[Analytical Perspectives]
[Special Analyses and Presentations]
[8. Research and Development]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]






[[Page 159]]


 
                       8. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

                            I.   INTRODUCTION

  Technological innovation and scientific discovery generated much of 
the Nation's economic growth over the last 50 years, creating millions 
of jobs, and improving the quality of life. For example, about two-
thirds of the 80 percent gain in economic productivity since 1995 can be 
attributed to information technology. This innovation and discovery was 
possible because of both public and private investment in research and 
development (R&D).
  The United States' investment in R&D is unparalleled. Our country's 
investment in R&D plays a major role in the state of the world's science 
and technology. Not only does the U.S. continue to lead the world in 
total R&D spending, but, as the most recent data indicate in the 
accompanying figure, U.S. R&D expenditures--combining private and 
public--exceed those of the rest of the G-7 countries combined.
  The Nation's investments in innovation and discovery are also vital to 
strengthening our capabilities to combat terrorism and defend our 
country. The President's 2003 Budget focuses on winning the war against 
terrorism and securing the homeland, while moderating the growth in 
overall spending. These priorities have affected the way R&D is being 
funded and directed, as well as the way the results of R&D are being 
used. Within the federal government's research portfolio, agencies have 
been directing many of their programs to assist in the defense effort. 
For example, one focus of R&D at the Department of Defense (DOD) is to 
improve detection of biological and chemical threats; the National 
Institutes of Health (NIH) is financing and conducting research to 
discover new disease treatments; and the Department of Transportation 
(DOT) is performing R&D to improve aviation security technology. 
Investments today in R&D will translate into the new capabilities for 
tomorrow for detecting threats to our security, defending ourselves 
against them, and responding to emergencies should they arise.

                                     

[[Page 160]]





  If adopted, this budget will provide the highest level of funding for 
R&D in history, but the focus should not be on how much we are spending, 
but rather on what we are getting for our investment. Our current 
priorities also call for redoubling our efforts to meet the President's 
charge that we improve the management, performance, and results of the 
federal government. A dedicated effort to improve the overall quality of 
the total investment in R&D by strengthening effective programs and 
fixing lower performers through reforms or reallocations will increase 
the productivity of the federal R&D portfolio and transcend the all-too-
common attention given to year-to-year marginal increases or decreases. 
Additionally, while it can be difficult to assess the outcomes of some 
research programs--many of which may not have a measurable effect for 
decades--it is important to establish meaningful goals for them and to 
measure annual progress toward them and performance in appropriate ways. 
Towards that end, the Administration is developing investment criteria 
for R&D programs across the government. Finally, the government must 
coordinate interrelated and complementary R&D efforts among agencies, 
combining programs where appropriate to improve effectiveness and 
eliminating redundant programs, to leverage these resources to the 
greatest effect.
  The federal government has multiple roles in achieving these goals. 
The government should be strong in its support of basic research, as it 
is the source of tomorrow's discoveries and new capabilities, and it 
will fuel further gains in economic productivity, quality of life, and 
national security. The government should also support those areas of 
applied research and development critical to the missions of the federal 
agencies, particularly in priority areas that private sources are not 
motivated to support. If the private sector cannot profit from the 
development of a particular technology, federal funding may be 
appropriate if the technology in question addresses a National priority 
or otherwise provides societal benefits. Finally, the federal government 
should help stimulate private investment and provide the proper 
incentives for private sources to continue to fuel the discovery and 
innovation of tomorrow. The Administration plans to do this through the 
permanent extension of the Research and Experimentation tax credit.
  To these ends, this chapter discusses how the Administration will 
improve the performance of R&D programs through new investment 
principles and other means that encourage and reinforce quality 
research. The chapter also highlights the priority areas proposed for 
R&D agencies and the coordinated efforts among them. The chapter 
concludes with details of R&D funding data across the federal 
government.

               II.   IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF R&D PROGRAMS

  R&D is critically important for keeping our Nation economically 
competitive. It will help solve the challenges we face in health, 
defense, energy, and the environment. As a result, and consistent with 
the Government Performance and Results Act, every federal R&D dollar 
must be invested as effectively as possible.

                        R&D Investment Principles

  The Administration is improving the effectiveness of the federal 
government's investments in R&D by subjecting investment decisions to 
transparent investment criteria. R&D requires special consideration in 
the context of performance assessment, as many R&D outcomes--especially 
those of basic research--may not be obvious for years or decades. 
Nevertheless, the government must improve its basis for deciding among 
R&D investments, including applying specific criteria that projects must 
meet and clear milestones for measuring performance.

[[Page 161]]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

  The Department of Energy (DOE) R&D Performance Pilot: As announced in
 the President's Management Agenda, the Administration developed
 investment criteria using DOE's applied energy R&D programs as a pilot.
 These are the Fossil Energy, Nuclear Science and Technology, and Energy
 Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs. The Administration is using
 the R&D criteria to recommend funding levels for the Department's
 applied R&D programs that support the President's National Energy
 Policy report.
 
  In the first year of the pilot project, application of the criteria
 indicated that data on the expected performance of many R&D projects
 are not readily available. For instance, using one energy-based metric,
 some of 19 Fossil Energy R&D programs failed to report any performance
 data at all, and those that did tended to report goals rather than the
 current cost performance of technologies under development. The
 Department, in conjunction with the Office of Management and Budget, is
 working to improve these performance metrics and data. DOE will improve
 the grading method to distinguish among programs more effectively. In
 this first year, about 80 percent of the criteria graded by DOE
 achieved a maximum score.
 
  Despite these initial problems, the criteria provided enough guidance
 to determine some opportunities for redirecting funds. In the fossil
 energy program, research to control greenhouse gases was increased,
 since there is little incentive for private investment in this area.
 Conversely, areas such as oil drilling technology, where the industry
 has the financing and incentive to do its own research, are funded at
 lower levels. Within DOE's renewable energy portfolio, wind power
 research will shift focus from technologies for high wind-speed areas
 to cost-effective technologies for low wind-speed areas, which are
 further from commercial viability and show great promise for greatly
 expanding the land area that can be used to capture this renewable
 energy resource. DOE will continue to work to integrate the R&D
 criteria more meaningfully into their budget formulation process in the
 coming year.
 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Based on lessons learned from the DOE pilot project and other inputs 
from experts and stakeholders, the Administration will develop R&D 
investment criteria to assist with budget allocation decisions at major 
R&D agencies starting in the 2004 budget process. While the specific 
criteria to be used in 2004 are still under development, several 
fundamental principles motivate and will guide them, including:
     Federal R&D priorities should be consistent with priorities 
          identified by the President.
     Federal R&D programs should focus on activities that 
          require a federal presence to attain national goals. To avoid 
          public funds displacing private investment, federally funded 
          R&D should focus primarily on areas where the private sector 
          cannot capture the benefits of the R&D.
     Programs and proposals should have thorough plans for the 
          research, with clear goals and planned end points or off-
          ramps, when appropriate.
     To maximize the quality of the research process and the 
          efficiency of the public investment, research programs should 
          use a competitive, merit-based process where appropriate. 
          Exceptions must be well justified.
     Agencies and programs judged to be outstanding in 
          conducting, awarding, and managing R&D should be identified 
          and supported.
     Less successful programs should follow successful models to 
          achieve improvements, or they should be reduced or moved to 
          agencies where they can be managed more effectively.
    Resources for new R&D priorities will be increased by 
          reducing or eliminating the funding for programs that have 
          completed their mission or that are redundant or obsolete.
  The Administration recognizes that researcher time is best spent on 
research and that added administrative burden for researchers is 
counterproductive. During the development and implementation of the 
investment criteria, the Administration will take the necessary steps to 
minimize their administrative burden and maximize their utility.
  The Administration has been studying management strategies for R&D 
that some agencies use to promote particularly effective programs. OMB 
and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) are developing a 
common analytical framework to assess the strengths and weaknesses of 
R&D programs across agencies, in order to identify and apply good R&D 
management practices across the government. For example, some agencies 
have more deliberate prioritization process, while other agencies have 
more experience estimating the returns of R&D and assessing the impact 
after the fact. The process of developing this framework will be 
iterative, involving the research agencies and the science and 
technology community.
  Due to the distinct goals and methods of basic research versus applied 
research and development, separate criteria are being developed. The 
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), OMB, and the federal 
agencies will work with the science and technology community to define 
helpful criteria and implement them effectively in preparation of the 
2004 budget.
  Using some of the principles identified above, the President's Budget 
begins to improve the performance of research programs across the 
government.

