific
principles that govern the phenomenon of fire, provides the
3
02/12/91
17:01
OMB LRD/ESGG
011
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-91 :10:37AM ;
2028773151-
202 895 8109;#18
knowledge base for fire safety, develops the underlying technical
support for new safety standards, and generates the engineering
methodology to support the practice of fire protection
engineering.
Paragraph 7 authorizes $15,048,000 for Computer Systems.
Through these activities, NIST (a) provides leadership and
research in the development of voluntary national and
international standards and conformance tests for computers and
telecommunication systems by assisting in the writing of
specifications and leading standards development activities; (b)
promotes "open" computer system architectures that accelerate the
use of new information technologies; and (c) provides technical
guidance to private industry and the Federal government,
participating in standards development, fostering implementation
agreements among vendore, and developing conformance tests.
Paragraph 8 authorizes $6,088,000 for Applied Mathematics and
Scientific Computing, which program is administered through the
Computing and Applied Mathematics Laboratory. These activities
ensure that the best and most appropriate techniques in
mathematical modeling, statistics, numerical analysis, and
scientific computing are made available to and used by staff in
the NIST laboratory-based programs and their collaborators in
industry. The program helps certify the accuracy and integrity
of NIST technical data and helps validate NIST scientific
experiments and measurement services.
Paragraph 9 authorizes $10,094,000 for fiscal year 1992 for
Technology Assistance. These activities include NIST's national
and international standards activities. National and
international standards activities provide a central source of
information and leadership for U.S. industry regarding national
and international standardization activities and issues concerned
with attestation of conformity, including product testing and
certification. Under these programs NIST provides critically
evaluated data on physical and chemical properties of materials
to scientists, engineers and the general public. NIST also
assures accurate and compatible msasurements through the
development, certification, and distribution of standard
reference materials (SRM's) and produces SRM's for use in
industrial production and quality assurance; environmental
analysis,; health measurements; and basic measurements in science
and metrology. In addition, oversight and management of the ATP
and MTC programs is provided through this activity.
Paragraph 10 authorizes $37,798,000 for Research Support
Activities. These activities are NIST's centrally managed
programs which provide support to all other NIST programs. The
programs provide competence development in NIST mission-oriented
areas of research, high caliber scientists and engineers for
ongoing research programs through NIST's Postdoctoral Fellowship
4
02/12/91
17:02
OMB LRD/ESGG
012
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-91 :10:38AM ;
2023778151-
202 385 3109;#14
Program; computing support for the research programs; a safe
environment for conducting NIST technical programs; and NIST's
Cold Neutron Research Facility, a special facility with critical
measurement capabilities for properties, performance, and
processing of materials and chemicals.
Paragraph 11 authorizes $46,200,000 for fiscal year 1992 for
Technology Development and Transfer Mechanisms. These programs
include the Regional Centers for the Transfer of Manufacturing
Technology and the Advanced Technology Program.
The Regional Centers and the ATP provide shared-risk
financial assistance combined with opportunities for cooperating
with NIST to develop or transfer technologies that can improve
U.S. manufacturing capabilities at all stages of technological
sophistication.
Section 4. Transfer of Funds.
This section provides that funds may be transferred among the
line items listed in Sections 2 and 3 upon notification of the
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation of the Senate
and the Committee on Science, Space and Technology of the House
of Representatives fifteen days in advance of any such transfer.
Section 5. Salary Adjustments.
This section authorizes such sume as are necessary for fiscal
year 1992 for adjustments in salaries, pay, retirement, and other
employee benefits in connection with the programs and activities
described in Sections 2 and 3.
Section 6, Availability of Appropriations.
This section permits the length of availability of funds
appropriated under authorization provided by this Act to be
determined in appropriations acts.
Section 7. Quality Improvement.
This section contains a technical amendment to the Stevenson-
Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to permit the Director
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to use
appropriated funds to carry out the Federal Government's
responsibilities in connection with the Malcolm Baldrige National
Quality Award.
Interest in the Award, and the demand for information about
it and for related support services, has gone well beyond the
private manufacturing sector of the U.S. economy, at which the
Award was originally aimed, to State governments, other Federal
agencies, and non-profit groups such as hospitals and health care
5
02/12/91
17:03
OMB LRD/ESGG
013
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-91 :10:39AM ;
2028778151->
202 395 8109:#15
organizations. The criteria developed for the Award, and
information on quality management from the Award recipients are
used by all organizations, both private and public, profit and
non-profit, to assess, and thus improve, their total quality
management. The demands on NIST for support services, and
information transfer activities have grown beyond anyone's
expectations.
This technical amendment would allow the use of appropriated
funds to provide for support services and information transfer
activities of NIST directly related to the operation of the
Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award program.
Section B, Construction of Facilities.
This section amends NIST's organic legislation to delete a
$250,000 limitation on the amount of funds that may be expended
for construction or improvement of buildings at the NIST
laboratories sites. This limit was last changed in 1980 from
$75,000 to $250,000. This ceiling can be interpreted to require
that the authority for any construction or improvement which
exceeds the limit be included in the statute appropriating funde
for NIST. This is inconsistent with current practice, under
which allocations of funds for major construction or improvement
projects are provided for in the reports accompanying legislation
making appropriations for NIST, rather than in the legislation
itself. This change will ensure that practice conforms with the
statute, while maintaining the current level of control over
construction projects.
Section 9. Recoupment.
This section clarifies the recoupment provisions of the
Advanced Technology Frogram (ATP). The ATP is designed to
provide funding for joint government, industry, academia,
research and development projects on precompetitive, generic
technologies. NIST has found that many potential ATP
participants, especially software developers, have declined to
participate in the ATP because of the current recoupment language
in the NIST Organic Act, which entitles the Federal Government to
B share of licensing fees and royalty payments in an amount
proportional to the Federal share of the costs involved. The
proposed clarifying language would retain a reasonable cap on
total recoupment from a project and afford the parties sufficient
flexibility to tailor the terms to their particular situation.
Sections 10 and 11. Educational Programs.
Section 10(2) authorizes the Director of NIST to grant
fellowships directly to U.S. citizens for research and technical
activities on NIST programs. Currently, the Director has
authority to award fellowships to foreign nationals; to students
6
02/12/91
17:03
OMB LRD/ESGG
014
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 :10:40AM ;
2028778151-
202 895 3109:#16
at U.S. institutions of higher learning; and to conduct, in
conjunction with the National Academy of Sciences, a postdoctoral
program for 20 to 40 new fellows per year. This amendment
provides NIST with the authority to appoint U.S. citizens to
fellowships with tenures at the NIST laboratories. This would
provide NIST with full flexibility in managing its fellowships
programs; and in responding to new directions in science and
technology and to the needs of its ongoing programs.
Section 10(2) expands NIST's existing educational programs to
authorize its Director to conduct an Undergraduate Scholarship
Program, with emphasis on recruiting minorities and women. The
Department recognizes the increasing need for trained scientists
and engineers to meet the requirements of the U.S. work force in
the coming decade. These work force demands can not be met
unless more students, especially women and minorities, are
encouraged to pursue careers in science and engineering. This
new program will aim at encouraging undergraduate students to
undertake science and engineering studies. In addition, it
would, through contact with NIST scientists and facilities,
introduce students to the attractive and varied science and
engineering career opportunities available in Federal research
laboratories.
Section 11 allows NIST to employ highly qualified foreign
nationals who are holders of an Alion Registration Receipt Card
(Form I-551), and who have filed a Declaration of Intent to
Become a U.S. Citizen (Form N-300). The provision reflects a
stark reality: the majority of students seeking advanced degrees
In U.S. engineering schools are foreign nationals, and they are
becoming a significant portion of the entry work force conducting
research in areas of emerging technologies, areas of critical
economic importance. Many U.S. employers are already adapting
their recruitment strategy to take advantage of this pool of
talent. This section would broaden the ability of NIST to
recruit in the very tight and competitive scientific and
engineering labor markets.
Section 12. State Technology Extension Program.
This section changes the termination date for contracts under
the NIST State Technology Extension Service program from
September 30, 1991" to "two years after award." Because of
delays in enacting the authorizing legislation, setting up the
program, and awarding the contracts, the current legislative
restriction will result in some of the contracts being in effect
a year or less. We believe this technical change will allow the
needed flexibility in administering the program while abiding by
the original intent of the Congress.
7
02/12/91
17:04
OMB LRD/ESGG
015
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 2-12-81 :10:40AM ;
2028778151-
202 395 8109:#17
Section 13. National Technical Information Service.
This section clarifies NTIS's authority to use unearned
customer deposits to fund operations, a question raised in a
recent internal audit. If NTIS does not have this authority, its
ability to continue to operate is seriously impaired. This
language confirms existing practice and permits NTIS to use
customer deposits for operations where it is technically
restricted from doing 80 today. It 18 the intent of this section
that these deposit funds are the legal property of the customer,
are to be refunded on demand, and are to be recorded as an
obligation when used to finance NTIS' operations or at the time
the refund is requested.
The language also confirms the current practice of purchasing
inventories and capital equipment through the NTIS fund. This
authority would supplement existing authority provided in 15
U.S.C. $ 3704b (a) (1) (B) to purchase capital equipment with net
revenues. The Department plans to report to Congress on the
adequacy of NTIS funding mechanisms and related operational
issues prior to submitting its budget to Congress for fiscal year
1993.
Section 14. Technical Assistance to Sematech.
This section makes the Under Secretary of Commerce for
Technology the Department of Commerce's representative on the
Sematech Advisory Council and makes the Technology Administration
responsible for preparing all required studies and reports
relating to its activities. The statutes being amended make
these the functions of the Under Secretary of Commerce for
Economic Affairs. Shortly after these statutes were enacted,
then-Secretary C. william Verity issued a Departmental order
formally establishing the Technology Administration and
transferred to it. many duties relating to R&D and the
commercialization of technology that previously had been handled
by units reporting to the Under secretary for Economic Affairs
and that are among the principal issues to be analyzed by the
Council in its periodic reports. The section will eliminate an
unnecessary bifurcation of responsibilities and properly reflect
the role of the Technology Administration. It is the
Department's intention that reports will be prepared by the
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy and NIST
will provide technical assistance.
8
OFFICE OF CABINET AFFAIRS STAFFING MEMORANDUM
Date: 3-20-91
Due by: 11:00 Friday, March 22
Subject: OMBCllarance: DSTP Progress Report
From: Holeswilliamson
ACTION
CONCUR
FYI
ACTION CONCUR FYI
HOLIDAY
FITZHENRY
DANZANSKY
MCMUNN
ADAIR
PORTER
BUCHHOLZ
SCHALL
CASSE
SECHLER
EVANS
WETHINGTON
FARRAR
WILLIAMSON
GUNN
HEIMBACH
JACKSON
Comments:
of will submit no comment unless
l hear otherwise fromyou by
11:00 on Fridas, March 22, Thanks.
