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
285790973
label
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285790973
contentType
document
title
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
62003-007
collections
Records of the White House Office of Science and Technology (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Allan D. Bromley Files
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
285790973
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
47aed838196ac38c
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:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
OA/ID Number:
62003
Folder ID Number:
62003-007
Folder Title:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
0
0
0
O
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 3, 1989
Professor R.W. Charlton
Vice-Chancellor and Principal
University of the Witwatersrand
One Jan Smuts Avenue
Johannesburg 2001
South Africa
Dear Professor Charlton:
Many thanks for your warm note of congratulations on the occasion
of my appointment as Assistant to the President for Science and
Technology and Director of the White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy.
I am happy to be considered a member of your University family
and, if your travels should bring you to Washington, please do let me know
so that I could have the pleasure of taking you to lunch in the White House.
With warmest best wishes.
Sincerely yours
Danan Bounley
DAB:lac
Office of the Vice-Chancellor and Principal
UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND, JOHANNESBURG
1 Jan Smuts Avenue, Johannesburg 2001
WITS 2050
Telegrams 'Uniwits' Fax: (011) 339-8215
Telephone (011) 716-3200
9 June 1989
Dr D Allan Bromley
Department of Physics
Yale University
New Haven
Connecticut 06520
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Dear Dr Bromley
I write to congratulate you, as the recipient of an Honorary Doctorate
from this University, most sincerely on your appointment as Science
Adviser to the President of the United States.
Please accept the good wishes of myself and my University. You will
fill this important office with the distinction which has marked your
whole career.
Yours sincerely
Bob Charlton
RW CHARLTON
Vice-Chancellor and Principal
RWC/sa/14/022
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Demmburay's Deamber 27'09
Dr. Robert Corell:
Dear Rob:
Enclosed herein The the rda
fn huloo Palatti that Imentemed
mean pecent
Bill agards-and havey
wayer.
Sweerely
Ada
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 17, 1989
Dear Admiral Cooper:
Thank you for your invitation to speak to
members of the Naval Submarine League (NSL)
and the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory
at the Technical Symposium next May. I look
forward to being with you on that occasion if
possible.
When you have more details about the meeting
and attendees, I will be interested in seeing
them.
Sincerely
Dr.
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Admiral D. L. Cooper
Vice Admiral, U.S. Navy
(Undersea Warfare)
Washington, D.C. 20500
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 24, 1989
Dear Dr. Coles:
Unfortunately Mark Crawford's interpretation of my Senate
confirmation hearing statements was quite the opposite of my
intent. I am a strong supporter of the Human Genome Project
and certainly did not imply, in the slightest, any interest
in delaying or stretching it out. What I was attempting to
do was to emphasize what, in my view, was an important
cooperation between the instrument intensive groups at the
Department of Energy's National Laboratories and the
scientists in the NIH laboratories in evolving an effective
and efficient approach to this challenging program.
Unfortunately, I find that all too many publication
interpretations of formal statements such as mine tend to
search for possible areas of controversy amplifying or
manufacturing them as the need may arise.
Thank you for your interest,
Sincerely yours,
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. L. Stephen Coles
Computer Science Department
University of Southern California
University Park
Los Angeles, California 90089-0782
COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
Henry Salvatori Computer Science Center
SOUTHERN OF CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY
(213) 743-5501
August 4, 1989
Dr. Allan Bromley, Director
Office of Science and Technology Policy
The White House
Washington, D.C
Dear Dr. Bromley:
Reading Mark Crawford's News & Comment Report in Science (Vol. 245, p. 349,
July 28, 1989, "Senate Committee Quizzes Bromley"), it stated that you "hinted
that the Human Genome Project might be stretched out." Awaiting the development
of new technology for sequencing and data analysis before making a commitment
is in my view precisely wrong. The urgency with which this project must be
pursued dictates that your Office must take the initiative in aggressively
managing the development of this new technology. In this way we can continue
the Human Genome Project mapping goals according to the schedule originally
proposed by Dr. James Watson.
I have many ideas about the strategic and tactical approach to conducting
this technology development program and would be happy to discuss them with you
further at your convenience.
Sincerely yours,
L.Stephen Coles
L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D.
Lecturer in Computer Science
and Radiology
LSC/bas
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, UNIVERSITY PARK, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90089-0782
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 24, 1989
Dear Dave:
Many thanks for your thoughtful note of July 31st which
arrived while I. was out of the country. I did indeed have
to weigh the charms of Washington against those of a number
of activities, such as STAC, where I had the very pleasant
opportunity to meet on a regular basis with a great many old
friends.
I look forward to an interesting few years here in
Washington and know that I will have frequent occasion to
call on these old friends for help and advice. You should
consider yourself warned!
Sincerely yours,
Anan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. David H. Cohen
Vice President for Research
Dean of the Graduate School
Northwestern University
Evanston, Illinois 60201
NORTHWESTERN_UNISIY
VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH AND
DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
EVANSTON, ILLINOIS 60201
312-491-3485
DAVID H. COHEN
July 31, 1989
Dr. D. Allan Bromley
Henry Ford II Professor of Physics
and Director, A.W. Wright Nuclear
Structure Laboratory
Yale University
272 Whitney Avenue
New Haven, Connecticut 06511
Dear Allan:
On behalf of the Scientific and Technical Advisory Com-
mittee of Argonne National Laboratory, I offer our warmest con-
gratulations on your appointment as Presidential Science Advisor.
Your decision must have been extraordinarily difficult, knowing
that accepting the new post might conflict with your ability to
serve on STAC.
I wish you every success and would like to indicate my per-
sonal sense of reassurance that President Bush will have such
able and accomplished counsel during a challenging period for the
scientific enterprise of the nation.
With warmest regards,
Dave Col
David H. Cohen
DHC/zg
Chairman, STAC
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 24, 1989
Dear Warren:
I had certainly not forgotten the Warren Cheston of the
University of Rochester in the 1950s, but was a little
surprised to find him deep in the midst of the biomedical
world.
Let me thank you for your note of congratulations and your
invitation to present the Arthur Stern lecture.
As you can imagine, I am occupied about 200 percent of the
time at present attempting to get my office appropriately
staffed and in operation, but your invitation is one that I
would be interested in accepting if it could perhaps be
postponed until late this fall or sometime next spring when
I hope to have things under control.
It was good to hear from you. You have picked a good year
for your centenary and I shall look forward to seeing you
sometime within the next few months.
With all best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Allan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. Warren B. Cheston
Associate Director
The Wistar Institute
36th Street at Spruce
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4268
THE
OF
WISTAR
INSTITUTE
AMATOMY
AND
THIRTY-SIXTH STREET AT SPRUCE PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104-4268
INSTITUTE
WISTAR THE A.D. 1808 BIOLOGY
PHONE: (215) 898-3700
TELEX #710 670 0328
TELEFAX #(215) 898-3995
CABLE ADDRESS: WISTARINST
WARREN B. CHESTON, Ph.D.
ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
(215) 898-3706
August 14, 1989
D. Allan Bromley, Ph.D.
Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
Old Executive Office Building
17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20506
Dear Allan:
Congratulations on your appointment by President Bush and confirmation by the
United States Senate. Your friends and colleagues wish you well on this important
assignment.
In addition to sending congratulations, I am inviting you, at your convenience, to
present the next Arthur Stern Lecture sponsored by The Wistar Institute. If you are able
to accept this invitation, the occasion would give you an opportunity to discuss your
policies and the goals of you office with representatives from a large conglomeration of
universities, research institutes, and research/teaching hospitals in the Philadelphia
area. I am certain that we will be able to assure you of an audience of the movers-and-
shakers of the science, engineering, and medical communities of this area.
It may be that you are unfamiliar with The Wistar Institute and its programs. Our
stature in the world of biomedical research can be attested to by Sam Broder of the
National Cancer Institute. We devote our efforts totally to basic biomedical research
and have along the way developed viral vaccines and cancer diagnostics and
therapeutics which are manufactured and marketed by commercial organizations
throughout the world. We shall be 100 years old in 1992.
Finally, it is more than possible that you have forgotten that we were graduate
students together in the physics department at the University of Rochester. It is one of
the reasons I have taken the liberty of writing to you.
Best personal wishes,
Warren Waver B. Cheston, Ph.D.
WBC/gh
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 28, 1989
Dear Hirsh:
Thank you for bringing the study on the AIDs epidemic
modeling to my attention. When Jim Wyngaarden comes on
board as my Associate Director for Life Sciences, he will be
contacting you on the issue you raised concerning the Survey
on HIV propagation. I intend to place increased attention
on life sciences in general, and welcome any information in
this area that you feel should be brought to my attention.
I agree that it is long past time when we should be doing
something concrete about your excellent report.
Warmest personal regards,
Sincerely yours,
Allan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. Hirsh Cohen
International Business Machines Corporation
Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Post Office Box 218
Yorktown Heights, New York 10598
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 29, 1989
PERSONAL
Dear Marvin:
I was delighted to get your letter and must say that I look
back on our efforts to sort out the Physics Department and
the Wright Laboratory with more than a little nostalgia.
What I badly need here in Washington is someone with your
sense both of style and of how to get things accomplished
efficiently and effectively. You did a tremendous job for
me in both of these situations and I am truly grateful.
Quite apart from that, it was fun!
I'm glad to hear that you have decided to redo your round
the world venture, but am puzzled as to how you actually
include both poles in this. I would suspect that the
facilities would be marginal at best!
As you can imagine, I desperately miss Mary Anne and was
prepared to do anything, up to and including kidnapping, to
bring her to Washington but I understand that, with Megan at
her present age, it really was not very feasible. In any
event, I need someone to look after my interests back at WNS
until I get back. I understand, via the grapevine, that
Peter has made some rather dramatic changes in the place.
We are still in the process of getting settled in our new
Bethesda home and I would feel much happier if we did not
still own the one in North Haven. There is however precious
little that one can do about the fact that the Connecticut
housing market seems to have collapsed.
If any of your travels brings you to the Washington area,
please do give me some warning so that I can have the
pleasure of taking you to lunch at the White House Mess.
It is one of the few fringe benefits that go with this
position.
Pat joins me in sending you our warmest best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Dan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Mr. C. Marvin Curtis
38 Castle Rock
Branford, Connecticut 06405
38 Partle Rock
CMC
Branford it 06405
WEDNESDAY,
AUGUST 232)
ALLAN-
Yai MAY BE GONE BUT YOU'RE CERTAINLY NOT FORGOTTEN
SINCE I'VE JUST RECEIVED A capy OF THE 1987 WASL
SUMPOSIUM PROCEDINES LWHC DID THOSE EXCELLENT PORTBAITS
of you? 3 I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CLEVE 62A4 is NEW
ENSCENCED CN your NEW OFFICE WALL (ID LIKE TC BE
CUSTODIAN OF ONE of THE CTHERS - I WOUDER WHERE THEY
ARE) AND 3 ALENGIOTH BOTH of Tax DDRESSES, MARY
ANNE WAS GOOD ENCLIGH TO SEND nt TEAR SHEETS of 40.8
COMFIRMATION HEARINGS THOSE MUST HAVE BEEN Face
of YOUR FINEST HOURS! ALONE WITH MY PART- TIME
JOB AS A RECREA MONAL THERAPIST (AND I MAJORS'S
IN ENGLISH 1) AT A LOCAL HEALTH CARE FACILITY FOR
ODER PEOPLE LUNICH I FIND EX TREMELY REW ARDING,
I REMEMBER WITH GRATILIDE YOUR KEEPING ME
Busy 34 PERSUADING ME TO HELP OUTWITH THAT
PHYSICS GRADUATES REUNION LAST MAY. to ALL
in WHICH I ADD-BY LOCKING BACK ON my
THIS is WHAT HAPPENS
WORKING ZELANONSHIP WITH YOU THROUGH THE
WITHOUT A HANDY
YEARS (TEPPED BY THAT V624 SPECIAL near FOR
MY RETIREMENT). ABD ic THINK THAT IT ALL
BEGAN WITH THAT ONE weed - STYLE! At tally
TYROWPITER!
RATE, BEFORE THIS PEN RUNS OUT of THE INK
it APPEARS iz BE LOSING, I JUST THOUGHT
the LIKE to sexi- YOU AND AT - same
LOCAL GREENNES! ALL THE BEST to BOTH
of You Now ANDALWAYS- AND THANKS!
manum
PS I'VE DECIDED to GO AROUND THE word
AGAIN, THIS TIME INCLUDING 30TH POLES !
PPS- THIS MED NOT BE ANSWERED Lu.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 30, 1989
Dear Paul:
Many thanks for your very interesting letter of August 23
addressing the question of low-cost access to space. This
is an extremely useful summary and I shall have frequent
occasions to refer to it. Beyond that, I will look forward
to discussing some of these possible activities with you in
the near future.
Again, my thanks for writing.
Sincerely yours,
Dn-
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. Paul J. Coleman, Jr.
President
Universities Space Research Association
The American City Building, Suite 212
Columbia, Maryland 21044
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01a. Letter
To: Allan Bromley From: Paul Coleman
8/23/89
(b)(1)
Re: Low-cost Access to Space (5 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
Date Closed:
2/8/2010
OA/ID Number:
62003-007
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
Low-cost Access to Space: Some Relevant Activities (7 pp.)
7/25/89
(b)(1)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence Presidential - C [1989]
Date Closed:
2/8/2010
OA/ID Number:
62003-007
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 WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 30, 1989
Dear Paul:
Many thanks for your very interesting letter of August 23
addressing the question of low-cost access to space. This
is an extremely useful summary and I shall have frequent
occasions to refer to it. Beyond that, I will look forward
to discussing some of these possible activities with you in
the near future.
Again, my thanks for writing.
Sincerely yours,
Dn-
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. Paul J. Coleman, Jr.
President
Universities Space Research Association
The American City Building, Suite 212
Columbia, Maryland 21044
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 31, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR RICHARD COOK
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY
goe
not
SUBJECT:
NOVA PROGRAM RECEPTION SEPTEMBER
AIR AND SPACE
You have asked for suggestions of possible persons
associated with OSTP whom you might invite to the above
inter in itto This
mentioned reception. I would suggest:
mith
1. Dr. James Wyngaarden, Director, NIH
(will be OSTP Associate Director)
occasm BRB
2. Dr. Thomas Ratchford, Executive Director, AAAS
(will be OSTP Associate Director)
3. Dr. Judith Bostock, OSTP
(Special Assistant to the Director)
4. Dr. James Decker, OSTP
Assistant Director for Physical Sciences
5. Dr. Nancy Maynard, OSTP
Assistant Director for Environmental Science
6. Ms. Michelle Van Cleave, OSTP
Assistant Director for Defense Science
Others not in OSTP whom you might wish to invite would be:
Dr. Erich Bloch, Director NSF
Dr. Jack Gibbons, Director OTA
Dr. Craig Fields, Director DARPA
Dr. Robert Hunter, Director OER/DOE
Dr. Gordon Oehler, Senior Scientist, CIA
Dr. Nyle Brady, Senior Scientist, AID
Mr. Thomas Murrin, Deputy Secretary, DOC
I appreciated your visit and the brief papers you left with
me have been most helpful. We have very real problems and I
have appreciated your input concerning them.
I look forward to meeting your Chairman when he is next in
town.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 13, 1989
MEMORANDUM FOR LOIS HAMATY
National Science Board
National Science Foundation
SUBJECT: Paul Chu's Medal of Science Certificate
Professor C.W. (Paul) Chu of the Texas Center for
Superconductivity at the University of Houston was here in
Washington recently, serving on an ad hoc panel that I've
assembled.