[[Page 162]]

  As an example of improving a program, the Administration is reforming 
the Department of Education's Office of Educational Research and 
Improvement (OERI) by implementing a more rigorous grant solicitation 
and peer review process. The Department is also developing a 
reauthorization proposal for OERI that should allow it to improve the 
quality, objectivity, coordination, and focus of the Department's 
research activities.
  The budget transfers some R&D programs between agencies. For example, 
the transfer of the U.S. Geological Survey's Toxic Substances Hydrology 
program and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Sea 
Grant program to NSF's more competitive, peer-review award process will 
improve the scientific rigor of the research. The peer review process 
allows the assessment of merit by other experts in the field, while 
competition ensures that the grants ultimately awarded have demonstrated 
their merit, over other competitive proposals.

                            Research Earmarks

  The Administration supports awarding research funds based on merit 
review through a competitive process. Such a system ensures that the 
best research is supported. Research earmarks--in general the assignment 
of money during the appropriation process for use only by a specific 
organization or project--are counter to the competitive process of 
selection based on merit. The use of earmarks improperly signals to 
potential investigators that there is an alternative to creating quality 
research proposals for merit-based consideration, including the use of 
political influence or by appealing to parochial interests.

                                     


  Moreover, the practice of earmarking funds directly to colleges and 
universities for specific research projects has expanded dramatically in 
recent years. Despite broad-based support for merit review, earmarks for 
specific projects at colleges and universities have yet again broken 
prior records. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, academic 
earmarks have steadily increased from a level of $296 million in 1996 to 
an estimated $1.67 billion in 2001. In 2001 alone, earmarked funds to 
colleges and universities increased nearly 60 percent (see figure). 
These funds represent an increasing share of the total federal funding 
to colleges and universities, which increasingly displaces competitive 
research, awarded by merit. For example, in 1996, academic earmarks 
accounted for 2.5 percent of all federal funding to colleges and 
universities. By 2001, the earmarked share of federal academic funding 
had increased to a high of 9.4 percent. While comparable figures for 
2002 are not yet available, the assessment of research allocation in 
Table 8-5 at the

[[Page 163]]

end of this chapter suggests that this trend has continued to grow for 
non-defense agencies in 2002.
  Some argue that earmarks help spread the research money to the states 
that would receive less research funding through other means. However, 
The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that this is not the main role 
they play. In 1999, for example, only a small share of academic earmark 
funding went to the states with the smallest shares of federal research 
funds. In fact, the 25 states with the largest shares of federal 
research dollars also received 74 percent of the earmark funding to 
colleges and universities. Meanwhile, earmarks help some rich 
institutions become richer. In 1999, 13 of the 25 institutions receiving 
the most earmarks were also members of the top 100 for total research 
funds. Table 8-7 provides a list of the 30 colleges and universities 
that received the most earmarked funding in 2001, according to The 
Chronicle of Higher Education (results for 2002 are not available at 
this time).
  There is a tendency to confuse a high budget number appropriated for 
an agency with a good outcome for the agency, but this is often not the 
case. Often, earmarks drive these increases. Worse yet, the flood of 
earmarks within that level displaces important competitive programs that 
have to be deferred or terminated. For example, in 2002 appropriations, 
earmarked funding for constructing a low priority propulsion lab at the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was paid for by 
cutting the very research that the lab is to support.
  Earmarks for research facilities can come at the cost of operations or 
research at those facilities. For example, earmarks in DOE's Office of 
Science increased 60 percent from 2001 to 2002. As a result, DOE has 
only the resources to operate its scientific user facilities at 
approximately 75 percent of the optimally available hours. Had these 
funds been allocated to facility operations as needed, a broader segment 
of the research community could have benefited, and the return on the 
federal investment in these facilities would have been higher.
  Some proponents of earmarking assert that earmarks provide a means of 
funding unique projects that would not be recognized by the conventional 
peer-review process. On the contrary, a number of agencies have 
procedures and programs to reward out-of-the-box thinking in the 
research they award. For example, DOD's Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency seeks out high risk, high payoff scientific proposals, 
and NSF program managers set aside a share of funding for higher-risk 
projects in which they see high potential.
  Many earmarks have little to do with an agency's mission. For example, 
Congress earmarked DOD's 2002 budget to fund research on a wide range of 
diseases, including breast cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, 
diabetes, and osteoporosis. Funding at DOD for such research totals over 
$600 million in that year alone. While research on these diseases is 
very important, it is not unique to the U.S. military and can be carried 
out and coordinated better within civil medical research agencies, 
without disruption to the military mission.
  The Administration is working with the scientific community to 
discourage the practice of research earmarks. Academic organizations, 
such as the Association of American Universities, and colleges and 
universities, including Massachusetts Institute of Technology and 
Washington University in St. Louis, have stated that they share the 
Administration's preference for merit review and recognize the problems 
with academic earmarks. The Administration will continue to work with 
such organizations and universities and the Congress to achieve our 
common objectives.

          III. PRIORITIES FOR FEDERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

  The 2003 budget requests record levels for federal R&D ($111.8 
billion, an 8 percent increase, as shown in Table 8-2). The 
Administration recognizes that investments in research--especially in 
basic research--will lead to the discoveries and technologies of 
tomorrow. The 2003 budget includes an emphasis on basic research, 
increasing associated funding across the agencies by $2.0 billion (or 9 
percent).
  In a 1995 report from the National Academy of Sciences, the scientific 
community proposed a ``Federal Science and Technology'' (FS&T) budget. 
Such a compilation highlights activities central to the creation of new 
knowledge and technologies more consistently and accurately than the 
traditional R&D data collection reported in Table 8-2. As shown in Table 
8-3, the 2003 budget requests $57.0 billion for FS&T (a 9 percent 
increase). The resulting FS&T budget is less than half of the total 
federal spending on R&D, though FS&T also includes some funding that is 
not R&D. Discussions of agency efforts in this section include the FS&T 
values from Table 8-3.
  Some in the science community call for greater ``balance'' across 
research agencies and disciplines, at times suggesting that all agencies 
should receive increases similar to those that NIH and other agencies 
have received. However, ``balance'' by that definition makes 
prioritization impossible. Increases in our top-priority research areas 
should logically be greater than increases for other areas. Instead, the 
2003 budget provides funding for top priority areas, while ensuring a 
good mix of basic, applied, and development in many fields of science 
and technology across the federal agencies. The Administration believes 
the focus should not be on how much we are spending, but rather on what 
we are getting for our investment and how well it is being managed.
  Over the past year, OSTP and OMB have worked with the federal agencies 
and the science community to identify top priorities for federal R&D. 
Some are in areas critical to the Nation, such as information 
technologies. Some are in emerging fields, such as nanotechnology, that 
will provide new breakthroughs

[[Page 164]]

across many fields. Others, such as anti-terrorism R&D, address newly 
recognized needs. The discussion below identifies four multi-agency 
priority areas, followed by highlights of agency-specific R&D 
priorities.

                       Multi-Agency R&D Priorities

  The 2003 budget targets investments in important research that 
benefits from improved coordination across multiple agencies. Two of 
these multi-agency initiatives--nanotechnology and information 
technology R&D--have separate coordination offices under the auspices of 
NSF to ensure coordinated strategic planning and implementation. Both 
initiatives will be producing integrated plans to describe detailed 
research proposals for 2003. The Administration is in the process of 
forming new organizations and strengthening interagency coordination for 
two priority areas--anti-terrorism and climate change R&D. The 
Administration will continue to consider other areas of critical need 
that could benefit in the future from improved focus and coordination 
among agencies.

