[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
AN OVERVIEW OF THE FEDERAL
R&D BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 16, 2005
__________
Serial No. 109-4
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/science
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
98-563 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HON. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York, Chairman
RALPH M. HALL, Texas BART GORDON, Tennessee
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
DANA ROHRABACHER, California LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
KEN CALVERT, California DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland MARK UDALL, Colorado
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan DAVID WU, Oregon
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia BRAD SHERMAN, California
JO BONNER, Alabama BRIAN BAIRD, Washington
TOM FEENEY, Florida JIM MATHESON, Utah
BOB INGLIS, South Carolina JIM COSTA, California
DAVE G. REICHERT, Washington AL GREEN, Texas
MICHAEL E. SODREL, Indiana CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana
JOHN J.H. ``JOE'' SCHWARZ, Michigan VACANCY
MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
VACANCY
VACANCY
C O N T E N T S
February 16, 2005
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 22
Written Statement............................................ 23
Statement by Representative Bart Gordon, Minority Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 24
Written Statement............................................ 25
Prepared Statement by Representative Vernon J. Ehlers, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 26
Prepared Statement by Representative Jerry F. Costello, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 28
Prepared Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Member, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives.... 29
Prepared Statement by Representative Michael M. Honda, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 30
Prepared Statement by Representative Lincoln Davis, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 30
Prepared Statement by Representative Russ Carnahan, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 31
Prepared Statement by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 31
Witnesses:
Dr. John H. Marburger, III, President's Science Adviser;
Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
Oral Statement............................................... 33
Written Statement............................................ 35
Biography.................................................... 44
Dr. Samuel W. Bodman, Secretary of Energy, U.S. Department of
Energy
Oral Statement............................................... 44
Written Statement............................................ 47
Biography.................................................... 48
Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., Director, National Science Foundation
Oral Statement............................................... 48
Written Statement............................................ 50
Biography.................................................... 54
Mr. Theodore W. Kassinger, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of
Commerce
Oral Statement............................................... 55
Written Statement............................................ 57
Biography.................................................... 66
Dr. Charles E. McQueary, Under Secretary for Science and
Technology, Department of Homeland Security
Oral Statement............................................... 66
Written Statement............................................ 68
Biography.................................................... 116
Discussion....................................................... 116
Appendix 1: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Dr. John H. Marburger, III, President's Science Adviser;
Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy.............. 146
Dr. Samuel W. Bodman, Secretary of Energy, U.S. Department of
Energy......................................................... 154
Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., Director, National Science Foundation.. 167
Mr. Theodore W. Kassinger, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of
Commerce....................................................... 168
Dr. Charles E. McQueary, Under Secretary for Science and
Technology, Department of Homeland Security.................... 172
Appendix 2: Additional Material for the Record
Insert for the Record from Dr. Samuel W. Bodman in response to
Representative Jerry F. Costello............................... 186
AN OVERVIEW OF THE FEDERAL R&D BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2005
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 11:00 a.m., in Room
2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L.
Boehlert [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
hearing charter
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
An Overview of the Federal
R&D Budget for Fiscal Year 2006
wednesday, february 16, 2005
11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m.
2318 rayburn house office building
1. Purpose
On Wednesday, February 16, 2005, the House Science Committee will
hold a hearing to consider President Bush's fiscal year 2006 (FY06)
budget request for research and development (R&D). Five Administration
witnesses will review the proposed budget in the context of the
President's overall priorities in science and technology. The Science
Committee will hold a separate hearing on February 17th to examine the
budget request for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA).
2. Witnesses
Dr. John H. Marburger, III is Director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP), the White House science office. Prior to
joining OSTP, Dr. Marburger served as President of the State University
of New York at Stony Brook and as Director of the Brookhaven National
Laboratory.
Dr. Samuel W. Bodman is Secretary of the Department of Energy (DOE).
Prior to joining DOE, Secretary Bodman served as Deputy Secretary of
the Treasury and, before that, Deputy Secretary of the Department of
Commerce (DOC). He also has served in executive positions in several
publicly owned corporations, and as a professor of chemical engineering
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Dr. Arden Bement is the Director of the National Science Foundation
(NSF). Prior to his appointment as NSF Director, Dr. Bement was
Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
and before that he was Professor and head of the School of Nuclear
Engineering at Purdue University.
Mr. Theodore W. Kassinger is the Deputy Secretary of the Department of
Commerce. Previously, Mr. Kassinger served as the General Counsel of
the Department.
Dr. Charles E. McQueary is the Under Secretary for Science and
Technology (S&T) at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Prior to
joining the Department, Dr. McQueary served as President of General
Dynamics Advanced Technology Systems, and as President and Vice
President of business units for AT&T, Lucent Technologies, and as a
Director for AT&T Bell Laboratories.
3. Background
Overall Budget
On February 7, 2005, President Bush delivered his FY06 federal
budget to Congress. Overall discretionary spending is increased by 2.1
percent--roughly equivalent to projected inflation. Consistent with
budgets of recent years, discretionary account increases are focused
heavily on Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) activities, which grow by just under five and seven
percent, respectively. Non-defense, non-homeland security discretionary
spending is reduced by nearly one percent.
Research and Development (R&D) Budget
The President's R&D budget proposes to spend $132.3 billion, an
increase of $733 million, or one percent, over FY05.\1\ The largest
increases for R&D go to the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA, $537 million, or 4.8 percent), DOD ($417 million,
or 0.06 percent), and DHS ($282 million, or 23.8 percent). All other
agencies collectively receive an average decrease of 1.0 percent. The
one percent R&D growth reflects increases in development ($1.2 billion,
or two percent).\2\ Applied research ($3 million, or 0.0 percent) and
basic research (^$320 million, or ^1.2 percent) are flat and slightly
lower, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A complete federal R&D spending table is provided at the end of
the charter in Appendix II.
\2\ Defense development is by far the largest factor in the overall
R&D increase, accounting for $1.4 billion in added spending.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Science and Technology Budget
The Federal Science and Technology (FS&T) budget is a way of
presenting the budget that was recommended by the National Academy of
Sciences; it focuses on spending for actual research by excluding areas
such as defense development, testing, and evaluation. In the FY06
budget, funding for FS&T declines by 1.4 percent, to $60.8 billion. The
FS&T budgets of DOC and DOE are particularly affected, receiving 14
percent and five percent cuts, respectively.
Administration Highlights and Perspective
Consistent with the President's overall budget priorities, the
request for R&D focuses on homeland security and defense spending while
limiting the growth in overall spending. The Administration argues that
science, technology, and innovation are given relative priority in the
budget, noting that non-defense budget authority declines by 0.26
percent, while non-defense R&D budget authority is increased by 0.74
percent.
The Administration also emphasizes several ways of looking at the
R&D budget that go beyond year-to-year proposals. For example, the
budget notes that in FY06, 13.6 percent of total discretionary outlays
will go to R&D, the highest share since 1968 and the heyday of the
Apollo program. The budget also compares the request level for many
agencies and programs to FY01, underscoring the fact that overall R&D
has increased 45 percent since 2001 (an annualized rate of 7.7
percent), and funding for NSF and NASA have increased by 25 and 19
percent, respectively, since FY01.
Critics counter that figures based on R&D do not give a clear
picture of what has been happening to research because the category is
so weighted toward development. They also point out that even in the
research category some agencies have done far better than others. DOD
alone accounts for almost 70 percent of R&D increases over the last
five years, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and DHS account
for almost 75 percent of the remaining civilian R&D increases. During
that same period, trends at other agencies range from modest increases
(DOE: 10 percent, and that includes defense development programs) to
modest cuts (DOC: -4 percent; EPA: -5 percent). Critics also note that
the figures that start in FY01 are based on final appropriations, which
reflect Congressional as well as Administration actions. Similarly,
critics note that the figures that start with FY01 include
Congressional earmarks, which for other purposes (see below), the
Administration backs out of its baseline spending figures.
For a number of science agencies (perhaps most notably the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA), the Administration
argues that it is proposing significant programmatic increases even
though the total proposed for FY06 is below that for FY05. That is
because the FY05 number includes numerous Congressional earmarks for
specific grants. The Administration argues that the earmarks should be
removed from the FY05 baseline to get a truer picture of what is being
proposed. The budget document reflects the Administration's continued
and growing concern over Congressional earmarks within R&D accounts.
The budget cites a study by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science that calculated that earmarks for R&D at
academic institutions increased by nine percent from 2004 to 2005, and
now total over $2.1 billion--up from $296 million only ten years ago.
The Chronicle of Higher Education has estimated that R&D earmarks now
account for eight percent of all federal funding to colleges and
universities.
The Administration also emphasizes that evaluations of agency and
program management are considered in determining proposed budgets.
Agencies are evaluated by the Executive Branch Management Scorecard,
which rates agencies with green, yellow, and red lights in areas such
as financial management, e-government, and human capital management.
Agencies under the Science Committee's jurisdiction scored very well on
these evaluations. Of the 26 agencies evaluated, DOE, NASA, and NSF
were three of only seven to receive three or more green lights.
4. Primary Issues
Here are some key questions raised by the FY06 budget request along
with relevant background:
Overall Funding Levels and Balance
Regardless of how science fares in the proposed FY06 budget in
comparison with other program areas, the figures are unarguably quite
tight and are projected to remain so for several years. What would the
impact of such austerity be on the research agenda, on U.S. leadership
in science and technology, on the production of future scientists and
engineers? The budget also would do little to increase the relative
strength of research in the physical sciences, which have fallen far
behind the biological sciences as a percentage of the federal research
budget. Increasing the relative strength of the physical sciences has
been a priority of the scientific community (including the President's
Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, or PCAST) and of the
Congress, as reflected in several Science Committee bills that have
been signed into law in the past four years, including the NSF
Authorization Act of 2002, the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and
Development Act, and the Cyber Security Research and Development Act.
All of those laws authorize significantly more for the physical
sciences than has been provided in appropriations or in the FY06
request.
Basic Research at the Department of Energy
The debate over the relative strength of the physical sciences
often focuses on funding for the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of
Science, which is a major source of funding for the physical sciences.
Congress last year provided an increase of almost four percent for the
Office--the first significant growth in many years--but the FY06 budget
would reduce funding for the Office by almost four percent (or by about
two percent if earmarks are removed from the FY05 baseline). The impact
on grants to individual researchers would be far larger, perhaps as
great as a 10 percent cut, because so much of the Office's budget is
spent on the costs of large user facilities run by the National
Laboratories. How high a priority should research at the Office of
Science be in the President's budget? The Office of Science has not
fared well in budget requests compared to the National Science
Foundation, which is in many ways a ``sister agency'' that focuses on
basic research.
Applied Energy Research
Funding for applied research in the FY06 budget is focused on a few
long-range initiatives, such as the President's hydrogen initiative.
Excluding the hydrogen/FreedomCAR activities, energy efficiency and
renewable energy R&D for FY06 would be cut by 11 percent, to $687
million. Does the budget appropriately balance funding for technologies
that could be deployed in the nearer-term with research on long-run
advances like hydrogen? The budget also proposes the elimination of
DOE's oil and gas R&D, which have been rated as ``ineffective'' by the
Office of Management and Budget. Is the elimination of these programs
warranted?
NSF Education Funding
The FY06 budget request cuts the Education and Human Resources
(EHR) account at NSF by 12 percent (and by 22 percent below the FY04
level of $938 million). NSF has indicated that the reductions in
elementary, secondary and undergraduate education are part of a
conscious policy to significantly pare its role in program
implementation, allowing these to migrate to the U.S. Department of
Education. Should NSF continue to play a significant role in science
and math education at all levels of schooling?