03/20/91
15:45
OMB LRD/LWP
001
6 pgo pgo
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
THAT IDADESS
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
SPECIAL
March 19, 1991
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL MEMORANDUM
TO:
Legislative Liaison Officer
Department of Agriculture-Marvin Shapiro-382-1516
Department of Commerce-Michael Levitt-377-3151
Department of Defense-Sam Brick-697-1305
Department of Education-John Kristy-401-2670
Department of Energy-Bob Rabben-586-6718
Department of Health and Human Services-Frances White-
Department 245-7760 of Housing and Urban Development=Edward
Murphy-755-7093
Department of Interior-Pam Somers-343-6706
Department of Justice-Paul McNulty-514-4606
Department of Labor-Bob Shapiro-523-8201
Department of Transportation-Tom Herlihy-366-4687
Department of Veterans Affairs-Raoul Carrol1-233-3832
National Science Foundation-Charles Herz-357-9435
Environmental Protection Agency-Christopher Hoff-
382-5414
National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Lynn
Smithsonian Heninger-453-1948 Institution-Margaret Gaynor-357-2962
SUBJECT: Draft Office of Science and Technology Policy progress
report. A list of members of the FCCSET Committee on
Education and Human Resources is also attached for your
information.
The Office of Management and Budget requests the views of your
agency on the above subject before advising on its relationship
to the program of the President, in accordance with OMB Circular
A-19. A response to this request for your views is needed no
later than noon on Friday, March 22, 1991. Questions should be
referred to Jack Fellows (202-395-3935).
Janet Rice Forsgren for
taxet R Forsonen
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
Enclosure
cc: Rae Nelson, OPD
Bob Grady
Kathy Burchard
Doreen Torgerson, OPD
Norine Noonan
Janet Forsgren
Holly Williamson, OCA
Joe Hezir
Tom Scully
John Morrall
Barry White
Dan Chenok
03/20/91
15:46
OMB LRD/LWP
002
FCCSET COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES
Name
Telephone
FAX
Admiral James Watkins, DOE, Chairman
202-586-6210
202-586-9988
Dr. Ted Sanders, Education, Vice-Chairman
202-401-1000
202-401-3093
Dr. Luther Williams, NSF, Vice-Chairman
202-357-7557
202-357-9813
Mr. John Schrote, Interior
202-208-6182
202-208-5048
Dr. Charles E. Hess, USDA
202-447-5923
202-755-7842
Mr. Roberts T. Jones, Labor
202-523-6050
202-523-6827
Mr. John C. Weicher, HUD
202-708-1600
202-619-8000
Ms. Kate Moore, Transportation
202-366-9191
202-366-6031
Ms. Nancy Mason, Commerce
202-377-1091
202-377-4498
Mr. Erich W. Bretthauer, EPA
202-382-7676
202-475-9761
Ms. Ann I. Bay, Smithsonian
202-357-2425
202-357-2116
Mr. William G. Myers, III, Justice
202-514-3116
202-514-4699
Dr. Frederick K. Goodwin, HHS/ADAMHA
301-443-4797
301-443-0284
Mrs. Margaret Finarelli, NASA
202-453-8310
202-755-3741
Dr. Ted G. Berlincourt, DOD
703-697-3228
703-697-3762
Mr. D' Wayne Gray, Veterans Affairs
202-233-2455
202-233-5584
Mr. Charles E. M. Kolb, OPD
6515
2878
Mr. Joseph Hezir, OMB
3404
4817
Mr. Barry White, OMB
4532
3910
Ms. Peggy Dufour, DOE, Executive Secretary
202-586-7970
202-586-9988
03/20/91
15:46
OMB LRD/LWP
003
DRAFT
March 19, 1991
Dear Madam Chair:
I am pleased to send you this progress report describing efforts, developed under
OSTP leadership, to accomplish the following: (A) The establishment and
restructuring of offices of education in mission agencies to support science and
mathematics education and to make the agencies fully responsive to the plan of the
Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET)
Committee on Education and Human Resources (CEHR); and (B) OSTP activities,
working with the National Science Foundation, the Department of Education, and
Federal mission agencies, to coordinate agency efforts to improve mathematics,
science, and engineering education, particularly in the area of developing laboratory-
education partnerships. I am also pleased to report on progress of Federal agencies
with research and development activities toward establishment of education offices at
each Federal laboratory under its control.
FCCSET COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), through the
Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology, established
the Committee on Education and Human Resources in the spring of 1990. The
Committee played a central role in preparing the Presidential Initiative on
mathematics and science education included in The President's FY 1992 Budget.
The CEHR is chaired by Secretary of Energy James Watkins, with the Deputy
Secretary of Education, Ted Sanders, and the Assistant Director for Education and
Human Resources of the National Science Foundation (NSF), Luther Williams, serving
as vice chairmen. The Committee includes sixteen departments and independent
agencies, each represented by a senior policy-level official, generally at the Assistant
Secretary level. The CEHR has representation from all Federal agencies with
significant responsibilities in the area of science, mathematics, engineering, and
technological education, including those with Jurisdiction over the education of
scientists, mathematicians, and engineers, as well as those with responsibilities for
technician training and science literacy for the general public. The Committee also
includes those agencies that are major users of scientific and engineering personnel.
03/20/91
15:47
OMB LRD/LWP
004
2
SENATE REQUEST (A): MISSION AGENCY EDUCATION OFFICES
This progress report is submitted in response to the Senate Appropriation
Committee's request, as set forth in its Report No. 101-474 to accompany H.R. 5158.
The request appears on page 114 of the Committee Report:
The Committee directs the OSTP to guide the mission agencies in
establishing and restructuring their offices of education to support
science and mathematics education and to make the agencies fully
responsive to the FCCSET Education Committee's plan. Also,
OSTP shall ensure that each agency's office of education has
programs directed at student and teacher segments from K
through graduate school.
Summary of Departmental and Agency Actions
Each of these departments and agencies has programs related to mathematics and
science education. Descriptions of these programs are provided in the enclosed
report, By the Year 2000, First in the World, which was prepared by the Committee
on Education and Human Resources. The report includes a separate chapter for each
of these departments and independent agency, beginning on page 67 and continuing
through page 301. (Although it is not a member of the CEHR, the report includes
information about programs of the Barry M. Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in
Education Foundation, which awards undergraduate scholarships for study in the
fields of mathematics and the natural sciences.)
The names of the departmental and agency officials who are contacts for mathematics
and science education programs are included with the descriptive materials for each
agency. In a number of the departments and agencies, there are several offices that
share in these responsibilities, and more than one contact is provided where
appropriate to facilitate inquiries from educators and the public. Most agencies have
programs that span the educational spectrum from kindergarten through graduate
school.
SENATE REQUEST (B): LABORATORY-EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS
This progress report is submitted in response to the Senate Appropriation
Committee's request, as set forth in its Report No. 101-474 to accompany H.R. 5158.
The request appears on page 115 of the Committee Report:
The Committee strongly encourages efforts within the Federal
Government to strengthen the educational activities of Federal
research laboratories. Further, the Committee believes that the
OSTP should require all Federal agencies with research and
03/20/91
15:48
OMB LRD/LWP
005
3
development activities to establish education offices at each
particular Federal laboratory under its control. The goal of such
an effort is to Improve Internal Federal agency science,
mathematics and engineering education programs, as well as
foster education partnerships between various Federal labs and
schools and academic institutions which are located near them.
The Committee notes there is a need to coordinate and
disseminate information on these programs among the various
Federal mission agencies, as well as between the National Science
Foundation [NSF] and the Department of Education. Therefore,
the Committee directs OSTP to work with the NSF, the
Department of Education, and Federal mission agencies to
coordinate agency efforts to improve math, science, and
engineering education, particularly in the area of developing
laboratory education partnerships. The OSTP shall report the
status of this effort and the agencies' funding needs for this
activity to the Committee by March 15, 1991.
Summary of Departmental and Agency Actions
A number of these departments and agencies have research and development activities
that are conducted through in-house and/or sponsored Federal laboratories. Many of
the laboratories, particularly the larger ones, have established education offices or
have designed certain staff to carry out this function. Furthermore, a number of
partnerships between the departments and agencies and their laboratories have been
established to bring their resources, especially the expertise of their scientists and
engineers, to bear on efforts to improve mathematics, science, and engineering
education. Funds to initiate or continue partnership activities are included in each
department's and agency's FY 1992 budget request under the President's Initiative.
The CEHR report, By the Year 2000, First in the World, provides descriptions of a
number of these partnerships. Mathematics and science education activities
conducted by Federal laboratories, including examples of specific partnership
agreements for some departments and agencies, are described in the respective
chapters for the following departments and agencies:
Department of Agriculture (pages 75-79);
Department of Commerce/National Institute of Standards and Technology
(pages 84-85) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (pages 88-
92);
Department of Defense (pages 95-109);
Department of Energy (pages 132-146);
03/20/91
15:48
OMB LRD/LWP
006
4
Department of Health and Human Services (pages 153-161);
Department of Housing and Urban Development (pages 161-169);
Department of the Interior (pages 175-181);
Department of Transportation (pages 222-230);
Environmental Protection Agency (pages 255-259);
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (pages 266-271); and
Smithsonian Institution (pages 292-297).
OSTP has worked with the Department of Education, the National Science
Foundation, and the mission departments and agencies to further interagency
cooperation with the goal of improving mathematics and science education. These
activities are summarized in the chapters on the Department of Education (page 118)
and the National Science Foundation (page 280).
Under the leadership of OSTP, and with the assistance of the FCCSET Committee on
Education and Human Resources, departments and agencies will continue to
strengthen their activities related to mathematics and science education. OSTP
intends to continue to foster the advances being made in terms of partnerships and in
tapping the resources of the Federal laboratories to help Improve mathematics and
science education. We much appreciate the support for these efforts provided by you
and your colleagues and look forward to working with you as we work on this vitally
important topic.
Sincerely,
D. Allan Bromley
Director
Enclosure
The Honorable Barbara A. Mikulski
Chair, Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs,
Housing and Urban Development, and
Independent Agencies
Committee on Appropriations
U.S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Federal Funds
Part Four-281
R 1992
DECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
153
55
55
11.5
Other personnel compensation
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
11.8
Special personal services payments
352
444
549
rticu-
POLICY
Total personnel compensation
1,673
2,086
2,315
11.9
200
311
343
12.1
Civilian personnel benefits
Federal Funds
94
336
314
21.0
Travel and transportation of persons
4
4
5
22.0
Transportation of things
General and special funds:
385
380
436
23.1
Rental payments to GSA
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
Communications, utilities, and miscellaneous charges
137
156
172
23.3
7
60
57
24.0
Printing and reproduction
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
107
78
115
25.0
Other services
47
53
58
For necessary expenses of the Office of Science and Technology
26.0
Supplies and materials
101
96
65
Policy, in carrying out the purposes of the National Science and
31.0
Equipment
est
Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C.
