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
285790809
label
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285790809
contentType
document
title
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
CF00957-020
collections
Records of the National Security Council (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Richard Barth Chronological Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285790809
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
9fc84e5c37148f15
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: National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
OA/ID Number:
CF00957
Folder ID Number:
CF00957-016
Folder Title:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
V
3
8
5
0
File
PCAST
5AUG91
DON,
ATTACHED DRAFT FYI. IT IS EXPECTED TO BE SIGNED WITH LITTLE
OR NO CHANGE.
PRESIDENT'S GUIDANCE AND NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY PARTS OF
THE DRAFT ARE HIGHLIGHTED.
Tom
TOM WELCH
OF DEFENSE
DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING
WASHINGTON, DC 20301-3010
INITO AMERICA
21 AUG 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR POLICY
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (COMMAND, CONTROL,
COMMUNICATIONS AND INTELLIGENCE)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (PRODUCTION AND
LOGISTICS)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (PROGRAM ANALYSIS
AND EVALUATION)
COMPTROLLER
GENERAL COUNSEL
ASSISTANT TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
(INTELLIGENCE POLICY)
DIRECTOR, ACQUISITION POLICY AND PROGRAM
INTEGRATION
DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT
DIRECTOR, DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS
AGENCY
DIRECTOR, DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY
DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC DEFENSE INITIATIVE
ORGANIZATION
SUBJECT: Direction for the DoD Science and Technology Program
Your coordination on the memorandums and associated
attachments at TAB A and TAB B is requested. These documents
were prepared in collaboration with senior science and technology
representatives from the Military Departments, Defense Agencies
and Director, Defense Research and Engineering staff. It is my
desire to forward both documents to the Deputy Secretary of
Defense for signature prior to September 13, 1991. Accordingly,
I request your coordination no later than September 6, 1991.
Charles E. Adolph
By Direction of the Secretary of Defense
Attachments
cc:
DOT&E
USD (A), Ms Spector; Col Mushala
TAB A
COORDINATION SHEET
SUBJECT: SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK AND ACTION PLAN
OFFICE/DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
CONCUR
DATE
ARMY
NAVY
AIR FORCE
JCS
USD (P)
ASD (C3I)
ASD (P&L)
ASD (PA&E)
COMP
OGC
ASD (IP)
AP&PI
DA&M
DARPA
DNA
SDIO
OF DEFENSE
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301
AMERICA
a
DRAFT
MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS
CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
UNDER SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE
DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING
ASSISTANT SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE
COMPTROLLER
GENERAL COUNSEL
INSPECTOR GENERAL
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION
ASSISTANTS TO THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION
DIRECTORS OF THE DEFENSE AGENCIES
SUBJECT: SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK AND ACTION
PLAN
As President Bush said last summer, "The nature of national
defense demands that we plan now for the threats on the distant
horizon." The rapidly changing world situation has made those
threats increasingly uncertain and placed even more emphasis on
the requirement to maintain the technological lead. To ensure a
robust program in science and technology and to focus our
research and development work throughout the Department the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering has developed the
attached Strategic Framework and Action Plan and I am directing
their execution.
The Director of Defense Research and Engineering is hereby
delegated the authority and responsibility for ensuring
implementation of this memorandum. In this regard, he shall
issue such directives as may be necessary, review progress on a
continuing basis, and report to me periodically on that progress.
The Director of Administration and Management, in
coordination with the appropriate officials of the Department,
shall prepare directives and revisions to directives to
incorporate the substance of the Action Plan as appropriate into
the Department of Defense Directives System. No increase in the
number of personnel in the Office of the Secretary of Defense
shall occur as a result of implementation of the Plan.
Attachments
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01a. Report
Strategic Framework for Defense Science and Technology
(b)(1)
(5 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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
01b. Report
Defense Science and Technology Action Plan (3 pp.)
(b)(1)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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.
TAB B
COORDINATION SHEET
SUBJECT: SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMMING GUIDANCE FOR POM94
OFFICE/DEPARTMENT/AGENCY
CONCUR
DATE
ARMY
NAVY
AIR FORCE
JCS
USD (P)
ASD (C3I)
ASD (P&L)
ASD (PA&E)
COMP
OGC
ASD (IP)
AP&PI
DA&M
DARPA
DNA
SDIO
OF DEFENSE
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301
AWIRIIA
DRAFT
E
UNCLASSIFIED
MEMORANDUM FOR: SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENT
CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
UNDER SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE
DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING
ASSISTANT SECRETARIES OF DEFENSE
COMPTROLLER
GENERAL COUNSEL
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION
DIRECTORS OF DEFENSE AGENCIES
SUBJECT: Science and Technology Programming Guidance for POM 94
Defense science and technology strategies, like Defense
acquisition strategies, will differ markedly in this FYDP from
those of the past. We are faced with a rapidly changing, and
increasingly lethal, global environment that demands that we
maintain investment hedges against technological surprise by
potential adversaries. Such surprises, or our own technological
development, could result in significant shifts in the commonly
accepted standards at the foundation of our previous defense
planning and system acquisitions. At the same time, we are
confronted with fiscal realities which collectively demand a more
focused effort in ongoing acquisition efforts, possibly
sustaining advanced technological development at the expense of
more aggressive production programs.
This global environment demands that we sustain a robust S&T
program as the foundation for our future defense capabilities.
Therefore, the Military Departments and Defense Agencies will
program for S&T (6.1, 6.2 and 6.3A) activities across the FYDP
not less than zero percent real growth from the level in the
FY-92 President's Budget, with a goal of 2% real growth. A
healthy Advanced Technology Development (6.3A) program to evolve
and realistically test promising technology base efforts and to
transition them into engineering and manufacturing development
may require a fluctuation above the 2% real growth level
depending upon new systems and technology insertion needs.
In planning our 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3A S&T investments, a
critical balance must be maintained between preserving the core
of broad, sustaining programs, and taking specific initiatives to
lay the foundation for acquiring new, militarily significant
warfighting capabilities. Within this latter portion of the
program, we are taking action to focus a significant portion of
the DoD S&T investment on a limited number of key thrust areas
that contribute directly to broadly applicable, high priority
defense needs. A seventh task of equal importance is the
application of advanced technology to improving design and
manufacturing processes to reduce the costs and production time
of our major system acquisitions. These thrust areas are
enumerated at Tab A. We will focus and sustain our S&T
investments in support of these seven thrusts areas such that we
will provide the technological foundations for fielding these
capabilities in not more than 15 years. Military Department and
Defense Agency S&T investment strategies will be evaluated to
ensure that a balance has been achieved between the broad core
program and these focused initiatives across the DoD.
Each of the Military Departments and Defense Agencies,
therefore, will submit with its FY 94-95 budget its S&T
investment strategy and action plan for investing in these seven
thrust areas. This input will include summary data in the format
at Tab B and, where applicable, will be coordinated through the
appropriate Defense Project Reliance panels.
The DDR&E will periodically review the programmed S&T
investments to ensure they are responsive to this guidance and
identified needs of the operational forces.
Attachments
S&T THRUST AREAS
1. Global surveillance and communications, focused on a theater
of operations with sufficient fusion and planning assets.
2. All-weather, day/night precision strike against 21st century
critical mobile and fixed targets.
3. All-weather defense against very low observable cruise
missiles, ballistic missiles and aircraft.
4. Undersea superiority against open ocean, coastal and regional
threats posed by advanced, stealthy nuclear and non-nuclear
submarines and by undersea mine warfare.
5. All-weather, day/night, survivable, mobile, and lethal ground
combat vehicles.
6. Technology for Training and Readiness, including embedded
training, distributed simulation, and virtual environment
depiction.
7. Reduction of DOD acquisition time and cost while improving
performance.
TAB A
s&T THRUST AREA DISPLAY
PE
Thrust Area yy-92 FY-93 II-II
Total 6.1
Total 6.2
Total 6.3A
TAB B
PCAST Theres Bor
National Security Council BS approval
The White House before popu CON
be done
PROOFED BY:
MT
LOG # 6568
URGENT NOT PROOFED:
BYPASSED WW DESK:
SYSTEM DOCLOG RRS PRS A/O
NSC INT
Was
SEQUENCE TO
HAS SEEN
DISPOSITION
/
K
Ken Hill
A
Bill Sittmann
Bob Gates
2
Brent Scowcroft
3. APNSA Has See
Bill Sittmann
Situation Room
West Wing Desk
NSC Secretariat
91 AUG 6 P7: 21 P7:21
4
as 9/7
Deal
5
FFA
A - Action
I = Information
D = Dispatch
R = Retain
N = No further Action
cc:
VP
Sununu
Other
Should be seen by:
(Date/Time)
COMMENTS Auggested Themes for mis w/PCAST
on 9/12. if BS agrees with these themes.