He mentioned to me at that time that he had never received
the certificate -- suitable for framing -- that was supposed
to have accompanied the Medal of Science which he was
awarded a year ago, at the same time I received mine. I
told him I would make contact with you to see what had
happened in his case, and to make sure that if the original
had become lost a duplicate would be made up and forwarded
to him.
I would very much appreciate your taking care of this matter
or directing me to the appropriate person who will make it
happen.
With all best wishes,
Man
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 15, 1989
Dear Dr. Hill:
Many thanks for your letter of August 28 and for your kind
comments on our recent meeting. I do indeed know that Tom
Ratchford has been depending upon you for copies of many of
your policy studies and reports and in many cases he has
been passing them on to me. I have been very much
interested not only in the content but also in the very high
quality that is evident in all of those that I have seen.
I much appreciate your sending me a copy of your paper on
"Agency Responsibility for Civilian Technology," which I
have read with very real interest. It is indeed very much
pertinent to my discussions with the people in the
Department of Commerce, and as these discussions proceed, I
expect to be back to you for further advice and counsel.
I look forward to working with you and am clearly going to
count on the CRS for very important input to OSTP
activities.
With all best wishes,
Sincerely yours
Oman
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. Christopher T. Hill
Senior Specialist, Science and Technology Policy
Congressional Research Service
The Library of Congress
Washington, D.C. 20540
R
Congressional Research Service
The Library of Congress
H I
Washington, D.C. 20540
August 28, 1989
Dr. D. Allen Bromley, Director
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Executive Office of the President
Washington, D.C. 20506
Dear Dr. Bromley:
It was a pleasure to meet you and to hear some of your views on
American science and technology policy issues at the meeting with
congressional support agency staff today at the Library of Congress. Speaking
for myself, I look forward to the opportunity to work with you and your staff
as we assist our respective branches of this great Government. My colleagues
all seemed to be impressed and pleased with your views and your style.
I am sure you know that Tom Ratchford has already called upon us for
copies of many of our policy studies and reports, which we are pleased to
provide so long as our congressional requesters have not imposed restrictions
on the dissemination of work we do for them.
Following up on the brief small-group conversation after the meeting on
government organization for the support of industrial technology, I am taking
the liberty of sending along a very brief review of this issue that I prepared
for the CRS publication, CRS Review. Perhaps it will be of some use to you
as you work with Deputy Secretary Tom Murrin and others to unscramble
this important subject.
Sincerely,
Senior Specialist
Science and Technology Policy
enc.
#
BERRIAED
RECEIVED
89 AUG 5 P2:41
OFFICE OF THE
U.S. PRODUCTIVITY
Agency Responsibility for
Civilian Technology
Christopher T. Hill
Calls for the Federal Government to spur civilian technology have
intensified. An important issue is, what agency should be in charge?
T
he role of the Federal Government in assist-
about 160, many on temporary assignments from
ing the development and application of new
other agencies or from outside Government, it sup-
civilian technology has grown slowly but
ports early-stage, high-risk R&D projects on tech-
steadily since the mid-1960s. The slow growth re-
nologies that may have military applications but
flects a tension between the belief that the market
that are not of immediate interest to the services.
can deliver new technology at an adequate pace
without government assistance or that such help
DARPA has contributed to the development of
would be ineffective, and the belief that institu-
many "spin-offs;" i.e, technologies that subsequent-
tional barriers and limitations in the real market-
ly have found important commercial applications,
including semiconductor electronics, computers,
place inhibit the ability of industry to perform op-
composite materials, and artificial intelligence.
timally. However, the rapid erosion of America's
technological lead in many fields vis à vis other
In the mid-1980s DARPA has more explicitly as-
nations and the slow growth in productivity since
sisted development of essentially civilian technol-
the early 1970s have led to renewed calls for the
ogies by providing matching funds for multi-firm
Government to spur civilian technology.
research consortia in such fields as semiconductor
chips (SEMATECH) and automated machine tools
During the Reagan administration the climate
(the National Center for Manufacturing Sciences).
for industrial innovation was improved by, for ex-
Some argue that DOD support of key civilian sec-
ample, enhancing tax incentives for R&D, estab-
tors has become important to national security be-
lishing the Small Business Innovation Research
cause some civilian technologies are now more ad-
program, and reducing antitrust barriers to coop-
vanced than military ones, and because some mili-
erative research. However, disagreement over the
tary systems now depend on commercial products
Federal role led to case-by-case and largely uncoor-
made by industries that are threatened by foreign
dinated efforts at direct financial assistance.
competition or have moved abroad.
Until recently, no Federal agency had assumed
Another reason for DARPA's growing support of
a lead role in financing civilian technology. Now,
civilian technology is that it has had more re-
however, both the new Federal Technology Admin-
sources than civilian agencies, especially during
istration (FTA) in the Department of Commerce
the defense buildup of the past decade. Only
and the Defense Advanced Research Projects
DARPA had the budget, staff, and procedures to
Agency (DARPA) in the Department of Defense
administer a program like SEMATECH with its
have such responsibilities. Deciding the proper
annual appropriation of $100 million. Yet another
role of each agency has become a key policy issue.
rationale for DARPA's role is that many advanced
technologies have both military and civilian appli-
DARPA's Role
cations. DARPA's current initiatives in high-defi-
DARPA was established in 1958 as an explorato-
nition television (HDTV) and high-temperature su-
ry research agency for DOD. With a budget today
perconducting materials have been justified on
of a little more than a billion dollars and a staff of
this ground.
Department of Commerce's Role
Christopher T. Hill is a CRS senior specialist in sci-
ence and technology policy.
For decades the Department of Commerce has
been responsible for science and technology
CRS Review/June 1989 17
through the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO),
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
ties, including ATP, were requested by the Presi-
dent or appropriated by the Congress for FY89.
tration (NOAA), the National Bureau of Standards
(NBS, now the National Institute of Standards and
The President's FY90 budget requested no money
for any of the new FTA or NIST authorities. How-
Technology, or "NIST"), and the National Techni-
ever, temporary appointments have been made to
cal Information Service (NTIS).
leadership posts in FTA and ATP.
These activities were consolidated under an As-
sistant Secretary for Science and Technology in
Proposals for Other Agencies To Lead
1962, and under a statutory Assistant Secretary
for Productivity, Technology and Innovation
Despite the establishment of FTA and the ATP,
(OPTI) in 1980. During the Reagan era, the operat-
some in Congress and among the public support
ing responsibilities for NBS and PTO were re-
creation of a separate technology agency, some-
moved from OPTI and placed directly under the
times referred to as a "civilian DARPA" or a De-
Secretary of Commerce. Since NOAA had become
partment of Science and Technology. It would help
industry accelerate the commercialization of new
independent of the other programs some years
before, OPTI then oversaw only NTIS and several
and emerging technologies having high but uncer-
miscellaneous technology programs, including ac-
tain potential for civilian applications by jointly
tivities to transfer federally owned technology to
funding R&D efforts. The ATP at NIST already
the private sector and State and local governments
has this authority, but it has no money to spend,
and calls for a civilian DARPA may reflect ATP's
pursuant to the Stevenson-Wydler Technology In-
limited visibility and doubts about whether ATP
novation Act of 1980. Authority given to OPTI by
can meet the challenge.
that Act to fund cooperative industrial technology
centers was never exercised.
Policy Issues
The Technology Competitiveness Act of 1988
(Title V of P.L. 100-418, the Omnibus Trade and
While debate continues over whether the Feder-
Competitiveness Act) and P.L. 100-519, the FY89
al Government should fund civilian industrial
NIST Authorization Act, authorize the Depart-
technology directly, much current discussion cen-
ment of Commerce to establish stronger, better co-
ters not on whether, but how. One issue is wheth-
ordinated policies and programs in support of civil-
er Congress should continue to fund cooperative
ian industrial technology development and trans-
industrial R&D consortia on a case-by-case basis or
fer. Together they (1) renamed the NBS as NIST
should delegate the responsibility to an executive
branch agency and give it the needed financial re-
and gave it new authorities to fund regional cen-
sources. Case-by-case support must be channeled
ters for the transfer of manufacturing technology;
to establish a clearinghouse for State and local
through one agency or another, while delegation of
programs related to productivity, technology and
authority keeps alive the issue of how an agency
should decide who gets how much to do what.
innovation; to assist State-based technology exten-
sion services; and to provide technical evaluation
A second major issue is whether to continue to
of non-energy related inventions; (2) established in
depend on DARPA, to give the ATP in the Depart-
NIST an Advanced Technology Program (ATP) to
ment of Commerce the resources to support civil-
financially assist firms and consortia that do R&D
ian technology or to create another entity to do
related to industrial technology; (3) established in
the job. Considerations here include whether the
the Department a new Undersecretary for Tech-
operating style (including security classification)
nology to direct a new Federal Technology Admin-
and incentives at DARPA are well matched to in-
istration (FTA) that would include NIST, NTIS,
dustry needs, whether DARPA can continue to
and the authorities under OPTI; and (4) estab-
play this role in an era of shrinking defense budg-
lished in FTA a new Assistant Secretary for Tech-
ets, and whether industry is sufficiently confident
nology Policy.
of the Commerce Department's long-term commit-
However, funding for FTA and NIST has not
ment to technology to embrace its assistance.
matched the expectations in the two acts of 1988.
Other issues are whether supporting civilian tech-
For FY89 NIST received $7.5 million to fund re-
nology might distract DARPA from its defense
gional centers that transfer manufacturing tech-
mission and whether the ATP should be given a
nology developed at NIST to the private sector. Be-
higher status, perhaps reporting directly to the
cause the authorization bills were enacted after
Undersecretary of Commerce for Technology, to
the FY89 appropriations process was well along,
ensure access to key decision makers in other
because of the Federal budget deficit, and because
agencies and in industry. Removing ATP from
of a lack of enthusiasm for the new authorities in
NIST might also allay concern that ATP may be
funded by diverting funds from established NIST
some quarters, no funds for the other new authori-
standards-related research programs.
18 CRS Review/June 1989
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 20, 1989
Dear Dr. Clodius:
Thank you for your invitation to address the Council on
Research Policy and Graduate Education at the November
20, meeting of the National Association of State
Universities and Land-Grand Colleges. I accept the
invitation and look forward to discussing science
policy and research universities with members of the
Council.
With best wishes,
Sincerely,
Dlum D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
CC: Dr. Thomas Collins
Dr. Robert L. Clodius
President
National Association of State Universities
and Land-Grant Colleges
One Dupont Circle, N.W.
Suite 710
Washington, DC 20036-1191
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 22, 1989
Dear Mrs. Chennault:
Many thanks for your letter of September 6 and your
congratulations on my confirmation on my new position. I
much appreciate your writing and also your strong
recommendation for Dr. Tony Yen, whom as yet I have only had
an opportunity to meet with rather briefly.
You may be interested in knowing that my Associate Director
for Engineering and Physical Sciences -- a Presidential
appointment that requires Senate confirmation -- will be
Professor Eugene Wong, who for many years has been chairman
of the combined Departments of Electrical Engineering and
Computer Science at the University of California in
Berkeley, and who was born in China. He is one of the
nation's most outstanding people in his field, and I
consider myself extraordinarily fortunate to have been able
to attract him to the OSTP staff.
Again, my thanks for writing and for bringing me not only
your own congratulations but those of the Republican Asian
Assembly, which you chair.
Sincerely yours,
DAnan D. Allan Bromley Somby
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Mrs. Anna C. Chennault
1511 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October's. '89
has Thomas Cech:
Dear Tom:
Marment congratulatumen
The habel award. ghad not
realized that you and Sid had
bun working m The RNA
question intrachs as parallel as
laow learn.
Itisa great
to you- and one much meritid-
batil also da guat went for
and en behalf the President- from
american permice. Both Nestrally
whom you will be hearing duetly-
warmint Thanks and Sincerely congratulations
Audu
From: Field Marshal Lord Carver GCB, CBE, DSO, MC
HOUSE OF LORDS
19th October 1989
bean h Browley
SELECT COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SUB-COMMITTEE II - - GREENHOUSE EFFECT
I am writing to thank you very much for meeting me and
other members of our Sub-Committee on the greenhouse effect
when we visited Washington three weeks ago. We learned a
great deal from our conversation and you were very kind to
spare us so much of your time.
On the whole, the evidence we received in the United
States both on the science of the problem and on the
responses, confirmed that which we had heard in the United
Kingdom. But we also gained new insights and have adjusted
the report which we shall be making to the House accordingly.
You may be interested in seeing our report when it is
published in the latter part of November and I shall arrange
for you to be sent a copy.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Cann
CARVER
Dr. Allan Bromley,
Director Designate,
Office of Science and Technology
Policy
Achnowledge andack Enery
Room 358,
Old Executive Office Building,
WASHINGTON DC 20506,
U.S.A.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 18, 1989
Dear Lord Carver:
Many thanks for sending me a copy of the report on the
greenhouse effect published by the Select Committee on
Science and Technology.
This is an excellent document, and I congratulate you and
your colleagues on it. It will be most helpful to us in our
continued study of greenhouse problems.
You will have noted perhaps that at Malta, President Bush
announced the meeting that I had mentioned briefly to you
during our meeting here in Washington. Since that time, the
scope has expanded somewhat to include economics as well as
science relating to global change; this reflects our growing
recognition in this country that we very much needed a
better hold on and understanding of the economic
consequences of possible courses of action in order to be
able to develop responsible policies.
Early in the new year, the President will be forwarding an
official invitation to Prime Minister Thatcher, inviting her
to send her chief science, economics and environmental
officials to a meeting here in Washington, now tentatively
scheduled for late April.
Again, many thanks for your report. It was a pleasure
meeting you in Washington, and I look forward to the
crossing of our paths again in the not too distant future.
With warmest best wishes for Christmas and the new year,
Sincerely yours,
3Anan D. Allan Bromley Roanly
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Field Marshal Lord Carver, GCB, CBE, DSO, MC
House of Lords
Westminster
London SW1A 5AA
England
8920633
From: Field Marshal Lord Carver, GCB, CBE, DSO, MC
HOUSE OF LORDS
24th November 1989
Dear Dr Browley
It was kind of you to say that you enjoyed
meeting our Committee when we visited Washington.
I am delighted to enclose a copy of our
report which is published on 28th November.
Your sincerely,
Michael Can
CARVER
Dr. Allan Bromley,
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology,
The White House,
WASHINGTON.
U.S.A.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 13, 1989
Dear Lord Carver:
I too enjoyed our visit and am pleased that your visit to
the United States proved helpful. I would indeed appreciate
a copy of your committee report on its completion. Thank
you for thinking of me.
With all best wishes,
Sincerely,
Донан D. Allan Bromley Jumby
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Field Marshal Lord Carver
House of Lords
Westminster
London SW1A 5AA
England
"CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING"
TYPE:
Information
DOCUMENT NUMBER: 8920633
FROM:
FIELD MARSHAL LORD MICHAEL CARVER
HOUSE OF LORDS - ENGLAND
TO:
BROMLEY
DATE OF
CORRESPONDENCE: 11/24/89
SUBJECT: ENCLOSING A COPY OF A REPORT FROM THEIR MEETING WITH
BROMLEY IN NOVEMBER.
ASSIGNED TO:
ACTION REQUIRED: NONE
SENDER'S DUE DATE:
OSTP DUE DATE:
DATE COMPLETED: 12/12/89
COPIES TO: D. Allan Bromley
Nancy Maynard
REMARKS: "GREENHOUSE EFFECT" BOOK (1) DAB (2) MAYNARD (3) FILES
DATE RECEIVED: 12/06/89
FILE: NEOB
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 27, 1989
Dear Mr. Cohen:
I am returning to you herewith an edited version of the
transcript of our May 11th interview in New Haven.