99.0
Subtotal, direct obligations
2,757
3,560
3,880
6601 and 6671), hire of passenger motor vehicles, services as author-
Reimbursable obligations
2
48
99.0
red by 5 U.S.C. 3109, not to exceed [$1,500] $2,500 for official
2,759
3,608
3,880
527
reception and representation expenses, and rental of conference
99.9
Total obligations
rooms in the District of Columbia [$3,560,000:] $3,880,000: Provided,
-301
That the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall reimburse
Personnel Summary
774
other agencies for not less than one-half of the personnel compensa-
costs of individuals detailed to it. (Departments of Veterans Af-
Total compensable workyears:
1,000
12
43
43
son fairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies
Full-time equivalent employment
1
1
1
Appropriations Act, 1991.)
Full-time equivalent of overtime and holiday hours
1,000
Program and Financing (in thousands of dollars)
antification code 11-2600-0-1-802
1990 actual
1991 est.
1992 est.
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE
527
REPRESENTATIVE
132
Program by activities:
100 Total obligations
2,759
3,608
3,880
-132
Federal Funds
Financing:
527
500 Unobligated balance lapsing
72
General and special funds:
Budget authority (gross)
2,831
3,608
3,880
SALARIES AND EXPENSES
300
For necessary expenses of the Office of the United States Trade
Budget authority:
Representative, including the hire of passenger motor vehicles and
Current:
XX Appropriation
2,829
3,560
3,880
the employment of experts and consultants as authorized by 5 U.S.C.
3109, [$20,000,000] $20,400,000 of which $2,500,000 shall remain
Permanent:
2
48
available until expended: Provided, That not to exceed [$89,000]
200 Spending authority from offsetting collections
$98,000 shall be available for official reception and representation
527
Relation of obligations to outlays:
expenses. (Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary,
0.00 Total obligations
2,759
3,608
3,880
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1991.)
st fund
7240 Obligated balance, start of year
1,045
1,498
1,761
7440 Obligated balance, end of year
-1,498
-1,761
-1,889
Program and Financing (in thousands of dollars)
Order
3,752
1990 actual
1991 est.
1992 est.
Γ 00
Outlays (gross)
2,308
3,345
Identification code 11-0400-0-1-802
P) in
otion
Adjustments to budget authority and outlays:
Program by activities:
ncial
Deductions for offsetting collections:
Direct program:
It is
$8.00
Federal funds
-2
-48
Trade coordination and negotiation
12,939
16,192
15,607
00.01
Geneva trade negotiations
2,451
2,523
2,632
$2.90
-48
00.02
iscal
Total, offsetting collections
-2
285
297
309
00.03
FTA panelist expenses
1,639
1,469
1,911
2,829
3,560
00.04
Computer operations
19 00 Budget authority (net)
90.00 Outlays (net)
2,306
3,297
3,752
00.91
Total direct program
17,314
20,481
20,459
Reimbursable program
1,088
886
886
01.01
est
The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) pro-
vides advice to the President concerning policies in science
Total obligations
18,402
21,367
21,345
10.00
and technology and on the utilization of science and technolo-
Financing:
Unobligated balance available, start of year
-76
-540
-59
246
5
iv in addressing important national problems. The OSTP op-
21.40
Unobligated balance available, end of year
540
59
24.40
5
erations include support to other Executive Office of the
39.00
Budget authority (gross)
18,866
20,886
21,286
55
President organizations on issues with science and technology
considerations; review and analysis, with the Office of Man-
311
agement and Budget, of research and development budgets for
Budget authority:
47
Current:
38
all Federal agencies; coordination of research and develop-
17,778
20,000
20,400
40.00
Appropriation
ment programs of the Federal Government; coordination of
Permanent:
4
68.00
Spending authority from offsetting collections
1,088
886
886
73
the implementation of a number of important international
8
science and technology agreements; and other activities neces-
Relation of obligations to outlays:
2
sary to carry out the duties, functions, and activities described
71.00
Total obligations
18,402
21,367
21,345
10
in Public Law 94-282, the National Science and Technology
Obligated balance, start of year
1,947
1,617
1,843
72.40
21
Obligated balance, end of year
-1,617
-1,843
-1,841
Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976.
74.40
13
Adjustments in expired accounts
-55
77.00
527
Object Classification (in thousands of dollars)
87.00
Outlays (gross)
18,677
21,141
21,347
identification code 11-2600-0-1-802
1990 actual
1991 est.
1992 est.
Adjustments to budget authority and outlays:
Deductions for offsetting collections:
Direct obligations:
88.00
Federal funds
-1,088
-886
-886
Personnel compensation:
ILI
4
Full-time permanent
941
1,500
1,661
87
50
88.90
Total, offsetting collections
-1,088
-886
-886
11.3
Other than full-time permanent
227
OFFICE OF CABINET AFFAIRS STAFFING MEMORANDUM
Date: 3-19-91
Due by: 1:00 Thursday, March 21
Subject: OMB clearance: OSTP QLAS on science + Tech. Issues
From:
Holly Williamson
ACTION
CONCUR FYI
ACTION CONCUR FYI
HOLIDAY
FITZHENRY
DANZANSKY
MCMUNN
ADAIR
PORTER
buchholz
SCHALL
CASSE
SECHLER
EVANS
WETHINGTON
FARRAR
WILLIAMSON
GUNN
HEIMBACH
JACKSON
Comments:
Please review and purvide connents
to me by 1:00 on Thusday March 21.
Manks.
22 22nager
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
tocal
Washington, D.C. 20503
MAR 18 1991
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL MEMORANDUM
LRM #M-122
TO: Legislative Liaison officer:
COMMERCE - Michael A. Levitt - 377-3151 - 324 -
DEFENSE - Samuel T. Brick, Jr. - 697-1305 325
EDUCATION - John Kristy - 401-2670 - 207
ENERGY 1 Bob Rabben - 586-6718 - 209
HHS - Frances White - 245-7760 - 328
JUSTICE - Paul McNulty - 514-2061 - 217
TRANSPORTATION - Tom Herlihy - 366-4687 - 226
STATE - Will Davis - 647-4463 - 225
TREASURY - Richard S. Carro - 566-8523 - 228
CEA - Francine Obermiller - 395-5036 - 242
EPA - Thomas c. Roberts - 382-5414 - 326
NASA - Martin P. Kress - 453-1948 - 219
- Charles H. Herz - 357-9435 - 248
NSF SPACE COUNCIL - Liz Prestridge - 395-6175 - 309
USTR - David Weiss - 395-3475 - 223
AGRICULTURE - Marvin Shapiro - 382-1272 - 312
SUBJECT: OSTP Q&AS on Science & Technology Issues --
from posture hearing
DEADLINE: 2:00 p.m., Thursday MAR 21 1991
The Office of above subject before advising on its Circular A-19. to
Management and Budget requests the views relationship of your
agency the program on the of the President, in accordance with OMB
Questions the legislative analyst for this item, or
should be referred to Constance BOWERS to Norine (395-3457),
NOONAN (395-3534).
JAMES Assistant Jame J J. JUKES Director Juhs (for) for
Legislative Reference
CC:
Holly Williamson
Greg Henry
Barry White
Tom Dorsey
Cora Beebe
Nancy Milton
Barry Clendenin
Susan offut
Janet Forsgren
Dan Corbett
DAH wairweather
Ron Peterson
03/18/91
17:53
OMB LRD/ESGG
002
DRAFT
Responses to Brown Committee Questions following 2/20/91 Posture Hearing
1.
What has been OSTP's involvement in assessing the results of the Report on
the Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program? Do you
plan on making any recommendations of your own as a member of the
National Space Council?
A.
As you know, NASA has undertaken a conceptual redesign of the Space Station
in response to a recommendation from the Augustine Committee and
Congressional mandate. My staff and I have participated actively in the Space
Council's consideration of the conceptual redesign with particular focus on the
scientific and technological aspects of the planned utilization of the Space Station.
2.
The Augustine Committee identified once again the need for a broad and stable
consensus on what we should be doing in space and how much we should
spend on these activities. Such a consensus must Involve the Administration,
Congress and, most importantly, a well-informed public. What role will you
play in developing a durable consensus on a long-term budget for NASA?
A.
I think that the Space Council should have the lead role in developing such a
consensus, but I shall continue to play an active role within the Space Council
3.
The Augustine Committee noted the value of International cooperation for
space activities, but recommended being more careful about entering into
cooperative ventures. The committee also recommended that such cooperative
ventures not include "in-line critical program elements." What guidelines would
you recommend for evaluating potential cooperative space activities?
A.
I am in fundamental agreement with the Augustine Committee in this regard.
There is indeed value in international cooperation on space activities, but the
value is not primarily financial
03/18/91
17:53
OMB LRD/ESGG
003
Response to Question 4 for the Record Submitted by Chairman George E. Brown, Jr.
4.
One of President Bush's stated goals is to "make America number one in math
and science." Please elaborate on how we can make that happen, and how that
achievement can be measured.
Answer: The goal cited in the Question is one of six developed as an outcome of
the Education Summit held by the President and the Nation's Governors in
September 1989 at Charlottesville, Virginia. One of the major Federal responses
to the goals related to mathematics and science achievement is the President's FY
1992 Budget Initiative for mathematics and science education.
The Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET)
assisted the President in the development of this initiative. The FCCSET effort was
conducted under my direction through the Committee on Education and Human
Resources (CEHR). The Committee is chaired by Admiral James D. Watkins,
Secretary of Energy, and has as co-Vice Chairman, Ted Sanders, the Acting Secretary
of Education, and Luther Williams, the Assistant Director for Education and Human
Resources of the National Science Foundation. Under their leadership, the CEHR
assisted in the development of the President's FY 1992 Budget Initiative on
Mathematics and Science Education. A copy of their report, By the Year 2000: First
in the World, is attached. This report presents the first complete inventory of Federal
programs for mathematics and science education and sets forth goals and priorities
designed to ensure that every U.S. student will be competent in mathematics and
science.
The CEHR program developed under FCCSET recognizes the need to involve
parents and teachers, as well as the scientific and engineering community in
activities to improve education. The National Science Foundation and the
Department of Education have major programs that provide support for teacher
preparation and continuing education, curriculum development and
dissemination, school reform, and student Incentives to pursue science and
engineering majors. Many of the mission agencies, such as the Department of
Energy, NASA, and the Department of Health and Human Services, sponsor
informal mathematics and science education activities that help sustain student
interest in these fields and that contribute to general science literacy for parents
and other adult members of the community. OSTP's involvement is to guide the
development of programs in the departments and agencies that will encourage a
continuing interest on the part of parents. The central role that parents can play
is the educational achievement of their children has been widely addressed by me in
public addresses across the nation.