  Anti-terrorism R&D: Scientific and technological advances will be used 
to prevent and respond to possible future terrorist activities at home 
and abroad. Potential antiterrorism R&D applications span a wide range, 
including safeguarding the mail, developing new vaccines and air safety 
systems, and creating advanced materials and enhanced building designs. 
Most aspects of our national life are being assessed for vulnerabilities 
to terrorists. Often, the scientific and technological community will be 
asked to devise solutions in cost-effective ways that do not impinge on 
our way of life. Over the next six months, OMB, OSTP, and the Office of 
Homeland Security will be working through the National Science and 
Technology Council (NSTC) to develop a coordinated, interagency R&D plan 
for antiterrorism. This budget identifies many antiterrorism R&D 
priorities (such as rapid detection and verification of biological 
threats). The NSTC plan will chart a comprehensive and integrated course 
for these efforts as well as provide cross-agency budgetary information.
  Networking and Information Technology R&D: The budget provides $1.9 
billion (a 3 percent increase) for the multi-agency Networking and 
Information Technology Research and Development Program (NITRD). By 
coordinating key advanced information technology research efforts, the 
NITRD agencies leverage resources to make broader advances in computing 
and networking than a single agency could attain. For example, the NITRD 
agencies develop and deploy computing platforms and software that 
perform over a trillion computing operations per second, to support 
advanced federal research in the biomedical sciences, earth and space 
sciences, physics, materials science and engineering, and related 
scientific fields. Accomplishments include: development of end-to-end 
optical fiber networking, providing vast improvements in bandwidth and 
network security for research and commercial applications; new 
technologies enabling cluster, or ``grid,'' computing, providing for the 
first time access to high-performance computation for scientific 
researchers nationwide; technologies for network security protection 
such as intrusion detection and risk and vulnerability analyses; and 
technologies for archiving, managing, and using large-scale information 
repositories, or ``digital libraries.'' In 2003, research emphasizes 
include network ``trust'' (security, reliability, and privacy); high-
assurance software and systems; micro- and embedded sensor technologies; 
revolutionary architectures to reduce the cost, size, and power 
requirements of high end computing platforms; and social and economic 
impacts of information technology.
  Nanotechnology R&D: The budget provides $679 million for the multi-
agency National Nanotechnology Initiative, a 17 percent increase over 
2002. The initiative focuses on long-term research on the manipulation 
of matter down to the atomic and molecular levels, giving us 
unprecedented building blocks for new classes of devices as small as 
molecules and machines as small as human cells. This research could lead 
to continued improvement in electronics for information technology; 
higher-performance, lower-maintenance materials for defense, 
transportation, space, and environmental applications; and accelerated 
biotechnical applications in medicine, healthcare, and agriculture. In 
2003, the initiative will focus on fundamental nanoscale research 
through investments in investigator-led activities, centers and networks 
of excellence, as well as the supporting infrastructure. Priority areas 
include: research to enable efficient nanoscale manufacturing; 
innovative nanotechnology solutions for detection of and protection from 
biological-chemical-radiological-explosive agents; the education and 
training of a new generation or workers for future industries; and 
partnerships and other policies to enhance industrial participation in 
the nanotechnology revolution. The convergence of nanotechnology with 
information technology, modern biology and social sciences will 
reinvigorate discoveries and innovation in many areas of the economy.
  Climate Change R&D: In June 2001, the President announced that the 
Administration's climate change policy will be science-based, and it 
will encourage research breakthroughs that lead to technological 
innovation. To advance and bring focus to climate change science and 
technology, the President created two new initiatives: the Climate 
Change Research Initiative (CCRI) and the National Climate Change 
Technology Initiative (NCCTI). The Administration committed to funding 
high-priority areas where investments can make a difference. These new 
initiatives will complement ongoing research funded under the U.S. 
Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and other related technology 
research programs that address climate change.
  The USGCRP has existed for more than a decade, and provides funding at 
nine different agencies for fundamental research on natural and human-
induced

[[Page 165]]

changes in the global environment, with the goal of attaining a more 
complete understanding of global climate change to better respond to the 
challenges it presents. In 2003, this program will continue, with a 
total funding level of $1.7 billion, an increase of 3 percent over the 
2002 enacted level. The 2003 budget will pause the development of 
follow-on NASA satellites, the largest single item in the USGCRP budget, 
consuming more than half of total program funding. NASA will not start 
new satellites until a review of the USGCRP, and its relationship to the 
new CCRI, is complete.
  In addition to increasing funding for USGCRP, the budget requests $40 
million in CCRI, to be shared among five agencies (NOAA, NSF, NASA, DOE, 
and USDA). This investment will begin to focus on answering key gaps in 
knowledge among those recently identified by the National Academy of 
Sciences in a report from 2001: ``Climate Change Science: An Analysis of 
Some Key Questions.'' This includes improving the capability of 
``integrating scientific knowledge, including its uncertainty, into 
effective decision support systems.'' CCRI will adopt performance 
metrics and deliverable products useful to policymakers in a short time 
frame (2-5 years).

  The NCCTI will build on an existing base of research and development 
in climate change technologies, primarily at DOE, EPA, and USDA. The 
budget requests $40 million for NCCTI within the DOE budget. Specific 
research areas are being identified through an interagency review 
process.

                          Agency R&D Highlights

  Each federal agency conducts R&D in the context of that agency's 
unique mission, structure, and statutory requirements. Below are 
highlights of key R&D programs in selected agencies in the 2003 budget. 
Table 8-3 shows the FS&T budget. As shown in Table 8-2, these programs 
and those of other agencies are part of the larger federal R&D 
portfolio.

  National Institutes of Health: NIH comprises 25 Institutes and Centers 
whose collective mission is to sponsor and conduct biomedical research 
and research training that leads to better health for all Americans. 
While NIH does conduct research in its own laboratories, a majority of 
its funding supports more than 50,000 scientists working in 2,000 
institutions across the United States. With the help of NIH grants, 
these scientists have been making great advances in the detection and 
treatment of diseases. All NIH grants are peer-reviewed and are funded 
based on their scientific merit.
  During the presidential campaign, the President promised to double the 
budget of the NIH by 2003 to $27.3 billion, from the 1998 level of $13.6 
billion. The 2003 budget includes the final installment of $3.9 billion 
needed to fulfill the President's commitment, which will maximize the 
opportunity to expand scientific discovery by increasing the number of 
new research grants funded. With this increase, NIH will further its 
efforts to support research on diseases that affect the lives of all 
Americans. For example, the budget provides $5.5 billion for cancer-
related research at the National Cancer Institute and other NIH 
Institutes.
  This NIH funding increase will also finance important research needed 
for the war against terrorism. As the country faces new and dangerous 
bioterrorism threats, the NIH will expand research on the effects of 
bioterrorism attacks and develop treatments in the event our Nation is 
ever attacked. The 2003 budget provides $1.75 billion for bioterrorism 
research, including genomic sequencing of dangerous pathogens, 
development of improved anthrax vaccine, and laboratory and research 
facilities construction and upgrades related to bioterrorism and Z-chip 
technology research. With the ability to identify a vast number of 
molecular signatures, the Z-chip can be used on the front line of 
medical response for nearly instant diagnosis of a wide array of 
biothreats or naturally occurring diseases, saving precious time and 
therefore lives in the first hours of a biological attack.