I am enclosing also a copy of a recent photograph with
President Bush as you requested.
I would appreciate it if you would be good enough to send me
a copy of your article when you have completed it.
All best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Duman D. Allan Bromley
Director-designate
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Enclosures: Transcript and photograph
Mr. David M. Cohen
131 Westwind Road
Wakefield, Rhode Island 02879
131 Westwind Road
Wakefield, RI 02879
July 3, 1989
Dr. D. Allan Bromley
Science Adviser to the President
Executive Office of the President
Office of Science and Technology Policy
Washington, DC 20506
Dear Dr. Bromley:
Enclosed please find a verbatim copy of my interview with you on
May 11, 1989. While this text will not be augmented save by a brief
synopsis of your earlier service in Washington and at Yale, I shall be
forced to remove portions to reduce it to a length suitable for
publication. My editor and I have not yet finalized these deletions
and shall not likely do so until the first weeks of September
(publication slated for the middle to the end of November). At that
time we shall send you another copy, if you would like to look at it.
In the meantime, I would like to make three small requests of
you. First, read over the text and make note of any points that you
believe have been mistranslated--the words are exact, though the
punctuation always carries the possibility of belying the intent of
your words. Second, could you , determine for me whether the
statement attributed by you to Philip Handley on page 11 is a direct
quote. Finally, I would appreciate it if you would have your
secretary send a picture of you with President Bush to me for
publication at the above address, if one is currently available.
Thank you again for your time and cooperation. Please contact
me if you have any comments.
Sincerely,
David M. Cohen
Haun person DAB
1
The following is the entire text from an interview with President
Bush's new science advisor appointee Dr. D. Allan Bromley, the Henry
Ford II Professor of Physics at Yale and director of the newly opened
A. W. Wright Nuclear Structure Laboratory, conducted on May 11,
1989.
Yale Scientific: First of all, I think we should start out by talking
about what your duties will be as the new science advisor.
Dr. D. Allan Bromley: I wear three hats. The first of those is as
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology. That's a new
position that President Bush has created which raises the science
advisor's position within the inner circle of the White House by
several notches. It raises it specifically to the same level as National
Security Advisor.
the
The second hat is the director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy in the White House. The third hat is chairman of a
new body which will be the President's Council of Science and
Technology Advisors. Now, It turns out that the first and third of
those are appointments that the President can make as he sees fit.
The second, however, is a position which reports both to the Congress
and to the President as a consequence of the legislation which set up
the office back in 1976. For that reason as director of that office you I
require Senate confirmation.
YS: Obviously, you will be holding all three offices at once, so you
will have more influence. It has been remarked in some of the early
articles concerning your appointment that you are going to have a lot
more influence than [Dr. William R.] Graham who is the current
science adviser. In what particular ways do you think that you will
have more influence with the President and how do intend to use
that influence?
DAB: First of all, I think even before the election, then candidate
Bush, now President Bush, made it very clear that he intended to
increase the visibility and the position of his cience and technology
dvisor, which is sort of the code word which covers those three
official titles, within the White House. This was a recognition on his
part that increasingly the decisions of consequence that he faces boil
up through the system and are not decided elsewhere in government
that finally come to his office for decision increasingly are thosé That contain
substantial science and technology components. So, Mr. Bush was
very sure all through the campaign and now that he wants to
2
emphasize both science for policy and policy for science at the
highest levels of the White House.
YS: Do you have any personal items on your agenda in terms of
science issues?
DAB: That is a state that I try painfully to avoid because to be an
effective member of the Inner Circle at the presidential level it is
essential that you be viewed as a member of the team and when it
comes to that team it is our background in science and technology
but specifically not just someone coming in with your own agenda
that you are going to try and push. Your function is to make sure
that the President has the alternatives available to him that involve
science and technology or that effect science and technology sharply
delineated so that he understands are what the implications of the
various choices that he must make as clearly as possible. Then, once
the President makes his decision, it will be my function to do
everything I can to insure that those decisions get implemented.
One of the ways of doing that is specifically to coordinate
activities across the whole spectrum of the Federal government.
Frequently now, there are cases where different agencies may be
addressing similar, related, or even the same problems, but there
isn't very much coordination. hey may sometimes be working
together in very harmonious fashion and at other times they may be
completely at cross purposes.
my function will be to try to make
sure, first of all, that the President's decisions actually get acted on in
the way he intends them to be acted on, and secondly that it be done
in an efficient way efficient and effective in terms of what it is
costing the taxpayer and in terms of what it is producing.
YS: You have no areas in the scientific community right now that you
have recommendations on or you feel aren't being acted on?
/Ench
DAB: Of course. There are a number of those, and obviously it will
be my function to bring matters to the President. One of the other
responsibilities is to be his early warning system. If it is a problem
that is of sufficient magnitude and of sufficient importance that it
merits Presidential attention, then it will be my responsibility to
make sure that that comes to his attention.
YS: Are there any topics in particular?
lobbyist
3
DAB: I am not going to go into detail as yet on this because, first of
all, I am not in place in Washington. The one thing I absolutely will
not do is to appear as a spekesman or representative for the
scientific community. That's absolutely the wrong thing for me to be
doing. The areas that I think are important to the country and to the
President areas the President will necessarily have to take a look at,
however,
I will mention. They come in two classes.
First of all, there are issues which fall under the general rubric of
science for policy. These are the kinds of questions where in the
absence of an active science advisor, the other participants in the
Inner Circle might very well not recognize that science and
technology have anything to contribute to the issue under discussion.
However, in fact, the issue under discussion might have substantial
impact on science and technology. So, both of those aspects are
important.
Let's just consider what a few of those might be. Obviously,
today one of the major areas is that of industrial competitiveness in
the international marketplace. If we don't have a strong, protected
economy, we are not going to have the resources to do any the or
wishto
have? many, at So, least, that's of very the hard. other good Science things and that technology the others obviously are going plays to ur may
do
an important role. We come immediately when we start considering com
that area to a second area of concern, and that's education and
training.
We are in a very difficult position at the moment, kind of underd, a
paradoxical. To caricature the situation let me say that the education
at the pre-college level in this country the situation can only be
classed as scandalous, At the college level because we unique among
the developed nations hav 10 centralized control or definition of
what a college education should provide we have peaks of excellence
which will match the very best anywhere in the world, and we have
troughs of mediocrity which defy description. On the average,
however, I think that we are competitive with the rest of the world
at the college level. At the graduate level we still set the standard
for worldwide activity. The reason we are able to do that be so bad
at The in pre-college, und and yet set the standard for the graduate level, is
simply because we are prepared to sacrifice a very large fraction of
our young people along the way, prepared to let them drop out of the
system. That fraction is much too high for this nation to continue accept;
10 We let this continue very definitely, at our own peril.
Out education and training is very important because in order for
us to remain competitive we are going to need new knowledge and
we are going to need. young minds trained to use that new
The
both The
inditations
4
knowledge creatively. We put a tremendous drain again unique in
this country on our research universities because in other countries
research and education are not considered to be synergistic and
symbiotic the way they are here and frequently the research is
done somewhere else, not at the same places where they teach their
education. It is important to recognize too, that although most of the
discussion thus far has focused on the professional the Ph.D., the
bachelor's candidate, there an enormous need, a growing need, in
this country for public with sufficient literacy that we get 20 That we have
technicians, technicians and trained personnel to work at the middle
levels in industry, in military, in space activities, in just about any
sort of activity you care to name. We are very short of people in that This
middle range. Of course, we are also very short of people at the
upper levels. In the early 1990's we are going to be short something
like 250,000 computer scientists a year, somewhere between 35 and
50,000 engineers. in almost branches of activity in engineering per
year, and here not much we can do about that now because the
pipeline is simply ten years long. If we are going to Effect things, we
have to start ten years before the time we want that effect to be
evident. So, that's education and training, and I could go on all
afternoon on that one But another major area, is the environment.
President Bush has spoken extensively on that, and you need only
consider the greenhouse effect, acid rain, waste disposal, the
destruction of tropical forests, and see the tremendous spectrum of
problems that we face. They not bounded in any way by national
or political boundaries: The are global problems. That, of course,
brings in immediately the whole question of international science
and technology. Very frequently, illustrated for example in the case
of India and Brazil in 1982, when Indira Gandhi came to Washington, and
in 1986, when President Sarah came from Brazil to Washington, it
was clear to both sides of the discussion that it was very important
for the U.S. to start talking with India and to Brazil. We had pulled
farther and farther apart politically, from situation where decades
ago we were the closest of collaborators on the world scene to a
situation we barely communicated in any area. As Indira Gandhi and
President Reagan and Sarmi and President Reagan discussed this sotuation
where
over a period of days, it became clear that the one area where we
could begin to talk to one another again and collaborate on the basis
of equals bringing contributions from both sides to the table, leads needs
from both sides to the table, was in science and technology. So, hose
programs were initiated; they have been successful.
The wonderful thing about the news is that once the channels are
open and once we start talking to one another about specific projects
José
such
5
in science and technology very quickly we see the channels broaden
so that on other matters we can begin talking to one another again.
International science and technology is increasingly recognized as
an important part of our foreign relations' No question about that
and it is one that think will increase whether or not we try to
increase it. anareathat
Another general area of concern is that of industry Energy is
importance energy
after all the ultimate resource. If you have abundant energy, then
you can have as much pure water as you want, you can have as big
an agricultural enterprise as you want by fixing nitrogen from the
air, liberating phosphorous from the rocks, pumping this pure water
to irrigate your crops. We tend to forget 1973; we tend to be a little
although
hazy about 1978 now during that there's adequate petroleum around agains
Though I must say that this past summer and this present summer
we are going to see dramatic price increases that which will focus
attention on the energy problems. In the long term we have the
challenge of coming up with a renewable energy source that will
replace our dependence on fossil fuels. The greenhouse effect may
accelerate this process, but we have to be able to do it in a way that
has an acceptable social and economic cost. That's a real challenge.
mahe The transition
YS: With respect to the energy, there has been talk of the possibility
of cold fusion which seems to appears to be without support. At the
same time the United States has focused on fusion as a source of
energy and has followed several paths.
DAB: Two primarily.
YS: In the past the laboratories seem to have been without
collaboration. Each has been pursuing its own alternatives. I believe
it was the Tokamak system that was mothballed without use.
DAB: No, that was the Mirror system that was mothballed.
YS: How do you feel about fusion and do you believe it needs to be
pursued at such a rate that the scientists go crashing by and spend
$350 million without ever testing it?
DAB: That's not quite a fair characterization. First of all, in this
country and in the rest of the world we are following two approaches
to duplicating the solar energy source. One of those is magnetic
confinement; the other is inertial confinement. Now, in the magnetic
confinement system in the days when the mirror machines were first
6
being developed at Livermore, for example, it was not at all clear to
anybody that there was any one solution that would work better
than any other. At Oak Ridge they had something called the bumpy
torus; at Princeton they had the stellarator, and at Livermore they
had the magnetic mirror machines. It was the Soviets who actually
came up with the Tokamak configuration which is essentially a toroid
with a very complex magnetic field which avoids the common
problem of these machines. All of them simply, because of the
electromagnetic principles. have an unholy tendency to turn
themselves inside out. No matter how you try to confine the plasma,
if you are not incredibly careful, you quickly find yourself with the
plasma outside and the vacuum inside which is not what you had in
mind. Now, the fact that the Mirror machine was abandoned was
simply a recognition that we had been building it over more than a
decade, and during that time we learned enough about the processes
involved and the instabilities the difficulties involved, that it was
already clear that we were far enough in our understanding that we
could back one course in magnetic confinement rather than several.
the winner in that particular horse race.
So, the focus has This been now on the Tokamak. Clearly, the t okamak is
In the inertial confinement business what we try to do is to take a
small pelletaivt pellet ignitit
YS: ful Like NOVA?
groups
DAB: Yes, but that's not the only approach. That's the one that uses
funith
this electromagnetic energy. There are people studying ways of doing The ignition
the
in heavy ion beams, xenon beams, for example, proton beams,
electron beams, and the whole question at issue is how do you most
effectively couple the energy from whatever kind of driver you are
using into the actual fuel pellet. You can understand that if you take
a nice, little glass balloon full of fuel and you irradiate it with a laser
beam, there is a great tendency for the laser light to reflect off the
pellet and do you not much good at all. In fact, in that case you have
to shape the laser pulse very carefully, first, to roughen up the
because surface of you your are fuel going pellet to try and to ,then compress to hit it it by with a factor the full of about power Jyour lazen
10,000. Here again, major progress has been made.
Although most of the work in this country is classified still, the
Japanese and the Europeans are talking about it quite openly. That is
to put the fuel pellet inside a little volume made of a heavy metal,
like gold. You fire the energy in, and it interacts with the gold and
produces makes an enormous density of X-rays, soft X-rays, and the soft X-
They
intime sothat
7
/one
rays then compress the fuel pellet and ignite the fusion. So, that
This
approach, the indirect drive approach, is the one that is being pushed
most heavily everywhere in the world now. These two approaches,
magnetic onfinement and the inertial confinement, look as
though they are track which would lead to a demonstration of
actual ignition by the end of the century. That's where we are now.
We can't afford not to continue that research because if we could pull
it off, these would provide a renewable, essentially inexhaustible,
energy source for the future.
approaches
YS: Getting back to the international forum with the Japanese and
the Europeans in fusion research, how important do you feel is it for
the United States to enter into international projects like space
research, supercolliders, or any large-scale, science project?
DAB: I am strongly in favor of international collaboration in any
instance where it makes sense. What I mean by that is in any
instance where there really is going to be some collaboration, and it's
not either some form of foreign aid or cosmetic trimming on the
project. In other words, all sides in the collaboration have to have
something concrete to bring to the project. You have mentioned one
or two of what are now known as the major projects. There's the
superconduct supercollider and the space station, the space plane, the
human genome mapping, the compact ignition okamak, just to name
five
six of them. I think in all of them you are going to see international
cooperation.
megaprojects
YS: How much do you think the United States ought to encourage it?
DAB: I think we should actively encourage it.
YS: Any particular nations, or just the most highly advanced ones?
DAB: The ones that have the most to contribute and are most
interested in getting involved with us. I think that doesn't mean just
Japan or Western Europe, for example. To take a specific instance, in
the superconducting supercollider the Indian government is one of
the very first to make a formal statement that they were prepared to
contribute $50 million towards the initial work on the SSC.
YS: You visited China about ten years ago. At that time you wrote in
a book upon returning that the Chinese were sufficiently along and it
was necessary for the Americans to help them and to cooperate with
8
them. There was a good opportunity for a nation coming along in
that sense that could help us someday in the sciences. How much
emphasis should we put on helping other nations to develop to the
point where they can help, they can provide scientific resources to
us, manpower or other resources?
excellence
DAB: We have to be rather careful about the question of manpower
because while it is demonstrably true that we are very dependent
upon scientific and technical personnel from other countries who are
coming here to be trained, particularly in higher education, because
they recognize the development of our higher education, it is also
true that the countries from which they come are increasingly
concerned about what they view as a brain drain what they view as
our attracting their best people and retaining them here for our
benefit and not for theirs. Sa, In terms of manpower we have a
delicate issue.
face
One of the most important contributions that the U.S. has made to
the development of the world as a whole has been education of
students worldwide In terms of cooperating with other countries,
the nost
developing countries, some which are part way along the
development route, I think that we have to treat them as individual
the
infortant
cases. When cooperation has the potential for opening up channels of
communication where cooperation in the long run will develop
expret.
broader markets for us and will provide us with greater contact with
a global market, I think we should be all for it.