1
03/18/91
17:54
OMB LRD/ESGG
004
2
The measurement of achievement in mathematics and science is obviously
Integral to the National Education Goals. This endeavor calls for broad public
involvement, and is not solely a Federal role. The National Governors
Association, for example, bas a panel on measurement. The Mathematical
Sciences Education Board, a body sponsored by the National Academy of
Sciences, is addressing these issues for mathematics. Another Academy group,
the Board for International Comparative Studies in Education, is working on the
challenging problems of comparisons of educational achievement between the
United States and other countries. Both the National Science Foundation and
the Department of Education are Involved in sponsoring projects on international
comparisons of educational achievement. A number of States are conducting
studies on measurement of educational achievement. Out of all these activities
should come the knowledge base, practices, tools, and agreed-on standards that
will provide the ability to measure progress toward the goals.
These goals are very challenging. If we are to achieve them, we will need a
concerted effort involving the Federal Government, the States, localities, teachers,
parents, and the students. Americans are frequently stirred by challenges to
make great exertions and achieve difficult goals. If there is that kind of response
to the challenge to improve mathematics and science achievement, we should
attain the National Education Goals.
03/18/91
17:54
OMB LRD/ESGG
005
5.
We hear conflicting reports from the media as to the health of the scientific
community; In your opinion, what criteria should be used to assess the health
of science in the U.S.?
A:
Numerous metrics are often used to describe the health of the U.S. science
community including funding levels, number of grants, the social benefits or
rate of return to investments in research, publications and citations, patents,
and Nobel and other major research prizes. Each of these captures only one
03/18/91
17:55
OMB LRD/ESGG
006
small aspect of the functioning of the science enterprise. A more general measure is
the extent to which our science enterprise contributes to advancing the frontiers of
knowledge, meeting national needs in areas ranging from economic competitiveness to
national security, educating our youth, and Improving our quality of life. I remain
convinced that overall we still have the strongest science and technology enterprise in
history. It is, however, true that other nations, by focusing their efforts, have moved
up to equal us . or in a few cases surpass us. This is neither surprising nor
necessarily bad. But it is essential that in those areas, where we may not define the
current frontiers, that we remain close enough to them so that we can exploit new
discourses or developments, wherever they are made, rapidly and effectively.
6,
Despite increasing budgets for federally-funded research, the demand for grants
continues to Increase. How do you think that the science community can more
realistically prioritize its funding requests?
A:
Peer review remains, far and away, the best method of evaluating priorities
among projects in fundamental science research. Peer review is the traditional
means of deciding whether or not to fund individual research grants as well as
the large facility construction projects that are required for forefront research
in many areas.
It more than anything else is responsible for the present strength of our enterprise;
while there are problems with peer review they are relatively minor and can be fixed.
7.
The High Performance Computing initiative includes creation of a National
Research and Education Network (NREN). How will the views and concerns of
the non-federal user community for the NREN be included in the planning
process for the network, since FCCSET membership Is limited to federal
agencies?
A.
Concerns of the non-federal users of NREN will be considered both formally
and informally. In fact, a private sector advisory committee is being formed
for this purpose by the Federal Networking Council, an inter-agency group
concerned with management of NREN.
We also have a panel within PCAST that provides an overview of our HPCC
programs.
8.
Do you think that a full multi-year program funding approach adopted last
year by the Congress for CRAF/Cassini and the House for Superconducting
Super Collider can be available for other large projects such as the GEOS
weather satellites, National Weather Service modernization, and Space Station
Freedom?
A:
Last year the Congress gave multi-year authorization for CRAF/Cassini and
the House of Representatives for the SSC after rebuffing similar requests for
the Space Station in the previous two years. Any attempts that Congress
makes to promote longer term stability in funding for R&D are, of course,
appreciated. The effectiveness of these efforts will be enhanced if multi-year
authorizations can be translated into multi-year appropriations. The
Administration is most interested in exploring how better to provide the stable
funding required for long-term projects such as the ones mentioned above.
03/18/91
17:55
OMB LRD/ESGG
007
9.
program to build a large-scale fusion reactor?
What is the status of United States participation in ITER, the international
A:
our A team led by DOE currently is negotiating terms for U.S.
agreement project. It is hoped that the negotiations will be completed, phase and
the ITER prospective foreign partners in the Engineering Design Activities participation with of
reached, within the next few months.
We view ITER thus far as a very effective and successful international cooperation
involving Japan, the USSR, the EC and the U.S.
03/18/91
17:56
OMB LRD/ESGG
008
Draft Answers
March 15, 1991
in response to
George Brown's Query
10.
While the intramural research programs of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology have been given a long overdue increase, the extramural
programs designed to help industry strengthen Its technological base are either
frozen or eliminated. What do you see the role of NIST in fostering Industrial
competitiveness?
The Administration has proposed a 15 percent increase, to a total of $248
million, to expand the National Institute of Standards and Technology's
(NIST's) ability to perform generic applied research and technology
development to address a rapidly growing number of important standards and
measurement issues. The increase will allow NIST to conduct research and
provide laboratory support for manufacturing technologies, Information
technologies, and other emerging technologies that are extremely important to
the U.S. economy. In addition, the budget includes $36 million for the
Advanced Technology Program (ATP) to help fund Industry-led high-risk R&D
on precompetitive technologies. I have been very impressed by the first round
of awards under the ATP program and believe this augurs well for its future.
11.
The Advanced Technology Program is due for an Increase from $10 million to
$37.9 [$35.9] million this year. What are the priorities for how that increase
will be allocated?
Approximately $11M of the FY91 funds will be used to fund the second year of
projects initiated with FY90 funding. NIST will announce a second open
competition and use the remainder of funds for new project starts resulting
from the second competition. As was done in the first competition, the Request
for Proposal (RFP) will cite the criteria below:
Technical and scientific merit (20%);
Broad-based commercial benefits (20%);
Technology transfer benefits (20%);
Experience and qualifications of the proposing organization(s) (20%);
and
Level of commitment and organization structure (20%).
The second RFP will not solicit specific technologies, but will refer to
appropriate lists of technologies and may also give some examples; e.g.,
advanced materials.
12.
What is the relationship between the priorities in the Critical Technologies list
which your office will submit to the Congress and the priorities in the
Advanced Technology Program?
We regard the Critical Technologies list as an excellent summary of the current
opportunities for the U.S. and expect this list to be very helpful in
implementing the Advanced Technology Program selection criteria. However,
of funds for actual awards should be merit based and decisions
03/18/91
17:56
OMB LRD/ESGG
009
13.
Would you recommend that the Advanced Technology Program money be
earmarked by Congress for particular technologies?
No, we believe that industry should establish priorities through the types of
proposals submitted.
14.
Legislation passed last year authorized a Critical Technologies Institute
organized as a federally-funded, contractor-operated organization attached to
OSTP. What is the current status of this Institute? How do you see the
Institute being used by OSTP? Will it help OSTP, which has been chronically
understaffed in the past, more effectively carry out its many responsibilities?
The National Critical Technologies Institute was established by the 1991
Defense Authorization Act. The law requires the Institute to:
Survey the views of industry; academia; and Federal, State, and local
government on the critical technologies identified by the National
Critical Technologies Panel and other technologies they consider critical.
Identify near-, mid-, and long-term objectives for research, development,
and production capability for each technology.
Prepare possible strategies to achieve the objectives.
Publish reports describing the national objectives and strategies and
progress in meeting them.
Perform additional duties as assigned by OSTP and the Federal
Coordinating Council on Science, Engineering, and Technology Policy.
Other activities that might be assigned to the Institute could include:
Issues in management of technology
Issues in technology transfer
Technology development case studies
Comparative surveys of technology trends for the U.S. and its trading
partners
Promotion of private/public sector Involvement in the selection,
generation, and exploitation of critical (generic) technologies
It is our intent that the National Critical Technologies Institute will be
operational by June 1991. Administrative support for the Institute is being
organization that is capable, additionally, of providing technical support. Now
sought through contractual arrangements with an existing not-for-profit
that the report of the National Critical technologies Panel has been completed
and submitted to the President, it is expected that the pace of implementation
of the Institute will increase. The Institute will expand the capabilities of
OSTP in carrying out its responsibilities.
that the Institute Director, who will play a key roll in its establishment
03/18/91
17:57
OMB LRD/ESGG
010
15.
What do you believe should be our priorities for funding research in the areas
of energy alternatives to fossil fuels and more efficient energy technologies? Do
you believe the President's budget request is adequate to meet our current
energy R&D needs?
A:
Nuclear fission merits vigorous research and development as the only currently
available technology capable of producing large blocks of electrical energy
without direct emissions of carbon dioxide, sulfur oxide, and nitrogen oxide.
Battery development has the potential to enable competitive electric vehicles to
displace imported oil. Solar, wind, and other renewable energy will serve
important niches. The efficiency of energy technologies can be significantly
increased through materials science research and development in areas such as
superconductors, high temperature ceramics, improved insulating materials,
CFC replacements, etc. The President's budget requests adequate funding to
meet our needs and proposes to leverage that investment through cooperative,
cost-shared efforts with industry.
In particular I believe that the new High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors (HTGR's)
hold high promise for the future.
16.
This Committee expects to address the issue of uranium enrichment this year.
What is the Administration's policy on the Importation of Soviet SWUs? Will
there be unlimited importation or will some type of restraint agreement be
worked out using the Department of Energy as the broker?
A:
There are DO restrictions on the importation of SWUs from other countries.
The Department of Energy is currently reviewing the impacts on domestic
producers of this policy.
03/18/91
17:57
OMB LRD/ESGG
011
17.
Despite the EPA Science Advisory Boards 1988 recommendation that the EPA
R&D budget be doubled over the next 5 years, the FY92 budget is the first
request for a significant increase (14%) in funding. Is the Administration
committed to requesting similar or greater increases over the next few years so
that we might approach the SAB's recommended levels?
A:
The budget places a major emphasis on efforts to protect and enhance America's
natural resources and the environment within the context of policies to promote
economic growth. Major increases are proposed in the FY 92 budget for a
number of important areas, including R&D. Although it is difficult to predict
future budget recommendations, if the past trend continues and Congressional
action is not inconsistent with these recommendations, we may see future requests
for increases.