Time leal will do TP's / paper for BS.
DISPATCH INSTRUCTIONS:
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02a. Presentation
Powerpoint presentation for PCAST Meeting (9 pp.)
9/12/91
(b)(1)
C
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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.
To: Solomon Buchsbaum From: Allan Bromley
7/19/91
(b)(1)
Memorandum
Re: Revised Terms of Reference for PCAST Panel on
Science, Technology, and National Security (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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.
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS
ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
PANEL ON
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND NATIONAL SECURITY
Chairman
Solomon J. Buchsbaum
Senior Vice President
Technology Systems
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Member of PCAST
Vice Chairman
John S. Foster
Vice President
Science and Technology
TRW, Inc.
and
Chairman
Defense Science Board
Panel Members
David Packard
Chairman of the Board
Hewlett-Packard Company
1501 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Member of PCAST
Ashton Carter
Director
Center for Science and International Affairs
Harvard University
John F. Kennedy School of Government
79 JFK Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Lew Allen
1040 South Arroyo Boulevard
Passadena, CA 91105
Norman Augustine
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Martin Marietta Corporation
6801 Rockledge Drive
Bethesda, MD 20817
George Heilmeier
President and Chief Executive Officer
BELLCORE
1E310
290 W. Mt. Pleasant Avenue
Livingstone, NJ 07039
Edward A. Frieman
Director
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
University of California, San Diego
9500 Gillman Drive, Mail Code 0210
La Jolla, CA 92093
Thomas J. Murrin
Dean
School of Business and Administration
Duquesne University
Rockwell Hall
Pittsburg, PA 15282
Office of Science and Technology Policy Representatives
Michelle Van Cleave
Assistant Director for National Security
(202) 395-7326
Charles Herzfeld
Senior Director of the Panel
(202) 395-1330
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02c.
To: Brent Scowcroft From: Richard Barth
9/11/91
(b)(1)
C
Memorandum
Re: Talking Points for PCAST Meeting (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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
02d. Comments
Comments for Meeting of President's Council of Advisors on
9/11/91
(b)(1)
C
Science and Technology (4 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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
02e.
To: Brent Scowcroft From: Richard Barth
9/6/91
(b)(1)
Memorandum
Re: Meeting with PCAST (2 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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
02f. Letter
To: Brent Scowcroft From: Allan Bromley
9/3/91
(b)(1)
Re: PCAST Meeting (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
National Security Council
Series:
Barth, Richard, Files
Subseries:
Subject Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
PCAST [President's Council of Advisors on Science Technology]
Date Closed:
1/19/2010
OA/ID Number:
CF00957-016
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.
THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS
ON
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(PCAST)
D. ALLAN BROMLEY, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the
President. (Chairman)
NORMAN BORLAUG, Distinguished Professor, Department of Soils and Crop
Sciences, Texas A&M University.
SOLOMON BUCHSBAUM, Senior Vice President, Technology Systems, AT&T Bell
Laboratories.
CHARLES DRAKE, Albert Bradley Professor of Earth Sciences and Professor of
Geology, Dartmouth College.
RALPH GOMORY, President, The Sloan Foundation.
PETER LIKINS, President, Lehigh University.
THOMAS LOVEJOY, Assistant Secretary for External Affairs, The Smithsonian
Institution.
JOHN McTAGUE, Vice President, Technical Affairs, Ford Motor Company.
DANIEL NATHANS, Professor of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Johns Hopkins
University School of Medicine.
DAVID PACKARD, Chairman of the Board, Hewlett-Packard Company.
HAROLD SHAPIRO, President, Princeton University.
PCAST PANELS
Panels
Chairmen
High Performance Computing and Communications
Solomon Buchsbaum
Ralph Gomory
International Economic Competitiveness
Ralph Gomory
Harold Shapiro
Bioscience and Biotechnology
Dan Nathans
Education and Human Resources
Peter Likins
Charles Drake
Technology and National Security
Solomon Buchsbaum
John S. Foster *
Global Environment and Natural Resources
Thomas Lovejoy
David Packard
Norman Borlaug
Megaprojects in the Sciences
John McTague
Harold Shapiro
* Chairman, Defense Science Board
DRAFT
September 3, 1991
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS
ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SEPTEMBER 12-13, 1991
AGENDA
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1991
OPEN SESSION 9:00 AM - 10:30 AM
CONFERENCE ROOM
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
722 JACKSON PLACE, NW
8:30 - 9:00
ARRIVAL AND COFFEE
9:00 - 9:15
OPENING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
9:15 - 10:00
THE OSTP BIANNUAL REPORT
DR. WELLS
10:00 - 10:15
DISCUSSION
DR. BROMLEY
10:15 - 11:00
THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON
MR. HUBBARD
COMPETITIVENESS
11:00 - 11:15
CLOSING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
AND MOVE TO ROOM 476,
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
DRAFT
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 Continued.
CLOSED SESSION 11:30 - 5:00 PM
ROOM 476
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
11:30 - 12:00
DISCUSSION OF PCAST PANEL DRAFT PAPERS
AND REPORTS
- Science, Technology and
DR. BUCHSBUAM
National Security
DR. FOSTER
12:00 - 1:00
LUNCH (In Indian Treaty Room)
1:00 - 2:45
DISCUSSION OF PCAST PANEL DRAFT PAPERS
AND REPORTS
- High Performance Computing and
DR. BUCHSBAUM
Communications
- Bioscience and Biotechnology
DR. NATHANS
- Education and Human Resources
DR. LIKINS
- Megaprojects in the Sciences
DR. MCTAGUE
- International Economic Competitiveness
DR. GOMORY
- Global Environment and Natural Resources
DR. LOVEJOY
DR. BORLAUG
MR. PACKARD
2:45 - 3:00
BREAK
3:00 - 3:45
S&T STATISTICS AND DATA COLLECTION
DR. NORWOOD
3:45 - 4:00
DISCUSSION
DR. BROMLEY
4:00 - 4:45
THE PRESIDENT'S NATIONAL SECURITY
GENERAL
STRATEGY
SCOWCROFT
4:45 - 5:00
OTHER BUSINESS AND
DR. BROMLEY
CLOSING REMARKS
DRAFT
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1991
CLOSED SESSION 9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON
CEA CONFERENCE ROOM
ROOM 324
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
8:30 - 8:50
ARRIVAL AND COFFEE
(DR. BROMLEY'S OFFICE, ROOM 358, OEOB)
8:50 - 9:00
MOVE TO ROOM 324
9:00 - 9:15
OPENING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
9:15 - 10:00
S&T AND COMPETITIVENESS,
SECRETARY
AND THE ECONOMIC POLICY COUNCIL
BRADY
10:00 - 11:00
DISCUSSION
DR. BROMLEY
11:00 - 11:30
DISCUSSION OF OCTOBER AGENDA
DR. BROMLEY
AND FUTURE MEETING FORMAT
11:30 - 12:00
OTHER BUSINESS AND
DR. BROMLEY
CLOSING REMARKS
CLOSED SESSIONS 12:00 PM - 3:00 PM
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
12:00 - 3:00
PANEL DISCUSSIONS - OEOB ROOM 476
-
Education and Human Resources
DR. LIKINS
12:00 - 2:00
PANEL DISCUSSIONS - ROOM TO BE DETERMINED
-
Megaprojects in the Sciences
DR. MCTAGUE
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
rile PCAST
July 9, 1991
MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENTS COUNCIL OF ADVISORS ON
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
DATE: Wednesday, July 10, 1991
LOCATION: Roosevelt Room
TIME: 3:45 P.M.
FROM: D. ALLAN BROMLEY
Alan
I. PURPOSE
To meet with your Council of Advisors on Science and Technology to review their
progress on a number of issues.
II. BACKGROUND
The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) was
established by Executive Order 12700 on January 19, 1991. The PCAST was
extended through June 30, 1993 by an Executive Order dated June 28, 1991.
The PCAST consists of ten eminent American scientists, industry leaders, and
distinguished members of the academic and research communities appointed by
you to give advice on issues involving science and technology.
The PCAST will present a status report on the various panels established to
review a variety of science and technology issues. As the attached memorandum
of July 2, 1991 indicates, a number of issues have been given to the panels for
further discussion. The issue areas include mathematics and science education,
global environment and natural resources, international economic competitiveness,
technology and national security, bioscience and biotechnology, "megaprojects" in
the sciences, and high performance computing and communications.
III. PARTICIPANTS
See attached list.
IV. PRESS PLAN
White House Photographer Only.
V. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
-- You enter the Roosevelt Room and greet the Council members.
-- You open the meeting.
-- Overview of the PCAST Panels - D. Allan Bromley
-- Discussion
VI. REMARKS
None required.
I I
Attachments
PARTICIPANTS
The President
John Sununu
Richard Darman
Michael Boskin
D. Allan Bromley
Roger Porter
Brent Scowcroft
Michael Deland
Norman Borlaug
I
Solomon ("Sol") Buchsbaum
Charles Drake
Bernadine Healy
Peter Likins
Thomas Lovejoy
Walter Massey
Daniel Nathans
John McTague
D. A. Henderson
William Phillips
J. Thomas Ratchford
Eugene Wong
Maryanne Bach
Karl Erb
Charles Herzfeld
Rachel Levinson
Nancy Maynard
William Snyder
Pierre Perrolle
Michelle Van Cleave
Thomas Welch
Kenneth Yale
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 2, 1991
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
Adam
SUBJECT:
Your Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
Advisors Mr. President, I would like to summarize the current activities of your Council of
on Science and Technology.
you indicated met 12 times and held 5 discussions with you. During our meetings,
(PCAST) Since February has 1990, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
Executive has had extensive discussions with various senior officials within Also,
Council a number of topics you would like PCAST to consider. the
Robert Office of the President, including the Vice President, Michael the
Administration's Gates, Michael Deland, and Roger Porter, to help better understand Boskin,
PCAST Truly, Donald Atwood and others to get their views including on how James the
Watkins, Richard in detail with many agency and department heads Further, the
Council talked goals and how the PCAST could be most helpful. the
could be responsive to you and the Administration.
the most intently on addressing many issues raised during these discussions. listening and is
working Mr. President, as Chairman I can report that the PCAST has been
hoc, discussion important are briefly described below. Each has been given to Seven ad of
time we would groups within PCAST for further discussion and at an appropriate separate,
look forward to reporting to you on these deliberations.
was The touched first issue is mathematics and science education. The importance of this
President of upon in nearly every PCAST discussion. Council member Peter issue
including the an extragovernmental perspective on the work of governmental goal groups, of
providing Lehigh University, has taken the lead in this area with the Likins, (1)
undertaking Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET); Federal
Committee on Education and Human Resources of the
and the talents enrollments in engineering and the sciences appropriate undergraduate
and graduate very serious problems in US precollege education, are as: how best
approach the specific studies to address such relevant questions such and (2) to
demands for of our population? Are Ph.D. recipients likely to be society's needs
enrollments faculty in engineering and the sciences in the coming decade? available How to meet can
in these areas best be altered?
A second issue involves the global environment and natural resources. Council
members Thomas Lovejoy of the Smithsonian, David Packard, and Nobel laureate
Norman Borlaug, are taking the initiative to: identify areas of potential interaction
and collaboration with the private sector in global change research; provide private
sector input on societal needs that can be served by further scientific research in the
areas of natural resources, and earth and environmental sciences; and identify areas
in need of further study in order to protect biological diversity and minimize the
impact of human populations upon it.
International economic competitiveness is a third issue for PCAST focus. As with
mathematics and science education, maintaining our science and technology base was
pointed to by Administration officials as crucial to increased U.S. economic
competitiveness. Council member Ralph Gomory, President of the Sloan Foundation,
was asked to lead a group considering the areas of new technology, product
improvement, and the technical workforce. Ralph will then work to identify ways to
of improving our competitive position internationally.
enhance the partnership between the government and the private sector with the goal
The war in the Gulf, among other things, demonstrated and confirmed the vital link
between technology and national security. In your statement, National Security
Strategy of the United States, you acknowledge that the economic and military
strength of the United States rests on technological superiority. I have asked Council
member Sol Buchsbaum, Senior Vice President for Technology System at AT&T Bell
Laboratories, and Johnny Foster, Chairman of the Defense Science Board, together
with David Packard and others to define and discuss the role science and technology
are expected to play vis-a-vis national security during the decade of the 1990's and
beyond in a vastly changed world environment. They will examine how effectively
science and technology frontiers are being integrated into our national security
activities; identify gaps or deficiencies, and where appropriate, propose alternative
mechanisms and approaches.
Because of its promise for improved health care and American quality of life, and
because the global market holds many promises for American industry, the area of
bioscience and corresponding biotechnology is a fifth PCAST topic. Council member
and Nobel laureate Daniel Nathans, Professor of Molecular Biology and Genetics at
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine will chair this effort. Daniel and his
group will provide information to PCAST on: ways to enhance the transfer of
biotechnology from Federally supported laboratories and University groups_to
American industry and how to encourage private sector leadership; ways to provide
private sector input on current and possible future governmental policies that will
enhance basic research in the life sciences and long term research and development
by the biotechnology industries.
A sixth area of PCAST focus is on research megaprojects in the sciences. Council
is member John McTague, Vice President for Technical Affairs at Ford Motor Company,
taking the lead with Harold Shapiro, President of Princeton University. They are
examining the relative roles of megaprojects, both of the large-scale, single facility
facility type such a the Human Genome Project, with the smaller individual
type such as the Superconducting Super Collider and the multi-investigator, multi-
investigator-initiated science projects. They will examine the potential for greater
international cooperation in the megaprojects, and suggest the most appropriate fora -
governmental and scientific, national and international - in which such cooperation
could be further discussed and coordinated.
A seventh topic being addressed by the PCAST is high performance computing and
communications. Your Presidential Initiative in the 1992 budget in this very
lead to build upon current Federal activities and to explore ways to encourage the
both the research and education communities. Here, Sol Buchsbaum is taking the
important area laid the groundwork for maintaining and extending U.S. leadership in
competitiveness in this field.
private sector participation and leadership that will maintain and ensure future U.S.
these The Council is pleased to respond to the challenge you have given it in examining
issues, and values the opportunities it has had thus far to provide advice. We
look forward to providing you with additional private input on each of these seven
areas and on others of importance to you and your Administration.
UNCLASSIFIED
RECORD ID: 9009726
NSC/S PROFILE
RECEIVED: 12 DEC 90 16
TO: BROMLEY, D
FROM: SITTMANN
DOC DATE: 13 DEC 90
SOURCE REF:
KEYWORDS: SCIENTIFIC
WH REFERRAL
file
POAST
PERSONS:
SUBJECT: BRIEFING BY PRES COUN OF ADVISORS ON SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / PCAST
ACTION: SITTMANN SGD WH REFERRAL
DUE DATE: 13 DEC 90
STATUS: C
STAFF OFFICER: BARTH
LOGREF:
FILES: WH
NSCP:
CODES:
DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION
FOR ACTION
FOR CONCURRENCE
FOR INFO
BARTH
COMMENTS:
DISPATCHED BY
DATE
BY HAND W/ATTCH
OPENED BY: NSMEM
CLOSED BY: NSMJT
DOC 2 OF 2
UNCLASSIFIED
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
TIME STAMP
EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT STAFFING DOCUMENT
9726
OFFICER: BARTH 05
SYSTEM LOG NUMBER:
ACTION
DUE: 10:AM 13DEC90
Prepare Memo For Scowcroft/Gates
Appropriate Action
Prepare Memo For Cicconi
Prepare Memo for Sittmann
Prepare Memo Sittmann
to Bromley w/i.fo Cicconi
CONCURRENCES/COMMENTS*
PHONE* to action officer at ext. 3550
Concur FYI
Concur FYI
Concur FYI
Barth
Hutchings
Poneman
Basora concurs
Jackson
Popadiuk
Beers
Johnson
Pryce
Broome
Kanter
Rademaker
Burns
Kitchen
Rice
Canas
Kuehne
Rostow Rademake for
Charles
Lampley
Tilley
Coulson
Lundsager
Tobey
Davis
Melby
Van Eron
Deal No cmt
Menan
Watson
Dorminey
Merchant
Welch
Dyke
Miller
Whitley
Frasure
Needles
Wilson
Fry
O'Leary
Working
Gordon
Paal
Zelikow
Gompert
Pacelli
Haass
Pavitt
Hayden
Pilling
INFORMATION
Sittmann
Hill
Exec Sec Desk
Scowcroft (advance)
Gates (advance)
Secretariat
COMMENTS
Logged By HLM
Return to Secretariat
379 OEOB
Document No 9726
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORAND
DATE: 12/12/90
12/13/90 NOON
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
SUBJECT: PCAST BRIEFING MATERIAL
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
ROGICH
CARD
UNTERMEYER
CICCONI
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
BROMLEY
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
HOLIDAY
REMARKS:
Please forward any comments directly to D. Allen Bromley, Rm.