YS: Also, in the international community there has been a great
uproar over the fact that the Japanese have caught up to us in the
so-called research areas, for example supercomputer development.
DAB: First of all, is wrong. I think H is a Tittle wrong the specific example you
have chosen But, in general, it is true that for several decades after
World War II we simply had unquestioned leadership in practically
all fields of science and technology. The fact that other countries. by
focusing their efforts on particular segments. have moved up equal to
us and in some cases ahead of us is not either wrong or surprising. It
is a perfectly natural development. We have to recognize that
overall we still have. by a very large margin. the "world's strongest
science and technology enterprise. But, Japan and Western Europe,
in particular, have focused their efforts on very carefully chosen
parts of the international market. they have been a little faster
at focusing on the fact that they are dealing with an international
market than we have.
9
In some cases, for example, like the one you mentioned,
supercomputers it is not clear that the Japanese with their fifth
turned
generation approach have really accomplished what they set out to
do. Just when they focused on the fifth generation of computers and
the idea of building ever more powerful mainframes, in this country
and in most of the rest of the world the attention went exactly the
opposite direction to decentralize, to have small units that talk to one
another. Now, it is true that in the supercomputer per se we have
had the unfortunate fact that just within recent weeks the ETA
company, which was one of our important supercomputer producers
has just decided that it is not an economically viable operation. That
leaves us only with one major manufacturer, and that is Cray. Cray
is betting the company on the use of gallium arsenide. If that works,
they will have an enormous headstart on the rest of the world. If for
some reason it doesn't work, then we will have gone a long way to
losing our leadership in a field that we clearly started, developed,
and brought to fruition. But what you hear from Japan more
frequently than the fact that they have moved ahead of us in basic
research areas is that they have been more effective in using basic
research results in making them into marketable goods and services.
That has been done by very careful planning and design; They have
focused on doing that specifically.
The Jananeee
The other thing to bear in mind is the subject of a book that was
just published last week by the MIT Press called Made in America.
It highlights one of the very serious problems that we have in this
country. That is that there is a myth that this country has moved in
a more or less inexorable fashion from an agricultural to a
manufacturing economy to a service economy. The myth is that
when we move from one of those economies to the next in this
evolutionary process, we can essentially forget the ones that have
gone before. That is simply, demonstrably wrong. You can't really
produce a strong manufacturing economy without having an
agricultural economy backing it up. And you can't produce a reliable,
strong service economy, if you don't have a strong manufacturing
economy backing it up.
What is most striking, in terms of contrast, between us and the
Japanese is that we tend to reward engineering and technological
developments of the Nobel Prize caliber, the major breakthroughs,
the revolutionary changes, and we don't pay much attention to those
small little changes on the production line that allow you to get your
product out two or three days earlier, a little more reliably, a little
cheaper; those are the qualities that in the long run buy you market
share. The Japanese have focused on those evolutionary changes in
mayhane
10
and
engineering, production, manufacturing to a much greater extent
than we have, and they have paid off handsomely for them. Because
In in one industry after another in steel, in consumer electronics, in
semiconductors, and recently in automobiles by targeting a particular
world market and by focusing their attention on doing it better,
quicker, and cheaper, even though we made the original invention,
the original breakthrough, the fact that they can get there before us
with a slightly cheaper product that will last a little bit longer means
that they have the market share.
YS: In this era of budget cuts, the deficit, and the enormous debt
there has been a big issue made of the fact that the United States
tends to support a lot of big science projects and doesn't focus as
much on the littler science projects.
DAB: That I think is a misconception.
YS: Well, in the sense that there are billions of dollars being spent on
the supercollider that could be spread over many little projects.
DAB: That's even a bigger misconception. First of all, the fact is that
big projects by their very nature attract press attention, attract
media attention; they attract Congressional attention. Nobody hears
about the fact that the NIH [National Institute of Health], the NSF
[National Science Foundation] are spending something like three-
quarters of their budgets on individual investigators around the
country. Nobody hears about that unless one of them does
something that gets him the Nobel Prize. But when a group of people
other
come together and propose the superconducting supercollider, that
gets everyone's attention very quickly because it is a big lump of
money from domestic accounts.
The fact is that the amount of our resources. as a nation, that are
tied up at the moment in big projects is very small; it's really very
small, it's only a few percent. The second thing is that one of the
very large misconceptions in the whole community is that funding is
interchangeable--that we have something called the science budget,
and if we don't spend it for A, it's available to spend on B, C, D, etc.
That doesn't work at all because particularly on big projects we must
recognize that the decision as whether to go forward or not to go
forward is not even primarily scientific and technological based. It is
based on national prestige; it is based on whether someone believes
that by doing this particular project or building this particular device
we are going to stimulate a whole new generation of students to go
another
11
are
into scientific and technological careers. It has in each case a whole
series of other dimensions and that's why it gets to a Presidential
level. science and technology its just one of the inputs that the
President has to consider when the decision is made. Because of that
the science budget is built from the bottom up, not from the top
down, and that's one of the things that is unique about this country.
In most other countries what you say is rather close to the truth.
The government is presented with a package; this is the science
budget, take it or leave it. Either they buy it, or they don't buy it. In
this country what you do is put the pieces together in all the
different agencies. and all the different parts of the Federal
government, each working for their own reasons to fulfill their own
missions. When you get it all done, then you add up all the pieces
and say this is the science budget for year X. So, the idea that you
can use that funding to do something else is absolutely wrong. In
fact, there is a very good argument that a lot of people will make
that precisely the converse is true--as the total amount being spent
on science goes up with large increments, then it is much easier to
add a few million here or there to take care of a lot of small projects. Air known
calloqually asthe mathow Principle, "20 Them That hath Shall mere be
YS: Another major issue in science as of late has been the new
biological inventions, the recombinant DNA, the gene splicing, where given!"
the biologists are starting to "tinker" with some of the building blocks
of life.
DAB: That's an inflammatory characterization.
YS: That is the characterization often used.
DAB: Yes, that is the characterization used I understand. butit is still
YS: I am wondering how you feel about in particular the attempts inflammatory to
use the anti-frost bacteria on crops, the idea of allowing them into
the environment, and the idea of allowing scientists to experiment on
human biological material.
DAB: Well, look There is no question that this is the era of the
biologist just as the fifties, let's say, and the forties were the era of
the physicist. Now, there's no question also that what has made this
new era possible is the instrumentation and the technology that were
developed by physicists and chemists in prior decades. I remember
a famous quote from Philip Handley, when he was President of the
National Academy of Sciences! he said that biology had been moved
Handlen
Aaquote
12
forward by five decades in the prior five years by using the tools of
the physicist. Now granting that we can do all those things that you
just mentioned, then the question is, the question that is generally
raised is, should we be tinkering with the building blocks of life?
Should we be experimenting on human cells and tissues?
Well, he question you have to ask yourself is who among us is
sufficiently wise and sufficient arrogant to say in advance whether
a
up
particular line of research that has the potential for coming out with
a fundamental understanding of the causes of cancer just as much as
it has for doing anything should be stopped. It is a question that I
think is as old as. the human race. It would not surprise me in the
slightest that when fire first appeared, people ran around in circles
worrying, "My God, what have they done. They're going to destroy
the world." Any new discovery of fundamental significance has the
potential to be misused. By the same token it also has the potential
to do enormous good. So, from the point of view of basic
understanding of the universe we live in and our role in it, in my
view, it would take astounding arrogance for someone to say,
"Look, I don't like what might come out of that research, and
therefore we shouldn't do it."
YS: They just launched the Magellan from the Space Shuttle a few
weeks ago but considerably behind their projected schedule. One of
the main issues in the space program has been whether we've
become too focused, whether we are putting too much into the
manned program, and whether we are putting too much into the
shuttle. How do you feel about that?
DAB: Well, I obviously feel it is a serious question. The balance
between the manned and unmanned programs is one that has bother
everyone of the spacefaring nations. It is one that is bothering the
Soviets, it's one that is bothering the French, and it is one that is
bothering us. One of the obvious inputs that works to drive the
program for the manned side of the system is simply that the public
is vastly more interested in programs that put people into space than
programs that put things into space. For that reason NASA[ National
Aeronautics and Space Administration] and its equivalents in other
countries have succumbed to the temptation to focus the program in
the manned direction because it is vastly easier to convince Congress
or other funding agencies to react to public interest and enthusiasm
and to provide funding. As in most other activities there is always
the feeling that there is never enough funding. In turn the decisions
get made, and I think that a lot of people are prepared at the
13
moment to make the case that we perhaps have gone too far in our
dependence on shuttles.
The reason is obvious. The people who are responsible for making
the shuttle work as a delivery system into space were terrified that
if we started doing a lot of other things we would end up dragging
out
the shuttle program UUP. That's intimidating just because of lack of
funding. There's no enthusiasm for really addressing alternatives on
either side. I think that the recognition is there that there are
a great many space based activities that really do not benefit from
having man present. There are a lot which would be impossible
without one, but we have to try and find a balance.
YS: In lieu of NASA starting up an extensive unmanned space
program in the near future, do you think that the United States
government should encourage private contractors and private
industry to build simple launch rockets?
substantial
DAB: That's a very hot topic, as you know, at the moment. It is one
where I have a massive conflict of interest in one way because the
president of the company that is doing that is one of my graduate
students. Joe Allen, who is the first physicist-astronaut, got his Ph.D.
here in the sixties, subsequently was an astronaut and then resigned from NASA,
He is now president of Space Induştries, Inc. Th commercially
developed space facility, this CDSF that they have proposed is what
they would like to present as an interim alternative. As the recent
National Research Council study pointed out, in something like thirty
months from the go-ahead they could have space in orbit that would
give you microgravity access, and the total cost would be about two
billion. The official NASA statement is that for 16 billion dollars they
will have a vastly more capable, more elaborate space station
available around about 1996. Unfortunately, the NASA station
started out at a cost of eight billion, is now at sixteen, and my own
worry is that we have not really given enough thought as of yet to
what we will be able to put in that station or what the station will
cost us.
toward
I have no question whatever that we are going to eventually
launch a space station that will be our stepping out point for the rest
of the universe. Mankind is never going to be satisfied to be
confined to this one small planet. So, We are going to have a space
station. It is a question of what kind of a space station, whether we
should do it in phases, starting smaller and moving to larger,
whether we should build these things in modular fashion so they're
expansible. These are very, very difficult questions because just as
14
in the case of the Shuttle those people who favor the very large or
the large station feel that any funds spent on the small one are just
going to slow up and, perhaps, derail the larger one. In particular, I
think that is true of the major contractors who are going to be
providing the big space station. They are obviously not happy about
the fact that somebody else is going to come in and perhaps either
postpone the space station or perhaps change its design substantially.
But, I think, in general, that in NASA and in much of the other major
government work, especially in the Department of Defense, one of
the elections that we must consider is that of getting more
entrepreneurs involved, more small companies that will perhaps
bring new views, new ideas, new approaches. Certainly, this is
important.
YS: Also in the space program is the idea of going to Mars with the
Soviets. The Soviets have just had problems with both Phobos I and
II. Do they have anything to offer us?
DAB: Oh, yes. Collaborating with the Soviets clearly has mutual
advantages, no questions about it. For example, one of the important
pieces of hardware that the Soviets can bring to the table in any such
collaboration is their heavy lift device [the Energia] which can put a
lot more material into orbit more economically. But The astronauts whomere
most directly involved in the pollo Soyaz mussim are verynich convinced That
YS: Perhaps one of the biggest areas of crossover between science
and policy was President Reagan's 1983 decision to start up the
Strategic Defense Initiative, "Star Wars". At the time it was first
proposed, a number of members of the scientific community
DAB: The most highly vocal part.
YS:
decided that they would not take any funding from this
project.
DAB: Again a general misconception. This statement you just made is
true of a small group of people, mostly concentrated at the
University of Illinois and at MIT who got enormous press coverage
for their statement to this effect. It in no sense represented the community
YS: I am aware of a case at the University of Rhode Island about
four years ago in which a professor was hounded basically because
he was the only person on campus taking money.
harming such
much better solutinis to suggest thate favour callabrators, gethere!" "mut
different technology is Those used The usand tspace pargrams, a
15
A lot of people said initially that the computer programs and the
actual physics behind it was such a fantasy that it wasn't necessarily
going to come (Brodic true in any conceivable amount of time.
DAB: There are two reasons for that. You have to understand that at
the end of World War II after nuclear weaponry was first used,
Bernard Golding wrote a little book called The Ultimate Weapon. The
thesis of that book was that there was no defense against nuclear
weaponry. That was the basis for our strategic posture for a number
of decades. and items clearly a true State menta Letume.
But two things happened that changed this situation. For a
number of decades Golding's statement was absolutely true. There
was no defense. But then two things have changed. First of all, the
That
accuracy with which nuclear weaponry, particularly missiles, can be
directed to their targets, So, That you can take out surgically specific
targets. It is not generally recognized, and it wasn't until the last
years of President Carter's Administration, that in a Presidential
directive he changed the targeting instruction on our weaponry, and
as far as we know the Russians did equivalently, from targeting
major population centers to targeting military centers, because Given
the accuracy we had prior to that it didn't make very much sense to
try to target specific military targets. You just targeted a large
population area, and you held the two populations hostage. The
tremendous increase in precision was the first change in the
equation.
The second major change was in n our ability to handle information Thechange
That's downright many orders of magnitude. Now the usual
statement is made that we couldn't take 20 million lines of code to
direct the Strategic Defense Initiative. Well, the obvious conclusion
that the listener is to draw is that it could never work. The fact is
that the airspace control in the United States, the FAA [Federal
world
Aviation Administration] control system, has about twenty million
weed
lines of code. A good many tens of thousands, if not millions, of
Americans each day trust their lives to it. With some reluctance, I
must say. Last night it took me five and a half hours to get from
National to LaGuardia one simple, shuttle, so the FAA sometimes has
problems; the weather was bad. Those are the two major changes
that have happened.
But
Now, there have been a number of, studies Probably, the most
technically sophisticated study of the whole situation was that
carried out by the American Physical Society on the strategic defense
diplomacy Their report is a very balanced work done by an
outstanding group of people. Their executive summary, however, got
(Might,
of SDI.
tilted rather badly from the body of the report Charbeen itself. It came out
withrespect to
16
much more negative than the report did The press conference that a
few people gave based on the executive summary moved the whole activity
thing to the front. farther the negative
The key thing involved here is that there 16 a misconception from
the very beginning about what President Reagan was talking about suggesting
This idea that President Reagan was talking about any impenetrable
umbrella over the U.S. was pure nonsense. Nobody including
President Reagan ever believed that would make sense. But, what he
was talking about was putting a lid over your adversary and trying
to minimize the number of missiles that get out through that lid that
we you have to contend with the rest of the way, when they come
toward you as
instiad
canand as
IQS
That aside, the very important consideration is that no matter
who in this country maybe utterly convinced that won't work, that
it'll never work, it is patently obvious that Mr. Gorbachev and the
Soviets are absolutely convinced that it will work. I don't think
anyone would have believed that the Soviets would have come back
to Geneva and that we would have an INF treaty in the absence of
the Strategic Defense Initiative. Furthermore, it is important to
recognize that the Soviets have been working on a strategic defense
initiative of their own for more than fifteen years, and they are
currently spending, according to the best information that I have,
something more than five times as much per year as we are on
theirs. So, if for no other reason than to prevent ourselves from
being blindsided, we have to continue our own research.