Technology Programs at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST)
While the internal laboratories at NIST are slated to receive a 12
percent increase in the FY06 budget proposal, the President proposes to
eliminate the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and to halve the budget
for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program (MEP). Both
programs were created by Congress in 1988. ATP, long a source of
controversy, provides grants to companies for pre-competitive research.
MEP runs centers, partly funded by states, throughout the country to
help smaller manufacturers take advantage of the latest technology.
Last year, the budget proposed to eliminate MEP, but the Administration
later retreated from the proposal. Should ATP and/or MEP be eliminated?
How high a priority are they compared to other activities at NIST?
5. Interagency Research Activities
The Administration has not proposed any new interagency R&D
initiatives for FY06.
National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI): NNI, interagency program that
coordinates federal support for nanoscale R&D, continues to be a high
priority of both the Administration and the Science Committee. Between
FY01 and FY05, spending on federal nanotechnology R&D more than
doubled, rising from $464 million in FY01 to $1.1 billion in FY05. The
FY06 budget requests an estimated $1.05 billion for the program in
FY06, a decrease of $27 million, or 2.5 percent, from the estimated
FY05 level.\3\ Requested funding for the five agencies\4\ authorized in
the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (P.L. 108-
153) is $666 million, which remains well below the $890 million
authorized for these agencies for FY06 in the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The budget estimates agency funding levels for the National
Nanotechnology R&D Program activities, but the data are not entirely
consistent from year to year. This is in part because discrepancies
arise due to the fact that some nanotechnology research is difficult to
identify or classify.
\4\ The five agencies authorized by the Act are: NSF, DOE, NASA,
EPA, and NIST. The total funding authorized by the Act for these
agencies is $3.7 billion over four years.
Networking and Information Technology R&D (NITRD): NITRD is described
as a ``collaborative effort of many federal agencies [and] the Nation's
principal source of long-term, fundamental information technology (IT)
R&D, including advanced technologies in high-end computing systems and
software, high-speed networking, software assurance and reliability,
human-computer interaction, and information management.'' For the
fourth straight year, the budget request does not include an increase
for NITRD. This year, the request is $2.2 billion, a 4.5 percent
decrease below the estimated FY05 level. A significant part of this
decrease is due to a reduction in funding at NASA, which is redirecting
funds from a number of programs to better support the President's
vision for space exploration. Within NITRD, the work on High End
Computing R&D is down six percent, due in part to a drop in funding in
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
this area at DOE Office of Science.
Cyber Security R&D: Proposed funding for cyber security R&D programs
remains flat. At NSF, the budget requests $67.5 million for cyber
security R&D (up two percent), but proposes cutting funding for cyber
security-focused education programs (down 27 percent to $12 million).
At NIST, the request is $19 million for cyber security R&D (the same
level as in FY05). All of these proposed funding levels are
significantly below the levels authorized in the Cyber Security
Research and Development Act (P.L. 107-305).\5\ Within the DHS Science
and Technology (S&T) Directorate, the FY06 budget requests $16.7
million for cyber security R&D, down seven percent from the FY05
level.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For FY06, NSF cyber security programs are authorized at $134
million and NIST cyber security programs are authorized at $77 million.
\6\ DHS also supports operational cyber security programs, such as
national alerts about existing computer and network vulnerabilities.
Located in the National Cyber Security Division of the Information
Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate, operational cyber
security receives roughly $73 million (a $6 million increase) in FY06.
Climate Change Research: The FY06 budget requests $1.9 billion for the
interagency Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), about the same level
as enacted in FY05. There is a $100 million (eight percent) decrease in
NASA's contribution to CCSP, offset primarily by a $57 million (46
percent) increase in NOAA and a $15 million (21 percent) increase in
USDA's contributions to the program. The request for CCSP includes $183
million for the interagency Climate Change Research Initiative (CCRI),
a 17 percent decrease above the FY05 enacted level. It is unclear why
CCRI was reduced when these activities have been a high priority for
the Administration in past years. CCRI is intended to target critical
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
scientific uncertainties and deliver results in three to five years.
The National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP): NEHRP is an
interagency effort aimed at reducing earthquake hazards through
activities such as seismic and engineering research, earthquake
monitoring, and code development and adoption. It includes NIST, NSF,
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). The complete NEHRP budget for FY06 has not yet been
provided to the Committee. However, the NSF request is $53.98 million,
roughly flat compared to FY05, and USGS receives $51.34 million, up
from $46.89 million in FY05. Included in the USGS NEHRP budget is $8.2
million for the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). In FY05, NIST
and FEMA were funded at $1.8 and $20.5 million, respectively. The
Committee remains concerned that NIST NEHRP funding will not be
sufficient to carry out its new responsibilities as the lead agency for
NEHRP.
6. Agency R&D Highlights
Department of Energy (DOE)
The FY06 request for civilian R&D at DOE of $5.4 billion represents
a decrease of five percent from FY05 enacted levels. The
Administration's top funding priorities for energy science programs are
hydrogen R&D, operating funds for scientific user facilities, and
fusion research.
Office of Science
The budget proposes cutting funds for the Office of Science by $137
million (-4 percent), to $3.46 billion. The budget request indicates a
higher priority for operating funds for scientific user facilities. The
request includes double digit funding for the operations of new
facilities such as the Spallation Neutron Source (+$74 million) at Oak
Ridge National Laboratory and four new Nanoscale Science Research
Centers (+$43 million), and a 10 percent cut for funding for research
grants.
The budget proposes to cancel plans for the physics facility at the
Fermi National Laboratory known as BTev. BTev was one of 20 facilities
included in the Office of Science 20-year facilities plan released last
year. A DOE scientific advisory panel recommended that if the project
was not initiated by 2008, it should be canceled in favor of other
pending large facilities proposals. The budget request no funds for
construction of the Rare Isotope Accelerator (RIA), a nuclear physics
facility accorded relatively high priority in the 20-year facilities
plan. The budget requests $4 million for RIA-related R&D in FY06. (A
site for RIA has not been selected; Argonne National Laboratory and
Michigan State University are the finalists.)
The request for fusion R&D is up $17 million overall, (+6 percent,
to $291 million) with funding for ITER (an international partnership to
build a large-scale fusion reactor) up $51 million (+113 percent to $56
million), although site negotiations have been stalled for more than a
year as France and Japan compete to host the project. The large
increase for ITER could result in reduced funding for basic fusion
research and curtailed operating time on existing fusion facilities in
the U.S.
In other program changes, the budget proposes a $126 million
reduction in funding for Biological and Environmental Sciences (^22
percent to $456 million) with proposed cuts targeted primarily in the
Medical Applications and Measurement area that hosts numerous
Congressional earmarks. The budget also proposes a $25 million
reduction for Advanced Scientific Computing (^11 percent to $207
million). On the other hand, the budget proposes a $20 million increase
(+28 percent to $87 million) for Genomics.
Applied Energy Programs
The FY06 budget proposes reduced funding for energy efficiency and
renewable energy (EERE) R&D programs while increasing funds for
hydrogen R&D. Overall funding for EERE R&D activities is cut $54
million (^5 percent to $975 million) but, if the hydrogen/FreedomCAR
activities are excluded, energy efficiency and renewable energy R&D is
cut by 11 percent ($79 million), to $687 million, from the FY05 enacted
level of $766 million.
In specific EERE programs, significant cuts were requested for
Building Technologies (^12 percent , ^$8 million to $58 million),
Industrial Technologies (^25 percent, ^$18 million to $57 million), and
the Biomass program (^18 percent, ^$16 million, to $72 million).
In fossil energy, overall funding is cut $80 million (^14 percent
to $491 million). DOE proposes to eliminate oil and gas technology
research, allocating $10 million to each program for orderly
termination of ongoing activities. Both these programs were scored
``Ineffective'' by OMB for the last two years. The stationary fuel cell
program (Distributed Generation), is cut by $12 million (^16 percent to
$65 million). In coal programs, there is an overall increase of $13
million (+4.9 percent to $286 million), with shifts in programmatic
emphasis. Carbon Sequestration gets a requested increase of $22 million
(+48 percent to $67 million) while the coal-based fuels program is cut
$10 million (^31 percent to $22 million) and Advanced Research is cut
$10 million (^28 percent to $31 million). FutureGen, the proposed $1
billion dollar project to build a zero-emissions coal plant, is funded
at $18 million, the same as last year's appropriation.
In the nuclear area, funding for civilian activities in Nuclear
Energy is up $15 million, (+4 percent to $389 million). In the research
and development programs, Nuclear Power 2010 is up $6 million (+13
percent to $56 million), Generation IV is up $5 million (+13 percent to
$45 million) and Nuclear Hydrogen up $11 million (+124 percent to $20
million). The Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization program and the Nuclear
Energy Research Initiative are not funded.
The Office of Electric Transmission and Distribution and Energy
Assurance receives a $25 million decrease (^20 percent to $96 million),
with the majority of the cut (^$20 million) coming from R&D programs.
Issues/Questions Raised by the FY06 Request for DOE
Hydrogen R&D: The budget requests a significant increase for R&D for
hydrogen as a fuel for transportation, while reducing funds for energy
efficiency and renewable energy R&D. In addition to questions raised at
the front of this charter, the focus on hydrogen raises an additional
question. Hydrogen must be produced from other energy sources, so if
renewable energy research is not well supported, it may not be possible
to produce hydrogen in the quantities necessary for transportation
without relying on imported energy.
Facilities vs. Research Grants: Traditionally DOE has maintained a
balance between research grants and laboratory activities. Since DOE is
the leading source of civilian physical sciences research funding, as
well as a large portion of other civilian basic research, the reduction
of grants to enable user facilities to continue to operate raises a
fundamental question about the role of the Office of Science. Should
the Department focus on providing the large-scale equipment and
facilities that scientists need and leave the funding of individual
experiments to others (whether inside or outside government), or should
the department strive to have a mix of both research grants and
facilities accessible to users?
National Science Foundation (NSF)
The National Science Foundation is the primary source of federal
funding for non-medical basic research conducted at colleges and
universities and serves as a catalyst for science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics education reform at all levels.
The FY06 budget request for NSF is $5.61 billion, an increase of
2.4 percent, or $132 million over the FY05 level. However, because NSF
received a 3.1 percent ($180 million) cut in FY05, the overall request
level for FY06 is approximately one percent below the FY04 level. Also,
the budget requests overstates the increase in NSF's actual buying
power because it includes $48 million for NSF to begin paying for Coast
Guard activities in Antarctica that had previously been paid for by the
Coast Guard.
For the second year in a row, the largest percentage increases in
the budget proposal are for personnel, administrative initiatives, and
construction of major research facilities. Specifically, the Research
and Related Activities (RRA) account, which funds most NSF research
programs, receives a 2.7 percent increase (including the Coast Guard
funds).\7\ The Education and Human Resources (EHR) Directorate, as
mentioned earlier, receives a 12 percent cut.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The transfer was proposed in an attempt to address ongoing
disagreements between NSF and the Coast Guard regarding the proper cost
to the Coast Guard of conducting ice-breaking activities. NSF faces
both short- and long-term questions regarding ice-breaking operations.