358, x7116, no later than NOON, Thursday, December 13, with a
copy to my office. Thank you.
RESPONSE:
December 13, 1990
To: D. ALLEN BROMLEY
The NSC concurs with the attached.
William Watter F Sittmann
CC: James W. Cicconi
Executive Secretary
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 11, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
SUBJECT:
Briefing by the President's Council
of Advisors on Science and Technology
Attached are two papers prepared by your Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST), and one paper prepared through an interagency process, that
will be used in discussions at their next meeting with you. The first is entitled
"Education in Science and Mathematics: Meeting the National Education Goals"; the
second is entitled "Technology and the American Standard of Living." The two
PCAST papers are summarized below. The third paper, "U.S. Technology Policy," is a
compilation of current Federal government policies that affect technology.
The two PCAST papers have been circulated to a number of offices within the
Executive Office of the President for review and comment. Because PCAST is
chartered as an independent advisory body it is appropriate for them to provide you
with independent advice. We believe, however, that it is important for your White
House staff to have an opportunity to respond to the thoughts of this group, which
would also allow the PCAST to obtain a better understanding of Administration
interests and policies. As a result, we have summarized here the major issues that
were raised in the review process. In addition, comments received on the papers will
be shared with PCAST members in preparation for their next meeting.
"MEETING THE NATIONAL EDUCATION GOALS"
The first paper applauds your leadership, and that of the nation's Governors, in
moving education toward the top of the nation's agenda. It points out, however, that
achieving the goals will require a fundamental restructuring of elementary and
secondary education in America. The goals themselves are an important element of
this restructuring, in that they focus on performance or levels of achievement rather
than processes or inputs such as the amount of time a student spends in a particular
class. Past reforms have most often involved changes in inputs, and the results of
these reforms have been generally disappointing.
A number of other fundamental changes will also be required to meet the national
goals. Promising approaches include the introduction of parental choice in education,
rewarding exceptional teachers, reducing impediments to change through school-based
management, and a shift in focus in education from institutions to the children those
institutions serve (particularly for students at risk of dropping out).
The members of PCAST believe that an evaluation of the proposed changes will
depend on the availability of reliable performance based assessment mechanisms for
both students and teachers. They indicate that considerable work needs to be done in
this area to create greater confidence in assessments and more understanding of how
assessments relate to actual learning.
PCAST points out that the federal government cannot mandate reform in the
decentralized system of basic education in America. However, the federal government
can facilitate the reform initiatives mentioned in the paper. A number of actions are
presented for further consideration:
Provide incentives to states or regions pursuing reforms
Foster greatly intensified research on academic assessments
Facilitate and coordinate state and local programs to deal with the dropout
problem
0
Encourage both private companies and government agencies to work
cooperatively with local schools
0
Encourage talented females and minority students to study science and
mathematics
0
Invest in teacher training programs in science and mathematics and use
forgivable loans and other incentives to attract young people with degrees in
science, mathematics, and engineering to teach in schools
COMMENTS ON "MEETING THE NATIONAL EDUCATION GOALS"
Some of the comments were favorable, pointing out that the papers are generally
consistent with existing Administration policy and the decisions emerging from the FY
1992 budget process. However, some specific points have been raised.
Some staff objected to the emphasis on assessment, indicating that we do not need
better tests to tell us how our schools are failing. To meet the goals we must take
action now and not wait for more studies on assessment. Furthermore, a focus on
assessment tends to emphasize central planning, whereas choice programs and other
reform strategies call for greater local autonomy and flexibility.
The scientific and engineering communities were also urged to focus on specific
actions that those communities might take to promote educational reform. For
example, scientists and engineers could work with local communities to promote
choice, magnet schools, and particularly alternate certification programs.
Finally, it was pointed out that the Federal government needs a solid rationale before
embarking on major efforts to retain talented females and minorities in science and
mathematics and to invest in teacher training programs. In addition, forgivable loans
for teacher education is not current Administration policy; similar legislative
provisions prompted veto recommendations from the Administration last year.
"TECHNOLOGY AND THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF LIVING"
The second paper states that new technologies and basic research have contributed to
dramatic increases in economic growth and improvements in the quality of life. The
United States has led the world in science and technology for much of this century,
resulting in a standard of living to which the rest of the world aspires. But, the
paper continues, we need to take other steps to continue to lead the world and
provide a standard of living that will allow our children and grandchildren to live
better than we do.
The paper points to three things that PCAST believes are required for America to
continue to benefit from the dividends of science and technology: (1) a continuing
flow of new ideas and new understanding; (2) the translation of new ideas and new
technologies into significant new products and into steady improvements of existing
products; and (3) a revival of quality manufacturing and production of goods.
According to the PCAST, the federal government has a role, though not the exclusive
role, in each of these three areas. Regarding the flow of new ideas, the Federal
government must continue to make a strong investment in basic research and must
continue to support the principle of scientific diversity. To address concerns about
the future support of scientific research, especially among young scientists, the federal
government should develop a well-articulated position that the generation of scientific
and technological talent is essential to America's future and will be given high
priority. Finally, the Federal government should join with the private sector to
revitalize the instrumentation and facilities that are crucial to forefront research.
The paper also discusses the importance of product development and the role of the
Federal government in assisting private industry. Compared with other countries, the
United States is seen as relatively weak at translating basic knowledge into significant
new products and in improving those products that are already an important part of
our lives. The Federal government can help to speed product development by creating
an economic climate that stimulates the development of new products and processes.
It can also support the development of generic, pre-competitive technologies that have
widespread applications in the public and private sectors.
The federal laboratories are a major resource. PCAST believes that they could
contribute more effectively to technology transfer, particularly if some of the
laboratories are given new missions focusing on generic, pre-competitive technologies,
on manufacturing, and on technology transfer. In addition, legislative and regulatory
actions by the federal government can support and encourage appropriate technology
transfer at the level of individual scientists and institutions.
Finally, even though manufacturing technology is predominantly the responsibility of
industry, PCAST believes the Federal government could take several actions to make
manufacturing a high priority for this country. Programs can be established to
recognize the importance of manufacturing to the American standard of living, as is
done through the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. The Federal government
could also support engineering education and fellowships targeted for research and
manufacturing technology.
COMMENTS ON "TECHNOLOGY AND THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF LIVING"
The majority of comments on the PCAST's technology paper focused on their call for
a renewed emphasis on manufacturing. One staff person noted that some economists
disagree on this emphasis, particularly since manufacturing accounts for just 22
percent of our GNP (down from 29 percent in 1950). In addition, it was felt that this
recommendation went beyond the charter of PCAST because it addresses economic
rather than R&D issues.
A concern was also raised about radically redirecting the missions of the federal
laboratories in support of civilian applications. If these laboratories no longer serve
a useful federal purpose, they should be phased down or closed. According to this
view, it would be very inefficient and unproductive to try to use the federal
laboratories to support the private sector.
Attachments
EDUCATION IN SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS:
MEETING THE NATIONAL EDUCATION GOALS
The National Education Goals developed by the President and the nation's
Governors have helped to move education toward the top of the nation's agenda.
Following the lead of the President and the Governors, Americans in growing numbers
are committing their energies to efforts designed to improve basic education.
Achieving the national goals will require significant improvement in science and
mathematics education. However, revitalizing science and mathematics education will
not be possible without much broader reforms in American basic education. This
paper therefore examines some of the general reform strategies that will be needed to
meet the national goals. It then suggests several ways in which the President and the
federal government can anticipate and facilitate those reforms, with a particular
emphasis on science and mathematics education.
THE NATURE OF THE GOALS
The National Education Goals have revolutionary implications for basic
education. They are performance goals stated in terms of outcomes or levels of
achievement. In the areas of science and mathematics, they require "demonstrated
competency in mathematics [and] science," sufficient to place U.S. students "first
in the world in science and mathematics achievement" by the year 2000, when "every
adult American will be literate and possess the knowledge and skills required in a
global economy." Moreover, the call for 90 percent of our young people to graduate
from high school requires that the goals extend to virtually all school-aged children,
even those for whom alternate educational strategies are required.
Previous efforts to improve education have often used input or process goals,
which prescribe the experiences that all students and teachers should undergo -- for
example, the amount and kinds of courses required of all students. Many of the new
approaches adopted in the 1980s were process reforms, and although there is some
evidence that these changes have contributed to modest progress in recent years, their
results have been generally disappointing.
2
REQUIREMENTS FOR EDUCATIONAL REFORM
Since the announcement of the National Education Goals, a consensus has
emerged that achieving them will require fundamental restructuring of basic education
in America. Incremental improvements may be achieved by further incremental
changes, but the magnitude of improvement needed to meet the goals calls for massive
change in the educational system.