It is important to recognize that we are in a research phase at the
moment, and we don't know whether it's technically, or economically,
or politically feasible to move beyond the that research stage. We are not
going to know that until the early nineties at least; that's the reason
we continue # have a lot of research to do. In that research.
unhappily, classification and security are things that hurt us in this
of
country much more than any potential adversary because we haven't
been able to tell our own public what the successes have been and
SDI
what the failures have been. Sp, the discussion in this country has
issues
tended to be rather uninformed and emotional. The adversaries
usually know pretty much what we are up to rather soon after we do
it. Security works against us in that respect. As far as I'm concerned
our
we have to continue the research program and explore it to know
what can be learned from that in terms of the feasibility of the
system as a whole.
17
YS: Something more on the technology side, but equally a policy
issue. For a while the Reagan administration was rather hesitant to
admit that there was a problem with acid rain; they were simply
studying it.
DAB: That's not true. It is going to cost, to reduce the sulfur and
nitrogen oxides emission to the level that is being discussed here
literally billions of dollars. One of the best papers analysis of that
fact was done by John Sununu, the former governor of New
Hampshire, published in a National Academy publication. What the
Reagan administration was saying was, "Look, for something that is
going to cost this much and is going to be paid, by the U.S. taxpayer
,
we have to be convinced that is going to work." In the early stages
there was no question that we did not have a good enough data set to
really understand what were the issues. We could dump $30 million billion
into the Middle West and at that time could possibly have seen no
significant effect anywhere except for missible a large hole in the
national budget. agree
I think that the Reagan administration may well have been
somewhat slow to react to more information as it became available.
By the same token the Canadian administration was overfast to react
because it became sort of one issue that any politician could ride
to some publicity. As an old Canadian, I was appalled at some of the
statements that were made. The situation has settled down now, and
I think that both sides agree that we do know enough to begin to
make some actual changes in the system. Those changes are getting
underway, and so the emotional, hysterical aspect of acid rain is, I
think, well behind us.
We still have to keep doing some research to understand better
how various biological systems react. That's one of the weak points current
We know how the acid rain gets there in a lot of cases, but it is not at
all clear how it really reacts, I'll give you a case in point. One of the
plans
problems that people are beginning to focus on, particularly in
Germany and Sweden, is the fact that when you have nitrogen oxides
mixed with the sulfuric oxides they act like fertilizers.
So,
your
spruce trees grow like crazy, and instead of closing down shop and
preparing for the winter they are charging along in the late fall and
not prepared for winter. When the first heavy frost comes, that's
what kills them. It is not the sulfur oxide, but rather the fact that
they are being overstimulated by the nitrogen oxides.
Now,
Hobody
knows whether that is true or not, but it is an interesting concept.
It's new, it has to be looked into, and it has to be understood. It
raises all sorts of questions. As long as you can happily believe that
18
it is sulfur oxides which are doing all the damage, you can say,
"Alright, let's go and fix the power plants. We can take care OF of
them." But, if it turns out that the nitrogen oxides are causing more
of a problem, they come from moving sources, they come from the
automobiles which are more difficult to control.
)
YS: A couple of weeks ago the Los Angeles region announced its
proposal for removing a lot of the pollution. A lot of people heralded
it as a major solution; a lot of people said that it was far too extensive
and far too costly for what it is supposed to achieve. What do you
think of it as a model of the future?
know
DAB: I don't believe know the details of it, but it is clear that any
time you address public policy issues of this sort in the last analysis
you have to come to a political decision. The decision is going to be
made politically by the public, because here you are doing
something that will impact the lives of the individual citizens. It is a
question of what they are prepared to pay for a better environment.
It is nothing that you are going to be able to impose from
Washington, so you can always expect that kind of debate you mention
The thing that I worry about is that there is enough science and
technology brought into the discussion so that you don't have the
Congress moved forward to impose limits on the pollutant emissions
situation we used to back about a number of years ago when the for example,
from automobiles and only after this had become law did they come
to the National Academy of Sciences to ask whether it was possible even
,to q
achieve those limits. That's the kind of thing that undermines public
confidence in the whole process. It is important that new science
and technology underlie the regulations that we produce.
theoretuag
YS: Two final questions. First of all, this work promulgate is going to take you
valid
away from Yale. Are you willing to stay as long as Bush stays in the
White House or would you only serve one term, if Bush were to be
reelected?
DAB: One never predicts that far in advance. I'm certainly not about
to do it now.
YS: Would you come back to teaching?
DAB: Yes, I have every intention of coming back here, and I will be
on leave. How long I will be in Washington is something of an
19
uncertain at this point. Birt, A the moment it looks like it is going
to be atleast about three and a half years.
YS: One final question. The appointment itself--what are your
thoughts on what it means to the Yale community?
DAB: Well, I means yeleis they are going to have to find somebody else to
teach the courses that I have been teaching. That's the first and sort
additional of crass, crude visibility impact. to Yale I suppose science, that but being I don't selected think it for means this brings postemhrings
anything very major, in fact. Much of the impact will be on me To to
leave just now after having spent several years getting riplon brand new research
facilities one of the three most powerful in the world, running. Not
to be able to use it is unpleasant. I enjoy teaching so I am going to
miss it, but this type of offer is very difficult to pass up.
The growtin
many and indifficalt
Happly,ing
taheour as Docution The wight Lahoratry and
longtunefuendard callegue, hoj. Peter Payker, will
I know Rat, avalirays, he willdoa superbjib.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 3, 1989
Dear Rollie:
This is an unhappily belated reply to your letter of
September 23 concerning the University of Bridgeport
symposium on the environment, transportation and energy.
Unfortunately, it simply would be impossible for me to
attend, much as I would like to.
The President has asked me to chair the Domestic Policy
Council Working Group on Global Change and to try to pull
together a coherent, government-wide point of view on what
is becoming an increasingly controversial issue. As part of
that activity, he has asked me to spend this coming week at
a meeting at The Hague, and when I come back, we will be
absolutely in the midst of the busiest few weeks of our
entire year, as the President's budget for fiscal year 1991
is given its final review. I have an arrangement with
Richard Darman, the Director of OMB, so that I sit in as an
active participant with him in these reviews, to carry out
the science and technology cross-cutting and coordination
function. All this being the case, I simply could not be
away on November 17.
From all that I hear down here, UI is in the midst of an
even more interesting period than during my years on the
Board.
I must say that I miss those contacts, despite the fact that
life here is anything but prosaic or dull.
Please give my warmest regards to all my old friends at UI
and, in particular, please thank Jim Crowe and everyone else
involved for the invitation to participate in the affair at
the University of Bridgeport. I very much regret that it
simply is impossible for me.
With warmest best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Dn
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Mr. Roland W. Comstock
Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs
United Illuminating Company
80 Temple Street
New Haven, Connecticut 06506
UI
United Illuminating
Roland W. Comstock
80 Temple Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06506-0901
Senior Vice President
Corporate Affairs
September 23, 1989
Dr Allan Bromley
6716 Tulip Hill Terrace
Bethesda, Maryland 20816
Dear Allan:
Jim Crowe asked me to drop you a note concerning an event
described in the enclosed materials. The sponsors are anxious to have
you as a keynote speaker and you may have already been contacted about
it. Although your presence certainly would add lustre both to the
program and to UI, the purpose of this note is not to put the arm on
you. The 'formal' invitation will come directly from the sponsors.
However, Jim thought some background might be useful.
STR
The event is being sponsored by the Connecticut Energy Advisory
Board of which Jim is a member. The CEAB is a statutorily-created
board consisting of representatives from state government (both
bureaucrats and elected officials), business and utilities, together with
the energy conservation advocacy groups. The purpose is to seek
consensus on state energy policy elements in a non-regulatory and mostly
non-adversarial forum. As respects UI, these elements can then be
reflected in such areas as rate design and other demand-side management
programs as well as provide us early opportunity to affect legislation.
Beyond that, consensus elements of energy policy can more easily be
reflected in appropriate legislation.
It's an effort at least worthy of UI's support and participation and
one which holds some promise of constructive result. If nothing else, it
at least provides us the opportunity to show that not all utility folks have
horns.
Whether or not you are able to participate, when contacted you can
do Jim/UI a favor by indicating that we have been in touch with you
about all this. If you need any further information, either Jim or I would
be happy to respond.
The United Illuminating Company
an investor-owned electric light and power company
2
As you might surmise, our bid for PSNH requires mounting a
political campaign in New Hampshire that in many ways parallels the
Seabrook-related effort in Washington. As a result, both George and I
are spending substantial time there. To the extent the outcome depends
on politics
and it does to some significant extent
then I think we are
rapidly gaining the edge up there. However, there are SO many potential
show-stoppers--financial, legal and regulatory--that final outcomes are
uncertain at this point. But meanwhile, forgive me for saying that
making 'war' is such great fun. It's my second favorite thing to do.
Cheers,
Ralliz
The United Illuminating Company
an investor-owned electric light and power company
DRAFT 09-12-89
CONNECTICUT ENERGY ADVISORY BOARD: CONGRESSIONAL FORUM
THE ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORTATION & ENERGY
POLICY ISSUES FOR THE 1990's
Friday, November 17th, 1989
University of Bridgeport
Recital Hall
9:00 A.M.
Welcome - Janet Greenwood, President, University of Bridgeport
9:15 A.M.
Forum Overview - James Sandler*, Chairman, Energy Advisory Board
9:30 A.M.
Keynote Address - President's Science Advisor, Allan Bromley
10:15 A.M.
Coffee Break
10:30 A.M.
Panel Discussion - "The Problem: Supply & Environment"
Chairman - Congressman Bruce Morrison, Third District
Jim McKenzie *
Rick Piltz *
World Resources Institute
Renew America
Bob Greenis *
Richard Hill * CEAB
12:00 Noon
Lunch
1:00 P.M.
Address - Governor O'Neill
1:30 P.M.
Panel Discussion - - "The System: Transportation in West CT"
Chairman - Congressman John Rowland, Fifth District
Commissioner William Burns
Horace McDonnell, CEO
Department of Transportation
Perkin-Elmer
Charles Stokes
Jim Crowe * CEAB
University of Bridgeport
United Illuminating
3:00 P.M.
Coffee Break
3:15 P.M.
Panel Discussion - "The Future: Alternative Fuels/Mass Transportation"
Chairman Congressman Christopher Shays, Fourth District
David Garrett *
Representative Joel Gordes *
U.S. Department of Energy
Energy & Public Utilities Committee
Warren Liebold, Sierra Club
+
American Petroleum Institute
4:45 P.M.
Summary - Workshop Chairman, Jim Sandler
*
Each panel: One speaker gives 20-minute address, other speakers give 10-minute
response, 20 minutes panel discussion, 20 minutes Q & A w/audience.
Speakers and Committee need to draft four key presentations.
* confirmed
CONNECTICUT ENERGY ADVISORY BOARD
CONGRESSIONAL FORUM
The Environment, Transportation & Energy
Friday, November 17th, 1989
University of Bridgeport
Panel No. 1: The Problem/ Supply & Environment -
Topic Issues:
near future petroleum supply problems
energy security
petroleum dependence (i.e. 50%+ imports)
global warming
air quality
Panelists:
Rick Piltz, Renew America
author of "Reducing the Rate of Global Warming:
the States' Role"
o Jim McKenzie, World Resources Institute
Senior Associate - Climate, Energy, and Pollution
(Formerly, energy policy analyst for
the Union of Concerned Scientists)
o Bob Greenis
graduate, MIT School of Engineering
private consultant
Richard Hill, Connecticut Energy Advisory Board
-2-
CONNECTICUT ENERGY ADVISORY BOARD
CONGRESSIONAL FORUM
The Environment, Transportation & Energy
Friday, November 17th, 1989
University of Bridgeport
Panel No. 2: The System: Transportation in Western Connecticut - -
Topic Issues:
current transportation system in SW Connecticut
transportation & economic development
transportation & the quality of life
ConnDOT's Transit Study
Panelists:
o Jim Crowe
Vice-President, United Illuminating
Member, Connecticut Energy Advisory Board
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 3, 1989
Dear Mr. Doyle Conner:
I appreciate your inquiry about the risks of pesticide residues
in food and the environment. This is a timely issue, one that
has also been raised by a number of other citizens.
On October 26 President Bush proposed a comprehensive program to
enhance food safety for all Americans. The President's plan is
designed to eliminate unacceptable risks to the public health,
and to provide for more orderly regulation of pesticides and
their use.
President Bush's plan was developed with input from the private
sector and from all the relevant government agencies. The result
is a sensible approach to complex and contentious issues, which
takes into account the varied private interests and represents an
unprecendented consensus among the federal agencies involved.
I am enclosing a copy of the press release which summarizes the
President's plan. I think you will find it responsive to the
concerns you have expressed.
If after you have had a chance to study the President's Food
Safety Plan questions remain, please do not hesitate to get in
touch with me again.
Thank you very much for bringing this important issue to my
attention.
With all best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
FAvan D. Allan Bromley Rzemby.
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Enclosure
Mr. Doyle Conner
Commissioner
Department of Agriculture
& Consumer Services
State of Florida
The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0810
CONSUMER
STATE OF FLORIDA
FLORIDA
WWW
SERVICES
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & CONSUMER SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
OF
DOYLE CONNER COMMISSIONER
*
THE CAPITOL / TALLAHASSEE 32399-0810
September 6, 1989
Dr. Allan Bromley
Science Advisor to the President
Office of Science and Technology Policy
17th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20506
Dear Dr. Bromley:
In 1987, the National Academy of Sciences published a report entitled,
"Regulating Pesticides in Food - The Delaney Paradox", which expressed
concern with the oncogenic risks from fungicides used in production of the
American food supply. As the regulatory agency responsible for the safety of
the food supply in our state as well as the lead agency in pesticide
enforcement, I am, indeed, concerned with media reports regarding new EPA
findings of toxic effects of the use of certain fungicides. Alternatives do
exist, but the alternative fungicide chemicals are likewise mentioned as
potentially harmful within the scientific review presented by the National
Academy of Sciences. If the chemicals present a significant risk within our
diet, they should not be used. However, it has been difficult for me to
assess the significance of such risks from the fragmented information we
have been able to receive.
The paramount issue is the production of a safe and adequate food supply
available to all socioeconomic classes. We are very proud of the
contribution the State of Florida has made to the nutrition and availability
of food in this nation through our vast and productive agriculture.
However, the same subtropical and humid environment of the State of Florida
and other Southern states which allows this enormous productivity, also
requires fungicides for control of many plant diseases. Therefore, the
safety and availability of fungicides is of significant interest and concern
to us.
Because most registered and effective fungicides currently available have
been targeted within recent studies as presenting potential health risks and
since no alternatives for fungal control currently are registered or
available, I would respectfully call upon you within your authority as
Science Advisor to the President to catalyze and guide the organization of
an interagency consensus panel involving the Departments of Agriculture and
Health and Human Services, and the Environmental Protection Agency to review
the overall question of health risks involving currently registered
antifungal pesticides. The health risks that these fungicidal chemicals
pose to our citizens need to be critically evaluated versus the risk of
lessened food availability and to risk of increased consumption of toxic
fungal metabolites.
Dr. Allan Bromley
September 6, 1989
Page Two
I would request that such a consensus panel review this subject at the
earliest possible time for we do not wish to continue utilizing chemicals
that may pose significant risks. If it is the consensus opinion of
scientists, regulators, and the medical profession that the use of these
fungicidal chemicals pose no more than a negligible risk to all age groups,
then we can continue to control in a safe manner the fungi which SO broadly
attack our food and vegetable crops.