In the short-term, it remains unclear whether $48 million is a
sufficient amount to pay for the activities. In the long-term, Congress
and the Administration must consider how best to replace the current
ice-breaking ships, which are aging rapidly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSF continues to receive high marks from the Office of Management
and Budget for the quality of its management and the excellence of its
programs. Building on its performance in the FY05 budget, NSF was one
of only seven agencies awarded three green lights on the Executive
Branch Management Scorecard. In addition, eight NSF programs were
examined using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) \8\. All eight
programs received ratings of ``Effective'' (the highest rating). NSF
was the only agency in the Federal Government to receive the highest
rating on every program that was ``PART-ed.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ PART is described by the budget as a tool ``developed to assess
and improve program performance so that the Federal Government can
achieve better results. A PART review helps identify a program's
strengths and weaknesses to inform funding and management decisions
aimed at making the program more effective.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issues/Questions Raised by the FY05 Request for NSF
Education and Human Resource Directorate (EHR): Of the seven budget
categories within the Education and Human Resources Directorate, four
receive major budget cuts ranging from 12 to 43 percent (Table 2): Math
and Science Partnerships (MSP), Elementary, Secondary, and Informal
Education (ESIE), Undergraduate Education (DUE), and Research,
Evaluation, and Communication (REC). Most programs within these
accounts are planning reductions in the number of new awards in 2006,
and two--MSP and REC--will not make any new awards.
The Department of Education also runs an MSP program. (Both were
created by Congress as part of the No Child Left Behind initiative).
The Education Department program receives a proposed FY06 increase of
$91 million to $269 million, but it is significantly different from its
NSF counterpart. The Department of Education's program awards funds to
states on a formula basis and focuses primarily on high-level
mathematics while NSF's program provides competitive, merit-reviewed
grants to universities and school districts to improve math and science
proficiency for students of all grades.
Investments in graduate education and in human resource
development, or activities to broaden participation in STEM fields,
fare better. In graduate education, the request of $155 million will
enable NSF to maintain its current stipend of $30,000 for top graduate
students and further broaden participation in these programs. In human
resource development, the funding request of $118.4 million will
provide ongoing support for programs and activities that expand
opportunities for traditionally under-served populations.
Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC): The FY06
budget request proposes $250 million for this account, $76 million (44
percent) above the FY05 level for this account, which funds large user
facilities. (NSF provides funding to private entities, usually
university consortia, to run the facilities.) The FY06 budget provides
money for no new starts despite a backlog of projects. Five major
facilities have been completed in the past two years. Each completed
facility, such as the new research station at the South Pole, requires
support for research as well as operations and maintenance funding once
it comes on line. Those funds come out of NSF's research budget.
Consequently, as MREFC projects begin operations, increasing budget
pressure is placed on core research activities. NSF faces a difficult
and growing challenge in balancing these two needs.
Grant Proposal Success Rate: Even as the total funding for NSF has
increased significantly over the past six years (up 40 percent), the
percentage of funded proposals has declined from 33 percent in FY00 to
an estimated 20 percent in FY05. For FY06, NSF has set a goal of
halting the decline in the success rate while maintaining grant size
and duration. Given this constraint, and the relatively flat budget
requested, NSF will try to reduce the number of proposals it receives,
in part by reducing the number of solicitations the agency issues.
Homeland Security R&D
Homeland Security R&D at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
The vast majority of R&D at DHS is funded by the Science and
Technology (S&T) directorate. Proposed funding for S&T is $1.37
billion, an increase of $253 million (23 percent) above the FY05
enacted level. Approximately half of this increase is not for new
research, but reflects the proposed transfer into the S&T directorate
of existing science programs that are now run by other parts of DHS,
particularly by the Transportation Security Administration. The Science
Committee has encouraged this consolidation. Even after this transfer
is taken into account, the funding for DHS S&T still increases by $126
million (11 percent).
One major new initiative within DHS S&T is the formation of a
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) ($227 million, of which $124
million is new funding). The DNDO will be located at DHS, but will
include representatives from other agencies, such as DOE and DOD. The
Office will be responsible for R&D related to detection of nuclear and
radiological materials, but will also coordinate the acquisition and
deployment of a national domestic nuclear detection system and the
establishment of protocols and training for users of detection
equipment. Other new initiatives in DHS S&T include a new program on
detection of certain chemical agents and initial work on a national
bio- and agro-defense facility.
S&T Directorate funding is split among various technical portfolio
areas, such as biological countermeasures, standards, critical
infrastructure protection, and support of conventional DHS missions
(such as the Secret Service); a complete list of portfolios and their
funding is provided in Table 3. Most of the portfolio areas, other than
those directly involved in the initiatives described above, remain flat
or decrease slightly.
Homeland Security R&D at Other Agencies
Approximately $2.8 billion is proposed for homeland security R&D
programs in departments and agencies outside of DHS (Table 10). The
bulk of this funding, $1.8 billion (up 3.2 percent from FY05), is for
bio-defense programs at NIH, such as basic research on infectious
microbial agents, applied research on diagnostics, vaccines, and
therapies, and construction of bio-safety facilities. The remaining
funds (approximately $1.1 billion) go to a number of other agencies,
such as: EPA, for research on detection of chemical and biological
agents in the water supply; NSF, for research related to critical
infrastructure protection and microbial genomics; the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA), for research on animal disease diagnostics and
vaccines; DOD for detection systems, protective gear, and vaccines for
biological and chemical agents; and DOE's National Nuclear Security
Administration for research on detection and attribution of
radiological and nuclear materials.
In addition to individual agency programs, a number of cooperative
efforts between DHS and other agencies exist: NSF and DHS jointly fund
a cyber security testbed; DHS provides funding to NIST for standards
work in a number of areas, such as standards for radiation detectors;
and EPA and DHS co-fund a university center on microbial risk
assessment.
Issues/Questions Raised by the FY06 Request for DHS
Balance of DHS S&T Programs: Most of the work of the Directorate is
heavily weighted toward development. Relatively little goes to fund
longer-term, more basic research. As a result, relatively little of the
funding is available to universities, although DHS S&T does fund
several university centers. Whether this shorter-range focus is optimal
for U.S. long-term security has been a matter of debate.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
NIST's Laboratory Programs
The FY06 budget requests $426 million for a wide range of research
conducted at NIST laboratories in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and Boulder,
Colorado. The request is $47 million (12 percent) above the FY05
enacted level of $378 million, and is slightly above the FY05 request.
NIST's budget was severely cut in FY04, leading to early retirements
and disruption of NIST's program activities. The FY05 appropriation
restored enough funding to maintain current programs and personnel.
The Administration's request for FY06 includes $40 million for
initiatives in three broad thematic areas: Advances in Manufacturing
($20 million), Measurements and Standards for Homeland Security ($3
million), and New Measurement Horizons for the U.S. Economy and Science
($17 million).
The Advances in Manufacturing initiative is intended to strengthen
U.S. efforts to commercialize nanotechnology, to improve software to
better coordinate the activities of all the suppliers involved in
manufacturing a particular product, and to improve U.S. competitiveness
by making sure that technical standards abroad do not disadvantage U.S.
products. Measurements and Standards for Homeland Security will fund a
permanent research program at NIST in biometrics (the use of equipment
to identify people by such biological means as fingerprints, iris
patterns, etc.), and the development of better standards for equipment
for firefighters and other first responders. New Measurement Horizons
for the U.S. Economy and Science will increase NIST research in such
areas as biotechnology and quantum computing--fields in which the U.S.
needs to establish and sustain a leadership role if it is to be
competitive.
Issues/Questions Raised by the FY06 Request for NIST
National Nanomanufacturing and Nanometrology Facility (N3F): To open
its new manufacturing laboratory to nanotechnology users outside the
government, NIST needs specialized equipment, and a dedicated budget to
maintain the facilities. Although the FY06 budget requests the
maintenance funding, the request for equipment is much less than the
$25 million requested (but not appropriated) for FY05. As a result, the
N3F may not be sufficiently equipped to support the goals of the
National Nanotechnology Initiative.
Impact of Proposed Elimination of the Advanced Technology Program
(ATP): The FY06 budget request proposes to eliminate ATP, but provides
no funds for the orderly shut down of the program, including the costs
to reassign or eliminate 228 positions. These costs could be as high as
$20 million. Moreover, ATP is expected to fund an estimated $13 million
worth of R&D conducted at the NIST laboratories in FY05. Therefore, the
proposal to end ATP could result in one-time costs to NIST of up to $33
million, eating up much of the proposed increase for the NIST
laboratories.
Impact of Scaling Back the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP)
Program: The FY06 request for MEP is $46.8 million, which represents
about a 60 percent cut from the FY05 enacted level of $109 million. At
this level, it is unclear how the MEP program would function as a
national network.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
The FY06 budget requests $3.6 billion for NOAA, a decrease of $300
million (eight percent) compared to the FY05 enacted level of $3.9
billion. However, NOAA's FY05 budget includes approximately $430
million worth of Congressionally mandated projects. If these earmarks
are removed from the FY05 baseline, then the President's budget could
be construed as proposing an additional $200 million (six percent
increase) for NOAA in FY06.
National Weather Service
The FY06 budget requests $839 million for the National Weather
Service (NWS), an increase of $56 million (seven percent). The request
includes $8.7 million to expand and modernize technology capabilities
at the NWS, including upgrades to the NOAA Weather Radio All-Hazards
warning network, a new drought forecasting initiative, and upgrades to
the supercomputers used in weather forecasting.
Tsunami Warning and Detection System
The FY06 budget request includes $9.5 million for NOAA to expand
the U.S. Tsunami Warning Network, an issue considered by the Committee
during a hearing on January 26, 2005. This request, combined with $14.5
million in supplemental funds in FY05, will allow NOAA to procure and
deploy tsunami detection buoys in a system designed to provide
continuous tsunami warning capability for both the Pacific and Atlantic
coasts of the United States and in the Caribbean.
Satellite Acquisition
The FY06 budget requests $964 million for satellite programs at
NOAA. This request is a $57 million (six percent) increase over the
FY05 enacted level of $907 million. The increase is for procurement,
acquisition, and construction of the next generation of weather
satellites, and is in line with the long-term budget plans for these
satellite systems. NOAA's polar-weather satellites are vital for three
to seven day weather forecasts, tracking of severe weather such as
hurricanes, and for climate observations. The next-generation of polar
satellites is currently under development, with the first launch
planned for 2010.
Issues/Questions Raised by the FY06 Request for NOAA
Weather Satellite Cost Increases: In September 2004, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) completed a report for the Committee on the
costs and risks associated with NOAA's next-generation polar satellite
program. The current projection for the cost of the next generation
polar satellite system has risen from $6.5 billion to $8.1 billion and
GAO estimates it is likely to rise by another $500 million before the
system is complete. The Committee recently learned that availability
one of the key sensors on the new polar satellite will be delayed by 16
months due to technical difficulties in developing the sensor. Cost
overruns in satellite programs could force NOAA to take resources away
from other important core missions at the agency.
Tsunami Warning Network: While the FY06 budget (along with the FY05
supplemental appropriations request) funds the purchase of new tsunami
detection buoys, funding in the out-years for the operation and
maintenance of the proposed tsunami warning system is uncertain. Each
buoy costs approximately $500,000 to purchase and deploy and has a
design life of less than two years, so NOAA's estimated $350,000 for
annual operation and maintenance seems inadequate. Also, funding is
uncertain for tsunami education and outreach programs, which witnesses
told the Committee are as important as tsunami detection in preventing
deaths.
7. Witnesses Questions
Witnesses have been asked to:
1. Review the R&D budget request in the context of the
Administration's overall priorities in science and technology.
2. Describe the mechanisms that the Administration uses to
determine priorities across scientific disciplines.
3. Describe the mechanisms the Administration uses to
coordinate its scientific research and technical development
activities with other federal agencies.