The emphasis on performance implicit in the goals is one of the most
important educational reforms needed to meet those goals. This focus on results
rather than inputs must be accelerated and become pervasive throughout American
elementary and secondary education.
However, performance can be emphasized only if achievement can be reliably
measured. Today, we need greater confidence in assessment mechanisms and more
understanding of how assessments relate to actual learning. Without such
improvements, many in the education community feel it will be difficult to reorder the
educational system on the basis of performance.
As assessment mechanisms are being improved, a complementary effort is
needed in the area of curricular reform. Much good work is being done in this area,
but implementation of the results in schools will not be easy. Moreover, testing
standards should be coordinated with curriculum development, which is a major
challenge.
A second fundamental change that will be required for the restructuring of
basic education is the introduction of parental choice in the selection of schools
appropriate for each child. Choice has many dimensions, ranging from permitting
some children to choose "magnet" schools within the public system to distributing
government vouchers for children to pay for educational expenses at any school,
public or private. Whatever system is adopted, it is important to provide some
measure of academic quality to act as a basis for choice. Requiring nationally
standardized tests and publishing their results would provide one of the indexes that
parents could use as consumers in the educational marketplace. Involving parents in
education has great value, and giving parents some element of choice is often the
beginning of a deeper parental involvement.
A third promising strategy in the reform of basic education is rewarding
exceptional teachers. Implementation often founders on the difficulty of assessing the
quality of a teacher, but improved assessments of teacher performance, along with
other means of evaluation, including peer review, provide important opportunities for
improving the quality of the teaching force.
Such efforts are especially important in science and technology. Unless
teachers at both the elementary and secondary levels understand and appreciate
science and technology, significant improvement will be difficult. Teacher training
programs to improve the quality of science and mathematics teaching will be an
3
essential element in meeting the national goals.
A fourth requirement for effective reform is reducing bureaucracies by relying
on school-based management that empowers principals and their teachers. However,
bureaucracies will relinquish control to teams of teachers and principals at individual
schools only if equity and accountability can be assured, which again raises the
question of educational assessment.
Finally, underlying the needed reforms of basic education is the recognition
that school is only one of many critical influences in a child's development. Only by
shifting our focus from our institutions to our children can we truly address the
challenges to our society. This strategy is particularly relevant for the retention of
students at risk of dropping out, who may require strategies beginning with prenatal
and child care even before formal school begins. If we are to strengthen our nation's
workforce and build better citizens, we must shape society's institutions to our
children and not vice versa.
THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The federal government cannot mandate reform in the decentralized system of
basic education in America. It can, however, facilitate, and where appropriate
finance, the reform initiatives cited above, using incentives and appropriate leveraging
to accelerate the reform process. In particular, we believe that the following federal
actions warrant serious consideration:
0
The federal government can provide incentives to states or regions pursuing
any of the reforms described in the previous section, subject to constraints designed
to ensure equity and equal opportunity. For example, federal funds might be used to
facilitate choice for needy students, thereby providing an inducement to states or
districts offering choice programs. Similarly, a national competition might be
established to recognize and reward exemplary programs for restructuring education
(just as the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award has recognized quality
improvements in industry).
0
The federal government can foster greatly intensified research on academic
assessment and the development of measurement instruments so that performance
standards can be set and the academic marketplace can function more rationally.
For example, federal funds could be used to leverage voluntary participation in
appropriate achievement evaluation programs.
0
The federal government can make a concerted, national effort to facilitate
and coordinate state and local programs, both public and private, to deal with the
school dropout problem. Successful drop-out prevention programs could be
recognized by the President and rewarded for their achievement.
0
The federal government can encourage private corporations, universities, and
4
national laboratories to work cooperatively with local schools, building on the many
excellent initiatives already under way.
In the areas of mathematics and science, the federal government can
encourage effective programs to engage talented girls and minority students in science
and mathematics, where they are now underrepresented.
0
The federal government can invest in teacher education programs in science
and mathematics and use forgivable loans and other inducements to attract to
teaching young people with degrees in science, mathematics, and engineering.
o The federal government can support programs using modern
communications technologies, including satellite technologies, to expand access of both
students and teachers to the most highly qualified teachers of science and
mathematics.
THE PRESIDENT'S ROLE
Responsibility for our system of basic education in America rests fundamentally
on the general population, who shape the learning environments of their children,
elect their school boards and other influential politicians, and demonstrate their
priorities by their behavior toward teachers and schools.
However, our nation's leaders influence the attitudes and values of the
electorate. The President, in particular, has a personal role that reaches beyond his
authority as our nation's chief executive officer. In choosing his own priorities as a
leader, he sets a standard for all to heed.
The President, in partnership with the Governors, has placed a great challenge
squarely on the national agenda. Now all of the resources of leadership must be
applied to meeting that challenge. Federal budget priorities must be set, the activities
of the federal agencies must be guided, and the President's personal commitment to
education must continue to be demonstrated. With timely actions, and with a
continuing and unremitting campaign of words, the President can secure his place in
the history of American education.
TECHNOLOGY AND THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF LIVING
Today most Americans take for granted a standard of warmth, cleanliness,
food, medical care, music and entertainment, and transportation that was undreamt of
150 years ago. This great surge forward in the standard of living can and will
continue. Furthermore, this progress can encompass all Americans and the citizens of
other countries as well.
The foundation for dramatic increases in economic growth and improvement in
the standard of living has been technology. Basic research built a fundamental
understanding of the physical world, including the laws of mechanics and gravity, the
atomic and molecular bases of chemistry, and the basic principles of electricity and
energy. Building on this knowledge, individuals brought forth one striking invention
after another, from the steam engine, railroads, and the telegraph to electric lighting,
the telephone, and radio. Over the years, the rate of technological progress
accelerated. Advances in agriculture liberated the vast farm population for other
pursuits; automobiles and airplanes provided unprecedented speed and accessibility
over vast distances; and the television and computerized communications linked the
world together. This remarkable surge in invention, which contributed to an equally
remarkable ability to produce goods and services in volume, did much to create the
modern world.
America has led the world in science and technology for much of this century
-- resulting in a standard of living to which the rest of the world aspired. This paper
explores what will be necessary to continue to lead the world and thereby provide a
standard of living that will allow our children and grandchildren to live far better
than we do today.
REQUIREMENTS FOR TECHNOLOGICAL LEADERSHIP
Since World War II, basic scientific research has provided a new foundation on
which to build for the future. The molecules in a material can now be seen and
studied at the atomic level. The discovery of the structure of DNA and of the
immense complexity of the cell has opened up whole new areas of opportunity. New
materials are being developed that are lighter, stronger, and more durable than
anything known today. Advanced computers and new modes of communication, such
as optical fibers, are resulting in new ways to learn, new ways to work, new kinds of
2
intelligent machinery with virtually unlimited new capabilities. Furthermore, a better
understanding of the environment is making it possible for these advances to have far
fewer negative environmental impacts than did earlier technological advances.
Three basic things will be required if the United States is to continue to
benefit from the dividends of science and technology.
1. A continuing flow of new ideas and new understanding, which are the basis
of new materials, better health care, new information technologies, a cleaner
environment, and other technological advances.
2. The translation of new ideas and new technologies into significant new
products and into the steady improvement of those that are already an important
part of our lives.
3. A revival of manufacturing and the production of goods, which in the past
has provided both the material wealth and the jobs that built the American standard
of living.
THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The federal government has a role, although not the exclusive role, in the
development of technology. In particular, it has been a major catalyst for technology
development through its direct investment in research and through legislative and
regulatory actions that have facilitated the development and commercialization of new
insights.
New Ideas and New Understanding
Our diverse science and technology base can generate new ideas anywhere -- on
the production line, in industrial or government laboratories, and in the individual
laboratories of universities and research institutes. Many new ideas have come from
basic research, which has been supported largely by the federal government. The
federal government supports this research through diverse mechanisms in government
laboratories and in hundreds of universities and private research institutes throughout
the United States.
Continued strong investment in basic research, the recognition that basic
research is a high national priority, and the continued support of the principle of
diversity without federal control of research are all essential. The federal government
must also ensure that the large sums of money it is investing are invested well. Thus,
oversight must be balanced with control in ensuring that this broad and diverse
research base thrives.
Through its support of research and training programs, the federal government
3
has also played a major role in training the next generation of scientists. However,
many scientists, particularly young scientists, are discouraged about their future
prospects in science. Some of these problems may be based more on perceptions than
realities. Nevertheless, there needs to be a well-articulated federal position across
science and technology that the generation of scientific and technological talent is
essential to America's future and will be given high priority.