  National Aeronautics and Space Administration: The 2003 budget 
provides $8.8 billion for FS&T programs at NASA, an 8 percent increase 
over 2002. The 2003 budget restructures under-performing programs and 
provides funding to address key issues including establishing a long-
term strategy for planetary exploration, emphasizing near-term results 
in climate change research, prioritizing research on the International 
Space Station, lowering the cost of access to space, and improving the 
safety and efficiency of the Nation's civil aviation system.
  In Space Science, the 2003 budget of $3.4 billion discontinues NASA's 
Outer Planets program due to substantial cost and schedule growth and 
redirects funding to a revamped New Frontiers program of competitively 
selected planetary missions focused on understanding the origins and 
existence of life beyond Earth. The 2003 budget also supports 
investments in safe and reliable nuclear power and nuclear-electric 
propulsion technologies to enable much faster and more frequent 
planetary investigations with greater science capabilities in this 
decade and the next. The 2003 budget for Earth Science ($1.6 billion) 
supports two important demonstrations--the National Polar-Orbiting 
Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS) Preparatory Project 
and the Jason follow-on--which will measure key variables that are 
needed to provide long-term, climate quality data to understand how the 
Earth's climate is changing. In Biological and Physical Research, the 
2003 budget of $851 million will yield clear priorities for Space 
Station research and invests in space radiation and space biology 
research initiatives that will enable new space platforms through which 
biological and physical research can be pursued.
  The 2003 budget continues planned increases in funding for NASA's 
Space Launch Initiative ($759 million in 2003), a high priority program 
that will lead to safer and lower cost, commercial launch vehicles to 
replace the Space Shuttle. The 2003 budget maintains key in

[[Page 166]]

vestments in technologies to improve aircraft safety and to reduce 
congestion in the Nation's civil aviation system ($220 million).

  National Science Foundation: The 2003 budget provides $5.0 billion, a 
5 percent increase, for research at NSF, whose broad mission is to 
promote science and engineering research and education. The budget 
provides: $678 million for NSF's lead role in NITRD, focusing on long-
term computer science research and applications; $221 million for NSF's 
lead role in the National Nanotechnology Initiative; $15 million for NSF 
participation in the Climate Change Research Initiative--in addition to 
$188 million for USGCRP--for research on climate change risk management, 
understanding the North American carbon cycle, and computer modeling; 
$27 million (a $20 million increase) for NSF basic research programs in 
microbe genome sequencing and the transmission of infectious diseases, 
two research areas of importance in combating bioterrorism.
  Based on NSF's noted expertise and success in funding competitive 
research, the 2003 budget aims to improve the quality of a number of 
science and engineering programs by transferring them to NSF. The budget 
transfers the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Sea 
Grant program and the United States Geological Survey's toxic substances 
hydrology research program to NSF, where merit-based competition will 
improve overall program effectiveness. These transfers will take 
advantage of NSF's competitive culture and demonstrated quality of 
results.
  The President's goal to improve the quality of math and science 
education in Grades K-12 will be pursued through the President's Math 
and Science Partnerships Initiative, which allows states to join with 
institutions of higher education, particularly math and science 
departments, in strengthening math and science education. The initiative 
provides a mechanism to allow scientists and engineers to be part of the 
solution in improving grades K-12 education. Funding for the programs is 
proposed to increase by $40 million, to $200 million. The budget also 
aims to further attract the most promising U.S. students into graduate 
level science and engineering by increasing graduate stipends from 
$21,500 to $25,000 annually.

  Department of Energy: The 2003 budget provides $5.0 billion for FS&T 
at DOE. The budget proposes $3.3 billion, a 1.5-percent increase over 
2002, for DOE Science programs, the Nation's leading sponsor of research 
in the physical sciences. DOE has a special role in supporting research 
in particle physics, nuclear physics, fusion energy sciences, chemistry 
of the radioactive elements, nanoscience, genomic sequencing, and 
computational science. The Department also supports research that will 
reduce key scientific uncertainties inherent in climate change and 
carbon cycle models. These basic science programs support the DOE's 
applied missions in energy, national nuclear security and environmental 
quality. The Department contributes to national science stewardship, a 
cornerstone of the Department's mission, by operating a suite of 27 
scientific user facilities--such as x-ray light sources, fusion 
experiments, particle accelerators and colliders. Over 18,000 scientists 
from universities, industry and government agencies use these facilities 
every year. Consistent with the Administration's emphasis on shifting 
funds to higher priority programs, the budget redirects funding to 
maintain operations at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.
  The Department sponsors applied research and development programs with 
two primary interests. In the national security area, DOE sponsors R&D 
that sustains the safety, reliability, and performance of the Nation's 
nuclear weapons ($3.1 billion in 2003). Nonproliferation and 
verification research conducted by the Department advances technologies 
for detection of nuclear weapons proliferation, nuclear explosion 
monitoring, and chemical and biological response. In the energy area, 
DOE sponsors research in energy production and use, from fossil, 
nuclear, and renewable sources. The Department has had success in 
reducing the cost of renewable energy resources (wind, solar, 
geothermal, and biomass), and it will continue R&D efforts to make these 
energy sources more cost-competitive. Last year's budget provided $150 
million to existing coal research towards the President's commitment to 
spend $2 billion over ten years on clean coal research. In the 2003 
budget, all coal programs are brought under one umbrella--the 
President's Clean Coal Research Initiative. Using a more transparent 
budget structure, this approach will improve the management and 
oversight of this $326 million program.
  DOE also sponsors R&D to improve the energy efficiency of buildings, 
industry, the transportation sector, and the federal government ($589 
million in 2003). DOE's energy conservation efforts include the 
following examples. Cost-shared R&D with industry will to continue to 
increase industrial output per unit of energy input. Development of a 
web-based tool will assist contractors and homeowners in identifying the 
most efficient energy-saving retrofit activities, based on the age and 
condition of the home and the funds available. A partnership with the 
trucking industry will dramatically improve fuel efficiency by 2010. 
And, a program to increase energy efficiency in federal buildings will 
achieve a 35 percent efficiency increase by 2010, compared to 1985 
levels.

  Department of Defense: DOD funds a wide range of R&D to ensure that 
our military forces have the tools to protect the Nation's security. 
DOD's 2003 budget includes $5.0 billion that appears in the FS&T budget.
  Due in part to the events of September 11, 2001, research and 
development of technologies and systems that address terrorist threats 
have been the focus of additional funds and urgency. Systems or 
technologies under development include: improved detectors of chemical 
and biological threats (for both remote and on-site application); more 
comfortable and more effective troop protective gear for use under 
chemical and bio

[[Page 167]]

logical attack; vaccines to provide protection against biological 
agents; surveillance systems to provide longer range and earlier warning 
of possible attacks using weapons of mass destruction; and more 
effective cave and other ``hard target'' attack munitions.
  DOD's ``Science and Technology'' programs (over $9 billion in 2003) 
range from basic research and applied research (included in FS&T), to 
fabrication of component prototypes for potential future systems. These 
programs explore and develop technical options for new defense systems 
and help reduce the chance of being surprised by new technologies in the 
hands of adversaries. Areas of emphasis include computing and 
communications, sensors, nanotechnology, understanding the military 
environment (for example, oceans, atmospheric and geological sciences), 
propulsion systems, and technologies for the next generation of long-
range strike aircraft. Promising technologies and processes may be 
incorporated into weapon systems of the future.
  Later stage development, test and evaluation funds ($45 billion) 
support development of new weapons and supporting systems, including 
testing the effectiveness of those systems and how they interface with 
other weapons or control systems. Systems under development in 2003 
include: the Joint Strike Fighter, ballistic missile defense systems, a 
new aircraft carrier, the DD(X) naval destroyer, space-based missile 
warning satellites, and unmanned underwater vehicles. Systems in the 
final stages of development include the F-22 fighter aircraft and the V-
22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. The Army continues development efforts in 
support of the Future Combat System as a major part of their 
transformation to a lighter, more mobile, and more effective fighting 
force.