Chairman Boehlert. Okay. The hearing will come to order.
I want to welcome everyone here to what might be seen as
the official opening of budget season for the House Science
Committee. I am pleased to say that we will be hearing this
morning from most of the top science officials in the Federal
Government.
I am especially gratified to welcome Secretary Bodman here
this morning. His presence here signals the new cooperative
science-oriented leadership he will be bringing to the
Department of Energy. I know that we will have the same
productive relationship with Sam Bodman at DOE that we did when
he was Deputy Secretary of Commerce, and I am pleased to have
him back in this committee's orbit. Mr. Secretary, welcome
back.
But while I am delighted to have so much talent arrayed
before us this morning, one would hardly describe the tone of
this morning's hearing as festive. The budget proposal before
us raises serious questions about our nation's direction in the
coming years.
While the President's budget proposal for research and
development can legitimately be seen as a glass half full or a
glass half empty, no one could describe it as a glass that is
filled enough to satisfy the Nation's thirst for scientific
advancement.
Let me elaborate.
The budget is a glass half full in that R&D, as a whole,
has fared better, and basic research has fared no worse than
non-defense domestic discretionary spending as a whole. In
other words, it would be unfair to describe the attitude behind
this budget as in any way ``anti-science.'' We are living
through a period of stringent austerity, and the science budget
reflects that rather than any hostility toward science.
There are also some grace notes in the otherwise dirge-like
tone of the budget. The National Science Foundation gets one of
the largest increases in the budget, although not enough to
keep pace with inflation, especially after the Coast Guard
transfer is subtracted. And the internal laboratories of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, a top priority
of this committee, would receive a 12 percent increase.
But this budget is also a glass half empty. Key science
agencies, most notably, perhaps, DOE's Office of Science, would
see their budgets cut. NSF education programs would be cut by
12 percent, about as misguided a policy as one could imagine. I
should say Congress tried going down this foolhardy path with
regard to NSF in the early 1980s and quickly and wisely
reversed course.
And perhaps most disturbingly of all, the outlook for the
out-years seems to be more of the same.
Now, I don't doubt that science growth will have to be
restrained in this budget environment. We might have to
eliminate some programs, such as the oil and gas research
programs the Administration has targeted.
But I think we have to think long and hard about whether it
is in the long-term interest of the United States to have a
multi-year period of real dollar cuts in spending on research
and development. And we have to think more clearly about what
our priorities are in a period of restrained growth, a topic I
will be returning to at tomorrow's hearing on NASA's budget.
With so much at stake, I am eager to turn to our witnesses,
although they may no longer feel so eager themselves. I
understand that each of them has devoted large portions of
their careers, very distinguished careers, I might add, to
creating a healthy, effective, federal science establishment.
It is our job to help them get more ``wallet'' to go with their
``will,'' to hearken back to a phrase from President Bush.
Let me end on a more positive note. For us to review the
budget effectively, we need the maximum amount of information
from the Administration. In the past, one of our frustrations
has been getting accurate numbers for what was being spent on
the interagency high performance computing program, another of
this committee's priorities. Dr. Marburger and Josh Bolten and
I had a flurry of correspondence on this last year.
I am pleased to say that this year those numbers arrived
here on time, as required by law. And I want to thank Dr.
Marburger and his staff and the staff at OMB and the relevant
agencies for working cooperatively with us on this. It will
make all our jobs easier, and it reflects the great working
relationship we have, even as we may disagree on some budget
decisions. So, please communicate my thanks to all involved on
this.
Mr. Gordon.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Boehlert follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert
I want to welcome everyone here to what might be seen as the
official opening of budget season for the House Science Committee. I am
pleased to say that we will be hearing this morning from most of the
top science officials in the Federal Government.
I am especially gratified to welcome Secretary Bodman here this
morning. His presence here signals the new cooperative, science-
oriented leadership he will be bringing to the Department of Energy
(DOE). I know that we will have the same productive relationship with
Sam Bodman at DOE that we did when he was Deputy Secretary of Commerce,
and I'm pleased to have him back in this committee's orbit.
But while I am delighted to have so much talent arrayed before us
this morning, one would hardly describe the tone of this morning's
hearing as ``festive.'' The budget proposal before us raises serious
questions about our nation's direction in the coming years.
While the President's budget proposal for R&D (research and
development) can legitimately be seen either as a glass half full or a
glass half empty, no one could describe it as a glass that is filled
enough to satisfy the Nation's thirst for scientific advancement.
Let me elaborate.
The budget is a glass half full in that R&D as a whole has fared
better, and basic research has fared no worse, than non-defense
domestic discretionary spending as a whole. In other words, it would be
unfair to describe the attitude behind this budget as in any way
``anti-science.'' We are living through a period of stringent
austerity, and the science budget reflects that rather than any
hostility toward science.
There are also some grace notes in the otherwise dirge-like tone of
the budget. The National Science Foundation (NSF) gets one of the
largest increases in the budget, although not enough to keep pace with
inflation, especially after the Coast Guard transfer is subtracted. And
the internal laboratories of the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST), a top priority for this committee, would receive a
12 percent increase.
But this budget is also a glass half empty. Key science agencies,
most notably perhaps DOE's Office of Science, would see their budgets
cut. NSF education programs would be cut by 12 percent--about as
misguided a policy as one could imagine. I should say Congress tried
going down this foolhardy path with regard to NSF in the early 1980s
and quickly reversed course.
And perhaps most disturbingly of all, the outlook for the out-years
seems to be more of the same.
Now, I don't doubt that science growth will have to be restrained
in this budget environment. We might have to eliminate some programs,
such as the oil and gas research programs the Administration has
targeted.
But I think we have to think long and hard about whether it is in
the long-term interest of the United States to have a multi-year period
of real dollar cuts in spending on R&D. And we also have to think more
clearly about what our priorities are in a period of restrained
growth--a topic I'll be returning to at tomorrow's hearing on NASA's
budget.
With so much at stake, I'm eager to turn to our witnesses--although
they may no longer feel so eager themselves. I understand that each of
them has devoted large portions of their careers to creating a healthy,
effective federal science establishment. It's our job to help them get
more ``wallet'' to go with their ``will''--to hearken back to a phrase
from the first President Bush.
Let me just end on a more positive note. For us to review the
budget effectively, we need the maximum amount of information from the
Administration. In the past, one of our frustrations has been getting
accurate numbers for what was being spent on the interagency high
performance computing program, another of this committee's priorities.
Dr. Marburger and Josh Bolten and I had a flurry of correspondence on
this last year.
I'm pleased to say that this year those numbers arrived here on
time, as required by law. So I want to thank Dr. Marburger and his
staff and the staff at OMB and the relevant agencies for working
cooperatively with us on this. It will make all our jobs easier, and it
reflects the great working relationship we have, even as we may
disagree on some budget decisions. So, please communicate my thanks to
all involved with that.
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to join you in
welcoming this very distinguished panel. And also, as usual, I
could just say amen to my Chairman's opening statements on most
occasions. And I want to say amen again. This is a very
distinguished panel, and I know all of you have spent a career
and a lifetime trying to make our country more advanced in the
sciences, and we thank you for that.
And Mr. Chairman, I agree with you as to your analysis of
the budget. And I also agree that the science budget today
could have been worse. But that doesn't mean that we just take
what we get and passively make lemonade out of lemons. We can
not ignore the cumulative damage this is going to do to our
nation's future.
This is my second year as Ranking Member, and I come to you
today even more distressed about the lack of foresight shown in
putting together this R&D budget than I was last year.
I am particularly concerned that reports have claimed that
Dr. Marburger called this a ``pretty good year'' for research
funding. How can this be a ``pretty good year'' when the
federal science and technology budget decreased by $877
million?
How can this Administration contend that a 12.4 percent cut
to K-12 science and math education is a ``pretty good year,''
or a six percent decrease in NASA's aeronautics, $320 million
less to basic research and an 8.2 percent cut to NOAA research
even after the tsunami disaster that we just witnessed? That
doesn't sound to me like a ``pretty good year.''
I wish that was the end of the list, but it is only the
beginning. NSF is over $5 billion behind the authorized level
that this Administration signed into law. The Department of
Energy research was slashed 4.1 percent for their Office of
Science, cut three percent for high-energy physics research,
and cut 8.4 percent for nuclear physics.
And I want to remind everyone that research in nuclear,
high-energy, and condensed matter physics is not just some
random academic exercise. Research in these areas has led to
many remarkable innovations, including PET scans, MRIs, nuclear
medicine, and cancer research.
The Manufacturing Extension Program, probably the most
effective federal program in providing immediate help to U.S.
manufacturers, is again slashed severely. The Advanced
Technology Program is again eliminated, and technology transfer
programs at NASA and DOE are cut. It makes no sense to cut job
creation programs when U.S. manufacturing is losing tens of
thousands of jobs to overseas competition.
This was not a ``pretty good year,'' not under any
circumstances.
The current approach of this Administration is
shortsighted. It ignores the vital role that research performed
today plays in our quality of life and our world position
tomorrow. We can and we must do better to secure our nation's
future prosperity. And we must redefine the discussion. We need
to consider science and technology research as an investment.
I have said it before, and I will say it again today,
maintaining a lead in science and technology is a flat-out
race. If we stop running at the top speed we can manage, we
will lose. Even in the current fiscal crisis, this budget is
not the top speed we can manage for science and technology
investment. Lack of investment in innovation now will come to
roost later, or as my father used to say, we are eating our
seed corn.
We all understand the need for reasonable cuts and budget
realignments, but we must do so with an eye towards our
country's future. I will work with my colleagues on both sides
of the aisle to try to realign the Administration's spending
priorities to better meet our science and technology needs and
to guard our future fiscal prosperity.
Thank you, and I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gordon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bart Gordon
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I join you in welcoming our distinguished
panel to this morning's hearing. And I agree with you, Mr. Chairman,
that the science budget before us today could have been worse--but that
doesn't mean we just take what we get and passively make lemonade out
of lemons. We cannot ignore the cumulative damage this is doing to our
future.
This is my second year as Ranking Member and I come to you today
even more distressed about the lack of foresight that this
Administration has shown in putting together this R&D budget than I was
last year.
I'm particularly concerned that reports claim Dr. Marburger called
this a ``pretty good year'' for research funding. How can this be
called a ``pretty good year'' when the Federal Science and Technology
budget decreased by $877 million dollars?
How can this Administration contend that a 12.4 percent cut to K-12
Science and Math Education is a ``pretty good year;'' a six percent
decrease in NASA aeronautics; $320 million dollars less to basic
research and a 8.2 percent cut to NOAA research--even after the tsunami
disaster the world just witnessed? That doesn't sound like a ``pretty
good year'' to me.
I wish that was the end of the list, but it is only the beginning.
NSF is over $5 billions dollars behind the authorization level that
this Administration signed into law.
Department of Energy research was slashed 4.1 percent for their
Office of Science, cut three percent for high-energy physics research,
and 8.4 percent cuts for nuclear physics.
I want to remind everyone that research in nuclear, high energy and
condensed matter physics is not just some random academic exercise.
Research in these areas has led to many remarkable innovations
including PET scans, MRIs, nuclear medicines and cancer therapies.
The Manufacturing Extension Program--probably the most effective
federal program in providing immediate help to U.S. manufacturers--is--
AGAIN--slashed severely. The Advanced Technology Program is--AGAIN--
eliminated. It makes no sense to cut job creation programs when U.S.
manufacturing is losing tens of thousands of jobs to overseas
competition.
This was not a pretty good year--not under any circumstances.