03/18/91
17:58
OMB LRD/ESGG
012
FRSH
(SUN)12. 87 01130
NO.S
PABE 2
18.Q. In the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, the
Congress established at the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences (NIEHS) a university-based multidisciplinary
research program to develop better methods for assessing the risks
to human health and for reducing those risks. with an FY 1991
appropriation of $21.9 million, the NIEHS is funding 11 grants
involving 99 separate projects at 21 institutions. Although the
President's Request includes a substantial increase for the
Superfund budget, the NIEHS Superfund Research Program was cut by
-
46% to $11.9 million while the 1990 reauthorization provided $35
million for FY 1992-1994. What is the reason for the drastic cut
in this excellent program?
A. The NIEHS Superfund Basic Research Program is an innovative
approach to answering the questions most often heard from people
whose environment has been affected by uncontrolled hazardous
substances: "What are the risks to me and my family and what can
science and technology do to help us?" The NIEHS Program provides
multiproject, multidisciplinary grants to universities to fund
integrated studies in biomedicine, engineering, hydrogeology,
ecology and statistical modelling. It is the only one of its kind
funded by the federal government. The knowledge gained will
provide a sound foundation for decisions about managing hazardous
substances in ways that protect human health and the environment.
The eleven grants funded thus far provide support for 98 projects
-
in 23 institutions. Accomplishments-include:
o
White rot fungus degrades a wide variety of waste site
chemicals including industrial dyes, solvents,
nitro compounds and halogenated hydrocarbons. Genetic
engineering is being used to enhance the speed of
degradation.
o
A number of bacterial strains isolated from carbon
filtration units have been used to treat benzene,
ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene in contaminated
groundwater.
o
Sperm numbers, morphology, and motility show differences
in normal vs. certain chemically exposed persons.
Studies show men exposed to perchloroethylene have dose-
dependent changes in sperm motion and morphology.
o
New equipment to monitor incinerator processes, e.g.,
photographic and spectroscopic, has been developed and is
being tested.
o
A new method of cleaning up solvents from hazardous
wastes sites such that they can be reclaimed from soil
and recycled has been developed.
03/18/91
17:58
OMB LRD/ESGG
013
FROM
(SUN)12. 00. '87 01130
NO.5
PAGE 3
o
Analytical chemists have devised ways to identify and
measure a wide range of chemicals bound to proteins in
human blood. Genetic toxicologists have developed ways
to see if the specific genetic signatures of these
chemicals are written on the genes of cells in the same
blood samples. Civil engineers have mapped the movement
of water in the chemically polluted Aberjona River and
its tributaries. soon this Superfund team will be
processing human samples and getting the answers as to
whether chemicals are moving from dumps to ground water
and into people in ways that cause detectable and
possibly significant genetic damage.
The NIEHS Superfund Basic Research Program receives its funding
from the Superfund Trust Fund through the Environmental Protection
Agency. The FY 1992 total EPA Superfund budget was limited to an
increase of $135 million over its FY 1991 appropriation of $1629
million, The urgency of cleaning up sites of great concern to the
public dictate that funding for research be a lower priority than
that for cleanup and enforcement.
03/18/91
17:59
OMB LRD/ESGG
014
03/13/91
10:34
202 357 9628
AD GEO
*** MAYNARD
002 002
Question: In its review of the FY 1991 U.S. Global Climate
#19
Research Program, the National Academy of Sciences commented on the
need to achieve an appropriate balance between spaced-based
observational capabilities and ground-based process studies and
modeling research as the program evolves. How does the FY 1992
budget respond to this recommendation?
Overall constraints on Federal funding have led the Committee on
Earth and Environmental Sciences to pursue a U.S. Global Change
Research Program (USGCRP) more focused on the highest priority
scientific and policy issues over the next few years. In
particular, the highest priority scientific and policy issue for
the USGCRP in FY 1992 is whether, and to what extent, human
activities are changing or will change the global climate system.
Despite the constraints on funding and need to focus the USGCRP on
the highest priority global change issues, the FY 1992 budget
proposed by the President for the Program is consistent with the
Academy's recommendation. The budget reflects a continued
commitment to establish an integrated, comprehensive (space- and
ground-based) atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial observing system
which will acquire the long-term databases necessary for the
development and testing of predictive models and for monitoring to
document global environmental changes. The budget also reflects a
strong, continued commitment to both conduct focused studies
necessary to improve our understanding of key processes that
control the global Earth system, including its climate. Further,
a strong commitment is reflected in the budget to augment research
on climate modeling and prediction, one of the highest scientific
Change. priorities identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
The proposed funding level for spaced-based research programs in
the USGCRP in FY 1992 is $596.2 million; an increase of 23.2
percent over the FY 1991 level. A comparable increase is requested
for ground-based research. The funding level requested for these
activities is essential if we are to put in place space- and
ground-based systems necessary for observing key environmental
processes at the global scale, a scientific capability that we
presently lack. We agree with the Academy's recommendation of
maintaining an appropriate balance between space- and ground-based
research and observation programs. Such a balance is essential for
a successful USGCRP given the spatial and temporal variability of
the systems being studied and the need to scale processes occurring
at the local level to the regional and global scales.
The remainder ($589 million) of the proposed budget of $1186
million for the USGCRP in FY 1992 is for a combination of ground-
based studies, modeling, and data management. The level of funding
for these activities is, in the view of the CEES agencies,
consistent with the scientific needs and priorities, the state of
the science, and the development of the USGCRP.
03/18/91
17:59
OMB LRD/ESGG
015
SENT BY xerox Telecopier 7021 : 5-15-81 i 3:28PM
2023951575-
i
20.
LAST YEAR YOU EXPRESSED CONSIDERABLE PRIDE IN THE MODEL
THAT THE COMMITTEE ON EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
AND THE USGCRP PROVIDED FOR INTERAGENCY PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENT AND INTEGRATION, AND YOUR INTENTIONS TO APPLY
THAT MODEL TO OTHER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ARENAS.
COULD YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE ON YOUR EFFORTS.
ANSWER: Upon confirmation, one of my early goals was to reinvigorate
Interagency collaboration in key fields of science and technology
relevant to the missions of several agencies. As you are aware,
the Federal Coordinating Council is an interagency forum within
the Executive Branch for reviewing and coordinating research and
development activities that cut across the missions of several
federal agencies. Working with the strong support throughout the
Administration, the Council is now comprised of Cabinet
secretaries, deputy secretaries, and heads of independent agencies
that have statutory authority for R&D programs in the federal
government. These departments/agencies integrate and help to
implement federal science and technology policy. The Council has
seven umbrella subject matter committees whose members are at
the Assistant Secretary level representing the views and subject
matter Interests of their respective agencies or departments.
Unlike the committees in the Legislative Branch, each of which
has discrete authority for oversight, interagency fora are
mechanism for discussion, analysis, collaboration, and consensus
building. The member agencies, 1.e., the heads of the R&D
departments and agencies, have the responsibility for
Implementing the agreed upon program as proposed by the
President's budget and as legislated by the Congress, proceeding
with the necessary contracting, budgeting and so on, developed
through the interagency process. This year, I am pleased by the
progress made by FCCSET in inventorying federal efforts in
mathematics and science education and identifying opportunities
to maximize federal activities in support of the President and
Governors. Furthermore, the FCCSET interagency mechanism has
helped to bring forward two additional presidential Initiatives in
the R&D budget for FY 92, the U.S. Global Change Research
Program and the High Performance Computing and
Communications Program.
Recognizing a potential gap in the FCCSET activities because, by law, all members of
FCCSET and of FCCSET committees are government employees and therefore private
sector calibration and validation of FCCSET activities is of great importance, I am
pleased that the President has created the President's Council of Advisors on Science
and Technology (PCAST) reporting directly to him to provide this essential private
sector input.
03/18/91
18:00
OMB LRD/ESGG
016
21.
The Budget proposes a 71 percent Increase ($52 million) for Agricultural
Research, most of which is for the competitive grants program. In the longer
term, how do you see the balance in the Agricultural Research program
between the competitive grants program and the older, decentralized formula
program under which block funding is provided to the agricultural land grant
colleges in each state?
A:
The Administration fully supports the goals of formula block grant programs
for maintaining States' basic agricultural research programs. The competitive
grants program in the National Research Initiative is designed to foster
cutting-edge research to complement that done with formula block grant funds.
Provided that the 14 percent cap on indirect cost recovery is not an lubibitor
of interest and that the program is as successful in stimulating cutting-edge
research as we think it will be, we will seriously consider requesting additional
funding for the NRL
03/18/91
18:01
OMB LRD/ESGG
017
22.
The President's budget calls for making permanent the research and
development tax credit as a means of spurring long-term R&D. Please
elaborate on what you see as the potential benefits of such a tax policy. What
are the potential tax expenditures?
The Administration is extremely concerned that the rate of growth in industrial
R&D has leveled off since the mid-1980s. For 1990 and 1991, both the
National Science Foundation and the Battelle Memorial Institute estimate that
Industrial R&D will, at best, keep pace with inflation. The tax Incentive can
help boost private R&D investment. The fact that the credit has not been 8
permanent one has kept it from having a maximum impact on long-range
corporate planning. Making the credit permanent will permit businesses to
establish and expand R&D operations and facilities without fearing that the
tax laws will suddenly change. The revenue cost of à permanent research and
experimentation tax credit is estimated to be $6.2 billion from fiscal years 1991
through 1996.
03/18/91
18:01
OMB LRD/ESGG
018
23. Does the Administration plan to submit a proposal to Congress addressing the
competitive disincentives of current anti-trust law?
ANSWER: The Administration has proposed legislation to eliminate concern that our
antitrust laws may be applied unreasonably to joint ventures that produce goods and
services, including joint ventures between competitiors, and thereby benefit U.S.
International competitiveness and consumers alike. On May 7, 1990, Attorney General
Thornburgh and Secretary Mosbacher transmitted to Congress the Administration's
proposed "Cooperative Production Act of 1990." This bill would amend the National
Cooperative Research Act of 1984 to extend its coverage of reseach and development
joint ventures to production joint ventures as well. The NCRA clarifies that the
potentially procompetitive joint ventures It covers are to be analyzed under the antitrust
"rule of reason" that takes full account of international competition as well as potential
efficiences. NCRA coverage also provides for reduced antitrust damage exposure upon
notification to the antitrust agencies.
24. Please submit to the Committee the memorandum to EPA listing your nominees for
witnesses at the Science Advisory Board hearings on the EMF report. Who (by name
and organizational affiliation) provided you with the names of your recommended
witnesses?
ANSWER: We are not at liberty to disclose the confidential deliberative processes
within the Executive Branch, but the Committee can be confident that all responsible
points of view were considered in our reflections on this Important issue.