  Department of Agriculture: The 2003 budget provides $1.9 billion, a 
one percent increase, for FS&T at the Department of Agriculture (USDA). 
The budget for USDA's research, education and extension programs 
proposes significant increases for high priority national needs and for 
competitive, peer-reviewed grants, while reducing or eliminating lower 
priority projects, particularly earmarks. Funded at $2.3 billion in 
2003, this program includes activities that are not part of the FS&T 
budget, such as USDA laboratory construction and rehabilitation, 
extension grants, and statistical programs. The 2003 budget adds $58 
million to the programs of the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) in 
the following areas: air and water quality and climate change, biobased 
products, bioenergy and biotechnology, protection against bioterrorism, 
emerging and exotic diseases, genomics and genetics, and library 
resources. In addition, the budget provides $240 million (a 100 percent 
increase) for the National Research Initiative (NRI), which funds 
competitive research grants covering a broad spectrum of agricultural 
research areas. The budget provides additional increases over 2002 of $7 
million for the expansion of the Agricultural Resources Management Study 
and of $15.5 million for necessary cyclical costs associated with the 
five year Census of Agriculture.
  The 2003 budget for Forest Service Research and Development programs 
($254 million) includes $10 million for new priority research on 
biobased products and bioenergy and a quantitative planning and graphic 
data analysis tool for forest planning. The budget also places 
additional emphasis on annualized forest inventories.
  In order to fund these increases and ensure that taxpayer dollars are 
used most effectively in the public interest, the budget proposes to 
eliminate unrequested earmarks for specific purposes at specific 
locations that were provided in 2002. These total $205 million for in-
house research ($89 million in ARS and $16 million in the Forest 
Service) and $123 million for research grants, for a total of over 400 
projects.

  Department of the Interior: Within the Department of the Interior 
(DOI), the 2003 budget provides $904 million for the United States 
Geological Survey (USGS), for science that emphasizes the mission 
responsibility of providing sound and impartial science to manage land, 
water, biological, energy, and mineral resources. The 2003 budget 
reduces direct federal funding for programs that support outside 
customers in order to increase the proportion of services paid for by 
these customers. The 2003 budget focuses resources on those programs 
that directly address the science needs of Interior bureaus, including 
funding for science to support ecosystem restoration in the Everglades. 
To support sound conservation decisions, USGS will combine natural 
resource monitoring and information technology that will promote 
conservation partnerships and better inform federal, state, and local 
land acquisition.
  The budget transfers USGS toxic substances hydrology research program 
funding to NSF. While the work of USGS is generally of high quality, 
this transfer will provide new emphasis on merit-based competitive 
selection. USGS will continue to play a role in identifying research 
priorities.
  Beginning in 2002, the Bureau of Land Management and USGS will help 
support the development of the E-Gov Geospatial One-Stop initiative. 
This initiative, led by the interagency Federal Geographic Data 
Committee, will make geospatial data more accessible and usable by 
developing government-wide data standards and deploying a user friendly 
web portal for geospatial data and mapping applications.

  Department of Commerce: The 2003 budget provides $861 million for FS&T 
at the Department of Commerce (DOC). For the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST), the budget provides $402 million--a 23 
percent increase over 2002--for research and physical improvements at 
NIST's Measurement and Standards Laboratories. In addition to funding 
ongoing research, the budget increase supports construction of new NIST 
facilities, including equipment for the Advanced Measurement Laboratory 
in Maryland. NIST labs work with industry to develop the measurements 
and standards needed to support technological innovation. Facilities 
modernization is needed to support NIST's groundbreaking research.

[[Page 168]]

  The 2003 budget also provides $107 million for NIST's Advanced 
Technology Program (ATP), which makes R&D grants to commercial firms. In 
2003, ATP will modify its program regulations to increase university 
participation and allow cost-recoupment for successfully commercialized 
technologies.
  The 2003 budget provides $297 million for FS&T at the National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to improve understanding of 
climate change, weather and air quality, and ocean processes. In 2003, 
NOAA's R&D will also support economic growth through continued efforts 
in marine biotechnology and aquaculture, as well as a new initiative to 
demonstrate benefits to the energy sector through improved weather and 
river forecasting capabilities. The budget also transfers the National 
Sea Grant College Program to NSF to promote more rigorous, merit-based 
competition among researchers. NOAA and NSF will jointly manage the 
program, and NOAA will continue to play a role in identifying research 
priorities.

  Environmental Protection Agency: The budget provides $797 million for 
FS&T at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Office of 
Research and Development (ORD) performs the majority of EPA's research 
and provides a sound scientific and technical foundation for 
environmental policy and regulatory decision-making. EPA relies on 
strong science to achieve its mission and has a responsibility to ensure 
that efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best 
available scientific information. In 2003, EPA will work to improve 
methods for assessing the cumulative risks of complex pollutant 
mixtures, tools to describe the impact of exposures to them on 
cumulative risk, and the tools for decision makers to address cumulative 
risks. EPA will also focus essential scientific support on its highest-
priority pending regulations to help strengthen its regulatory process. 
A new EPA effort to identify innovative environmental technologies 
through a national competition is expected to help solve such vexing 
problems as effluent trading programs and removing arsenic from drinking 
water. EPA will also fund a new biotechnology research effort to address 
information gaps and develop management tools for allergenicity, and 
ecological risk and resistance. The budget includes $75 million for 
research into technologies and procedures to cope with future biological 
or chemical incidents.
  Department of Transportation: The 2003 budget provides $548 million 
for FS&T at the Department of Transportation (DOT). DOT research funds 
are concentrated primarily in the federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the 
Federal Airline Administration (FAA). The FHWA ($421 million in 2003) 
supports research to improve the quality and safety of the Nation's 
transportation infrastructure. Specifically, the research focuses on 
methods to increase the quality and longevity of roadways, identifies 
safety improvements possible through the use of Intelligence 
Transportation Systems (ITS), and analyzes the use of surveillance 
technology for improved traffic control, emergency evacuations and 
critical infrastructure. NHTSA's 2003 budget provides $58 million for 
R&D in crash worthiness, crash avoidance and data analysis to help 
reduce highway fatalities and injuries.
  In aviation research, and in light of the September 11th terrorist 
attacks, security will be the major focus for the FAA as it develops the 
best technologies to prevent future incidents. The 2003 budget provides 
$95 million for aviation security technology research.

  Department of Education: The 2003 budget provides $431 million for 
FS&T at the Department of Education. The vast majority of the 
Department's research and development is administered by three offices: 
the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), National 
Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR), and the 
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).
  OERI, which administers the largest share of FS&T funds through 
Research, Development, and Dissemination, conducts research on teaching, 
learning and achievement; develops materials and methods to help 
students succeed; and disseminates these techniques to teachers and 
schools. In 2003, OERI's research portfolio will include a program that 
builds on the substantial science of reading to study conditions under 
which children decode and ultimately comprehend what they read. A second 
new program will support trials of existing preschool curricula to 
identify which work best. A third will identify strategies to enhance 
the use of research findings by teachers, school administrators, and 
policymakers.
  The Administration is developing a reauthorization proposal for OERI 
that will address many of its perennial research quality issues through 
structural reform. The new structure should allow OERI to improve the 
quality, objectivity, coordination, and focus of the Department's 
research activities. Until reauthorizing legislation is enacted, the 
Assistant Secretary is improving the scientific quality of OERI-funded 
research projects through implementation of a more rigorous grant 
solicitation and peer review process.
  The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services 
administers R&D related to persons with disabilities through NIDRR and 
OSEP. NIDRR conducts research and related activities to maximize the 
full integration, employment, and independent living of individuals with 
disabilities, consistent with the President's New Freedom Initiative, 
which aims to help individuals with disabilities lead more independent 
lives.
  OSEP supports special education research projects, demonstrations, and 
outreach in order to produce new knowledge in the fields of special 
education and early intervention, apply effective research in model 
demonstration projects, and put knowledge into the hands of those who 
work with children with disabilities.

  Department of Veterans Affairs: The 2003 budget provides $409 million 
for FS&T at the Department of

[[Page 169]]

Veterans Affairs (VA), an increase of 10 percent. In addition, the 
Department receives significant funding from other governmental agencies 
and private entities to support VA-conducted research, which brings the 
total of R&D VA performs to $1.4 billion. The 2003 budget provides $394 
million for clinical, epidemiological, and behavioral studies across a 
broad spectrum of medical research disciplines. Among the agency's top 
research priorities are improving the translation of research results 
into patient care, special populations (those afflicted with spinal cord 
injury, visual and hearing impairments, and serious mental illness), 
geriatrics, diseases of the brain (e.g., Alzheimer's and Parkinson's 
disease), treatment of chronic progressive multiple sclerosis, and 
chronic disease management.

