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
285792319
label
International Subject, White House: FCCSET CISET [Committee on International Science, Engineering, and Technology] [1992]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
285792319
contentType
document
title
International Subject, White House: FCCSET CISET [Committee on International Science, Engineering, and Technology] [1992]
description
Records pertain to the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
citationUrl
identifierLocal
62073-008
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
285792319
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
5608bf899f22589a
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
2008-1027-F; 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:
Organization Files - FCCSET
OA/ID Number:
62073
Folder ID Number:
62073-008
Folder Title:
International Subject, White House: FCCSET CISET [Committee on International Science, Engineering,
and Technology] [1992]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
0
0
0
0
FILL:CISET FILL
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 26, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR AMBASSADOR BARTHOLOMEW
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY DAB/OC
SUBJECT:
CISET STUDY TO DEVELOP PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES
FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Thank you for your memorandum of May 30, 1990 discussing the CISET study on
principles and guidelines for international S&T. I am pleased to hear your positive
views on the need to articulate the foreign and economic policy goals of the United
States as they relate to international S&T activities supported by Federal agencies.
I read with great interest your suggestion on approaching the issue through the NSC,
starting with a working group of the OES PCC. While I believe CISET would be the
most appropriate mechanism to develop the report, I would be willing to discuss a PCC
approach as well. I appreciate your support for having Tom Ratchford head up the
study in the OES PCC, although I have difficulty with the reporting structure implicit
in that arrangement. If we do not agree that CISET should lead the effort, I suggest we
consider creating an ad hoc PCC, chaired by Tom, building on the OES PCC work you
have initiated concerning Russia and on CISET studies related to Western Europe,
Eastern Europe and developing countries.
Given the considerable effort this exercise will require, its importance to foreign and
economic policies relating to international S&T, and the delays experienced so far in its
launch, we need to review the schedule for the study as well. The time frame should
allow technical agencies to devote sufficient attention to the report, since it will no doubt
have a substantial influence on their future S&T activities.
I would be pleased to discuss this further with you.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
July 24, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR D. ALLAN BROMLE
FROM:
ToM BARTHOLOMEW RATCHFORD DRAND
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Your note to me asks to discuss the May 30, 1992 memorandum to you from
Reg Bartholomew. In his memorandum to you, Reg suggests the international
S&T principles and guidelines study be done through an OES PCC Working
Group chaired by me and reporting to Buff Bohlen.
Attached, for discussion purposes, is a draft reply. It expresses a preference
for using CISET but a willingness to discuss options. The options include
working through the PCC process, but eschewing the route of reporting
through Buff.
I would be happy to discuss this in more detail at your convenience.
Please memo
"Document Control"
TYPE:
ACTION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: 9202043
ORIGINATOR: 02
STATUS I
DIRECTORATE STATUS
FROM:
PEARSON, W. Robert: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
TO:
DR. D.A. BROMLEY
DATE OF
CORRESPONDENCE: 06/01/92
SUBJECT: HE IS FORWARDING A MEMORANDUM FROM UNDERSECRETARY
BARTHOLOMEW TO DR. BROMLEY CONCERNING A PROPOSED
STUDY ON INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BY
CISET.
DIRECTORATE
STAFF
ASSIGNED: INTERNATIONAL/POLICY
ASSIGNED:
ACTION
STAFF
REQUIRED: AS NECESSARY
ACTION:
SENDER'S DUE DATE:
OSTP DUE DATE:
06/18/92
STAFF DUE DATE
DATE COMPLETED:
DATE COMPLETED/DEPT:
COPIES TO: D. Allan Bromley
FCCSET
WHITE HOUSE TRA
REMARKS:
from nets R. discuss work
T:
OSTP RECEIVED: 06/
FILE: P-INTERNATION
CENTRAL FILES:
9211593
-
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
June 1, 1992
MAILING
MEMORANDUM FOR BRENT SCOWCROFT
THE WHITE HOUSE
SUBJECT: CISET Study on International Science and Technology
Please transmit the attached memorandum from Under
Secretary Bartholomew to Dr. Bromley concerning a proposed
study on international science and technology by the Committee
on International Science, Engineering and Technology (CISET).