I am transmitting my request to your office as well as to the Secretaries of
the Departments of Agriculture and Health & Human Services, and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency due to the multiagency
and broad nature of the fungicide issue.
Thank you very much for your consideration of my request for it is one of
critical importance to the agricultural food production in our state and in
our nation.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
Doyk Doyle Conner Canner
Commissioner
DC/rh
Secretary Louis Sullivan
Administrator William Reilly
Congressional Delegation
Deputy Secretary Jack Parnell
Asst. Secretary Jo Ann Smith
Commissioner Frank Young
Jun wyngaarden
An
CC: Secretary Clayton Yeutter
Dr. Martha E. Rhodes
Dr. Dan Smyly
Dr. Bill Pace
Dear Mr. Doyle Conner:
I appreciate your inquiry about the risks of pesticide residues
in food and the environment. This is a timely issue, one that
has also been raised by a number of other citizens.
On October 26 President Bush proposed a comprehensive program to
enhance food safety for all Americans. The President's plan is
designed to eliminate unacceptable risks to the public health,
and to provide for more orderly regulation of pesticides and
their use.
President Bush's plan was developed with input from the private
sector and from all the relevant government agencies. The result
is a sensible approach to complex and contentious issues, which
takes into account the varied private interests and represents an
unprecendented consensus among the federal agencies involved.
I am enclosing a copy of the press release which summarizes the
President's plan. I think you will find it responsive to the
concerns you have expressed.
If after you have had a chance to study the President's Food
Safety Plan questions remain, please do not hesitate to get in
touch with me again.
Thank you very much for bringing this important issue to my
attention.
With all best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Enclosure
Mr. Doyle Conner
Commissioner
Department of Agriculture
& Consumer Services
State of Florida
The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0810
OSTP:JBWyngaarden:mcq:10/27/89
"CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING"
DOCUMENT NUMBER: 8910011
TYPE:
Action Item
DATE OF CORRESPONDENCE: 09/06/89
FROM:
Florida Department of Agri.
Doyle Conner, Commissioner
TO:
Bromley
SUBJECT: Oncogenic risks from fungicides used in production
of American food supply.
ASSIGNED TO: Nancy Maynard
ACTION REQUIRED: Comments to DAB
James Wyngaarden
SENDER'S DUE DATE:
OSTP DUE DATE: 09/22/89
DATE COMPLETED:
COPIES TO:
NEOB files
FILE:
EOB PENDING
DATE RECEIVED: 09/11/89
REMARKS: Dr. Bromley askes for comments. Received another
one on this subject Record 8910004 assigned to Nancy
Maynard so sent her copy too. jj
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 22, 1989
Dear Secretary Cavazos:
I appreciated the opportunity you gave me to speak to the
participants of the First National Conference of the Dwight D.
Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education Improvement Program
on November 2. As you know, I have a great personal interest in
strengthening the nation's science and mathematics education
programs, as well' as my professional interest as a scientist
working in the public policy arena.
I would like to call your attention to Title III of Report 101-
128 of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations which included
the following paragraph:
In addition, the Committee is concerned about the
failure of the Department of Education and the
National Science Foundation to cooperate more readily
on steps to improve math, science and engineering
education. Too often the NSF's educational materials
have not had the chance to be properly distributed
through the extensive education network. For this
reason, the Committe directs the OSTP to take immediate
steps to improve any and all coordination problems
between the two agencies and to report to the Committee
by March 1, 1990, on the progress they have made on
this matter.
To reply to the Senate Committee on Appropriations in a timely
fashion, I would like to meet with you and Erich Bloch as soon as
possible to discuss ways by which our agencies can comply with
the Committee's request. If you have no objection, I will have a
member of my staff contact your office to arrange the meeting for
us. I look forward to seeing you soon.
Sincerely,
Doman
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
The Honorable Lauro F. Cavazos
Secretary of Education
400 Maryland Avenue S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20207
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 22, 1989
Dear Mr Eich Bloch:
I commend you and your staff for the outstanding program the
National Science Foundation provided this year for the
Presidential Awardees in Teaching Mathematics and Science. There
was no doubt that the teachers were most appreciative of the
ceremonies acknowledging their expertise and dedication to their
profession.
I would like to call your attention to Title III of Report 101-
128 of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations which included
the following paragraph:
In addition, the Committee is concerned about the
failure of the Department of Education and the
National Science Foundation to cooperate more
readily on steps to improve math, science and
engineering education. Too often the NSF's ed-
ucational materials have not had the chance to be
properly distributed through the extensive education
network. For this reason, the Committee directs
the OSTP to take immediate steps to improve any
and all coordination problems between the two agencies
and to report to the Committee by March 1, 1990, on
the progress they have made on this matter.
To reply to the Senate Committee on Appropriations in a timely
fashion, I would like to meet with you and Secretary Cavazos as
soon as possible to discuss ways by which our agencies can comply
with the Committee's request. If you have no objection, I will
have a member of my staff contact your office to arrange the
meeting for us. I look forward to seeing you soon.
Sincerely,
Duan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
The Honorable Erich Bloch
Director, National Science Foundation
1800 G Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20550
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
February 7, 1990
MEMORANDUM FOR D. ALLAN BROMLEY
FROM:
KATHERINE L. YURACKO KLY
SUBJECT:
BRIEFING MEMORANDUM - MEETING WITH
ERICH BLOCH AND LAURO F. CAVAZOS
ON WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 7, 1990 AT 3:30 pm
AT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W.
PURPOSE:
To discuss general guidance for the OSTP report to
Congress on DoEd-NSF coordination.
OTHER
PARTICIPANTS: Erich Bloch
Lauro F. Cavazos
J. Thomas Ratchford
ISSUES FOR
DISCUSSION:
OVERVIEW OF OSTP REPORT TO CONGRESS:
The problem:
Improved coordination between the NSF and the
DoEd is needed. The Senate Appropriations
Committee has stated that "the NSF's educational
materials have not had the chance to be properly
distributed through the extensive education
network." We need to address whether DoEd's
existing delivery systems should and can be used
more effectively to distribute NSF materials in
math and science education.
Proposed strategy for solution:
SHORT TERM: develop coordinating mechanisms
between DoEd and NSF.
LONG TERM: establish a FCCSET committee to
coordinate activities of all federal
agencies in math and science education.
Possible impediments:
DoEd feels hampered by overly prescriptive
language in their authorizing legislation.
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS:
1. What steps should be taken by NSF and DoEd to
set up a formal coordination network?
2. At what level should coordination take place?
Who specifically will chair the coordination
effort for each side?
3. Given existing legislative constraints on DoEd
programs, how much of this coordination problem
can be dealt with administratively?
4. If DoEd programs are indeed over-prescribed by
Congress, should we propose that Congress relax
the legislative constraints? What are suggested
specific steps we might propose?
5. What should Bloch and Cavazos say regarding
these coordination activities in their upcoming
Congressional testimony?
Attachments:
A. Preliminary Draft Outline of Report on DoEd-NSF Coordination
B. DoEd and NSF Program Descriptions
C. DoEd and NSF Budget Summaries
D. Senate Appropriations Committee Directive
DRAFT
OUTLINE OF REPORT TO SENATE ON NSF/DoEd coordination
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the report is to
A. comply with the request of the Senate Committee
and
B. report on OSTP plans for improved coordination among all
of the agencies with respect to math/science/engineering/
technology education
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS
A. DoEd Programs (very brief descriptions)
1. Eisenhower Math/Science Education Program
2. Compensatory Education Program (Chapter 1)
3. Fund for Innovation in Education (FIE)
4. National Diffusion Network
5. Office of Education Research and Improvement Programs
6. Office of Postsecondary Education Programs
B. NSF Programs (very brief descriptions)
1. Teacher Preparation and Enhancement
2. Materials Development, Research, and Informal Science
Education
3. Undergraduate Science and Engineering and Mathematics
Education
4. Research Career Development
5. Studies and Program Assessment
C. Commonalities in Purpose of Programs
1. Teacher training
2. Improvement of Instruction
3. Underrepresented Groups
4. Data Collection and Analysis
D. Dissemination Mechanisms
1. DoEd: regional centers, ERIC, NDN, networks with
state education officials
2. NSF: publications by agency and by grant recipients
III. AGENCY COORDINATION
A. Existing Mechanisms for Coordination
1. Informal contact for information exchange at program
managers' level
2. Contact regarding jointly funded programs
A-1
B. New Mechanisms to be Implemented
1. Formal coordination
a. Under Secretary of Education and Director of NSF
b. Assistant Secretaries of Elementary and Secondary
Education, Education Research and Improvement, and
Postsecondary Education, and the Associate
Director of NSF Science and Engineering Education
Directorate
2. Use of DoEd dissemination networks to publize
appropriate NSF projects
3. Request legislative change for DoEd programs for
which the existing legislation may be too
prescriptive
C. FCCSET
A-2
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PROGRAMS
Dwight D. Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education Program
The Eisenhower program is the largest single DoEd program
devoted exclusively to the improvement of math and science
education. The primary purpose of the program is to improve
teacher training and instruction in math and science at the
precollege level. The program is divided into two main
components: the state grant program and the national program.
Under the state grant program, the majority of funds pass
through the state to local districts to support a variety of
teacher training and instructional improvement projects. Some
funds are retained at the State level to support demonstration
and exemplary programs.
The Eisenhower national program primarily supports projects of
national significance designed to improve the quality of
teaching and instruction in math and science.
Compensatory Education Program (Chapter 1)
The Chapter 1 program, the largest federal elementary and
secondary education program, provides compensatory education
to educationally disadvantaged students in reading and math.
About half of all students served by Chapter 1 receive some
math instruction, primarily in the early elementary grades.
Star Schools
Fund for Innovation in Education Technology Education
These programs support the instructional use of high-
technology equipment in precollege math and science education.
Higher Education Minority Science Improvement
Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need
Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education --
Comprehensive Program for Math and Science
These programs, under the Office of Postsecondary Education,
all support the improvement of math and science education.
B-1
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION PROGRAMS
Teacher Preparation and Enhancement
This activity focuses on improving precollege science and math
education through effective preservice and in-service teacher
training. In FY 1991, emphasis will be placed on the Statewide
Initiatives to forge strong Federal-State partnerships to
restructure pre-college education throughout the Nation.
Materials Development, Research, and Informal Science Education
This activity focuses on the need for a consistent pattern of
elementary and secondary school science and math instruction. A
major effort is to develop improved instructional materials for
science in the secondary schools. Informal science activities and
research about the teaching and learning process will also be
emphasized. Programs to develop and demonstrate the use of modern
technology in addressing educational problems will continue.
Undergraduate Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Education
Continued emphasis will be placed on strengthening college
instrumentation and laboratories. Comprehensive regional
centers for minorities and other model collegiate programs to
stimulate the participation of women, minority, and disabled
students in curricula leading to science careers will be
increased to support approximately 15 centers by FY 1991.
Efforts to enhance the currency of undergraduate faculty and
to improve the undergraduate curricula will also increase.
Research Career Development
For FY 1991, the number of new three-year graduate fellowships
will be increased to 1100, completing the planned doubling of
the program from its level in FY 1987. This includes
continuation of a "Women in Engineering" program offering to
attract more women into the Nation's engineering faculty. The
funding will also permit an expansion of the Young Scholars
Program for talented high school and middle school students.
Studies and Program Assessment
This includes studies of national and international trends
relevant to science education, collecting and analyzing data on
science and engineering education, and supporting policy studies.
B-2
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BUDGET SUMMARY
MATH AND SCIENCE PROGRAMS
Title
1989
1990
1991
Appropriation
Appropriation
Proj.
OESE
Chapter 1 Basic and Concentration Grants
School Improvement Programs:
1/
1/
N/A
Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education
State Grants
OERI
$128,440,000
$126,837,000
$228.8 M
Research and Development Center in
Mathematics
Research and Development Center in Science
500,000
I
N/A
Star Schools
500,000
500,000 N/A
Fund for Innovation in Education:
7,900,000-
8,100,0002 --
Technology Education
Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education
1,000,000
:
I
National Programs
8,892,000
8,781,000 9.2 M
OPBE
National Study of Title II programs
750,000
-
---
OPE
Higher Education Minority Science Improvement.
Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need.
5,307,000
5,416,000
5.6 M
Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary
12,844,000
15,793,000
N/A
Education-Comprehensive Program for Math
and Science
1,000,000
2,900,000 N/A
Total
167,133,000
168,327,000
1/ students The total 1990 appropriation was $4,593,258,000. Approximately 47 percent of
sometimes served by Chapter 1 receive remedial assistance in mathematics,
combined with reading. Therefore, an estimate is not available.
2/ About 55 percent of funds appropriated for Star Schools are used
mathematics and and science. The remainder is used primarily for foreign for language
teacher training.
N/A not available
C-1
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION BUDGET SUMMARY
Summary of Request
(Millions of Dollars)
Subactivity
FY 1990
FY 1989
FY 1990
Current
FY 1991
Actual
Request
Plan
Request
Teacher Preparation and Enhancement
$63.66
$68.50
Materials Development, Research,
$81.00
$89.60
and Informal Science Education
43.99
49.00
Undergraduate Science, Engineering,
48.00
61.50
and Mathematics Education
28.00
30.00
Research Career Development
34.00
50.00
30.98
Studies and Program Assessment
38.00
36.90
44.90
4.50
4.50
4.37
5.00
Total, Activity
$171.13
$190.00
204.27
$251.00
Summary by Educational Level
(Millions of Dollars)
FY 1990
Educational Level
Change
Current
FY 1991
Plan
Request
Amount
Percent
Pre-college
$140.37
Undergraduate
$165.10
$24.73
17.6%
34.00
Graduate
50.00
16.00
47.1
29.90
35.90
6.00
20.1
Total, Activity
$204.27
$251.00
$46.73
22.9%
C-2
92
93
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,500,000 for
The Committee recommends $900,000 for the National Space
the activities of the Council on Environmental Quality. This is an
Council. This is $337,000 above the administration's request, but
increase of $639,000 above the House allowance and the budget re-
$300,000 below the House allowance.
quest and an increase of $650,000 over the fiscal year 1989 appro-
The Committee expects a progress report on the Council's efforts
priation.
to assist the President in developing a long-term exploration of
The Committee understands that both the House and Senate cur-
space initiative by April 1, 1990.
rently have legislation pending that will assign the Council new re-
sponsibilities and emphasize the importance of integrating global
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
environmental concerns into Federal policy decisions. Furthermore,
there are indications that the President envisions an enhanced role
Appropriations, 1989
$1,587,000
for the Council during his administration. Thus, the Committee be-
Budget estimate, 1990
2,997,000
lieves an appropriation of $1,500,000 is justified and expects the
House allowance
2,027,000
Committee recommendation
2,997,000
Council to give priority to using them to hire staff to implement
the recent G-7 accord on global change.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Committee is concerned that over the past several years the
Council has not produced its annual environmental quality report
The Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] was created
in a timely manner. The Committee urges the administration to
by the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and
look closely at the activities and priorities of the Council and di-
Priorities Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-282) and provides advice to
rects the Council to issue its annual environmental quality report
the President concerning policies in science and technology and on
in an expeditious manner.
the utilization of science and technology in addressing important
national problems. OSTP also supports other organizations within
the Executive Office of the President with regard to issues involv-
NATIONAL SPACE COUNCIL
ing science and technology considerations; reviews and analyzes
the research and development budgets and programs of the Federal
Appropriations, 1989
Government, in concert with the Office of Management and
Budget estimate, 1990
$563,000
House allowance
Budget; coordinates research and development programs of the
1,200,000
Committee recommendation
Federal Government; and fulfills other obligations, duties, func-
900,000
tions, and activities mandated by the National Science and Tech-
program DESCRIPTION
nology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976.