The current approach of this Administration is short sighted--it
ignores the vital role that research performed today plays in our
quality of life and world position tomorrow. We can and we must do
better to secure our nation's future prosperity. We must redefine the
discussion. We need to consider science and technology research as an
investment--not spending.
I've said it before and I will say it again now--Maintaining a lead
in science and technology is a flat out race. If we stop running at the
top speed we can manage, we will lose. Even in the current fiscal
crisis, this budget is not the top speed we can manage for science and
technology investment. Lack of investment in innovation and invention
now will come home to roost later.
We all understand the need for reasonable cuts and budget
realignments, but we must do so with an eye towards our country's
future. I will work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
try to realign this Administration's spending priorities to better meet
our science and technology needs and guard our future fiscal
prosperity.
Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you, Mr. Gordon, I think.
You have presented much that I find myself in agreement
with, but most of the presentation was the half empty side of
the glass, and I tried to concentrate on the half-full side of
the glass.
The bottom line is this: whether you are a Democrat or a
Republican, Chairman or a Ranking Member, we are committed to
the proposition that wise investments in science pay handsome
dividends for our future. And I know the panelists before us
share that view. I also know the panelists before us and their
departments have to go through a process. And we do not
consider the science enterprise in isolation. It is in
conjunction with all of the other many demands on the budget,
particularly during this very difficult time.
But I think it is fair to say there is widespread agreement
on this on a bipartisan basis that, if anything, we need more
investment in science, not because it is under our
jurisdiction, although that is important to us, not because we
have an appreciation for these programs, which we do, but
because we know it represents a sound investment in our
nation's future, and we also know that it is a very competitive
world out there, and others are racing when sometimes it
appears that, in certain areas, we are strolling along. We need
to engage in that race, because I want to be first. We are
first now, and I want to retain that premier position.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Ehlers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Vernon J. Ehlers
Chairman Boehlert, I am pleased that we are here today to discuss
one of our most pressing of national issues, the Federal Government's
investment in science and technology.
Science and technology are critical to our economic prosperity and
national security. Economists have attributed much of our nation's
improvement in productivity in recent years to the results of research
and development. Productivity improvement and technological
breakthroughs spurred the longest period of economic expansion in our
nation's history, and they hold the key for stimulating our economy now
as well as protecting our nation through application of such
advancements.
I understand that the FY 2006 budget request represents the
Administration's priorities of space exploration and national defense.
I am pleased to see that the Department of Homeland Security's science
and technology budget is enhanced by more than 10 percent, as well as
the Administration's substantial commitment to the exploration program
at NASA.
I would like to address three parts of the budget request in
particular; the Department of Energy's Office of Science, the National
Science Foundation, and the National Institute for Standards and
Technology.
The Department of Energy's Office of Science funds 40 percent of
our nation's physical science research. Research in these areas has led
to many new economic and medical advancements including, among others,
new energy sources, the Internet, cell phones and laser surgery. To
maintain our economic, technical, and military preeminence, the Federal
Government must continue to support research in these areas. The FY
2006 budget request for the Office of Science is $3.46 billion--a
decrease of almost four percent from the FY 2005 enacted level. I was
disappointed to learn that the plans for the new Rare Isotope
Accelerator (RIA) as well as the BTev physics facility at the Fermi
National Laboratory have been postponed indefinitely, in light of the
lack of funding for these projects. RIA is tied for number three
priority for large facilities ranked by the Department, and is
essential for our country to maintain leadership in nuclear science
research.
I'd also like to specifically address the FY 2006 budget request
for the National Science Foundation, which is tasked with promoting the
progress of science; advancing the national health, prosperity, and
welfare; and securing the national defense. The NSF FY 2006 budget
request of $5.6 billion is a 2.4 percent increase over FY 2005
appropriations; however, it is $2.9 billion below the authorized
funding level necessary to complete the commitment Congress made to
double NSF funding in 2002. I continue to support this doubling
commitment, and I regret that in this austere budget environment it may
not be immediately possible to fulfill this obligation.
NSF is the only federal agency dedicated solely to supporting basic
scientific research. NSF funding accounts for one-fifth of all federal
support for basic research and 40 percent of physical science research
at academic institutions. Nearly 90 percent of these awards are made
through a competitive, merit-review process that ensures that excellent
and innovative research is being supported. Furthermore, NSF
consistently receives the highest rating from OMB for the efficiency
and excellence of its programs.
NSF is also the primary federal supporter of science and math
education; it underwrites the development of the next generation of
scientists and engineers. I am particularly concerned about the trend
of the current budget request that reduces the Education and Human
Resources budget at the Foundation by more than $104 million, or 12
percent. This dramatic decrease is unparalleled in other parts of the
federal science and technology portfolio. Decreasing awards in
education, or eliminating any new awards entirely, seems very
shortsighted when we are currently facing the challenge of adequately
preparing our students to enter science and technology fields. I have
worked very hard to maintain the Math and Science Partnership program
at NSF, where grants are awarded on a peer-reviewed basis that
complements the strengths of a research-based organization. The FY 2006
request for the Math and Science Partnerships of $60 million will only
allow continued funding for the programs that were started in previous
years, eliminating the future of an incredibly important program to
determine how our students learn the subjects of math and science.
Though research grant funding is relatively stable in the FY 2006
budget request, the grant proposal success rate at NSF continues to
decline as the number of applications rises. The decrease from 33
percent of funded proposals in FY 2000 to an estimated 20 percent in FY
2005 contributes to my concern about what type of effect this may have
on innovative, young researchers struggling to maintain their careers
in such a competitive environment. As a larger percentage of worthy
work is not funded, I believe that such an environment will adversely
affect those considering entering science and technology fields.
Maintaining a higher success rate through reducing the number of
solicitations or other similar means is a disservice to our national
needs and sends the wrong message to those exploring the edge of
science and technology innovation.
On a more positive note, I am pleased that the President is
requesting $426 million, or a 12 percent increase, for the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) laboratories. NIST has a
proven track record in research and development on standards and
measurement techniques that help U.S. industries become more globally
competitive and retain leadership in cutting-edge technologies. I am
particularly pleased that the request includes $19 million in funding
for an Advanced Manufacturing research initiative. This initiative is
aimed at speeding the development of industrial applications of
nanotechnology and streamlining manufacturing standards. It will help
small and medium-sized manufacturers and has goals very similar to the
Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act which I passed through the
House last Congress.
However, I am very concerned about a different manufacturing
program at NIST. The President's FY 2006 budget request cuts the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program by over 50 percent to
$46.8 million. I have worked very hard over the years to help my
colleagues in Congress understand that MEP is vital to retaining
American competitiveness and American jobs, and I believe they
appreciate the value of this program. Yet each budget cycle the
Administration proposes to significantly cut this program, which the
Department of Commerce itself recognized as a valuable program in a
2004 report on manufacturing. Diminishing funding for MEP will
devastate small and medium-sized manufacturers and in the long run
severely hurt our competitive edge in the manufacturing sector.
I am supportive of the President's FY 2006 budget request of $3.5
billion for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
While this represents a nearly $300 million (or eight percent) decrease
from the FY 2005 enacted level, the reduction is from the elimination
of congressionally directed projects.
In summary, I cannot emphasize enough that I believe funding for
science and technology must be a priority in the FY 2006 budget. While
the overall request for NSF is in the right direction, I am very
concerned about the cuts to the education programs and I will continue
to work to highlight the importance of critical programs like the Math
and Science Partnerships. I am pleased with the Administration's
request of $426 million for the NIST labs and pledge to work with my
colleagues to see that request fully funded.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Costello follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Jerry F. Costello
Good morning. I want to thank the witnesses for appearing before
our committee to discuss the President's FY06 Budget for Research and
Development. Today's hearing serves as an opportunity for oversight of
certain departmental programs. As you are aware, a number of trends
spotted in last year's budget submission are seen again in the FY06
budget, including reversal of the trend toward parity in defense and
non-defense R&D, an increase in the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, and targeted cuts towards government-industry programs.
The Department of Energy's Fossil Energy Research and Development
programs make prudent investments in long-range research and
development that help protect the environment through higher efficiency
power generation, advanced technologies and improved compliance and
stewardship operations. These activities safeguard our domestic energy
security. This country will continue to rely on traditional fuels for
the majority of its energy requirements for the foreseeable future, and
the activities funded through this account ensure that energy
technologies continue to improve with respect to emissions reductions
and control and energy efficiency. The Fossil Energy Research and
Development program impacts my congressional district because the coal
industry is of great importance to the economy and livelihood of my
constituents in Southern Illinois. As you may know, this area is rich
in high-sulfur coal. The shifting of production to low-sulfur coal has
cost many of my constituents high-paying jobs. Therefore, I am very
pleased to learn that coal programs received an overall increase of $13
million in this year's budget. I have been a strong advocate for
developing technology that focuses on carbon sequestration and am proud
of the $22 million increase it received in the President's budget.
However, I would like to see a future increase of advanced research and
coal-based fuel programs and will work with my Democratic and
Republican colleagues to accomplish these goals.
The House report language from last year's Interior appropriations
bill stated that the Administration's FutureGen program, a zero-
emissions coal plant, needs to be justified in future budgets before it
can be considered for funding by the Committee. Therefore, I am
extremely pleased the President's budget again provides $18 million
dollars for the FutureGen Initiative. I urge the Committee and the
Appropriators to look favorably on the Administration's and the
Department of Energy's continued financial backing for FutureGen. The
Administration has asked Congress to set aside an additional $257
million to fund the project in 2007 and beyond. I am committed to
working with the Department of Energy, the Committee, and appropriators
from both sides of the aisle to secure funding for FutureGen.
I strongly believe the FutureGen Initiative is a great national
investment and Illinois stands ready to provide the resources and
expertise needed to operate this state-of-the-art coal-fired power
plant. I have led the effort to locate FutureGen in Illinois, including
a bipartisan effort in the House to secure funding for the project. In
2003, I hosted a roundtable discussion regarding FutureGen, focusing on
the tremendous impact it will have on Illinois, along with Governor
Blagojevich, both U.S. Senators, and U.S. Congressman John Shimkus. Dr.
C. Lowell Miller, Director of the Office of Coal Fuels and Industrial
Systems at the Department of Energy, made a presentation on the
specifics of the project. Recently, the Illinois delegation sent a
letter to DOE Secretary Bodman, expressing our strong support for
locating the FutureGen project in Southern Illinois. Implementing the
coal research program, which includes the clean coal technology program
and FutureGen, is significant to my state and my district, and I look
forward to hearing from Secretary Bodman about the status of the
Initiative and the planned spending in this area.
Conversely, I am disappointed to see the Advanced Technology
Program (ATP) was eliminated from the FY06 budget, nor provided any
funds for the orderly shut down of the program. Again, the
Manufacturing Extension Program (MEP) was significantly cut in the
President's budget and at this level it is unclear how the MEP could
function as a national network. The Illinois Manufacturing Extension
Center (IMEC) has worked with over 400 small and mid-sized
manufacturers. These companies reported an average cost savings of
$179,000 with IMEC's assistance. In all, these manufacturers reported
more than $490 million in sales, cost savings, and productivity. It is
difficult to hear that the FY06 budget will leave the MEP Centers
struggling to survive rather than focusing on what they do best:
helping businesses increase efficiency and productivity in order to be
competitive in the global marketplace.