W. Robert Pearson
Executive Secretary
Attachment:
As stated.
United States Department of State
Under Secretary for International Security Affairs
Washington, D.C. 20520
May 30, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR:
D. Allan Bromley
The White House
FROM:
Reginald Bartholomew
SUBJECT:
CISET Study on International Pay Science and
Technology
Your April 27 memorandum is very much in line with my own
thinking in this area. Several months ago I asked the OES
bureau to move out in this general direction through the NSC
committee system -- starting with an analysis of our science
and technology interests with Russia and the other newly
independent states, particularly our goals for the upcoming
visit of President Yeltsin. That process is already yielding
some very useful results, thanks in part to what I understand
is OSTP's strong interest and support.
My sense in deciding to initiate the process in the NSC
system was it would be more appropriate to carry out the full
effort there -- starting at the PCC (OES) level -- because, as
you point out, what we want to do with other countries in
science and technology cooperation in the future may lead us to
consider adjustments to national security and foreign policy.
That is why I think the points you make in your memorandum
are very important. In particular, I was impressed by your
argument that we need to single out two areas for study as part
of the process of arriving at a decision on whether new
Administration policy is needed:
-- Changes over the past four decades in the distribution
of centers of research, flows of scientists and engineers,
and commercial importance of R & D; and,
-- Agency-by-agency review of their current international
science and technology activities and how such activities
relate to their specific technical missions.
-2-
Allan, it seems to me that, rather than launching a whole
new exercise in CISET at this stage, we should move full speed
ahead with the PCC process and, in particular, focus on these
two areas through a special study. In this respect, I think
your idea of having Tom Ratchford head up such a study group is
an excellent one. I have also discussed it with Buff Bohlen
and, if you agree, I see no reason why he should not proceed to
pull together a PCC subcommittee to begin drafing a study of
the above two areas. Once concluded -- and I hope we could
have it by July 1 -- this study would then be fed into the full
PCC effort that Buff chairs, which I would see producing a
final product for the Deputies Committee to approve in late
November.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
April 27, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR AMBASSADOR BARTHOLOMEW
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY Plan
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR CISET STUDY TO DEVELOP PRINCIPLES
AND GUIDELINES FOR INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
As you know, the last four decades have seen a remarkable degree of international
activity and cooperation in science and technology (S&T) by the Federal Government.
In this endeavor, we have tried both to foster goodwill and cooperation among
countries, and to facilitate the conduct of research that is inherently international in
scope.
These four decades have seen fundamental changes in the distribution of centers of
research, flows of scientists and engineers, and commercial importance of research and
development. We need to continue to adjust to these changes in our national policies,
foreign policy development, and in our technical agencies.
The U.S. Government has, as you know, hundreds of international agreements
promoting and facilitating cooperation in S&T, both at the technical agency level and at
the U.S. Government level. I am of the opinion that there is a need for a clear
articulation of foreign and economic policy goals of the United States as they relate to
international S&T activities. In addition, there is a need within each technical agency to
review their international S&T activities in light of their mission and overall U.S.
foreign and economic policy.
In your capacity as Chair of the Committee on International Science, Engineering and
Technology (CISET), I am requesting the creation of an Ad Hoc Working Group of
CISET to prepare a report which will address these issues. This report, including
recommended actions, would be due July 1, 1992, and a draft principles and guidelines
for the conduct of international S&T would be delivered by October 1, 1992. A draft
State of Roles and Objectives describing specific functions, structure, and tasks is
attached for your reference.
The CISET is the appropriate forum for discussing these important topics, considering
its mandate to increase the overall effectiveness and productivity of Federal efforts in
international science, engineering and technology. Additionally, because this exercise
will cut across agency boundaries, a forum of this type is needed to provide the
necessary overview and expertise.
Ambassador Bartholomew
April 27, 1992
Page two
If you feel that an Ad Hoc Working Group of CISET is not the appropriate venue for
this study, and that these issues should be more appropriately addressed in some other
forum, I would be pleased to discuss this further with you.
I look forward to your positive response.