The National Space Council was reestablished by section 501 of
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Public Law 100-685. Its primary function is to provide advice and
assistance to the President on national space policy and strategy.
The Committee recommends $2,997,000 for the Office of Science
The Council has been directed by the President to review U.S. Gov-
and Technology Policy [OSTP]. This amount is the same as the ad-
ministration's amended request and $970,000 above the House al-
ernment space policy, including long-range goals, and develop a
lowance. This amount is $1,410,000 above the fiscal year 1989 level.
strategy for national space activities. The Council will also develop
The Committee recommends that the President's amended
recommendations for the President on space policy and space-relat-
budget request, submitted to Congress in July, be funded at the
ed issues and will encourage cooperation and exchange among the
proposed level. This increase will provide funds for additional re-
civil, national security, and commercial space sectors. In addition,
sources for OSTP and initiation of the President's Council of Sci-
it will monitor and coordinate implementation of the President's
ence and Technology Advisors [PCAST].
national space policy by executive departments and agencies, and
The Committee notes that since fiscal year 1980, total Federal
will resolve differences concerning major space and space-related
R&D has continued to grow from $29,800,000,000 to $58,800,000,000
policy issues. The Council is composed of the Vice President as
in fiscal year 1988. However, of this $29,000,000,000 increase,
Chairman, the Secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, Commerce,
$24,400,000,000 (84 percent) was defense R&D. Civilian R&D, on the
and Transportation, the Director of the Office of Management and
other hand, through fiscal year 1988 has not kept pace with infla-
Budget, the Chief of Staff to the President, the Assistant to the
tion. In fact, it has been cut by more than 9 percent in real terms
President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the Presi-
since 1980. At the same time, defense R&D has more than doubled
dent for Science and Technology, the Director of Central Intelli-
to $39,500,000,000 constituting 82 percent real growth.
gence, and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and
The Committee is concerned with this imbalance between civil-
Space Administration.
ian and defense R&D. Therefore, the Committee requests the Presi-
dent's science advisor to prepare and submit a report by February
1, 1990, analyzing the balance between defense and nondefense re-
94
are inte
search and development. In addition, the report should include rec-
ments,
ommendations as to how this mix of Federal R&D support might
hazards
be reoriented to better support the Nation's priorities in science
activity
and technology.
infrastr
In addition, the Committee is concerned about the failure of the
when I.
Department of Education and the National Science Foundation to
prepare
cooperate more readily on steps to improve math science and engi-
warnin.
neering education. Too often the NSF's educational materials have
of peop
not had the chance to be properly distributed through the exten-
also pr
sive education network. For this reason, the Committee directs the
program
OSTP to take immediate steps to improve any and all coordination
the tecr
problems between the two agencies and to report to the Committee
ulation
by March 1, 1990, on the program they have made on this matter.
Earti
Finally, consistent with the Committee's interest in global
enhanc
change research, OSTP is directed to outline what it believes to be
to prep
the principle scientific questions that are in greatest need of atten-
emerge
3
tion and report to the Committee by May 1, 1990 on how the exist-
sessme:
ing interagency Committee on Earth Sciences research strategy
assist S
plans to answer these questions.
approa
emerge
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
tional
for pla:
Appropriations, 1989
$633,712,000
for the
Budget estimate, 1990
816,273,000
Radi
House allowance
648,928,000
improv
Committee recommendation
655,198,000
in area
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $655,198,000 for
bilities
the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] in fiscal year
ties, in
1990. This amount is $161,075,000 less than the budget estimate
rials li
and $6,270,000 above the House allowance.
local g
approva
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Fede
FEMA is responsible for coordinating Federal efforts to antici-
tivity a
that th
pate, prepare for and respond to a spectrum of major civil emer-
gencies. The Agency also works to assure the effectiveness of the
peaceti.
National Civil Defense Program and the availability of civil de-
governr
tal, nat
fense systems and resources in coping with all manmade and natu-
Train
ral disasters; consolidates the programs aimed at preventing and
State, a
mitigating the effects of potential disasters with the programs de-
nizatio:
signed to deal with the disasters once they occur; coordinates and
emerge
plans for the emergency deployment of resources that are used on
and lo
a routine basis by Federal agencies; and helps to coordinate pre-
through
paredness programs with State and local governments, private in-
Fire A
dustry, and voluntary organizations.
phase-ir
FEMA's budget submission describes several principal activities,
wide p
including:
trainin
Civil defense.-This activity provides for the development of
Federa.
plans and functional emergency capabilities to mitigate, prepare
rescue,
for, respond to, and recover from attack-related emergencies, which
tions to
creates the capability to respond to emergencies caused by natural
tion an
and technological hazards. It has financial and technical assistance
most of
programs which support State and local organization requirements,
Progra:
and operating costs. Federal civil defense objectives and support
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 29, 1989
Dear President Cyert:
Thank you for your letter of November 7. I have become aware of
the situation you describe of the increased competition for
research funds, the high priority ratings required for support
and the possibility of a much reduced award rate during the
coming year. I know these factors can discourage young
scientists, particularly those just finishing postdoctoral work.
The current constraints are a result of the necessity to control
Federal expenditures in an effort to mitigate the deficit. I am
optimistic that these constraints will be temporary. The present
situation reminds me somewhat of the double digit inflation years
of 1979 to 1982 when, in spite of an increasing current dollar
budget, the NIH lost 14% of its purchasing power through
inflation. That, too, was a time of discouragement for young
scientists, but beginning in 1982 we entered a period of
expansion. During the next seven years the NIH budget doubled,
representing a 40% real growth. The number of new and competing
awards never fell below 5,000, the total number of awards
increased by about 5500 and special measures were developed to
encourage and stabilize young scientists in the system.
Even during the present constrained period there are indications
of increased needs for scientists in years ahead. The National
Science Foundation foresees an expanded need for doctoral level
scientists in the United States in both industry and academia,
attributable both to growth factors and to the retirement of an
exceptionally large cohort of faculty in the next decade. Thus
there is, in my view, every reason to continue to encourage young
people to enter science.
2
We will certainly need to watch carefully the balance between
training and opportunity. I know that it is difficult for young
graduates to appreciate the cyclical nature of such relationships
when they are entering the job market during a period of
retrenchment. NIH will be looking at various maneuvers to make
certain that as large a share as possible of first-time and young
applicants enter the system. We will assist in any way we can
from this office. It is critically important that the nation not
lose the contribution of these newly trained scientists.
Thank you for writing about this important matter.
Sincerely yours,
DArlan Premiley
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Richard M. Cyert, Ph. D.
President
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890
8920356
Carnegie
Office of the President
Mellon
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890
412-268-2200
November 7, 1989
Dear Dr. Bromley:
One of the problems in our science funding that bothers me
considerably is the situation in NIH. I am a member of the
National Advisory General Medical Sciences Council and see that
the shortage of funds in the face of increased costs of doing
science has significantly raised the priority ratings required for
grants.
At the same time, I know that we have stimulated an increase
in the supply of researchers in biology and biochemistry through
fellowships and hortatory campaigns. Now, as this supply of
students finishes their postdoctorate work and enters universities
that need them badly, they will have great difficulty in pursuing
their research. Many will, thus, be driven from their fields.
The situation is extremely bad and will result in bitterness
and ruined lives. I think the situation is desperate and calls
for some action to help avert an imminent crisis. I know budget
cuts, rather than increases, are the order of the day, but this
situation deserves close scrutiny.
Sincerely,
Buckard M Cyers Bechard
Richard M. Cyert, Ph.D.
Dr. D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for Science and Technology
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
"CORRESPONDENCE TRACKING"
TYPE:
Action Item
DOCUMENT NUMBER: 8920356
FROM:
RICHARD M. CYERT
CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY
TO:
BROMLEY
DATE OF
CORRESPONDENCE: 11/07/89
SUBJECT: CONCERNED ABOUT NIH FUNDING.
ASSIGNED TO: James Wyngaarden
ACTION REQUIRED: DRAFT RESPONSE FOR DAB SIGNATURE
SENDER'S DUE DATE:
OSTP DUE DATE:
11/27/89
DATE COMPLETED:
COPIES TO: JUDY BOSTOCK
Nancy Maynard
REMARKS:
DATE RECEIVED: 11/13/89
FILE: NEOB
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 7, 1989
Dear Hirsh:
I was delighted to learn from your letter of November 6,
which arrived while I was in the Netherlands, that you had
joined Ralph Gomory at the Sloan Foundation.
You are absolutely correct that one of the major thrusts in
my office will be that of trying to obtain a more effective
flow of technology know-how and research results between the
federal laboratories and the private sector. We have all
looked at this from various angles over the years and, as
you note, there have been a large number of reports but very
little action.
I am committed to having a draft technology policy for the
United States available sometime in the early part of 1990
and to having a section on technology transfer in that
document. I would very much like to talk with you and Ralph
about it, and once we get a draft of even a preliminary
sort, I would be very appreciative if you and Ralph would be
willing to take a look at it and let me have your comments.
I tend to distrust even the term "technology transfer,"
because it implies that there is the possibility of
selecting a technology, neatly wrapping it at some Place A,
then transferring it in some magical fashion to Place B,
where it can be unwrapped and immediately utilized with full
effectiveness by the recipients, who may well have no
background whatsoever for that use. I believe that the
whole term has given the process something of a bad name,
and we should come up with something quite different. In my
view, what we require is a continuous process, with human
contact all along the way, so that the technology gets
transferred more or less automatically with people who
really understand how to use it and what sort of
infrastructure is required before the transfer makes any
sense.
I remember well at Yale that we worked for years to make
some of this work. In the early days, we had meetings
chaired by our president, Kingman Brewster, and later Bart
Giamatti, where we invited CEOs of major corporations to
spend a day on campus, where they were entertained and
edified by a few of the senior faculty. These meetings
always ended with a great flurry of enthusiasm, and after
the CEOs went home, they regularly told their vice
presidents for R&D to contact Yale and make something
happen. At this point, everything fell apart because at the
time there really was no central focus within the university
where such calls could either be received or acted upon. A
few years ago, I was instrumental in setting up an Office of
Cooperative Research, directed by an individual who had
spent a very large fraction of his life in a major chemical
industry, with the office charge being that of providing an
interface between what was going on within Yale and the
interests of the Yale faculty members with the interests of
the external callers. In only some six months, this office
was a remarkable success and a whole series of ongoing, very
productive collaborations and cooperations had been arranged
and were in place. Although the national laboratories I
know, in many cases at least, have such offices, I have
never been convinced that they have been given adequate
visibility and clout within the individual laboratory
organizations to actually be able to make things happen. In
our Yale case, the director of this Office of Cooperative
Research reported directly to the provost and president and
had real authority. What I have been trying to do recently
is to stimulate the creation of such an office in the
national laboratories, staffed with people reporting
directly to the laboratory director and given adequate
authority, again, to make things happen and to follow
through on requests and demonstrated interest from external
organizations.
I must also say, of course, that I have been very much
impressed by the fact that the Japanese, the Germans, and
even the French, have been much more aggressive and
effective at utilizing the mechanisms that do exist in our
national laboratories than have our American colleagues.
The problem remains a vitally important one if we are to
have any hope of retaining any kind of economic
competitiveness, and I would welcome any of your thoughts on
it. I appreciate your passing on a copy of the ERAB report.
It does have an excellent executive summary, and in my
opinion, the Department of Energy laboratories have been
paragons in this area, as compared to all the other federal
laboratories.
It was good to hear from you, and I look forward to working
with you.
With warmest best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Allan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. Hirsh Cohen
Program Officer
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
Suite 2550
630 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10111-0242
8920354
ALFRED P. SLOAN FOUNDATION
SUITE 2550
630 FIFTH AVENUE
NEW YORK, N.Y. IOIII-0242
HIRSH COHEN
(212) 649-1649
PROGRAM OFFICER
FAX (212) 757-5117
November 6, 1989
The Honorable D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
The Old Executive Office Building
17th Street and Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20506
Dear Allan,
From your own comments in the press and from other activities I
observe, there is and will continue to be pressure to use the
federal laboratories more effectively in producing useful
technology for industry.
I studied the DOE laboratories a few years ago and I do not think
much has changed since then. I see a number of new studies being
discussed or actually starting and I worry that the studies will
never lead to actions. I am sending a copy of the ERAB report
which has a fairly efficient executive summary.
By the way, I have left IBM (after 30 years) and have joined Ralph
Gomory at the Sloan Foundation.
Sincerely yours,
Huil Cohen
Hirsh Cohen
Enclosure
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 14, 1989
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for your recent letter and your kind words of
congratulations on my appointment.
I have passed your proposal along to my Associate Director
for Physical Sciences and Engineering for review.
Unfortunately, I have an extremely small staff and they are
spread fairly thin. However, if time permits, someone will
endeavor to review your proposal.
Sincerely,
Dauan D. Allan Bromley Fromly
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Mr. James C. Campbell
Rural Route #4
Golf Club Road
Smiths Falls, Ontario, K7A 4S5
James C. Campbell
RR#4, Golf Club Road, Smiths Falls, Ontario, K7A 455 Phone (613) 283 4703
November 23, 1989
Office of the President of the United States
White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC, USA, 20500
Dear Mr. Allan Bromley:
DAB
May I please congratulate you on your appointment as President
Bush's chief science advisor which was reported in the Queen's
Alumni Review issue of November-December 1989.
My recent time at Queen's was marked by an idea which would be
valuable in light of recent developments and I wish to briefly
discuss my thoughts.
Discussions of the concept initially led to a patent search,
however research found an article in Scientific America, (April
1982, page 44-46) which suggested the technique was currently
in use and was applied to ocean going oil drilling platforms.
Briefly, the concept uses tension members, rods cables or
wires, to hold floating structures down to the sea floor. Thus
the displacement is constant regardless of the loads applied.
The weight of vehicles reduces the tension force holding down
the structure, but can never go "slack" or buckle in
compression. (The tension members may be made to "float" in
order to support their own weight in very deep applications.)
This concept may be combined with the contemporary suspension
bridge, such as the Golden Gate Bridge, to make a submerged
tunnel held down below the waves for trains or cars across
large bodies of water. (Please see the illustration)
I believe that such projects, as part of a "Caribbean
Interstate", could bring prosperity to the area which is the
best safeguard for peace and the drug problem.
The railway industry has given way to trucks and perhaps ships
could soon compete against faster more versatile forms of
traffic such as the submerged tunnel concept discussed here.
I have enclosed a brief description of myself and I would be
pleased to discuss this concept further at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Lane Caphaell
James Campbell
enclosure:
years of research in carbohydrate
chemistry.
Thomson: George Thomson, Arts'62, Law'65
(LLM Berkeley), Toronto, was recently
Grad appointed Bush's science advisor
named Deputy Minister of Labor, with the
Di
Allan Bromley, Sc'48, MSc'50,
and other powerful figures in the
Ontario government.