03/18/91
18:01
OMB LRD/ESGG
019
9120666
GEONGE E BROWN, . California, CHAIRMAN
ROBERT $ WALKER Pennsylvania
P. JAMES BENEENBRENNER #. Wissensin
CHERWOOD L DOEHLEAT. New York
we H. SCHEVER, New York
TOM LEWS. Rende
MARK YH LLOYD. Terinesses
DON AFTER -
DAN GUCKMAN. Kenbas
sep MONNSON, Washington
HAROLD & VOLKMER,
NOWARD WOLFE Michigan
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NON PACKARD. California
PAUL 1. HENRY. Michigan
RALPH M. HALL Taste
HARRIS W. FAWELL lines
DATE MCCURDY, Oklahoma
D. FRENCH BLAUGHTER &. Virginia
NORMAN Y. MINETA, California
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
LAMAR SMITH. Texas
TM VALENTINE North Carotina
CONSTANCE A. MONELLA, Marybrd
ROBERT 9 TORRICELLI New Jersey
NICK BOUCHER Virginia
AND TECHNOLOGY
DANA ROHRABACHER Colifornia
STEVEN M. SCHIFF, New Memor
TERRY L BRUCE
RICHARD H STALLINGS. Idaho
P4:18
TOM CAMPBELL Colliernia
JOHN , RHODES, ML, Arizona
JAMES A TRAFICANT. M. Ohio
SUITE 2320 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
JOE BARTON. Texas
MENRY J. NOWAR, New Vers
DICK ZIMMER New Jersey
CARL c. PERKINS, Keneucky
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
WAYNE f. BILCHREST. Maryland
TOM McMiLLEN, Maryland
DAVID a NAGLE town
JIMMY HAYES. Louisions
(202) 228-6371
RADFORD BYERLY, 4.
JERRY F. COSTELLO. Minois
Chief of Staff
JOHN TANNER Tennessee
GLEN BROWDER Alabama
DIRECTOR
MICHAEL RODEMEYER
Chief Counsel
PETE GEREN. Texas
MAY THORNTON. Artument
DAYID D. CLEMENT
JM BACCHUS. Florida
Republican Chief or $torl
TM ROEMER, indiana
aub CAAMER Alebatho
February 28, 1991
DICK SWETT. New
MICHAEL J KOPETEK!, Oragon
JOAH KELLY HORK, Missouri
BARBARA-ROBE COLLINS, Michigan
Dr. D. Allan Bromley, Director
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Executive Office of the President
Washington, D.C. 20506
Dear Dr. alban
The Committee's R&D Posture hearing earlier this week was a fine
success. Your excellent statement and thoughtful answers to Members'
questions was central to that success, and I want, on behalf of the Committee,
to express our thanks for your most valuable contribution.
The inevitable time constraints did not allow all our Members to pose the
many questions which they had in mind. I wonder if we might impose on you
for the answers to some of those questions, a set of which I attach. To meet
our printing schedule for the hearing transcript, I would ask that the answers
be provided to us no later than Friday. March 22nd. I would greatly
appreciate your assistance in this matter.
I know that you share with me a strong conviction about the importance
to the nation's future of the Federal Government's investment science and
technology. I intend to work closely with all the officers in the Executive
Branch and all the elected officials in the Congress to further augment that
investment. Your own pivotal role in that endeavor is one I fully appreciate.
and I look forward to working with you toward our common objective.
Sincerely.
Seorge GEORGE E. BROWN, JR.
Chairman
GEB/Htm
Attachment
03/18/91
18:02
OMB LRD/ESGG
020
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
DR. D. ALLAN BROMLEY
1991 R&D Posture Hearing
February 20, 1991
1.
What has been OSTP's involvement in assessing the results of the Report
on the Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program?
Do you plan on making any recommendations of your own as a member
of the National Space Council?
2.
The Augustine Committee identified once again the need for a broad and
stable consensus on what we should be doing in space and how much we
should spend on these activities. Such a consensus must involve the
Administration, Congress and, most importantly, a well-informed public.
What role will you play in developing a durable consensus on a long-term
budget for NASA?
3.
The Augustine committee noted the value of international cooperation
for space activities, but recommended being more careful about entering
into cooperative ventures. The committee also recommended that such
cooperative ventures not include "in-line critical program elements."
What guidelines would you recommend for evaluating potential
cooperative space activities?
4.
One of the President Bush's stated goals is to "make America number one
in math and science." Please elaborate on how we can make that happen,
and how that achievement can be measured.
5.
We hear conflicting reports from the media as to the health of the
scientific community: in your opinion what criteria should be used to
assess the health of science in the U.S.?
6.
Despite increasing budgets for federally-funded research, the demand for
grants continues to increase. How do you think that the science
community can more realistically prioritize its funding requests?
7.
The High Performance Computing initiative includes creation of a
National Research and Education Network (NREN). How will the views
and concerns of the non-federal user community for the NREN be
included in the planning process for the network. since FCSET
membership is limited to federal agencies?
8.
Do you think that a full multi-year program funding approach adopted
last year by the Congress for CRAF/Cassini and the House for
Superconducting Supercollider, can be available for other large projects
such as the GOES weather satellites, National Weather Service
modernization, and Space Station Freedom?
03/18/91
18:02
OMB LRD/ESGG
021
9.
What is the status of United States participation in ITER, the
international program to build a large-scale fusion reactor?
10.
While the intramural research programs of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology have been given a long overdue increase, the
extramural programs designed to help industry strengthen its
technological base are either frozen or eliminated. What do you see as
the role of NIST in fostering U.S. industrial competitiveness?
11.
The Advanced Technology Program is due for an increase from $10
million to $37.9 million this year. What are the priorities for how that
increase will be allocated?
12.
What is the relationship between the priorities in the Critical
Technologies list which your office will submit to the Congress and the
priorities in the Advanced Technology Program?
13.
Would you recommend that the Advanced Technology Program money
be earmarked by Congress for particular technologies?
14.
Legislation passed last year authorized a Critical Technologies Institute
organized as a federally funded, contractor-operated organization
attached to OSTP. What is the current status of this Institute? How do
you see the Institute being used by OSTP? Will it help OSTP, which has
been chronically understaffed in the past, more effectively carry out its
many responsibilities?
15.
What do you believe should be our priorities for funding research in the
areas of energy alternatives to fossil fuels and more efficient energy
technologies? Do you believe the President's budget request is adequate
to meet our current energy R&D needs?
16.
This Committee expects to address the issue of uranium enrichment this
year. What is the Administration's policy on the importation of Soviet
SWUs? Will there be unlimited importation or will some type of
restraint agreement be worked out using the Department of Energy as
the broker?
17.
Despite the EPA Science Advisory Board's 1988 recommendation that the
EPA R&D budget be doubled over the next 5 years, the FY'92 budget is
the first request for a significant increase (14%) in funding. Is the
Administration committed to requesting similar or greater increases over
the next few years so that we might approach the SAB's recommended
levels?
18.
In the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, the
Congress established at the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences (NIEHS) a university-based multidisciplinary research program
to develop better methods for assessing the risks to human health and for
reducing those risks. With an FY 1991 appropriation of $21.9 million. the
NIEHS is funding 11 grants involving 99 separate projects at 21
03/18/91
18:03
OMB LRD/ESGG
022
institutions. Although the President's Request includes a substantial
increase for the Superfund budget, the NIEHS Superfund Research
Program was cut by 46% to $11.9 million while the 1990 reauthorization
provided $35 million for FY 1992-1994. What is the reason for the drastic
cut in this excellent program?
19. In its review of the FY 1991 United States Global Climate Research
Program, the National Academy of Sciences commented on the need to
achieve an appropriate balance between space-based observational
capabilities and ground-based process studies and modeling research as the
program evolves. How does the FY 1992 budget respond to this
recommendation?
20. Last year you expressed considerable pride in the model that the
Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences and the USGCRP
provided for interagency program development and integration, and your
intentions to apply that model to other science and technology arenas.
Could you give us an update on your efforts?
21. The Budget proposes a 71 percent increase ($52 Million) for Agricultural
Research. most of which is for the competitive grants program. In the
longer term. how do you see the balance in the Agricultural Research
program between the competitive grants program and the older,
decentralized formula program under which block funding is provided to
the agricultural land grant colleges in each state?
22. The President's budget calls for making permanent the research and
development tax credit as a means of spurring long-term R&D. Please
elaborate on what you see as the potential benefits of such a tax policy.
What are the potential tax expenditures?
23. Does the Administration plan to submit a proposal to Congress addressing
the competitive disincentives of current anti-trust law?
24. Please submit to the Committee the memorandum to EPA listing your
nominees for witnesses at the Science Advisory Board hearings on the
EMF report. Who (by name and organizational affiliation) provided you
with the names of your recommended witnesses?
January 31, 1991
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
ISSUES (in no particular order of priority)
Division of Life Sciences
Associate Director-Designate, DA Henderson
NIH, NSF (biological), CDC, FDA, USDA
Decade of the Brain
Misconduct in Science
Biotechnology
International Health Issues
Vaccine Development, Licensing,
and Application
Radiation
Food Safety
Animal Welfare
Protection of Human Research Subjects
Human Genome Project
Agriculture Research and Nutrition
Agent Orange
Electromagnetic Fields (health effects)
Health Care Reform
Drug Approval Process
Division of Industrial Technology
Associate Director, William D. Phillips
National Critical Technologies Panel/Report
Critical Technologies Institute
&2Space Council
Technology Transfer
University-Business-Government Interactions
Economic Competitiveness
Global Change - Industrial Liaison
Foreign Investment in U.S. Industry
Intelligent Manufacturing System
Manufacturing Forum
Science and Technology Attaches Abroad
Metrification
Division of Policy and International Affairs
Associate Director, J. Thomas Ratchford
International
S&T Agreements
Cooperation in Basic Science "Megaprojects"
Intellectual Property Rights
Social Sciences
Mathematics and Science Education
University Infrastructure
National Critical Materials Council
Director, vacant
Superconductivity Action Plan
Critical Materials Report
Advanced Materials Program Plan
Division of Physical Sciences and Engineering
Associate Director, Eugene Wong
Computers and Computational Research:
High Performance Computing
Physical Sciences Research:
Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, etc.
Engineering Research and Development
Energy Technologies: Basic Energy Sciences, Nuclear Energy,
Renewable Energy Sources (Solar, Hydrogen, etc),
Conservation, Transportation, etc.