Fossil fuels, especially coal, are this country's most abundant and
lowest cost fuels for electric power generation. They are why this
country enjoys the lowest cost electricity of any industrialized
country. The prospects for technology advances for coal and other
fossil fuels are just as promising as those for alternative energy
sources, such as solar, wind, and geothermal. Therefore, I am
disappointed that most accounts under Renewable Energy Resources would
be cut by 11 percent. Non-fossil energy sources are extremely important
initiatives and I believe we should dedicate more resources toward
these programs.
I welcome our panel of witnesses and look forward to their
testimony.
[The prepared statement by Ms. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I greatly appreciate you calling this
hearing and I am especially grateful that our distinguished witnesses
have agreed to take time out of their busy schedules to answer our
questions today.
The purpose of this hearing is to provide an opportunity to explore
issues affecting the entire Research and Development (R&D) budget.
I, like many of colleagues, have a lot to say today about the
budget we have before us. The budget includes severe cuts to almost
every major government program and creates a deficit in 2006 that is
likely to top $400 billion. This budget can be categorized as reckless
and irresponsible.
Programs to promote efficiency and renewable energy would be
reduced to about $1.2 billion or four percent. Double-digit cuts to
many programs in this category were hidden by a 16 percent increase to
$260 million for a program to develop hydrogen as an efficient fuel
source.
The reductions prompted critics to question the White House's
energy priorities. In addition, this plan would reduce the Department's
extensive science and technology programs by about four percent, or
$3.5 billion, while environmental cleanup activities would be reduced
by eight percent, to $6.5 billion. What really disturbs me about the
Department of Energy's budget is that it assumes $2.4 billion revenue
in oil and gas leasing at the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, even
though Congress has never approved a plan opening this land for oil
exploration.
The National Science foundation has always been near and dear to my
heart. While I am pleased to see an increase in funding levels for NSF
as a whole will receive a two percent increase. However, this increase
cannot come at the expense of valuable programs to increase
participation by under-represented groups.
The President's budget calls for a 12 percent reduction in funding
for Math and Science education programs (cutting down to $737 million
from $841 million in fiscal 2005) These are programs that I have long
supported. This reduction leaves hundreds of thousands of children, the
majority of which are in public schools, behind. The success of the
world's most advanced economy depends on a strong and scientifically
literate workforce composed of all races and both genders.
NSF's $5.7 billion budget authority is $3 billion short of the
funding level it was pledged in 2002, when Congress authorized doubling
its budget by 2007.
Members of Congress must be fiscally responsible when it comes to
making decisions about our budget during these trying times. Our
greatest responsibility is to leave our children a world that is safer,
more prosperous, and more secure.
This budget fails that test. It is fiscally irresponsible. It is
morally irresponsible. And it demonstrates a failure to lead.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Honda follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Michael M. Honda
Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Gordon, thank you for holding
this important hearing today. This is an essential first step in the
oversight process it is our committee's responsibility to perform. I
emphasize that this is a first step, however--we must be sure to pay
close attention to each of the agencies represented here, both to
celebrate their successes and to make sure they are doing the job we
expect them to do.
I am disappointed that the Federal Science and Technology (FS&T)
Budget for Fiscal Year 2006 declines by 1.4 percent to $60.8 billion,
and am concerned in particular by the significant decreases in the FS&T
budgets of the Departments of Commerce and Energy, which decline by 14
percent and five percent, respectively. In a time when we are concerned
about U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace, it is troubling
that we are decreasing our investment in basic research and
development.
There is a troubling theme that runs through the budget requests of
each of these agencies--broken promises. The Congress and the President
made promises to increase the budget of NSF and to invest increasing
amounts in nanotechnology, but these budget requests do not reflect
those promises. And while the budget delivers on some promises made to
develop facilities at the DOE national laboratories, by reducing the
amount of funding for research it ensures that those facilities will
not be used to their maximum benefit.
I am also disturbed by the funding cut planned for the
Manufacturing Extension Program and the complete elimination of the
Advanced Technology Program. A 60 percent cut for MEP produces a
situation in which it is unclear how the program can continue to
function as a national network. At a time when we are losing
manufacturing jobs to overseas competitors, it is essential that we
help out our domestic manufacturers as much as we can.
The zeroing out of the Advanced Technology Program is particularly
egregious, since the budget request does not even provide the funds
that will needed to execute the termination of the program, should
Congress go along with such a proposition. The funds will need to be
``found'' somewhere else, and the most likely target are the labs of
the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which could end up
losing a much needed budget increase to close out ATP.
There are many questions that must be answered about this budget
request, and I hope the witnesses will provide us with those answers
today.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Davis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Lincoln Davis
Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.
While I appreciate all of our witnesses today, I want to focus on
the budget priorities for the Department of Energy's Office of Science.
The Office of Science budget shapes the priorities and direction of
physical science and energy research in our prestigious national
laboratories. Laboratories such as the Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
near my District, are dependent on that budget to survive and build
upon years of energy research that has resulted in greater energy
efficiency and cleaner-burning fuels.
Scientists all over the country use our national laboratories to
conduct important research that benefits our nation and the world. I
hope that the Office of Science will re-think parts of its budget plan
to show greater support for research and facilities at the national
laboratories.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Carnahan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Russ Carnahan
Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, thank you for hosting this
hearing and working diligently to encourage this impressive panel to
sit before us today. Members of the panel, I am pleased that all of you
have decided to accept the Committee's invitation to appear and I look
forward to hearing your testimony.
It is clear the research and development portions of the budget
have been hit hard by administration cuts. Even the hearing charter
written by the majority suggests that cuts could significantly impact
U.S. leadership in science and technology and on the production of
future scientists and engineers. If our nation's impressive standing in
science slips, we will risk our national security--we cannot sit idly
by and let this happen.
Mr. Kassinger, on a more specific note, I believe that slashing the
successful Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program (MEP) by an
egregious 56.5 percent should be reevaluated. I understand the tight
budgetary constraints that face us in these difficult times, but I
hesitate to nearly abolish the only program available to aid small
local manufacturers. The network of extension centers and field offices
that offer small local manufacturers process improvements, worker
training, business practices, and information technology applications
is unavailable elsewhere.
In my home State of Missouri, our MEP program is called the
Missouri Enterprise. It has nine field offices, and has created or
retained 2,449 jobs and $279,320,000 in 2003. The work that Missouri
Enterprise and all MEPs is significant and I believe worth the expense.
Please work to preserve this important program.
[The prepared statement by Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Sheila Jackson Lee
Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member Gordon,
I want to thank you for organizing this important hearing to
discuss the federal research and development budget for the 2006 fiscal
year. Clearly, you have compiled an impressive panel of witnesses from
some of the top agencies affected by this budget. Let me take a moment
to recognize Dr. Samuel Bodman and congratulate him on recently being
unanimously confirmed by the Senate and being sworn in as the 11th
Secretary of Energy earlier this month. The five panelists here
represent some of the brightest and hard working minds in America and I
look forward to working with all of them in the future to improve our
nation's scientific and technological capabilities.
Unfortunately, while I wholeheartedly support the work of the
science community, I do not believe the President's budget for R&D
meets all the needs of our nation to move forward in this new century.
This Administration's budget continues the same bad choices that have
led to huge deficits and mounting debt during the last four years. For
the third year in a row, the Administration's budget sets a record
deficit, and offers no real plan to put the budget in balance. In
addition to the debt it has accumulated, the Bush Administration
proposes $1.6 trillion in tax cuts and a plan for Social Security
privatization that can only drive the deficit up. In order to pay for
small portions of these plans, the Administration plans to cut services
for veterans, students, small businesses, law enforcement, health,
urban and rural development, and environmental protection. Sadly, the
R&D budget is not immune from these cuts and vital programs to improve
the lives of Americans are left to suffer.
However, the most troubling aspect of the President's budget is
that it continually omits costs and provides incomplete data, obscuring
the full extent of the damage done by its policies. This budget fails
to factor in the cost of the President's Social Security Privatization
plan which will cost the American taxpayer $754 billion from 2009-2015.
The cost to repair the Alternative Minimum Tax will be as high as $774
billion, none of which is included in the budget. Perhaps the most
flagrant abuse in the President's budget is that it does not include
the realistic costs for Iraq and Afghanistan, which based on a CBO
analysis, will be as much as $384 billion over ten years. Sadly, the
budget for R&D continues the use of this fuzzy math through the
selective use of earmarks. When it suits the Administration to count
earmarks, such as when calculating budget increases from 2001-2005,
they do so. When it doesn't suit them to count earmarks, such as when
claiming that one of their budget cuts isn't a real cut when the
earmarks are left off, they don't. These kinds of misleading budget
tricks are not only wrong, but they are in fact immoral. This is the
American taxpayers money we are talking about here and whether we are
talking about the federal budget as a whole, or just the R&D budget,
the American people deserve to have a fair and accurate portrayal of
where there tax dollars are going.
I am disappointed to find that the President's budget proposal will
cut the science funding for R&D. The so-called increase in funding is
actually merely 0.56 percent, which in fact is less than the two
percent expected rate of inflation. So in real spending power, the
federal R&D funding would decline. In addition, nearly all of this
meager increase is targeted for weapons development. If you eliminate
weapons development from the equation, the federal research investment
decreases by 1.4 percent in the President's request. Government-wide
funding for basic research would decrease by 1.2 percent and funding
for applied research would decrease by $3 million. Furthermore, these
numbers do not take into account the two percent expected rate of
inflation; so in its actual application the cuts are steeper than the
numbers would indicate.
I am also appalled by the Administration's effort to basically
destroy the Manufacturing Extension Program (MEP) and the Advanced
Technology Program (ATP) in the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) budget. The MEP is a successful federal/State
partnership designed to assist small manufacturers retain their
competitive edge. The Administration's request of $46.8 million is less
than one-half of what is required to maintain a fully operational
national network of MEP Centers. MEP helps smaller manufacturers take
advantage of the latest technology. Similarly, the ATP provides grants
to companies for pre-competitive research; this program is now being
completely eliminated from the Bush Administration budget. This is no
way to help the crisis we face in the great loss of manufacturing jobs
in this nation. In my State of Texas alone, we have lost 188,000
manufacturing jobs since the beginning of the Bush Administration. In
spite of these tremendous job losses, this Administration chooses to
basically eliminate two successful technology programs and I find that
kind of fiscal mismanagement to be inexcusable.
I am also greatly disappointed to find that promises made regarding
funding for NSF have been broken once again. Three years ago, the
President signed an authorization bill doubling NSF funding over five
years. Unfortunately, the requests for NSF since the signing ceremony
have been lackluster at best, as they would produce a doubling of
funding in about 25 years. As a result of these deficient funds NSF is
$5.8 billion behind its target. The balance between the physical
sciences and health sciences remains highly skewed. In 2002, this
Administration signed a bill to correct that imbalance but the
Administration has failed to follow through on that obligation. It's
sad to think that so many promises made by this Administration are
broken in this highly flawed budget proposal.
The fact that this Administration has decided to cut $1.3 million
for cyber security funding under the Department of Homeland Security is
appalling to me. Cyber threats to our nation will only continue to grow
as time goes on and as technologies become available. Cyber security is
an area where the Federal Government must stay one step ahead of those
who hope to threaten our nation. Cyber security is so urgent because
terrorists or other criminals can attack our technological
infrastructure from thousands of miles away and can be nearly
untraceable to authorities. The United States should be at the
forefront of cyber security in the world and that requires an increase
in funding, not the decrease we see here.
Despite the great deals of flaws in the President's budget and the
lack of funding I see for R&D, I remain hopeful. I remain hopeful
because we still have many tremendous R&D programs that can impact the
lives of the American people in so many different ways. I look forward
to seeing our scientific community continue to make advances and
improve upon our technological infrastructure. So, I look forward to
hearing from our distinguished panel about how their agencies can
accomplish these lofty standards.