Attachment
STATEMENT OF ROLES AND OBJECTIVES
FOR THE
AD HOC WORKING GROUP OF THE
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE,
ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY
ON
PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR
INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
The Ad Hoc Working Group on Principles and Guidelines for International Science and
Technology (hereinafter referred to as the Working Group) is hereby established under
the Committee on International Science, Engineering, and Technology (CISET) of the
Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology (FCCSET) by
action of the FCCSET Chairman.
Purpose
The purpose of the Working Group is to review the conduct of international science and
technology activities sponsored and supported by the United States Government through
its technical agencies. The Working Group will draft guidelines and principles for use
by Federal agencies in their conduct of international science and technology programs
and activities, and recommend through the CISET to the FCCSET whether the
principles and guidelines be recommended to the President for possible incorporation
into an executive order.
Functions
Reporting to and under the direction of the Chairman of CISET, the Working Group
will review:
o
the changing environment for international science and technology, including
national security, economic, and domestic policy considerations;
o
the role of international science and technology in research and development
programs of technical agencies;
The Working Group will review and recommend principles and guidelines with respect
to:
o
effectiveness of present policies and organization in utilizing science and
technology in support of foreign policy objectives;
-2-
o
the scope and effectiveness of government role in providing foreign science and
technology information for U.S. Government, universities and industry;
o
the role of science and technology exchanges (mobility) in civilian technology
transfer;
o
the role and utility of both umbrella and agency level science and technology
agreements;
o
the process for review, approval, and implementation of international science and
technology agreements including the utility of a "model" agreement, the
interagency approval process, and documentation and reporting on activities
under the agreements;
0
the role of international cooperation in megaprojects from both a domestic and
foreign policy perspective;
0
U.S. government practices for addressing foreign proposals for technology
cooperation, particularly when the proposals cut across multiple agencies and
include private sector participation;
0
agency procedures for handling proposals from foreign principal investigators;
o
existing legislation including the effectiveness and value of the Title V reporting
requirements; and
0
emerging S&T relationships with Eastern & Central Europe & CIS.
Structure and Membership
The Associate Director for Policy and International Affairs in the Office of Science and
Technology Policy will serve as Chairman of the Working Group.
The following departments and agencies are represented on the Working Group:
National Security Council
Office of Management and Budget
United States Trade Representative
National Space Council
Agency of International Development
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
-3-
Department of Energy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Interior
Department of State
Department of Transportation
Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Responsibility of the Working Group Chairman
o
Hold regular meeting of the Working Group and approve agendas;
o
appoint individuals as necessary to take responsibility for completing reports or
other necessary documents to be drafted by the Working Group;
Products and Delivery Times
1) A study of the issues outlined above including recommended action; due July 1, 1992;
2) Proposed guidelines and principles for the conduct of international science and
technology; due October 1, 1992.
Termination Date
The Working Group shall terminate on November 1, 1992, unless otherwise extended by
the FCCSET Chairman.
Determination
I hereby determine that the formation of the Ad Hoc Working Group of the Committee
on International Science, Engineering, and Technology on Principles and Guidelines for
International Science and Technology is in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the Executive Branch by law and that such duties can
best be performed through the advice and council of such a group.
Recommended:
Approved:
Chairman, CISET
Date
Chairman, FCCSET
Date
SENT BY:
4-30-92 ; 2:54PM :
OSTP-
202 647 0773:# 2/ 2
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 28, 1992
Dear Secretary Watkins:
Jun
Thank you for your letter of January 16 regarding the need for Administration-wide
principles for international science and technology (S&T) collaboration. I am pleased to
learn of efforts within your own department to address issues related to international
agreements. It is my firm belief that improvements to agency procedures, operations,
and goals must come from within.
I have been considering your suggestion for a White House-initiated study and strategy
for handling of international S&T efforts. What you have suggested is consistent with
my efforts to create, within the FCCSET Committee on International Science,
Engineering and Technology (CISET), an Ad Hoc Working Group to look at the need
for and possible development of principles and guidelines to guide international S&T
activities of the technical agencies. My staff is coordinating these efforts with the staff
of the National Security Council and the Department of State.