Finally, in partnership with the private sector, the federal government has a
role in revitalizing the research infrastructure. A modern infrastructuré is essential if
we are to create environments for talented people to generate new ideas.
Translation of New Ideas into Technologies
One of the greatest threats to continued improvements in our standard of
living is our relative weakness at translating basic knowledge into significant new
products and in generating steady improvement of those products that are already an
important part of our lives. Other countries now succeed at this process this much
more effectively than we do here in the United States.
The federal government has both a direct and an indirect role in translating
new ideas and new understanding into useable technologies. First, it can help create
an economic climate that stimulates the development of new products and encourages
the formation of new entrepreneurial companies. The federal government can also
support the development of generic, precompetitive technologies that have widespread
applications in the public and private sectors (examples include high performance
computing, biotechnologies, and materials science and engineering). The federal
government has often taken this role in the past, as in the cases of computer
technologies, aeronautical developments, and agricultural advances. It is important,
however, that such support not pull the federal government into an inappropriate
development role.
The federal laboratories are a major government resource that could, in some
cases, be marshalled to participate more effectively in technology transfer. In
particular, some federal laboratories could be given new missions focusing on generic,
precompetitive technologies, on manufacturing, and on technology transfer.
In general, the federal government needs to promote legislative and regulatory
actions that support and encourage appropriate technology transfer at the level of
individual scientists and institutions in both the private and public sectors. Concerns
about conflict of interest must be resolved so that they do not inappropriately retard
the entrepreneurial spirit.
4
Manufacturing
If America is to benefit from its own new ideas, this country must once again
become preeminent in manufacturing. This is largely the responsibility of industry,
but there are certain things that the federal government can do to make
manufacturing a high priority for this country. The President can recognize the
importance of manufacturing to the American standard of living. The Malcolm
Baldrige National Quality Award is an example that has been extremely successful.
Other programs that give manufacturing this kind of recognition need to be
established. The federal government can also support engineering education and
fellowships targeted for research and manufacturing technology.
SETTING PRIORITIES IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
In times of limited financial resources, choices must be made. Investments to
support technology, and thereby increase the American standard of living, will not
necessarily be free. The federal government's priorities in science and technology may
have to shift to more explicitly recognize economic growth and a higher standard of
living as national goals. In any such evaluation, we feel that the three areas
discussed above basic research, the translation of new ideas into products, and
manufacturing technologies -- must have priority if this country is to continue to
increase its standard of living.
U.S.
TECHNOLOGY POLICY
THE OFFICE SIDENT OF
ONLY CUTIVE UNITED SCIRNCE POLICY will OFFICE P a
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C.
SEPTEMBER 26, 1990
U.S. TECHNOLOGY POLICY
A nation's technology policy is based on the broad principles that govern the
allocation of its technological resources. Competitive market forces determine, for the
most part, an optimal allocation of U.S. technological resources. Government can
nonetheless play an important role by supplementing and complementing those forces.
Technology policy is not something that, once set in place, remains immutable. Broad
principles exist, but effective technology policy requires sufficient flexibility to permit
response to changing national and international situations. We are in an era marked
by increased international economic interdependency and increasingly stronger
technological capabilities in other industrial nations. These factors pose competitive
challenges for U.S. firms as well as opportunities. In formulating a national
technology policy, consideration must be given to a nation's traditions, its strengths
and weaknesses, and the international environment in which it exists.
In almost all respects the U.S. science and technology base remains the world's
strongest. The Nation's research universities and the ability of its people to innovate
remain the envy of the world. Nonetheless, industrial competitiveness depends on
many factors besides technology. Our strengths in technology and innovation have
not prevented an erosion in market shares of U.S. companies in many industries. As
new products mature, the advantage quickly shifts from the innovator to the efficient
producer. We have also seen the importance of high rates of capital investment for
the industrial competitiveness of Japan, Europe, and the Pacific Rim countries.
The competitive challenges American firms face are multifaceted ànd complex. There
will be no facile, short-term solutions. We, in this Administration, believe it is
essential that we recognize and use the strengths of our economic system more
effectively to help U.S. firms remain competitive. In order to do so, all elements of
our society must recognize that while we possess many strengths and assets, problems
do exist, and that we can mobilize our resources and solve them. At the same time,
we need to refrain from actions that might distort our basic system of free enterprise
- the Nation's ultimate strength.
In order to build on its strengths, U.S. society needs to focus on ensuring:
a quality workforce that is educated, trained, and flexible in adapting to
technological and competitive change;
a financial environment that is conducive to longer-term investment in
technology;
the translation of technology into timely, cost competitive, high quality
manufactured products;
an efficient technological infrastructure, especially in the transfer of
information; and
Federal laboratories, and industry all contribute to the science and technology base.
Industry makes the investments necessary to turn this knowledge base into
commercial products and processes. Federal, state, and local governments support
research both directly when they fund specific R&D projects, and indirectly through
tax and other incentives for private sector R&D investment. The Federal Government
also sets the overall macroeconomic and legal environment in which industry's
decisions about product and process development and commercialization take place.
In that context, the Administration's strategy to implement U.S. technology policy
includes the following major elements:
Role of the Private Sector
While the government plays a critical role in establishing an economic environment to
encourage innovation, the private sector has the principal role in identifying and
utilizing technologies for commercial products and processes. In particular, the
private sector has the responsibility to:
conduct research and development to advance industry-related knowledge and
technology; identify and aggressively pursue potential commercial applications for technologies
developed by its own laboratories as well as by universities, Federal laboratories,
and foreign sources;
increase quality, output, and productivity by undertaking necessary investments in
physical capital;
improve the skills and abilities of its workforce to meet its specific needs; and
participate cooperatively in improving the quality of U.S. education.
Government policies can help establish a favorable environment for private industry
to conduct these activities but cannot substitute for aggressive private sector action.
Government Incentives for the Private Sector
0
Create an environment conducive to technological competitiveness by ensuring that
technology policy concerns are factored into the formulation of related policies (e.g.
fiscal, monetary, trade, environmental, etc.) with the overall objective of enhancing
U.S. economic growth.
Encourage private technology-related investment through Federal monetary and
fiscal policies. For example, reducing the capital gains tax differential and making
permanent as well as enhancing the tax credit for research and experimentation
will provide incentives for added investment. Incentives can also be provided
through appropriate tax policies.
3
Provide an appropriate legal environment at the Federal level that removes
unnecessary obstacles to innovation. Reducing the uncertainties about antitrust
enforcement related to inter-firm cooperation in research and technology
development encourages the pooling of limited resources and a rapid diffusion of
results while still protecting against anticompetitive practices. Reducing the
antitrust uncertainties about joint production ventures will also enable firms to
cooperate in the development and introduction of new products.
Revise Federal procurement regulations and practices to permit greater integration
of government and commercial production at the factory level, as well as encourage
greater innovation and efficiency in development and production. Also encourage
the use of commercial products, to the extent feasible, for defense, space, and other
government applications.
Improve opportunities for companies to commercialize technologies and computer
software developed during the performance of government contracts by allowing the
contractors to retain rights in technical data and by protecting their trade secrets.
Provide a stable regulatory environment in order to decrease risk for private
investment.
Seek greater harmonization of regulations and standards for products and
processes with our major trading partners.
Encourage increased U.S. participation in multi-lateral international
standardization efforts through the standards activities of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
Seek better international protection of intellectual property to allow more benefits
to be recovered from R&D investments.
Education and Training
Revitalize education at all levels including not only the training of scientists,
engineers, and the technical workforce, but also educating our population to be
sufficiently literate in science and technology to deal with the social issues arising
from rapid scientific and technical change. Achieving such a goal will require a
broad-based approach involving business, academia, and educational organizations,
as well as Federal, state, and local governments.
0
Develop a framework for Federal interagency coordination and collaboration in
mathematics, science, engineering, and technology education. The goal is to define
an effective and appropriate role for the Federal government in support of the
states, localities, and universities as they improve science and technology education
to build human capital in the U.S.
4
Encourage continuing education and training, recognizing that, particularly in
scientific and technological fields, education must be a lifelong activity.
Federal R&D Responsibilities
Increase Federal investment in support of basic research. Private industry does
not invest heavily in basic research because the payoffs are so unpredictable and
diffuse that individual firms cannot be confident of fully recovering their
investments. However, the long-term potential benefits of this research are so large
that society cannot afford not to make the investment, especially in university
research which, in addition to new knowledge, also produces trained scientists and
engineers of the future.