                     Stimulating Private Investment

  Along with direct spending on R&D, the federal government has sought 
to stimulate private investment in these activities with tax 
preferences. The current law provides a 20-percent tax credit for 
private research and experimentation expenditures above a certain base 
amount. The credit, which expired in 1999, was retroactively reinstated 
for five years, to 2004, in the Tax Relief Extension Act of 1999. The 
budget proposes to make the Research and Experimentation (R&E) tax 
credit permanent. The proposed extension will cost $14 billion over the 
period from 2004 to 2007. In addition, a permanent tax provision lets 
companies deduct, up front, the costs of certain kinds of research and 
experimentation, rather than capitalize these costs. Finally, equipment 
used for research benefits from relatively rapid cost recovery.
  Table 8-1 shows a forecast of the costs of the tax credit.

                 Table 8-1.  PERMANENT EXTENSION OF THE RESEARCH AND EXPERIMENTATION TAX CREDIT
                                 (Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            2003     2004     2005     2006     2007   2003-2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Law.............................................    4,590    4,020    2,330      990      410    12,350
Proposed Extension......................................        0      906    2,949    4,654    5,623    14,132
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................    4,590    4,926    5,279    5,644    6,033    26,482
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         IV.   FEDERAL R&D DATA

                           Federal R&D Funding

  R&D is the collection of efforts directed towards gaining greater 
knowledge or understanding and applying knowledge toward the production 
of useful materials, devices, and methods. R&D investments can be 
characterized as basic research, applied research, development, R&D 
equipment, or R&D facilities, and OMB has used those or similar 
categories in its collection of R&D data since 1949.

  Basic research is defined as systematic study directed toward greater 
knowledge or understanding of the fundamental aspects of phenomena and 
of observable facts without specific applications towards processes or 
products in mind.
  Applied research is systematic study to gain knowledge or 
understanding necessary to determine the means by which a recognized and 
specific need may be met.
  Development is systematic application of knowledge toward the 
production of useful materials, devices, and systems or methods, 
including design, development, and improvement of prototypes and new 
processes to meet specific requirements.
  Research and development equipment includes acquisition or design and 
production of movable equipment, such as spectrometers, microscopes, 
detectors, and other instruments.
  Research and development facilities include the acquisition, design, 
and construction of, or major repairs or alterations to, all physical 
facilities for use in R&D activities. Facilities include land, 
buildings, and fixed capital equipment, regardless of whether the 
facilities are to be used by the Government or by a private 
organization, and regardless of where title to the property may rest. 
This category includes such fixed facilities as reactors, wind tunnels, 
and particle accelerators.
  There are over twenty federal agencies that fund R&D in the U.S. The 
nature of the R&D that these agencies fund depends on the mission of 
each agency and on the role of R&D in accomplishing it. Table 8-2 shows 
agency-by-agency spending on basic and applied research, development, 
and R&D equipment and facilities.

[[Page 170]]



                                                  Table 8-2.  FEDERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SPENDING
                                                     (Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                         Dollar  Percent
                                                                                                    2000     2001     2002      2003    Change:  Change:
                                                                                                   Actual   Actual  Estimate  Proposed  2002 to  2002 to
                                                                                                                                          2003     2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Agency
  Defense.......................................................................................   39,664   42,235    49,171    54,544    5,373      11%
  Health and Human Services.....................................................................   18,051   21,037    23,938    27,683    3,745      16%
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................................................    9,242    9,675     9,560    10,069      509       5%
  Energy........................................................................................    6,892    7,772     9,253     8,510     -743      -8%
  National Science Foundation...................................................................    2,947    3,363     3,571     3,700      129       4%
  Agriculture...................................................................................    1,773    2,182     2,336     2,118     -218      -9%
  Commerce......................................................................................    1,110    1,054     1,129     1,114      -15      -1%
  Veterans Affairs..............................................................................      618      748       796       846       50       6%
  Transportation................................................................................      603      792       867       725     -142     -16%
  Environmental Protection Agency...............................................................      559      598       612       650       38       6%
  Interior......................................................................................      645      622       660       628      -32      -5%
  Education.....................................................................................      238      264       268       311       43      16%
  Other.........................................................................................      796      922     1,021       858     -163     -16%
                                                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................................................   83,138   91,264   103,182   111,756    8,574       8%
 
Basic Research
  Defense.......................................................................................    1,136    1,271     1,305     1,336       31       2%
  Health and Human Services.....................................................................   10,062   11,601    13,183    14,467    1,284      10%
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................................................    2,137    1,652     1,909     2,298      389      20%
  Energy........................................................................................    2,262    2,390     2,420     2,517       97       4%
  National Science Foundation...................................................................    2,540    2,894     3,093     3,242      149       5%
  Agriculture...................................................................................      684      801       860       880       20       2%
  Commerce......................................................................................       42       50        52        73       21      40%
  Veterans Affairs..............................................................................       52      301       344       367       23       7%
  Transportation................................................................................       10       17        13        25       12      92%
  Environmental Protection Agency...............................................................       58      105       107       101       -6      -6%
  Interior......................................................................................      266       56        58        55       -3      -5%
  Education.....................................................................................        2        2         2         1       -1     -50%
  Other.........................................................................................      170      190       196       183      -13      -7%
                                                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal....................................................................................   19,421   21,330    23,542    25,545    2,003       9%
 
Applied Research
  Defense.......................................................................................    3,405    3,673     3,656     3,616      -40      -1%
  Health and Human Services.....................................................................    7,692    9,064    10,249    12,379    2,130      21%
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................................................    1,534    2,533     2,766     3,099      333      12%
  Energy........................................................................................    1,874    2,330     2,874     2,866       -8       0%
  National Science Foundation...................................................................      184      181       192       199        7       4%
  Agriculture...................................................................................      831    1,045       988       946      -42      -4%
  Commerce......................................................................................      780      768       838       795      -43      -5%
  Veterans Affairs..............................................................................      520      432       436       462       26       6%
  Transportation................................................................................      396      445       522       396     -126     -24%
  Environmental Protection Agency...............................................................      388      370       381       431       50      13%
  Interior......................................................................................      367      534       570       541      -29      -5%
  Education.....................................................................................      151      172       178       212       34      19%
  Other.........................................................................................      344      413       432       348      -84     -19%
                                                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal....................................................................................   18,466   21,960    24,082    26,290    2,208       9%
 
Development
  Defense.......................................................................................   35,026   37,270    44,200    49,570    5,370      12%
  Health and Human Services.....................................................................       44      107       129       100      -29     -22%
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................................................    2,702    2,698     2,582     2,648       66       3%
  Energy........................................................................................    1,855    2,042     2,851     2,162     -689     -24%
  National Science Foundation...................................................................        0        0         0         0        0      N/A
  Agriculture...................................................................................      111      152       163       156       -7      -4%
  Commerce......................................................................................      130      170       162       109      -53     -33%
  Veterans Affairs..............................................................................       29       15        16        17        1       6%
  Transportation................................................................................      185      247       256       221      -35     -14%
  Environmental Protection Agency...............................................................       92      101       103        97       -6      -6%
  Interior......................................................................................       12       32        32        32        0       0%
  Education.....................................................................................       85       90        88        98       10      11%
  Other.........................................................................................      253      306       378       310      -68     -18%
                                                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal....................................................................................   40,524   43,230    50,960    55,520    4,560       9%
 
Facilities and Equipment
  Defense.......................................................................................       97       21        10        22       12     120%
  Health and Human Services.....................................................................      253      265       377       737      360      95%

[[Page 171]]

 
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.................................................    2,869    2,792     2,303     2,024     -279     -12%
  Energy........................................................................................      901    1,010     1,108       965     -143     -13%
  National Science Foundation...................................................................      223      288       286       259      -27      -9%
  Agriculture...................................................................................      147      184       325       136     -189     -58%
  Commerce......................................................................................      158       66        77       137       60      78%
  Veterans Affairs..............................................................................       17        0         0         0        0      N/A
  Transportation................................................................................       12       83        76        83        7       9%
  Environmental Protection Agency...............................................................       21       22        21        21        0       0%
  Interior......................................................................................        0        0         0         0        0      N/A
  Education.....................................................................................        0        0         0         0        0      N/A
  Other.........................................................................................       29       13        15        17        2      13%
                                                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal....................................................................................    4,727    4,744     4,598     4,401     -197      -4%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Federal Science and Technology Budget

  Table 8-3 contains the FS&T budget, which accounts for nearly all of 
federal basic research, over 80 percent of federal applied research, and 
about half of civilian development.