Space Science Basic Research (Hubble Space Telescope, Gamma
Ray Astronomy, Advanced X-Ray Astronomy Facility)
Risk Analysis/Risk Assessment
Nuclear Waste Management
Structure of Science Support (Large and Small Investigators)
National Energy Strategy
Aeronautics
National Laboratories
National Security
Assistant Director, Michelle Van Cleave
Defense
Intelligence
Arms Control
Export Controls
Military Space
Emergency Telecomunications Management
Chemical and Biological Terrorism
Information System Security
Environment
Assistant Director, Nancy Maynard
Environment
Global Climate Change/Global "Warming"
Forestry
Framework Convention on Climate Change
Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (FCCSET)
Executive Director, Maryanne Bach
Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences (CEES)
Committee on Physical Mathematics and Engineering Sciences
Committee on International Science, Engineering and Technology
Committee on Education and Human Resources (EHR)
Committee on Life Sciences and Health
Committee on Food, Agriculture Research and Forestry
Committee on Industry and Technology
OFFICE OF CABINET AFFAIRS STAFFING MEMORANDUM
Date: 3-21-91
Due by: 5:00Wed march 27
Subject: OMB Clearance: OSTP Q+A'S High Performance
From: Holly Williamson
computing
ACTION CONCUR FYI
ACTION CONCUR FYI
HOLIDAY
FITZHENRY
DANZANSKY
MCMUNN
ADAIR
PORTER
BUCHHOLZ
SCHALL
CASSE
SECHLER
EVANS
WETHINGTON
FARRAR
WILLIAMSON
GUNN
HEIMBACH
JACKSON
Comments:
Please review and provide
comments to me by 5:00 on
Wednesday, march 27. Manls.
03/21/91
16:58
OMB LRD/ESGG
001
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
4 paree
Washington, D.C. 20503
MAR 21 1991
total
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL MEMORANDUM
LRM #M-128
TO: Legislative Liaison Officer:
ENERGY - Bob Rabben - 586-6718 - 209
NASA - Martin P. Kress - 453-1948 - 219
NSF - Charles H. Herz - 357-9435 - 248
COMMERCE - Michael A. Levitt - 377-3151 - 324
EPA - Thomas c. Roberts - 382-5414 - 326
DEFENSE - Samuel T. Brick, Jr. - 697-1305 - 325
HHS - Frances White - 245-7760 - 328
SUBJECT: OSTP Q&As on High Performance Computing
DEADLINE: Wednesday MAR 27 1991
The on the above subject before advising on its relationship Circular A-19. to
Office of Management and Budget requests the views of your
agency the program of the President, in accordance with OMB
Questions should be referred to Constance BOWERS (395-3457),
the legislative analyst for this item.
JAMES
James J. JUKES J. (for) Julie
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference
CC:
Jack Fellows
Norine Noonan
Joe Hezir
David Gold
Ken Schwartz
Greg Henry
Dan Taft
Nancy Milton
Bruce McConnell
Cyndi Vallina
Richard Turman
Holly Williamson
03/21/91
16:58
OMB LRD/ESGG
002
DRAFT
March 22, 1991
Dear Chairman Walker:
Thank you for your letter of March 11, 1991. Attached is the first part of my
response to your questions. My recommendation for specific changes in H.R. 656 will
follow.
Sincerely yours,
D. Allan Bromley
Director
Enclosure
The Honorable Robert S. Walker
Chairman
Committee on Science, Space and Technology
U.S. House of Representatives
Suite 2320 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
03/21/91
16:59
OMB LRD/ESGG
003
Response to Questions from Chairman Walker
following Dr. Bromley's Testimony of March 7. 1991
before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology
1.
Please provide the Subcommittee with both the incremental and total run-outs
for each of the agencies participating in the President's High Performance
Computing and Communications Program (DOE, NASA, NSF, NIST, NOAA,
EPA, NIH, and DARPA) over each of the next five years.
A:
The following budget figures are for planning purposes only. Those for FY93
and later are subject to revision and reexamination by the Administration.
High Performance Computing and Communications Planning Budget
(in millions $)
Agency
92
93
94
95
96
DARPA
232
283
353
399
447
DOE
93
110
138
157
168
EPA
5
5
5
5
5
NASA
72
107
134
151
145
HHS/NLM
17
17
17
17
17
NIST
3
3
3
3
3
NSF
213
262
305
354
413
NOAA
2.5
3
3
3
3
Total:
638
789
956
1087
1202
increase:
49
51
167
131
115
2.
Does the President's initiative envision the government buying and owning
supercomputers, high end switches, fiber optical cable, and other hardware? Is
there any reason why the network cannot be established commercially from its
inception? Is it necessary for the federal government to do more than fund
research and development and contract for services from the network?
A:
The initiative envisages the government purchasing and owning supercomputers,
as it currently does, especially the prototypes developed with government support.
03/21/91
16:59
OMB LRD/ESGG
004
These will be placed in strategic locations to allow early software development and
application to Grand Challenge problems. However, except for research purposes, we
do not envisage the purchase of switches, optical fiber, or any other networking
hardware. The "establishment" of NREN will be achieved through purchasing
telecommunications services from commercial vendors. The networking functions
under the initiative will be to contract for services, to support research and
development, and to use NREN as a testbed to develop network applications
important to the research and education community.
3.
What specific and detailed changes would you like to see made to H.R. 656?
A:
We have extensive changes to recommend. These will follow in a
supplementary response.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Memo
To Robert M. White
n.d.
(b)(1)
Re: Your Lunch with Reginald Bartholomew, State Under
Secretary for International Security Affairs (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02a. Report
Re: An Alternative Intellectual Property Allocation Provision
n.d.
(b)(1)
for Use with Institutions of the European Community and
Member States (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02b. Attachment
Re: Joint Management Allocation Provision (1 pp.)
n.d.
(b)(1)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03a. Memo
Charles Wessner to Deborah L. Wince-Smith
2/28/91
(b)(1)
Re: Issues for CISET Meeting, March 1, 1991 (8 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03b. Paper
Re: S&T Agreements with Brazil, The PRC, and Indonesia:
n.d.
(b)(1)
Current Status and Courses of Action (3 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03c. Outline
Re: Possible Courses of Action (1 pp.)
n.d.
(b)(1)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
AGENDA
Meeting
of
FCCSET Committee on International
Science, Engineering and Technology
(CISET)
March 1, 1991
3:00-4:30 p.m.
Department of State, Room 1105
1) Welcome by the Chairman
2) Remarks by Dr. Allan Bromley
Dr. Bromley will highlight S&T actions resulting from
the President's Latin American trip, international
facets of the Administration's new R&D budget, a
meeting of G-7, EC and USSR Science Advisors under the
auspices of the Carnegie Commission, and the first
meeting of the U.S./EC Joint Consultative Group on
S&T, which will take place on February 25.
3) Review and Approve Minutes of Previous Meeting (document)
4) Reports on Subcommittee Activities
a)
S&T Cooperation with Industrialized Countries
Subcommittee Chairman Philip Schambra will briefly
outline the Subcommittee's next major focus. Further
observations about the U.S./EC meeting will be invited
from CISET members.
b)
S&T with Developing Economies (document)
Chairman Richard Bissell will distribute an advance
copy of a request for data for a compendium of U.S.
S&T activities with developing countries. He will
seek Committee support for a prompt and thorough
response by late March.
c)
Title V
Chairman John Boright will highlight the 1990 report,
based upon the conceptual outline approved by CISET in
July.
-2- we PCAST
M Claque & Shappa will
d)
Megascience
Cleir science
-(
Chairman Fred Bernthal will report on the
Subcommittee's current efforts to develop domestic and
projects. international guidance for cooperation on megascience Mopie
- majn policy impti catcoms
5) Report on GATT - Post-Uruguay Round
The USTR representative will discuss the current
outlook for the GATT.
6) "Joint Management Plan" for IPR Protection (document)
The Committee will be asked to approve a "joint
management plan" approach for allocation of
intellectual property rights (IPR) prepared by the
CISET Working Group on IPR, for use in negotiations
with the EC and its member nations.
7) S&T Agreements with the PRC, Indonesia and Brazil (document)
The Committee will receive a status report on current
Policy
S&T negotiations with these countries and be invited
to consider possible courses of action on S&T
agreements with the PRC and Indonesia, scheduled to
expire in April and May.
8) Other Business
9) Date of Next Meeting
Casada
MEMBERSHIP
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
CHAIRMAN:
Ambassador Reginald Bartholomew
Under Secretary of State
Department of State
2201 C Street, NW, Room 7208
Washington, DC, DC 20520
Phone: 647-3526
FAX: 657-0775
Executive Secretary: Andy Reynolds
Phone: 647-3632
FAX: 647-0773
VICE CHAIRMEN:
Dr. Fred Bernthal
Deputy Director
National Science Foundation
1800 G Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20550
Phone: 357-9427
FAX: 357-9725
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Alternate:
Dr. Philip Schambra
Director, Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of
Health, Department of Health and Human Services
9000 Rockville Pike, Room B2C39 Building 31
Bethesda, MD 20892
Phone: 496-1415
FAX: 480-3414
Point of Contact: Gray Handley
Phone: 496-5093
FAX: 480-3414
Alternate: F. Gray Handley
EXOFFICIO:
Dr. J. Thomas Ratchford
Associate Director for Policy and International Affairs
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
Room 494
Old Executive Office Building
Washington, DC 20506
Phone: 456-2894
FAX: 395-3719
Point of Contact: Sara Bowden
Phone: 395-4626
FAX: 395-3917
Alternate: Sara Bowden
Mr. Dan Taft
Deputy Associate Director (Special Studies),
National Security and International Affairs
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
725 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20503
Phone: 395-3285
FAX: 395-3307
Point of Contact: Dan Taft
Phone: Same as above
FAX: Same as above
Alternate: Jim Nix
Dr. Richard Bissel
Assistant Administrator for Science and Technology
Room 4942
Agency for International Development
320 21st Street, NW
Washington, DC 20523
Phone: 647-1449
FAX: 647-3028
Point of Contact: Dr. Jeff Schweitzer
Phone: 647-1827
FAX: 647-3028
Alternate: Mr. Brad Langmaind
Dr. Leonard Haynes III
Assistant Secretary for the Office
of Postsecondary Education
Room 4082
Department of Education
7th and D Streets, SW
Washington, DC 20202-5100
Phone: 708-5547
FAX: 708-9814
Point of Contact: Dr. Harry Gardner
Phone: 708-7862
FAX: 708-9814
Alternate:
Ms. Deborah L. Wince-Smith
Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy
Department of Commerce
14th Street and Constitution Avenue, Room H481B
Washington, DC 20230
Phone: 377-1581
FAX: 377-4817
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Alternate:
Dr. Raymond F. Siewert
Acting Deputy Director for Defense Research and
Engineering
Department of Defense
Room 3E 114
The Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-1000
Phone: 695-5036
FAX: 693-5229
Point of Contact: Col. James S. Butt, Military Assistant to Mr.