Chairman Boehlert. So with that, let me thank all of the
very distinguished witnesses. Secretary Bodman has been on the
job two weeks, and he has been testifying for three weeks, so
how do you figure that one? And Dr. Marburger, we are in
regular consultation with you, and I thank you so much for the
fine job you do for the President and the country. And Mr.
Kassinger, it is good to have you back. And Dr. Bement, you
know I am an unabashed cheerleader for the agency that you
represent. And Dr. McQueary, we created your job and the whole
notion that there should be someone like you in a very
sensitive position within the Department of Homeland Security.
And I am so pleased to have you.
So we have before us, ladies and gentlemen of this
committee, some of the Nation's finest public servants. They
are trying to deal with a very difficult budget scenario, and
if the truth be known, I can guarantee you each of our
witnesses would come up with a wish list that would contain a
lot more than they got. But we have got to deal with what is
requested, and then we will do our level best to assist in
getting more in the right areas.
With that, let me introduce the panel: Dr. John Marburger,
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy,
affectionately known as the Science Advisor to the President;
Dr. Samuel W. Bodman, the newly-installed Secretary of Energy;
Dr. Arden Bement, Director, National Science Foundation; Mr.
Theodore W. Kassinger, Deputy Secretary of Commerce; and Dr.
Charles E. McQueary, Under Secretary for Science and
Technology, Department of Homeland Security.
You know the drill. You are experts. We would ask you to
try to confine your opening statement to five or six minutes. I
am not going to be arbitrary. It is too darn important what you
are talking about, and you are the only panel. But keep in
mind, the less you speak in your formal presentation, the more
opportunity we have for a good, healthy exchange. And we both
might benefit from that.
With that, Dr. Marburger.
STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN H. MARBURGER, III, PRESIDENT'S SCIENCE
ADVISER; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
Dr. Marburger. Thank you, Chairman Boehlert, and Ranking
Member Gordon, and Members of the Committee. I am pleased to
appear before you once again to discuss the President's R&D
budget for fiscal year 2006.
As you know and have said in your opening remarks, despite
the exceptional pressure on this budget, it does propose an
increase in federal R&D funds. The budget maintains a strong
focus on winning the war against terrorism while moderating the
growth in overall spending. And this focus is reflected in the
proposed R&D investments.
The Administration has made difficult choices, and it has
maintained the strength in priority areas, such as
nanotechnology, information technology, the hydrogen
initiative, and space exploration. Furthermore, while overall
non-security discretionary spending is reduced by one percent,
non-security R&D is not correspondingly diminished. The fiscal
year 2006 proposal preserves the substantial increases made,
and I might add, with your support, Mr. Chairman, and that of
your committee, during the first term of this Administration.
My written testimony does summarize the extraordinary
growth of R&D funding during the past four years, and it is
from that plateau of excellence that we view this budget
proposal.
This budget requests $132.3 billion for federal R&D, an
increase of $733 million over the current year's record R&D
budget. The budget allocates 13.6 percent of total
discretionary outlays to R&D, the highest level in 37 years.
Non-defense R&D accounts for 5.6 percent of the total
discretionary outlays, an amount significantly greater than the
five percent average over the past three decades.
In my oral testimony, I will just briefly highlight the
agency budgets, Mr. Chairman, and describe the priorities that
shape them. And my colleagues on the panel have much more to
say about the details for their agencies, as you know, so let
me simply begin with the Department of Defense.
The fiscal year 2006 request is more than $70 billion, of
which $5.5 billion is for DOD basic and applied research. This
is $900 million less than the fiscal year 2005 enacted level in
this category, but it is greater than the fiscal year 2005
enacted level minus Congressional earmarks, which are over a
billion dollars for this agency, and $250 million more than the
fiscal year 2005 presidential request.
And I would like to take this opportunity to express my
concern briefly that investments in defense R&D are discounted
by some science budget commentators as somehow less important
than non-defense science. That is wrong. National security
related science and technology drive innovation and strengthen
economic competitiveness in much the same way as technical work
for other purposes. The technology required for national and
homeland security is nearly always dual use and benefits
civilian as well as military products.
Let me move on to homeland security.
Science and technology at the Department of Homeland
Security will increase from $1.2 billion to $1.5 billion,
including $227 million to fund the creation of an important new
Domestic Nuclear Defense Office, DNDO.
At NIH, the fiscal year 2006 request is $28.8 billion for
biomedical research, a $196 million increase from fiscal year
2005 enacted.
In NSF, NSF's budget, as you noted, Mr. Chairman, would
increase by 2.4 percent to $5.6 billion in fiscal year 2006.
Investments in this key science agency strengthen U.S. science
across the board and play an exceptionally important role in
America's unique system of university-based science and
engineering research.
The Department of Energy Office of Science: this budget
provides $3.5 billion for DOE's Office of Science, a $57
million reduction after removing $80 million in earmarks. This
reduction does not imply diminished priority for Office of
Science operations, but reflects various construction and
procurement adjustments. Over a five-year period, this
Administration has invested more than $17 billion in the Office
of Science basic research at DOE, which is 14 percent greater
than the previous five-year period in constant dollars.
NASA: the request for NASA is $16.46 billion, a 2.4 percent
increase from 2005, reflecting a strong commitment by the
Administration to the missions of this agency. The fiscal year
2006 budget request also makes some hard decisions in NASA,
trading off some products with high technical risks to maintain
others with high scientific value. And I know you will hear
more about that in your hearing.
The Department of Commerce: the 2006 budget provides over
$1 billion for R&D at the Department of Commerce, including
$361 million for oceanic and atmospheric research at NOAA, an
11 percent reduction due mostly to the effect of earmarks and
an increase of eight percent in NIST's core programs, which
actually translates to 22 percent after earmarks are excluded.
In EPA, the 2006 S&T request, science and technology
request, is $792 million, a two percent increase over fiscal
year 2005 even before removing $70 million in earmarks.
The Department of Transportation, and this is the last
agency I will mention specifically, the fiscal year 2006 budget
request for highway-related research is $543 million, $23
million less than 2005 before removing significant earmarks.
Mr. Chairman, you mentioned interagency initiatives, among
them the Networking and Information Technology R&D program.
With President Bush's fiscal year 2006 budget request of $2.2
billion for this program, the investment in this area over five
years will total more than $10.4 billion.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: the President's
budget provides for over $1 billion for this multi-agency
initiative, bringing the total investment under this
Administration to $4.7 billion.
Climate change: the fiscal year 2006 budget proposes
approximately $1.9 billion to fund the Climate Change Science
Program, which is virtually the same as 2005 despite reductions
in NASA due to reprioritization of programs. With this request,
the Administration will have invested more than $9 billion over
five years to improve our understanding of the global climate
system.
The Hydrogen Fuel Initiative receives $260 million, a 16
percent increase from 2005. The initiative remains on track to
meet President Bush's five-year, $1.2 billion commitment to
hydrogen research and development announced in his 2003 State
of the Union address.
And finally, in homeland security, the Department of
Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate funding
will increase from $1.1 billion to $1.4 billion. R&D is focused
on countering chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and
other catastrophic threats. I mention DHS again in this context
of interagency cooperation, because many agencies contribute to
our domestic safety.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, America's
science and technology capabilities are the envy of the world.
I believe the President's fiscal year 2006 budget proposal
maintains and selectively strengthens these capabilities in
areas that are important to the Nation's national homeland and
economic security, and I look forward to responding and
answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Marburger follows:]
Prepared Statement of John H. Marburger, III
Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Minority Member Gordon, and Members of
the Committee, I am pleased to appear before you once again to discuss
the President's research and development (R&D) budget. As I have said
many times before, I greatly appreciate the effective working
relationship between our office and your committee, which I believe has
resulted in good outcomes for the Nation's science and technology
enterprise.
The budget this year is subject to considerable pressure, as you
know, and the President is committed to cutting the budget deficit in
half by 2009. These factors make this year's budget proposal the
tightest in nearly two decades.
Despite these pressures, federal R&D funds will increase in the
President's fiscal year (FY) 2006 budget. The Budget maintains a strong
focus on winning the war against terrorism, while moderating the growth
in overall spending, and this focus is reflected in the proposed R&D
investments. The Administration has also maintained high levels of
support for priority areas such as nanotechnology, information
technology, the hydrogen initiative, and space exploration.
Furthermore, while overall ``non-security'' discretionary spending is
reduced by one percent, ``non-security'' R&D is not correspondingly
diminished. The FY06 proposal preserves the substantial increases
made--with your support--during the first term of this Administration.
This treatment of R&D is consistent with the President's commitment to
science and technology and the vital role they play in meeting the
Nation's goals for national and economic security and the quality of
life.
Comparing R&D investments in this Administration with investments
in other top national priorities demonstrates this commitment: From
FY01 to this FY06 proposal, federal spending on Department of Homeland
Security activities will have increased 83 percent; Department of
Education programs are up 40 percent; and Department of Defense
spending is up 37 percent. At the same time total federal investment in
R&D will have increased 45 percent. The percentage increase in R&D has
been second only to the increase in the Department of Homeland Security
during President Bush's first five budget years (and I might add,
during Chairman Boehlert's five years as Chairman of this committee).
This historic increase in R&D has not been confined to a single
agency or field of science. It does include a significant investment in
defense R&D, whose value to the Nation's technical enterprise extends
well beyond the defense establishment. Defense R&D funds significant
university and private sector research, supports a large number of
scientists, engineers and technical experts, and is instrumental in
training and recruiting the next generation of technical talent for the
Nation. Non-defense R&D, however, has also benefited from similar large
increases during the past five years.
I am emphasizing these historical data to provide a context for
this year's request. Within a pattern of overall budget constraint,
funds are provided that we believe are appropriate to maintain and
refine the large program increases of previous years. Within the
pattern of detailed agency budgets, priorities have been established
and choices made that preserve the Nation's investment in the
critically important assets of science and technology.
THE PRESIDENT'S FY 2006 R&D BUDGET
The President's FY 2006 Budget requests $132.3 billion in Federal
Research and Development funds, an increase of $733 million over this
year's (2005) record R&D budget. The Budget allocates 13.6 percent of
total discretionary outlays to R&D--the highest level in 37 years. Non-
defense R&D accounts for 5.6 percent of total discretionary outlays, an
amount significantly greater than the 5.0 percent average over the past
three decades.
While non-defense discretionary program budget authority is reduced
by 0.26 percent in this proposal, non-defense R&D funds are increased
by 0.74 percent. The category of Basic Research is maintained near its
historically high level at $26.6 billion in FY 2006, slightly down from
$26.9 billion in FY 2005.
Not all programs can or should receive equal priority, and this
budget reflects priority choices consistent with recommendations from
numerous expert sources. In particular, this budget is informed by
recommendations from the President's Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST), and reflects an extensive process of consultation
among the federal agencies, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
As in previous years this R&D budget highlights collaborations
among multiple federal agencies working together on broad themes. I
will describe some individual agency highlights, followed by the five
multi-agency R&D priorities highlighted in the President's FY 2006
Budget: Networking and Information Technology R&D; National
Nanotechnology Initiative; Climate Change Science Program; Hydrogen
Fuel Initiative; and Homeland Security R&D.