                                                    Table 8-3.  FEDERAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BUDGET
                                                     (Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                         Dollar  Percent
                                                                                                     2000    2001     2002      2003    Change:  Change:
                                                                                                    Actual  Actual  Estimate  Proposed  2002 to  2002 to
                                                                                                                                          2003     2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Agency
 
  National Institutes of Health \1\...............................................................  17,827  20,438  23,433    27,335    3,902      17%
 
  NASA \2\........................................................................................  7,013   7,789   8,113     8,774       661       8%
    Space Science.................................................................................  2,606   2,760   3,034     3,428       394      13%
    Earth Science.................................................................................  1,734   1,825   1,695     1,639       -56      -3%
    Biological and Physical Research..............................................................   839     944      828       851        23       3%
    Aero-space Technology.........................................................................  1,834   2,260   2,556     2,856       300      12%
 
  National Science Foundation.....................................................................  3,903   4,437   4,795     5,036       241       5%
 
  Energy..........................................................................................  4,338   4,911   5,099     5,027       -72      -1%
    Science Programs \3\..........................................................................  2,820   3,218   3,240     3,285        45       1%
    Renewable Energy..............................................................................   306     370      386       408        22       6%
    Nuclear Energy................................................................................   226     261      244       251         7       3%
    Energy Conservation \4\.......................................................................   577     619      641       589       -52      -8%
    Fossil Energy \5\.............................................................................   409     443      588       494       -94     -16%
 
  Defense.........................................................................................  4,541   4,944   4,961     4,952        -9       0%
    Basic Research................................................................................  1,136   1,271   1,305     1,336        31       2%
    Applied Research..............................................................................  3,405   3,673   3,656     3,616       -40      -1%
 
  Agriculture.....................................................................................  1,759   1,885   1,890     1,913        23       1%
    CSREES Research and Education.................................................................   488     514      552       563        11       2%
    Economic Research Service.....................................................................    67      69       70        82        12      17%
    Mandatory Research Grants \6\.................................................................   120     120        0         0         0      N/A
    Agricultural Research Service \7\.............................................................   866     936    1,017     1,014        -3       0%
    Forest Service \8\............................................................................   218     246      251       254         3       1%
 
  Interior (USGS).................................................................................   847     918      950       904       -46      -5%
 
  Commerce........................................................................................   826     828      948       861       -87      -9%
    NOAA (Oceanic and Atmospheric Research) \9\...................................................   285     325      362       297       -65     -18%
    NIST \10\.....................................................................................   541     503      586       564       -22      -4%
 
  Environmental Protection Agency \11\............................................................   683     746      750       797        47       6%
 
  Transportation..................................................................................   593     521      651       548      -103     -16%
    Highway research \12\.........................................................................   490     387      448       421       -27      -6%
    Aviation research \13\........................................................................   103     134      203       127       -76     -37%
 
  Education.......................................................................................   317     363      377       431        54      14%
    Special Education Research and Innovation.....................................................    64      77       78        78         0       0%
    NIDRR \14\....................................................................................    86     100      110       110         0       0%
    Research, Development, and Dissemination......................................................   167     186      189       243        54      29%
 

[[Page 172]]

 
  Veterans Affairs \15\...........................................................................   321     363      373       409        36      10%
                                                                                                   -----------------------------------------------------
     Total........................................................................................  42,968  48,143  52,340    56,987    4,647       9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Levels adjusted to include the full share of accruing employee pensions and annuitants health benefits. For more information on these items,
  please see Chapter 14. Levels for 2000 are derived without accrual in most instances.
\1\ The 2002 appropriation includes $100 million for the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, Turberculosis, and Malaria.
\2\ All years normalized to reflect 2003 transfers of funding for Space Station research facilities, space communications activities, and associated
  institutional support from human space flight.
\3\ Includes $36 million for programs transferred from Environmental Management.
\4\ Excludes state grant programs.
\5\ Excludes balances tranferred from the Clean Coal Technology program for activities in 2001 ($95 million), 2002 ($34 million), and 2003 ($40
  million).
\6\ Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems.
\7\ Excludes buildings and facilities.
\8\ Forest and Rangeland Research.
\9\ Excludes Manufacturing Extension Program.
\10\ The 2003 level does not include the Sea Grant program, which was transferred to NSF.
\11\ Science and Technology, plus superfund transfer. The 2002 level does not include anti-terrorism supplemental funding, which is primarily for
  drinking water vulnerability standards. The 2003 level includes an additional superfund transfer for security research related to building
  decontamination.
\12\ Includes research and development funding for the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and the National
  Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
\13\ Federal Aviation Administration Research, Engineering, and Development. Excludes funding for aviation security research in all years, now funded
  through the Transportation Security Administration.
\14\ National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
\15\ Medical and Prosthetic Research.

                         Interagency R&D Efforts

  Table 8-4 shows agency spending for Networking and Information 
Technology R&D, the National Nanotechnology Initiative, and the climate 
change research and technology initiatives.

                                     

                          Table 8-4.  AGENCY DETAIL OF SELECTED INTERAGENCY R&D EFFORTS
                                 (Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Dollar  Percent
                                                                     2001     2002      2003    Change:  Change:
                                                                    Actual  Estimate  Proposed  2002 to  2002 to
                                                                                                  2003     2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Networking and Information Technology R&D
  National Science Foundation.....................................   636      676       678        2       0%
  Health and Human Services.......................................   277      310       336       26       8%
  Energy..........................................................   326      312       313        1       0%
  Defense.........................................................   310      320       306      -14      -4%
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration...................   177      181       213       32      18%
  Commerce........................................................    38       43        42       -1      -2%
  Environmental Protection Agency.................................     4        2         2        0       0%
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
    Total.........................................................  1,768   1,844     1,890       46       3%
 
National Nanotechnology Initiative
  National Science Foundation.....................................   150      199       221       22      11%
  Defense.........................................................   125      180       201       21      12%
  Energy..........................................................    88       91       139       48      53%
  Commerce........................................................    33       38        44        6      16%
  National Institutes of Health...................................    40       41        43        2       6%
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration...................    22       22        22        0       0%
  Environmental Protection Agency.................................     5        5         5        0       0%
  Department of Transportation....................................     0        2         2        0       0%
  Department of Justice...........................................     1        1         1        0       0%
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
    Total.........................................................   464      579       679      100      17%
 
Climate Change Research Initiative................................
  Commerce........................................................     0        0        18       18      N/A
  National Science Foundation.....................................     0        0        15       15      N/A
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration...................     0        0         3        3      N/A
  Energy..........................................................     0        0         3        3      N/A
  Agriculture.....................................................     0        0         1        1      N/A
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
    Total.........................................................     0        0        40       40      N/A
 
U.S. Global Change Research Program
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration...................   1,176   1,090    1,109       19       2%
  National Science Foundation.....................................   181      188       188        0       0%
  Energy..........................................................   116      120       126        6       5%

[[Page 173]]

 
  Commerce........................................................    93      100       100        0       0%
  National Institutes of Health...................................    54       60        68        8      13%
  Agriculture.....................................................    51       56        66       10      18%
  Interior........................................................    27       28        28        0       0%
  Environmental Protection Agency.................................    23       21        22        1       5%
  Smithsonian.....................................................     7        7         7        0       0%
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
    Total.........................................................  1,728   1,670     1,714       44       3%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes $9 million in offsetting collections in 2003 for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
  These activities were funded at $15 million in 2001 and $14 million in 2002.