Thank you for bringing this important issue to our attention and I look forward to
working with you to bring about real and substantial improvements to our international
S&T endeavors.
Sincerely,
Due
D. Allan Bromley
The Assistant to the President
for
Science and Technology
The Honorable James D. Watkins, USN (Retired)
The Secretary of Energy
Washington, DC 20585
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 2, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR AMBASSADOR WISNER
FROM:
D. ALLAN BROMLEY Dnan
SUBJECT:
CISET STUDY OF U.S. OBJECTIVES FOR INTERNATIONAL
S&T IN THE POST COLD WAR FOREIGN POLICY SETTING
The U.S. Government is involved in a wide variety of international programs, and has
hundreds of international agreements promoting and facilitating cooperation in S&T.
Further, we see our foreign policy to be increasingly interlaced with S&T
considerations. Much of our policy framework and our technical agency programs
derive, however, from the period immediately following the Second World War. I
believe there is a need to critically examine the adequacy of current U.S. Government
policies regarding S&T activities with international implications. Such an examination
will not only focus on the integration of science and technology with U.S. foreign and
economic policy objectives, but also on how our policies affect the health of S&T in the
United States.
In your capacity as Chairman of the Committee on International Science, Engineering,
and Technology (CISET), I am requesting that you establish an Ad Hoc Working Group
of CISET to prepare a report which addresses these issues. The attached overview
provides a conceptual framework for the study.
I have asked my staff to work with yours to a draft Statement of Roles and Objectives
for the working group. I would also be pleased to receive your recommendation on who
should be its chairman.
I look forward to your positive response.
U.S. OBJECTIVES FOR INTERNATIONAL S&T
IN THE POST COLD WAR FOREIGN POLICY SETTING
A CISET STUDY
PURPOSE
A CISET working group would conduct a one-year study of the adequacy of current
U.S. government policies regarding S&T activities with international implications, and
the integration of science and technology with foreign and economic policy objectives of
the United States. On the basis of appropriate review of the international science and
technology activities sponsored by the U.S. Government, using existing materials to the
extent possible, the working group would develop recommendations to Federal agencies
for their conduct of international S&T programs and activities.
METHODS
The working group would approach its mandate in two stages. The first would be to
inventory and evaluate existing policies and means of integrating science, technology and
foreign policy. The second stage would, based on this evaluation, develop
recommendations for implementation by the agencies.
Analysis and Evaluation
To provide a basis for effective evaluation, the group would first inventory and review
technical agency S&T activities. It would utilize CISET and NSC reports and
compendia, as well as agency reports and documentation in this effort. This initial
exercise would include an examination of:
flows of S&T personnel (including students and post-doctoral researchers) to and
from the United States, and the effects of agency policies and programs on these
flows;
the scope and effectiveness of the government role in providing foreign S&T
information to government agencies, universities and industry;
the role and utility of both umbrella S&T agreements and agency-level S&T
agreements, and the desirability and feasibility of developing a model bilateral
S&T agreement;
U.S. government practices for addressing foreign proposals for technology
cooperation, particularly when the proposals cut across multiple agencies and
include private sector participation; and
emerging S&T relationships in developing and industrialized countries, including
the former Soviet Union and Central and Eastern Europe.
Recommendations
Based on the results of the activities described above, the Working Group would develop
a series of recommendations for action for technical agency policies and programs that
will strengthen U.S. science and technology; and to better enhance the integration of
science and technology and foreign policy. Recommendations would address increased
effectiveness of:
Policies and organization in using science and technology in support of foreign
policy objectives;
Policies and programs in using foreign policy tools to advance national science and
technology objectives; and
International programs of Federal agencies in enhancing U.S. science and
technology.
The subject of study for this Working Group extends into areas of some sensitivity in
terms of agency mandates and historical approaches to science and technology. The
critical nature of the issue, however, and the potential long-term and positive impacts on
U.S. approaches to international science and technology, warrant the extensive effort
that will be needed for success. Working together with the agencies, one year should
provide a realistic time frame to accomplish the objectives of the Working Group.