Siewert
Phone: 703-695-3042
Phone: 703-694-6550
FAX: 703-693-5305
Alternate: Mr. Stuart Schwartzstein
Dr. James Decker
Director for Energy Research, Acting
Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave, SW
Washington, DC 20585
Phone: 586-5434
FAX: 586-4120
Point of Contact: Barbara Chambers (Secretary)
Phone: Same as above
FAX: Same as above
Alternate: KDr. David B. Nelson, Executive Director
Mr. John Sayre
Assistant Secretary for Water and Science
Mail Stop 6640
Department of the Interior
1849 C Streets, NW
Washington, DC 20240
Phone: 208-3186
FAX: 371-2815
Point of Contact: Dr. Hanlan Watson, Dep. Asst. Sec.
Phone: 208-4933
FAX: 371-2815
Alternate: Dr. Hanlan Watson, Dep. Asst. Sec.
Mr. Travis P. Dungan
Administrator of Research and Special Programs Administration
Department of Transportation
400 7th Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20590
Phone: 366-4433
FAX: 366-7431
Point of Contact: Alfonso B. Linhares
Phone: 366-4208
FAX: 366-3272
Alternate: Mr. Mark C. Dowis, Associate Administrator
Mr. Tim Atkenson
Assistant Administrator of International Activity
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Phone: 382-4870
FAX: 755-0653
Point of Contact: Dr. Allan Hecht
Phone: 382-4870
FAX: 755-0653
Alternate: Dr. Allan Hecht, DAA of International Activity
Mr. John Weicher
Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research
Department of Housing and Urban Development
451 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20410
Phone: 708-1600
FAX: 619-8000
Point of Contact: Doris Lesesne
Phone: 708-1600
FAX: 619-8000
Alternate: James Stimpson - - 708-4230
Ms. Margaret G. Finarelli
Associate Administrator for External Relations, Acting
Code X, Room 7021
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC 20546
Phone: 453-8310
FAX: 755-3741
Point of Contact: Joyce Cristenbury (Secretary)
Phone: Same as above
FAX: Same as above
Alternate: Peter G. Smith
Mr. Harold Denton
Director of Governmental and Public Affairs
Mail Stop 17F2
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555
Phone: 492-1780
FAX: 492-1672
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Alternate:
Dr. Charles Hess
Assistant Secretary for Science and Education
Room 217W
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Washington, DC 20250
Phone: 447-5923
FAX: 755-7842
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Alternate:
Mr. Peter Allgeier
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Europe
Office of the United States Trade Representative
600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20506
Phone: 395-6864
FAX: 395-3911
Point of Contact:
Phone:
FAX:
Alternate: Mr. Bruce Smith
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03d. Minutes
Re: FCCSET Committee on International Science,
10/25/90
(b)(1)
Engineering and Technology (CISET) Draft Summary
Minutes (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
03e. Memo
To Dr. D. Allan Bromley
11/17/90
(b)(1)
Re: CISET Final Report on "The Implications of European
Integration for Science and Technology" and Other Current
Activities (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
S&T SEED II Projects
Attachment 2
Statistics
Duration of projects:
less than 1 year
6
up to 1 year
13
1 - 2 years
12
2 - 3 years
12
3 - 4 years
1
4 - 5 years
3
47
1 year or less projects = 40%+
2 years or less projects = 66%+
3 years of less projects = 91%+
Cost of Projects
Number
Percent
Up to $50,000
13
27% +
$50 - - 100,000
7
42% + $100,000 or less
$100 - 300,000
12
68% $300,000 or less
$300 - 500,000
6
$500 - $1 million
3
$1 - 2 million
2
Over $2 million*
2
45**
*Two big ticket items: Energy assessments - $9 million +
Health training $3.5 million
**Between $100,000 and $1.375 million health libraries
upgrade
Between $100,000 and $1.6 million - post-Chernobyl
assessment
Themes
Library upgrades, computer linkages
Medical university upgrade
Community involvement in health care enhancement
Drug abuse
Medical and lab equipment upgrades
Energy data collection & assessments
Energy efficiency
Industrial energy use
Safe nuclear power
Mining
Conservation and environmental protection
Management training and services
- medical & health; transportation; industry energy use;
fishing industry; environmental protection
Cross-disciplinary topics
- health-environment; environment-tourism; geologic
science-environmental pollution; energy-environment
2585D
Attachment 3
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
December 11, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR HONORABLE REGINALD Naie BARTHOLOMEW, CHAIRMEN
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE,
ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY, CHAIRMAN
Au-
SUBJECT: CHARTER FOR COMMITTEE
It is my pleasure to forward to you the signed charter for the Committee on
International Science, Engineering, and Technology. On behalf of the Full FCCSET,
let me thank you and the Vice-Chairmen for your hard work and dedication to
assisting in further coordination of Federal R&D activities.
The signed charter reflects both your recommendations and revisions based upon final
review by the Council. It should be considered an internal working document to
guide the Committee in the deliberative process of providing recommendations to the
FCCSET. Feel free to contact me or Maryanne Bach, Executive Director of FCCSET,
for any clarification you may desire.
Again, thank you for your enthusiastic support for and continued participation in the
FCCSET process.
Attachment
Internal Document
CHARTER
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL, SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
of the
Federal Coordinating Council on Science, Engineering, and Technology
The Committee on International Science, Engineering and Technology (CISET) is
hereby established by action of the Federal Coordinating Council for Science,
Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET). It serves as a part of the internal
deliberative process of the FCCSET, which provides overall guidance and direction.
The Council shall serve as the forum for developing consensus and resolving issues
raised in the Committee process.
Purpose
The purpose of the Committee on International Science, Engineering and Technology
is to advise and assist FCCSET to increase the overall effectiveness and productivity
of Federal efforts in international science, engineering and technology affecting two or
more Federal agencies. The Committee will address significant international policy
matters which cut across agency boundaries and shall provide a formal mechanism
for interagency policy review, planning, coordination as well as exchanges of
information regarding international science, engineering and technology.
Functions
Reporting to and under the direction of the Chairman of FCCSET, the CISET will:
o
provide review and advise on Federal programs and issues in
international science, engineering and technology including technical
assistance.
0
facilitate planning, coordination, and communication among Federal
agencies engaged in international science, engineering and
technology;
0
review and advise on U.S. programs, policies and positions concerning
science, engineering and technology in multilateral organizations;
0
identify and recommend options for Federal priorities and plans in
international science, engineering and technology;
Internal Document
Structure
The Chairman of the FCCSET appoints the Chairman of the Committee on
International Science, Engineering and Technology.
Responsibilities of the Chairman:
o
hold regular meetings of the Committee (no fewer than four per year)
and approve agendas;
o
submit an annual report, approved by the Committee, to the Chairman
of the FCCSET for review by the full Council;
o
appoint with consultation of the FCCSET Committee Chairman (and as
necessary, abolish) subcommittees, task forces and working groups as
necessary to achieve the Committee's purpose;
0
meet regularly (bimonthly) with the Chairman of the FCCSET and other
Committee chairmen to evaluate progress, discuss policy coordination,
receive new instructions from the FCCSET and report on ongoing
activities.
The following departments and agencies are represented on this Committee, normally
at the Assistant Secretary level or above.
Department of State, Chair
Department of Defense
Department of the Interior
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Health and Human Services, NIH, Vice Chair
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of Transportation
Department of Energy
Department of Education
Office of Management and Budget
U.S. Trade Representative
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Agency for International Development
Office of Science and Technology Policy
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Environmental Protection Agency
National Science Foundation, Vice Chair
2
Internal Document
Terms of Reference (ToR), shall be developed by the Committee Chairman, in
consultation with the Committee, for all subcommittees, task forces and working
groups dealing with significant and complex questions. The Terms of Reference shall
identify and bound the issues to be addressed, specify the desired products and
delivery times to the Committee, and be forwarded to the FCCSET Directorate for
FCCSET final review, coordination with other ongoing activities and approval. All
documents are considered internal unless otherwise approved by FCCSET for
publication. Membership on subcommittees, task forces, and working groups is not
restricted to Committee members but must be full-time federal government employees.
Committee activities shall be coordinated by an Executive Secretary, designated by the
Committee Chairman. Additional staff and funding assistance, consistent with the
functions of this charter are the joint responsibility of the Committee
members to the extent that funds are available from within their existing
appropriations.
Private Sector Interface
The Committee shall recommend to the Chairman of the FCCSET the nature of
private sector advice needed to accomplish its mission.
The Chairman of the FCCSET shall take necessary steps to ensure appropriate
interaction between the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST) and the FCCSET.
The Committee may also receive ad hoc advice from various private sector groups as
consistent with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Compensation
All members are full-time Federal employees who are allowed reimbursement for
travel expenses by their agencies plus per diem or subsistence while away from their
duty stations and in accordance with standard government travel regulations.
Documentation
Agendas and records of actions of Committee meetings are prepared and disseminated
to members by the Executive Secretary. Records of actions are submitted to members
for approval, and minutes are distributed to all members of the Committee, and to
the Executive Director of FCCSET. Complete records of all Committee activities,
including those
of task forces and working groups are maintained in the office of the Chairman. The
Committee prepares an annual report for the Chairman of the FCCSET not later
3
Internal Document
than 60 days after the end of each fiscal year. The report contains, as a minimum,
the Committee's functions; a list of members; a list of subcommittees, task
forces and working groups and their Terms of Reference; the dates, places and
agendas for all meetings; and a summary of the Committee's activities,
accomplishments and recommendations during the year.
Termination Date
Unless renewed by the Chairman of FCCSET prior to its expiration, the Committee
on International Science, Engineering and Technology shall terminate not later than
October 1, 1991.
Determination
I hereby determine that the formation of the Committee on International Science,
Engineering and Technology is in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the Executive Branch by law and that such duties
can best be performed through the advice and counsel of such a group.
Approved :
Dolan Chairman, FCCSET Romley Dec11,1990
4
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
04. Memo
Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) to
2/25/91
(b)(1)
Committee on International Science, Engineering and
Technology (CISET)
Re: An Alternative Intellectual Property Allocation Provision
for Use with Institutions of the European Community and
Member Sta (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
05. Report
Re: An Alternative Intellectual Property Allocation Provision
n.d.
(b)(1)
for Use with Institutions of the European Community and
Member States (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
06. Attachment
Re: Joint Management Allocation Provision (1 pp.)
n.d.
(b)(1)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
07. Attachment
Re: Standard IPR Annex (3 pp.)
n.d.
(b)(1)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Economic Policy Council (EPC)
Series:
Wethington, Olin, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Science & Technology [2]
Date Closed:
1/6/2010
OA/ID Number:
04296-002
FOIA/SYS Case #:
2005-0336-F
Appeal Case #:
Re-review Case #:
Appeal Disposition:
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
Disposition Date:
AR Case #:
MR Case #:
AR Disposition:
MR Disposition:
AR Disposition Date:
MR Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
PRM. Removed as a personal record misfile.