                     Allocation of Research Funding

  Federal funds appropriated to Executive Branch agencies may be used in 
different ways, ranging from grants awarded to university researchers to 
supporting research at federal laboratories. The Administration supports 
the competitive, merit review process for funding research in most 
cases. However, there are appropriate roles for other modes of 
allocating research funding in some circumstances, such as funding 
research at specific facilities that have unique capabilities.
  In order to better understand and characterize the methods agencies 
use to allocate their research funding, agencies reported how research 
funds are allocated by the following five categories:

  Research performed at congressional direction consists of intramural 
and extramural research programs where funded activities are awarded to 
a single performer or collection of performers with limited or no 
competitive selection or with competitive selection but outside of the 
agency's primary mission, based on direction from the Congress in law, 
in report language, or by other direction.
  Inherently unique research is intramural and extramural research 
programs where funded activities are awarded to a single performer or 
team of performers without competitive selection. The award may be based 
on the provision of unique capabilities, concern for timeliness, or 
prior record of performance (e.g., facility operations support for a 
unique facility, such as an electron-positron linear collider; research 
grants for rapid response studies such as Pfisteria, an environmental 
hazard that arose suddenly).
  Merit-reviewed research with limited competitive selection is 
intramural and extramural research programs where funded activities are 
competitively awarded from a pool of qualified applicants that are 
limited to organizations that were created to largely serve federal 
missions and continue to receive most of their annual research revenue 
from federal sources. The limited competition may be for reasons of 
stewardship, agency mission constraints, or retention of unique 
technical capabilities (e.g., funding set aside for researchers at 
laboratories or centers of DOD, NASA, EPA, NOAA, and NIH; Federally-
Funded Research and Development Centers; formula funds for USDA).
  Merit-reviewed research with competitive selection and internal 
(program) evaluation is intramural and extramural research programs 
where funded activities are competitively awarded following review for 
scientific or technical merit. The review is conducted by the program 
manager or other qualified individuals from within the agency program, 
without additional independent evaluation (e.g., merit-reviewed research 
at DOD).
  Merit-reviewed research with competitive selection and external (peer) 
evaluation is intramural and extramural research programs where funded 
activities are competitively awarded following review by a set of 
external scientific or technical reviewers (often called peers) for 
merit. The review is conducted by appropriately qualified scientists, 
engineers, or other technically-qualified individuals who are apart from 
the people or groups making the award decisions, and serves to inform 
the program manager or other qualified individual who makes the award 
(e.g., NSF's single-investigator research; NASA's research and analysis 
funds).
  Table 8-5 lists how federal R&D agencies report allocating research 
funding among these categories.

[[Page 174]]



                                                                Table 8-5.  ALLOCATION OF FEDERAL RESEARCH FUNDING, 2001 and 2002
                                                                         (Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Research         Inherently      Merit-Reviewed    Merit-Reviewed    Merit-Reviewed         Total
                                                                                        Performed at    Unique  Research   Research  with    Research  with    Research  with  -----------------
                                                                                        Congressional  ------------------      Limited         Competitive       Competitive
                                                                                          Direction                          Competitive     Selection  and    Selection  and
                                                                                     ------------------                       Selection         Internal          External
                                                                                                          2001     2002  ------------------    Evaluation        Evaluation       2001     2002
                                                                                        2001     2002                                      ------------------------------------
                                                                                                                            2001     2002     2001     2002     2001     2002
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Agency
  Health and Human Services.........................................................       89      142      206      230    2,392    2,718      201      216   17,777   20,126   20,665   23,432
  Energy............................................................................      134      223    1,078    1,068    2,382    2,820      305      395      821      788    4,720    5,294
  Defense *.........................................................................      678      426      295      350    1,012    1,014    2,712    2,950      247      221    4,944    4,961
  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.....................................      230      287      152      149      532      398    1,377    1,550    1,894    2,291    4,185    4,675
  National Science Foundation.......................................................        0        0        0        0      191      206      184      192    2,700    2,887    3,075    3,285
  Agriculture **....................................................................      105      122      815      893      720      676        0        0      206      157    1,846    1,848
  Commerce..........................................................................       18       21      354      377      100      108      204      218      142      166      818      890
  Veterans Affairs..................................................................        1        0        0        0        2        2      349      370      381      408      733      780
  Interior..........................................................................       27       48      156      154      379      392       26       31        2        3      590      628
  Transportation....................................................................       55       82       69       73        0        0      338      380        0        0      462      535
  Environmental Protection Agency...................................................       39       60       39       38      195      192       69       68      133      130      475      488
  Education.........................................................................        5        0        0        0        0        0        0        0      169      180      174      180
  Smithsonian Institution...........................................................        0        0      108      111        0        0        0        0        0        0      108      111
  Other.............................................................................      385      413       11        7       17       17       76       74        6        6      495      517
                                                                                     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...........................................................................    1,766    1,824    3,283    3,450    7,922    8,543    5,841    6,444   24,478   27,363   43,290   47,624
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  * Allocation among categories is preliminary.
** Does not include net mandatory funding for USDA research grant programs of $120 million in FY 2001.

                                Earmarks

  Table 8-6 lists the top 30 recipients of individual academic earmarks 
in 2001, as identified by The Chronicle of Higher Education. In addition 
to $1.2 billion in earmarks to specific colleges and universities, there 
is another $431 million in earmarked funding to be shared in an 
unspecified distribution among these and other colleges and 
universities.
  Table 8-6. 30 Colleges and Universities Received Over 40 Percent of 
Unshared* Academic Earmarks in 2001

                                     

                          Table 8-6.  COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES RECEIVED OVER 40 PERCENT OF UNSHARED* ACADEMIC EARMARKS IN 2001
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                 Number of      Sum of
                                   College or University                                                   State                  Earmarks    Earmarks*
                                                                                                                                  Received    (millions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.   University of Alaska at Fairbanks.....................................................   Alaska                                     20        $35.0
2.   Loma Linda University.................................................................   California                                  4        $35.0
3.   Marshall University...................................................................   West Virginia                               6        $27.6
4.   University of New Hampshire...........................................................   New Hampshire                              14        $27.5
5.   Dartmouth College.....................................................................   New Hampshire                               5        $25.9
6.   University of Missouri at Columbia....................................................   Missouri                                   21        $23.7
7.   University of Mississippi.............................................................   Mississippi                                20        $23.7
8.   University of Alabama at Birmingham...................................................   Alabama                                    12        $22.1
9.   University of Nebraska................................................................   Nebraska                                    4        $19.5
10.  Kansas State University...............................................................   Kansas                                     12        $18.3
11.  University of Florida.................................................................   Florida                                    14        $18.3
12.  Mississippi State University..........................................................   Mississippi                                33        $18.2
13.  Pennsylvania State University at University Park......................................   Pennsylvania                               14        $16.7
14.  Wheeling Jesuit University............................................................   West Virginia                               9        $16.3
15.  University of Maine...................................................................   Maine                                       9        $16.2
16.  West Virginia University..............................................................   West Virginia                              17        $15.6
17.  Auburn University.....................................................................   Alabama                                    17        $15.2
18.  University of South Carolina at Columbia..............................................   South Carolina                              6        $14.6
19.  Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville..........................................   Illinois                                    3        $14.3
20.  University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa...................................................   Alabama                                    10        $14.2
21.  University of South Florida...........................................................   Florida                                     8        $13.2
22.  University of Minnesota--Twin Cities..................................................   Minnesota                                   5        $12.7
23.  University of Louisville..............................................................   Kentucky                                    9        $12.5

[[Page 175]]

 
24.  New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology.........................................   New Mexico                                  7        $12.5
25.  University of Southern Mississippi....................................................   Mississippi                                11        $11.8
26.  Montana State University at Bozeman...................................................   Montana                                    17        $11.1
27.  Washington State University...........................................................   Washington                                 18        $10.5
28.  University of Hawaii, Manoa...........................................................   Hawaii                                     20        $10.4
29.  Medical University of South Carolina..................................................   South Carolina                              3        $10.0
30.  University of Miami...................................................................   Florida                                     4         $9.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals do not include earmarks split among institutions, where the distribution was not specified.