DSc'81, one of the world's lead-
White House. According to Sullivan,
Tourchin: Bob Tourchin, Sc'65, MBA'67, has
been appointed Manager, Materials Han-
ing nuclear physicists, has been ap-
Allan Bromley's title, which is new,
dling, with Dofasco Steel.
pointed President George Bush's
"suggests that the Bush administra-
Yates: Roger Yates, Sc'64, and his wife Norma
chief science advisor.
tion will
have moved to Dallas, TX, from New-
Allan, a 63-year-old native of
place more
castle/Toronto. Roger is Vice-President
Westmeath, ON, has assumed
importance
and General Manager of a new branch of
responsibility both for "science for
on the ad-
Hatch Associates Consultants, Consulting
policy" and "policy for science."
vising than
Engineers. Roger and Norma have four
In the former role he will be
did the
sons, two of whom have Queen's connec-
responsible for evaluating how
Reagan ad-
tions; Barry, Com'88, and Andrew,
Arts'91.
federal policy decisions will impact
ministrati
on science, and in the latter for co-or-
on."
dinating Washington's policies
Allan
regarding science and technology -
has served
1970-79
including federal support, as well as
in past in a
for American involvement in inter-
Allan Bromley
number of
Alexander/Kelly: Howard Alexander,
national science.
influential
Mus'74, and Kim Kelly, Com'81, plan to
Allan, who is the Henry Ford II
positions within the American scien-
marry on Feb. 10, 1990. They will be living
Professor of Physics and Director of
tific community, including as presi-
at 233 Macdonald, Box 359, Terrace Bay,
the A.W. Wright Nuclear Structure
dent of the American Association for
ON POT 2W0
Laboratory at Yale University, has
the Advancement of Science in 1981.
Annan: David Bruce Annan, Arts'74,
known George Bush for many years.
Following his graduation from
MBA'77, was recently appointed Assistant
In a recent interview he told reporter
Queen's, Allan earned his doctorate
Vice-President, Marketing and Develop-
Walter Sullivan of the New York Times
ment, Cantel Inc, Canada's largest cellular
at the University of Rochester and
network. He has been with Cantel in
that he will be a member of the
became an assistant professor there.
Toronto, since its beginnings in 1985, fol-
President's "inner circle" of advisors.
He then worked for a time at Atomic
lowing a career with Bell Canada. David
Since the science visor makes no
Energy of Canada Ltd. before joining
Bruce and his wife Kathryn live in Oak-
important decisions himself, his in-
the faculty at Yale in 1961. He was
ville, ON.
fluence depends heavily on his per-
chairman of the physics department
Bartlett/Bedal: The Rev. Ross Bartlett, Arts'79,
sonal relationship with the President
there from 1970 to 1977.
MDiv'82, MA'82, and Penny Bedal,
Arts'84, have moved to Maple, ON, where
Ross is Minister of Maple United Church.
Penny continues her work as an historic
Brown: Ian Brown, Arts'73 (MA, Waterloo), in
Craig: Darryl Craig, Artsci'76 (BEd Toronto,
interpreter at Montgomery's Inn in
November 1988 was reelected to a fourth
MEd U.B.C.), has been appointed Prin-
Etobicoke. Friends are invited to contact
term as a trustee on the Durham Board of
cipal, Birchwood School, Fort McMurray,
them at 9944 Keele St., Maple, ON L6A 1R6.
Education, representing public school
AB. Darryl was Vice-Principal at
Berofe: Stephen Berofe, Arts'72, is Director of
ratepayers in Whitby, ON. June 1989, Ian
Westwood Community High School in
Marketing for Oak Street Music, which is
was elected Chairman of the Board.
Fort McMurray for the past three years.
Fred Penner's record label. Stephen wel-
Brownhill: Peter Brownhill, Sc'71, is Assistant
Crothers: Carlyle Crothers, Sc'70, and his
comes contacts with Queen's alumni from
Vice- President (Bell Information Systems)
family are trying a mid-life adventure.
Arts'72 or Arts'73 at 301-140 Bannatyne
with Bell Canada. Peter's new address is
They have moved to North Port, Long Is-
Ave., Winnipeg, MB R3B 3C5. Phone (204)
1413 Micmac St., Ottawa, ON K1H 7N4.
land for better sailing and less taxes! Car-
957-0085.
Campbell: Catherine Campbell, Mus79 (MLS
lyle is Director of Manufacturing with Koll
Western), has a two-year contract with
Morgan. His son Doug is a member of
WUSC as a librarian at the Chitedze
Sc'93.
Agricultural Research Station at a village
Cullimore: Darlene Cullimore, MEd78 (BA,
The flexibility of a
near Lilongwe, the capital of Malawi,
MA Manitoba), has been appointed Execu-
RRIF?
Central Africa. She may be contacted c/o
tive Director, Eastern Ontario Centre for
Chitedze Agricultural Station, PO Box 158,
Entrepreneurship, in Kingston.
The income guarantees
Lilongwe, Malawi, Central Africa.
D'Angelo: Murray D'Angelo, MBA79, has
of a
Campbell: Jane Campbell, Arts'72, is teaching
been promoted to Senior Manager, Com-
at Payap University, Chiang Mai,
merce Lending, responsible for all of the
Life Annuity?
Thailand, for the year 1989-90. She is on
National Bank's commercial lending ac-
leave from the City of York Board of
tivities in Western Canada. In August,
Call or write for sound advice,
Education.
Murray and his family moved from Oak-
reliable service and computer-shopped
Conway: Sean Conway, MA'77, MPP for
ville, ON, to Calgary. (See 1970s Births.)
optimum rates.
Renfrew North, was recently named Min-
Davies: Bryan Davies, MPA'73 (BCom Toron-
ister of the three ministries dealing with
to), was recently appointed Deputy
education in the Ontario Government:
Treasurer of the Ontario Government.
RON TILLOTSON, P.ENG. (Sc'56)
Education; Skills Development; and Col-
Bryan was formerly Deputy Minister of
1075 Bay Street, Suite 605
leges and Universities.
Housing.
Toronto, Ont. M5S 2B1
Court: David Court, Com'79 (MBA Harvard),
Fraser: Donovan Fraser, Arts'76 (BEd Ot-
Phone: (416) 960-0964 or
Toronto, was recently elected a Principal in
tawa), Whitby, ON, has been appointed
fax 960-5341
the management consulting firm Mc-
Multiculturalism Consultant for the Dur-
Kinsey & Company.
ham Board of Education.
40 QUEEN'S ALUMNI REVIEW / November - December 1989
RAILWAY TUNNEL FLOATING UNDER THE SURFACE
OF A BODY OF WATER
FOR FAST
MASS TRANSIT AND CONTAINER FREIGHT
A Conceptual Proposal
by
James C.Campbell
Printed
September 25, 1989
Scientific Am. April 82 -pages 44-46 -
HELICOPTER
LANDING PAD
TENSION LEGS
(STEEL TUBES)
160
DRILLING TEMPLATE
ANCHOR PILINGS
(EIGHT AT EACH CORNER)
FOUNDATION TEMPLATE
SEA FLOOR
HUTTON TENSION-LEG PLATFORM illustrates the complexi-
the trough of the maximum expected wave. After the platform is in
ty common to all large offshore oil structures. The topside facilities
place wells will be drilled through conductors that will guide the drill
rest on a buoyant bull designed to yield with the waves. The hull is
pipe through a drilling template on the sea floor. In the heaviest seas
held down by four groups of highly tensioned tubular-steel tethers
the platform may swing as much as 79 feet from the vertical but will
anchored to the sea floor by preset foundations at each corner. The
at the same time remain level. The Hutton platform is being devel-
tethers pull the hull down $0 that they will never go slack even in
oped by Conoco, a division of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company.
The Hutton platform, being devel-
T
he third project of advanced design
oped and built by Conoco, Inc., for the
is the tension-leg platform (TLP).
British sector of the North Sea, is the
Whereas. steel-template platforms and
first commercial tension-leg platform.
concrete gravity-base platforms are re-
Like the concrete gravity-base cells, the
garded as fixed structures, the tension-
TLP hull is constructed in a large dry
leg platform is a compliant structure: it
dock and moved to a deep-water mating
has the ability to yield to the waves in
site, where it can be submerged to re-
a controlled manner. Tension-leg plat-
ceive its topsides. After mating, the hull
forms have two main structural ele-
and topside assembly is towed to the in-
ments: a floating hull similar to a semi-
stallation site, submerged to allow its
submersible drilling rig but much larger,
tethers to be connected to preset foun-
and an array of highly tensioned vertical
dations and deballasted to tension the
tethers at each corner. The tethers, fash-
tethers. The dynamic response of a ten-
ioned out of high-tensile-strength steel
sion-leg platform can be likened to that
tubes, pull the floating hull down so far
of an inverted pendulum except that the
that they never go slack even in the
platform is held level by the panto-
trough of the maximum wave estimated
graphlike configuration of its tethers. In
to come once every 100 years. Although
the heaviest seas the Hutton platform,
the tether system allows a degree of lat-
riding in 485 feet of water, is designed to
eral motion, it prevents the heave, or
swing as much as 79 feet from the verti-
vertical motion, associated with free-
cal and so to diminish wave impact.
floating craft such as drilling vessels.
Before the Hutton platform is in-
The floating hull must be designed
stalled a drilling template will be em-
with a careful balance between buoyan-
placed on the sea floor within the perim-
cy and freeboard (the part of the hull
eter of the tether foundations. A semi-
above water) in order to handle extreme
submersible drilling rig will then pre-
troughs as well as maximum crests.
drill 13 directional wells, which can be
The great advantage of tension-leg plat-
connected to the topside piping when
forms is their relative insensitivity to the
the platform arrives. In this way produc-
increase of cost with the increase in the
tion can start much earlier than it would
depth of the water: other things being
if all 24 of the projected wells had to be
equal, only the tethers need to be length-
drilled after the platform was in place.
ened. As the offshore industry sensed
The TLP design was selected for the
that it was reaching the economic depth
Hutton platform for three reasons.
limits for fixed structures its attention
First, the lifetime of this particular field
shifted toward compliant structures and
is expected to be shorter than that of
particularly to the TLP. A secondary
other fields in the North Sea, so that a
but important economic advantage of
reusable platform has an extra advan-
the TLP is that it can be untethered and
tage over a-fixed structure. Second, the
anchored at a new site! the Offshore
field happens to be one where little gas is
Technology, Conference of lasti year
released as the oil pressure in the field is
many more technical papers were con-
reduced. As a result there will be no
cerned with TLR's than were concerned
need to inject gas back into the field as
with any other Innovative design.
oil is withdrawn, an operation that adds
considerably to the weight the platform
must carry. Third, the estimated cost of
the tension-leg platform was essentially
the same as the cost of a steel-template
platform. For these reasons the spon-(
sors concluded that the novel TLP de-
sign merited a demanding test. If the
Hutton platform can prove its worth in
the rigorous environment of the North
Sea, much valuable information will be
gained for future installations world-
wide. The Hutton project may therefore
be a milestone in the development of
offshore platforms.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02a. Letter
From: James Campbell
11/89
(b)(6)
Re: Summary of qualifications [personal information
redacted] (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
Date Closed:
2/8/2010
OA/ID Number:
62003-007
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. Letter
From: J.D. McGeachy
10/16/89
(b)(6)
Re: Letter of Recommendation for James Campbell [personal
information redacted] (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence Presidential - C [1989]
Date Closed:
2/8/2010
OA/ID Number:
62003-007
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
02c. Letter
From: A. van Eyken
10/25/89
(b)(6)
Re: Letter of Recommendation for James Campbell [personal
information redacted] (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
Date Closed:
2/8/2010
OA/ID Number:
62003-007
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.
CAREER PLANNING AND PLACEMENT
Queen's University
Kingston, Canada
K7L 3N6
Tel 613 545-2992
Fax 613 545-3856
April 28, 1989
Mr. James C. Campbell
R.R. #4
Golf Club Road
Smiths Fall, Ontario
K7A 4S5
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for letting me use your resume in our "20 Best Resumes" booklet.
Your resume was chosen because it is one of the BEST I have seen when
checking through our Graduate Registry System files (115 files), and also
from resumes that I have collected in my counselling appointments.
As I mentioned over the phone, I will be sending you a copy of the booklet
when it is published in September. If your address will be different,
please make a note of this on the attached waiver form.
Would you please sign the attached waiver and return it to me at Career
Planning and Placement.
Thank you, again, and Good Luck.
Sincerely,
Cathy Puell
Cathy Purcell (Mrs.)
Career Counsellor
ad
encl.
P.S. Thank you for the revised copy 5 disk sorry
missed you
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02d. Resume
Resume of James Campbell [personal information redacted]
(b)(6)
(3 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Science and Technology Policy, Office of (OSTP)
Series:
Bromley, D. Allan, Files
Subseries:
Correspondence Files
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
D. Allan Bromley Correspondence - Presidential - C [1989]
Date Closed:
2/8/2010
OA/ID Number:
62003-007
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 WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 18, 1989
Dear Fred:
I was delighted to get your letter and to be brought up to
date on your Norwegian trip. I particularly appreciated the
photographs taken at the department reception at Yale.
You can be certain that Bethesda has indeed changed in the
past fifty-five years, and I am not at all certain that the
change has been entirely for the better. We now, however,
are reasonably established and at least have no more
cardboard boxes in evidence.
You are more than correct that, among many other things, my
new position qualifies as an intensive learning experience!
Pat joins me in sending you and Aud our warmest best wishes
for Christmas and the new year.
Sincerely yours,
Duan
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Mr. Fred W. Curtis
37 Robbinsville-Edinburg Road
Robbinsville, New Jersey 08691
FRED W. CURTIS
37 ROBBINSVILLE-EDINBURG RD.
ROBBINSVILLE, N.J. 08691
Tel. (609) 259-9242
Nov. 3, 1989
Dear Allan and Pat:-
It's been a long time since I saw you at your "goodbye"
party in Gibbs, but I've thought of you often and wonder
how you like the Washington rat race! You were fortunate to
find a house so quickly. I'm sure the Bethesda that I Knew
fifty-five years ago, when I used to run down to Washington
to court my first wife, has changed a wee bit but certainly
it must be still a lovely area.
Mary Anne has been Kind enough to send me your
addresses, both home and office, so this is just a hello to
you in your new home. Enclosed are some snaps that Aud
took. Hope they will recall pleasant memories of Yale.
I know it's a bit late, but thanks so much for your
letter, Allan, of a couple of months ago. Believe me, I got
a Kick out of receiving a letter with that three word return
address--The White House!
We haven't been on any more long trips such as our
wonderful Norwegian experience in June, but we travel to
Southbury, Shelburne Falls, and Rochester to Keep our kids
in line, and Keep well by walking and bicycling. Lately we
have done a lot of baby sitting for our friends, and believe
me, keeping 2 year to 16 year old kids happy and well while
their parents are away for a few days is a mind boggling,
back breaking, and time consuming job. Oh well, we seem to
thrive on it.
I hope you both are well. Audrey joins me in sending
Best regards.
Jud
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
January 29, 1990
Dear Bill:
This is just a brief note of appreciation for your time and effort in arranging for me
to learn more about your laboratory and about the activities in your state in
geothermal and ocean thermal gradient energy research. I was much impressed by
what I learned and by the imaginative approach that you and your colleagues to
exploiting the unique resources of your state. The aquaculture activities I found
particularly interesting as ancillary developments to the energy programs, and I look
forward to keeping in touch concerning all of these activities.
I regret that the weather on the big island chose not to cooperate, but I very much
appreciate all your efforts in trying to make it possible for me to see a cross-section
of the exciting work that you have underway.
With warmest best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Dear
D. Allan Bromley
Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
Dr. William R. Coops
Managing Director
National Energy Laboratory of Hawaii
220 South King Street
Suite 820
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813