Participate with the private sector in precompetitive research on generic, enabling
technologies that have the potential to contribute to a broad range of government
and commercial applications. In many cases these technologies have evolved from
government-funded basic research, but technical uncertainties are not sufficiently
reduced to permit assessment of full commercial potential. In pre-competitive
research, which occurs prior to the development of application-specific commercial
prototypes, research results can be shared among potential competitors without
reducing the financial incentives for individual firms to develop and market
commercial products and processes based upon the results.
Continue the Federal government's development of products and processes for
which it is the sole or major consumer, such as national defense, provided that no
commercially available products can be substituted. The government, in such
cases, must rely principally on the private sector to undertake the development
process. Revise current Federal procurement regulations to strengthen the abilities
of companies involved in developing and demonstrating these products to use the
same research results and technologies for commercial purposes.
Maintain a strong Defense technology base to provide options for future weapons
systems development and to help avoid technological surprises by potential
adversaries. Special emphasis needs to be placed on shortening the time required
for transferring R&D results to production and on using commercial products.
Streamline Federal decision-making structures and mechanisms to eliminate
unnecessary and cumbersome regulations and practices that inhibit industrial
competitiveness.
Encourage international cooperation in science and technology, where mutually
beneficial, and inform U.S. researchers of opportunities to participate in R&D
initiatives outside the U.S.
5
Transfer of Federally Funded Technology
Improve the transfer of Federal laboratories' R&D results to the private sector.
Where appropriate, these laboratories should give greater consideration to potential
commercial applications in the planning and conduct of R&D, and these efforts
should be guided by input from potential users. To achieve this goal, there must
be a closer working relationship among these laboratories, industry, and
universities. Defense-related laboratories can make major contributions while still
providing adequate safeguards for classified information.
Promote increased industry-Federal laboratory-university collaboration, including
personnel exchanges, to help convert Federally-supported R&D into new
technologies that the private sector can then turn into commercial products and
processes.
Promote and encourage access by U.S. industry to Federal laboratories within the
guidelines established by the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-
502), other existing legislation, and Executive Order 12591.
Expedite the diffusion of the results of Federally-conducted R&D to industry,
including licensing of inventions and removal of barriers to commercialization of
Federally developed computer software.
Encourage direct laboratory-industry interaction within broad, flexible Federal
guidelines, since effective technology transfer occurs at the operational level.
Federal-State Activities
Recognize the importance of decentralization, and encourage states to develop
programs that take into account the individual characteristics of each state.
Federal programs in such areas as education, training, the national infrastructure,
and regional generic technology centers, should build upon state initiatives.
Programs To Implement U.S. Technology Policy
The Administration has undertaken a broad range of programs and initiatives
aimed at translating the technology policy into action. These programs and their
associated budget levels requested for Fiscal Year 1991, where applicable, are
summarized here.
6
Incentives for the Private Sector
The Administration has proposed improvements in incentives for private sector
innovation by:
Reducing the tax rate on capital gains permanently to spur entrepreneurial
activity.
The Administration has proposed restoring a capital gains tax differential such
as existed before the Tax Reform Act of 1986. A lower tax rate on. capital gains
will encourage investors and entrepreneurs to make the investments necessary to
be competitive.
Making the research and experimentation (R&E) tax credit permanent to reduce
uncertainty.
Under current law, the R&E tax credit is scheduled to expire on December 31,
1990. The Administration proposal to make the credit permanent would permit
businesses to establish and expand research facilities without fearing that the tax
laws will suddenly change.
Protecting intellectual property through international negotiations.
The Administration is aggressively pursuing improved international protection of
intellectual property. The current negotiations in the Uruguay Round of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) are an important forum for
developing better international rules. Negotiations on intellectual property rights
are also being conducted in the World Intellectual Property Organization and in
trilateral talks with the European Community and Japan. In addition, the U.S.
is pursuing bilateral negotiations on intellectual property rights under the
provisions of the 1988 Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act.
Liberalizing export controls to enhance high technology product exports.
Dramatic changes in the Eastern European security environment have permitted
an Administration re-evaluation of U.S. export controls, and paved the way for an
expanded trade potential for U.S. high technology industries.
Reforming product liability laws to restore balance to the tort system.
The Administration supports the adoption of uniform product liability standards
across the 50 states based on three principles of fairness: the right of an
innocent person to fair compensation for actual damages; liability based on
responsibility for harm and not ability to pay; and encouragement of alternatives
to costly litigation. The proposed changes to product liability laws would
7
maintain incentives to produce safe products, but would restore balance to the
tort system and reduce uncertainty - particularly for new products.
Reforming the Federal procurement process.
The Administration supports continued efforts to streamline the procurement
process, reduce its complexity and paperwork burden, and provide contractors
with incentives to innovate and reduce costs. The Administration has proposed
changes in legislation and regulations to foster commercial style competitive
procedures for the acquisition of commercial products. A revision of the
Federal Acquisition Regulations is being drafted that will allow contractors to
retain commercial rights in technical data developed under Federal contracts.
The Administration is also developing a policy mandating increased agency use of
performance based contracting that gives contractors more freedom and incentive
to innovate.
0 Removing barriers to research, innovation, and development.
The Administration supports continued elimination of unwarranted regulation.
Deregulation can spur innovation as well as lower prices. It also requires a
continuous reexamination of existing regulatory policies to avoid unnecessary
stifling of new products and processes. The Administration has proposed
antitrust legislation that would reduce the legal uncertainties for companies to
enter joint production ventures while still protecting against anticompetitive
practices. Challengers would be required to prove that such ventures would
harm competition. The legislation would also eliminate punitive treble-damage
awards under certain circumstances.
Education and Training
In addition to the President's broad initiatives on education, there are a number
of programs directed at improving education in mathematics and science and at
training of the technical workforce. These include:
0 National Science Foundation: $463 million plus research assistantships proposed
in Fiscal Year 1991
The National Science Foundation has a broad range of programs dealing with
mathematics and science education and human resources at all levels. Major
programs are:
- Research career development (graduate research fellowships and enrichment
activities for talented high school students).
- Teaching materials development and informal science education (aimed primarily
at the pre-college level).
8
Teacher preparation and enhancement (upgrading quality of faculty, providing
Presidential Awards for Excellence in Science and Mathematics Teaching, and
developing model programs for women, minorities, and the handicapped).
Undergraduate science, engineering, and mathematics education (includes
instrumentation grants, curriculum development, faculty revitalization,
comprehensive regional centers for minorities, and research experiences for
undergraduates).
In addition, almost 16,000 graduate students are supported by research
assistantships through regular research grants to universities.
Department of Education: $333 million proposed in Fiscal Year 1991
Eisenhower mathematics and science program (provides funds to help State and
local educational agencies carry out programs to train teachers and improve
instruction in mathematics and science).
Adult education program (aimed at skills needed to cope with new technologies
and providing for workplace literacy).
National Institutes of Health: $292 million plus research assistantships proposed
in Fiscal Year 1991
Almost 12,000 graduate students receive training grants.
Tens of thousands of graduate students are supported by research assistantships
through the $4.4 billion in extramural research grants.
0
National Aeronautics and Space Administration: $51 million proposed in Fiscal
Year 1991
Program activities cover informal K-12 science education, mobile presentations on
space to elementary and secondary schools, teacher workshops and internships at
NASA research centers, grants for undergraduate and graduate students, and
programs for minorities in science and engineering education.
Department of Energy: $25 million plus research assistantships proposed in
Fiscal Year 1991
Programs include science and mathematics exposure for middle and high school
students, research training of undergraduates, and graduate fellowships in science
and engineering.
An estimated 4,000-4,500 graduate students are supported by research
assistantships through research grants to universities.
9
Department of Defense: $364 million projected for Fiscal Year 1991 for
non-military personnel
-
Pre-college programs (summer programs for minorities).
-
Undergraduate programs (primarily ROTC scholarships in technical fields).
-
Graduate fellowships and research assistantships.
-
Post-doctoral and faculty research appointments.
Department of Agriculture: $125 million proposed in Fiscal Year 1991
Challenge grants to strengthen undergraduate education.
Capacity building grants to strengthen teaching and research programs in the
"1890 Land Grant" institutions.
National needs fellowships to recruit and train scientists in the most critically
deficient areas.
Graduate assistantships associated with research grants projects. About 13,000
graduate students are supported for graduate studies.
Ag-In-The-Classroom to support science strengthening in K-12 programs.
Research apprenticeships to bring high school students into university and
government laboratories to stimulate interest in science.
School enrichment program to function as a catalyst between schools and
community to strengthen science programs.
-
Postdoctoral program in Agricultural Research Service and Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service laboratories.
Federal R&D Responsibilities
The Fiscal Year 1991 budget proposes to allocate about $71 billion for research
and development. This is an increase of $4.5 billion, or 7 percent, over 1990 enacted
levels. Civilian R&D will increase by 12 percent, while defense-related R&D will
increase by 4 percent. Within this total, $12 billion will be allocated for basic
research, an increase of $1 billion or about 8 percent over 1990. The budget contains
a number of new and expanded programs that will contribute to the Nation's R&D
enterprise and competitive posture. These include:
10
A 13 percent increase in the National Science Foundation's budget request for
research and facilities, which account for over 75 percent of the NSF budget.
Support for basic science and engineering is the foundation on which U.S.
technology is built. Within the overall increases there are emphases on Science
and Technology Centers, networking and communications, Engineering Research
Centers, and major research equipment for universities.
Developing advanced technologies to meet Defense and civilian agency needs.
Based on the results of a special survey of the support for selected advanced
technologies that are funded by more than one Federal agency, the budget
proposals are:
-
Robotics - The budget provides $192 million to six Federal agencies for support
of robotics R&D. The focus of this R&D is on the development of systems that
are more autonomous and capable of interacting with changing and uncertain
environments.
-
High Performance Computing - The budget provides $469 million for Federal
support of R&D focused on high performance computing. This activity
includes the full range of advanced computing technologies as well as systems
and applications software, networking, and underlying research and human
resource infrastructure.
Semiconductors - The budget provides $537 million for research on
semiconductor materials, development and application of semiconductor
materials to meet agency mission needs, and support of R&D on semiconductor
manufacturing processes. The largest single Federal program is DOD funding
of $100 million per year for SEMATECH, a semiconductor industry R&D
consortium.
- Superconductivity - The budget provides $215 million for superconductivity
R&D. Programs in five Federal agencies deal with both high temperature and
low temperature superconducting phenomena and materials.
Advanced Imaging Technologies - The budget provides $118 million for
advanced imaging R&D. Advanced imaging systems include interactive
graphics, high definition displays, advanced signal processing, and advanced
digital switching technologies.
Improving productivity and the quality of life through biotechnology. The budget
proposes $3.6 billion for biotechnology R&D. In pharmaceuticals, foods,
agriculture, waste management, and energy, biotechnical advances offer the
possibility of improvements that will make a real difference in people's lives.
Developing technologies for improved transportation. The budget proposes
funding for transportation R&D of $1,527 million. This R&D is aimed at
maintaining a modern, efficient transportation infrastructure, an essential factor
11
in being industrially competitive. Federal programs are focused on aeronautics,
highways, mass transit, railroads, maritime, water, aviation, and other
transportation areas.
Promoting alternate sources of energy. For conduct of energy R&D programs in
the Department of Energy, the budget proposes total funding of $2,450 million.
The R&D is aimed at maintaining abundant, reliable, and economic sources of
energy. Federal programs cover a broad spectrum of energy technologies
including solar, renewable, conservation, nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, and fossil
energy, and supporting energy sciences.
Enhancing industrial productivity and development of standards. The budget
proposes $198 million for the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
R&D in fundamental measurements and standards provides the foundation for
U.S. industry, commerce, and science to achieve levels of accuracy and
compatibility required to support technological development, efficient processing,
process control, and quality assurance. Special activities include R&D on
advanced manufacturing technologies. In addition, the Advanced Technology
Program provides grants to industry-led ventures to support research on pre-
competitive generic technologies.
Transfer of Federally Funded Technology
Many important steps have been taken, pursuant to the Federal Technology
Transfer Act and other legislation, to increase the degree to which Federal
laboratories collaborate with private industry in commercializing the results of
Federally-funded research and development. These activities include:
Establishment of over 200 active cooperative research and development
agreements between Federal laboratories and private companies.
Creation of the Precision Manufacturing Technology Program by the Department
of Energy to provide U.S. industry greater access to the extensive manufacturing
technology, expertise, and facilities available within the Department's Defense
Programs weapons complex.
Formation of the Biotechnology Research and Development Consortium, a joint
research effort between the Department of Agriculture's Northern Regional
Research Center, the University of Illinois, the State of Illinois, and six U.S.
companies.
Formation of a joint venture in high temperature superconducting materials and
applications by Du Pont, Hewlett-Packard, and Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Establishment of Regional Manufacturing Technology Centers. The budget
provides $5 million for this program. The approach is to reduce the barriers
12
faced by small- and medium-sized manufacturers in adopting new technology by
creating awareness and providing up-to-date, practical information and expertise
on manufacturing technologies and practices.
Federal-State Activities
Federal programs have already been initiated to build upon the advantages offered
by decentralized programs operating at the state and local level. These programs
include:
Department of Commerce Clearinghouse for State and Local Initiatives on
Productivity, Technology and Innovation:
The Clearinghouse gathers and analyzes information on the many technology
development centers at the state and local level. It will help to develop a
network of contacts among state and local officials and staff.
Small Business Development Centers:
Each Small Business Development Center (SBDC) serves as a one-stop assistance
center for businesses and provides services ranging from pre-business start-up
counseling to technical advice for existing businesses. The centers have a
legislative mandate to assist in technology transfer, make use of Federal
laboratories and equipment, and coordinate and conduct research they deem
worthwhile.
University Centers Program:
This program provides funds to involve the resources of universities in economic
development within the community.
NASA Industrial Applications Centers Program:
The centers offer clients access to a national data bank that includes over 100
million documents of accumulated technical knowledge, along with their expertise
in retrieving information and applying it in support of clients' needs. The
centers are backed by state-sponsored business or technical centers that provide
access to the technology transfer network.
Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers Program:
The centers provide trade-impacted small and medium-sized manufacturers
with in-depth technical assistance.
13
Staff 4014
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 21, 1990
gile
RCAST
MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL BRENT SCOWCROFT
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT
FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY Am
ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY
SUBJECT:
MAY 24-25 PCAST MEETING
The President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology will hold its fourth
meeting on May 24-25, 1990. A preliminary agenda is attached.
I cordially invite you to attend any portion of the meeting in which you may have an
interest. Please inform Tom Welch, PCAST Secretariat, at 395-5101 if you can join
us.
Attachment
PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
MAY 24-25, 1990
PRELIMINARY AGENDA
THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1990
OPEN SESSION: 9:00 A.M. - 12:00 NOON
CONFERENCE ROOM, COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
722 JACKSON PLACE, N.W.
8:30-9:00
ARRIVAL -- COFFEE AND PASTRIES
9:00-9:30
OPENING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
9:30-10:30
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC
COMPETITION -INFORMATION
DR. GOMORY
BRIEFING AND DISCUSSION
DR. PHILLIPS
10:30-10:45
BREAK
10:45-11:45
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES --
INFORMATION BRIEFING
DR. LOVEJOY
AND DISCUSSION
DR. MAYNARD
11:45-12:00
CLOSING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
2
THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1990 continued
12:00-1:00
LUNCH - ROOM 208, CORDELL HULL CONFERENCE ROOM
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
CLOSED SESSION, 1:00 - 5:00 P.M.
ROOM 208, CORDELL HULL CONFERENCE ROOM
OLD EXECUTIVE OFFICE BUILDING
1:00-2:00
MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
PANEL APPROVE TERMS OF REFERENCE,
MEMBERS AND MILESTONES
DR. McTAGUE
DR. PHILLIPS
2:00-2:15
BREAK
2:15-3:15
BIOSCIENCE AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
PANEL - DISCUSSION OF DRAFT
TERMS OF REFERENCE,
DR. NATHANS
RECOMMENDED MEMBERSHIP
DR. WYNGAARDEN
3:15-4:15
EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES
PANEL -- DISCUSSION OF DRAFT
TERMS OF REFERENCE, RECOMMENDED
MEMBERSHIP
DR. LIKINS
DR. RATCHFORD
4:15-5:00
FUNDING FOR INDIVIDUAL
INVESTIGATORS AND SMALL GROUPS
DR. ERB
5:00
CLOSING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
6:30
RECEPTION AND DINNER HOSTED BY AMERICAN ASSOCIATION
FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE (DINNER AT 7:00)
OCCIDENTAL RESTAURANT, 1475 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
3
FRIDAY, MAY 25, 1990
CLOSED SESSION, 9:00 A.M. - 12:00 NOON
ROOSEVELT ROOM, THE WHITE HOUSE
9:00-10:00
THE BUDGET PROCESS AND TIMING
AS IT RELATES TO PCAST AND
FCCSET
MR. DARMAN
10:00-10:30
DISCUSSION
10:30-10:45
BREAK
11:15-11:45
OTHER PCAST ISSUES
11:45-12:00
THE NEXT MEETING
AND CLOSING REMARKS
DR. BROMLEY
REVISED 5/21/90