AGENCY BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
Department of Defense (DOD):
DOD's FY 2006 R&D budget is over $70 billion. These funds will help
to transform our nation's military capabilities to meet future threats
and to fight the Global War on Terror. They also will improve DOD's
capabilities against weapons of mass destruction, including new
laboratory facilities, detection systems, and protective measures
against advanced biological and chemical weapons. From FY 2006 to FY
2011, $764 million is budgeted to upgrade infrastructure at the U.S.
Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID), a
critical component of this nation's federal biodefense effort. USAMRIID
not only works to protect men and women in uniform, it also responds to
emerging infectious diseases that threaten our nation (i.e., SARS, West
Nile, Hantavirus and Ebola).
I want to take this opportunity to express my concern that
investments in defense R&D are often discounted by science budget
observers as somehow less important than non-defense science. That is a
serious misconception. Weapons systems development and other national
security-related discovery and technology creation drive innovation and
strengthen economic competitiveness in much the same way as technical
work for other purposes. The technology required for national and
homeland security is nearly always ``dual use'' and benefits civilian
as well as military products.
Because science, mathematics, and engineering (SME) are vital
disciplines to our national defense, a formal DOD Science, Mathematics
and Research for Transformation (SMART) Defense Scholarship Pilot
Program was established in FY 2005. The purpose is to promote the
education, recruitment and retention of U.S. citizens in SME studies
deemed critical to national defense. DOD also uses other scholarship
and fellowship programs (i.e., the National Defense Science and
Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) fellowship program) to sponsor graduate
students. Funding for NDSEG has increased to support 200 new students
annually by FY 2007.
A total of $5.5 billion is provided for DOD basic and applied
research. This is $905 million less than the FY 2005 enacted level in
this category, but greater than the FY 2005 enacted level minus
Congressional earmarks (over $1 billion)--and $250 million more than
the FY 2005 request. This budget request does not continue FY 2005
earmarks beyond FY 2005, instead increasing programs of priority to
military leaders. Earmarks are not consistent with using funds most
efficiently to target military priorities or to support the best
research for military purposes. The Administration is prepared to work
with Congress to achieve consistency in Legislative and Executive
priorities to fund the best scientific research possible to support our
military forces.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS):
DHS-wide funding for science and technology (including TSA, Coast
Guard and Secret Service) will increase from $1.2 billion to $1.5
billion (FY 2005 to FY 2006). Within that total, DHS Science and
Technology (S&T) Directorate funding will increase from $1.1 billion to
$1.4 billion (FY 2005 to FY 2006). R&D is focused on countering
chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and other catastrophic
threats.
The President is requesting $227 million in DHS to fund the
creation of a Domestic Nuclear Defense Office (DNDO) whose
responsibility will be to develop a comprehensive system to detect and
mitigate any attempt to import or transport a nuclear explosive device,
fissile material, or radiological material intended for use within the
U.S. The DNDO will enhance and coordinate the nuclear detection efforts
of Federal, State and local governments and the private sector to
ensure a managed, coordinated response. At the federal level, the DNDO
will draw representatives from agencies involved with nuclear defense
research. They will analyze current nuclear defense R&D investments and
create a prioritized road map of future research that will address
current gaps and deficiencies. This will allow for the development of a
coordinated plan, while at the same time ensuring that critical gaps
are addressed and redundancies avoided, and maintaining the integrity
of each agency's current unique missions.
The S&T Directorate is leading the Administration effort to develop
new countermeasures to protect civilian and commercial aircraft against
man portable air defense systems (MANPADS). In the 2006 Budget, the
President has requested $110 million to continue DHS's Counter-MANPADS
program. This $49 million increase over last year's budget will go to
funding phase II of the program in which systems developed by BAE
Systems and Northrup Grumman will undergo rigorous testing and
evaluation.
The University Programs Office within the S&T Directorate has
established three Homeland Security Centers of Excellence (Texas A&M,
USC, and the University of Minnesota) and has just awarded a grant to
the University of Maryland to become the fourth Center of Excellence.
This program will continue to operate and expand to seven Centers with
a requested FY 2006 budget of $63.6 million, which is 90 percent of the
current year budget. The fellowship program will continue at the FY
2005 level.
National Institutes of Health (NIH):
Following fulfillment of the President's commitment to complete the
five-year doubling of the agency's budget, the FY 2006 request is $28.8
billion, a $196 million increase from FY 2005 enacted. The recent
budget doubling changes the scale of NIH operations and requires new
management mechanisms to better integrate, coordinate and focus
research, especially interdisciplinary research, across NIH's 27
Institutes and Centers (ICs).
Since 2001, the NIH Budget has increased by $8.2 billion or 40
percent. NIH is committing $333 million towards Roadmap initiatives, an
increase of $98 million over the FY 2005 enacted level. The Roadmap is
a part of the total NIH budget, and is important as a means to optimize
the effectiveness of the entire research portfolio, focusing on efforts
that no single or small group of ICs could address. Roadmap initiatives
will provide the tools to transform the content and process of medical
research over the next decade.
Other highlights include $2.9 billion for AIDS research, including
the highest priority goal of development of an AIDS vaccine, and almost
$1.8 billion for Biodefense research and development activities. In
addition, NIH has recently issued an interim final rule changing the
way employee conflict of interest is regulated. We believe this action
will greatly increase public confidence in the integrity of the NIH
intramural research program. NIH also has proposed an NIH Public Access
Policy, which provides the public with better access to research
publications resulting from NIH-funded research. This is accomplished
by establishing a comprehensive, searchable electronic archive of NIH-
funded research publications, providing publicly available access to
all.
National Science Foundation (NSF):
Funds are requested to increase the budget for NSF by 2.4 percent
to $5.6 billion in FY 2006, 26 percent above 2001's $4.4 billion level.
Similar investments in the past have yielded important scientific
discoveries, which boost economic growth and enhance Americans' quality
of life.
NSF leads two Administration priority research areas that promise
to strengthen the Nation's economy: the National Nanotechnology
Initiative (NNI) and the Networking and Information Technology R&D
program (NITRD). NSF-funded nanotechnology research, proposed at $344
million in FY 2006, a 1.6 percent increase over 2005 and 129 percent
since 2001, has advanced our understanding of materials at the
molecular level and has provided insights into how innovative
mechanisms and tools can be built atom by atom. This emerging field
holds promise for a broad range of developing technologies, including
higher-performance materials, more efficient manufacturing processes,
higher-capacity computer storage, and microscopic biomedical
instruments and mechanisms. NSF's investments in NITRD, funded at $803
million in 2006, a one-percent increase over 2005 and 26 percent since
2001, support all major areas of basic information technology (IT)
research. NSF also incorporates IT advances into its scientific and
engineering applications, supports using computing and networking
infrastructure for research, and contributes to IT-related education
for scientists, engineers, and the IT workforce.
Growing concerns about the vulnerability of computers, networks and
information systems have prompted increased NSF investments in cyber
security research, education and training. The FY 2006 Budget provides
$94 million for these activities.
Every research discipline in the agency is increased between one to
3.5 percent, allowing the grant funding rate to be restored to 21
percent (from 20 percent in 2005). Funding is provided for the five
Major Research Equipment (MRE) projects already approved (Atacama Large
Millimeter Array, EarthScope, the IceCube Neutrino Observatory, the
Rare Symmetry Violating Processes (RSVP) installation, the National
Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), and the Scientific Ocean
Drilling Vessel).
In order to most effectively and efficiently support the Nation's
polar research activities in Antarctica, funding for three polar
icebreakers is being transferred from the U.S. Coast Guard to NSF ($48
million). In the future, this will permit NSF to define the options for
refurbishment or replacement of two of the ships, as well as
operational options for the third (Arctic) icebreaker.
The FY 2006 Budget will continue NSF's efforts to prepare U.S.
students for the science and engineering workforce, with funds for
4,600 graduate research fellowships and traineeships. NSF provides
annual stipends in these programs of $30,000, which is significantly
higher than the average stipend of $18,000 in 2001.
Department of Energy (DOE):
The FY 2006 Budget provides $3.5 billion for DOE's Office of
Science, a $57 million reduction after removing $80 million in
earmarks. This reduction does not imply diminished priority for Office
of Science operations, but reflects various construction and
procurement adjustments. Over a five year period this Administration
has invested more than $17 billion in Office of Science basic research
at DOE, 14 percent greater than the previous five-year period in
constant dollars.
The Department has a broad program of basic research and operates a
unique suite of major scientific user facilities in support of its
missions. The FY 2006 Budget provides funding to complete construction
and begin operation of the Spallation Neutron Source--to become the
world's preeminent facility for materials studies--and four new
nanoscale science research centers. $25 million is included for the
development of a High-end Computing (HEC) Leadership Class Computer,
bringing the total three-year investment to $100 million. $83 million
begins construction of the Linac Coherent Light Source--a revolutionary
new facility that will open entirely new realms of discovery in the
chemical, materials, and biological sciences. Basic materials and
chemistry research in support of the Hydrogen Fuel Initiative is
enhanced to $33 million and assuming that international partners reach
a timely site decision, $46 million is available to begin fabrication
of U.S. contributions to the International Thermonuclear Experimental
Reactor (ITER). These investments will allow U.S. scientists to remain
at the forefront of their fields.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA):
During the year since the President outlined a bold vision for
sustained and affordable human and robotic exploration of space, NASA
has restructured its organization and reprioritized its programs. The
current human spaceflight programs, Shuttle and International Space
Station, are focusing research and technology development on enabling
the vision, while requirements are being established for the next
generation of space transportation. An exciting array of space science
missions are being planned that will enhance our understanding of the
solar system, including interactions between the Earth and the space
environment, and building observatories that will peer further into the
cosmos to understand the origin of the universe, its structure,
evolution and destiny.
The President's FY 2006 Budget request for NASA is $16.456 billion,
a 2.4 percent increase from 2005, reflecting a strong commitment by the
Administration to pursue the exploration vision. The FY 2006 Budget
request also makes some hard decisions, canceling some projects with
high technical risk and others whose cost estimates would have led to
the certain cancellation and delay of several other important programs.
The budget request maintains NASA's focus on exploration and science
while strengthening the long-term foundation for continued success.
The budget requests about $3.2 billion in FY 2006 for new vehicles
and technologies to enable sustained human and advanced robotic
exploration far from Earth. NASA has identified the major requirements
for a Crew Exploration Vehicle that will carry astronauts to the Moon.
NASA plans to perform risk reduction tests in 2008 and stage its first
crewed flight by 2014. NASA will also continue pursuing nuclear
technologies for space applications, optical communications for high
data rate connectivity to space probes, radiation shielding, and other
advanced technologies to support the exploration vision. In addition,
NASA is pursuing innovative means to engage private industry including
offering space prizes to spur innovation.
The budget requests approximately $5.5 billion in FY 2006 to
continue advancing our scientific understanding of the Sun, Earth, and
planets and to inform decisions regarding appropriate human exploration
missions. NASA will also build on its legacy of revolutionizing
astronomy by continuing current operations of space telescopes such as
Hubble, Chandra, and Spitzer while planning for the next generation of
spacecraft that will enhance our ability to find planets around other
stars, peer deep into the history of the universe, and improve our
understanding of its structure.
The FY 2006 Budget continues to fund critical investments in Earth
science satellites, technologies, and research. NASA will continue to
play a major part in the interagency Climate Change Science Research
Program, and contribute to the international initiative on the Global
Earth Observing System of Systems.
The budget requests approximately $6.4 billion in FY 2006 for
operating the Space Shuttle and continuing assembly and operations of
the International Space Station. NASA is examining configurations that
meet the needs of both the new space exploration vision and our
international partners using as few Shuttle flights as possible to
enable Shuttle retirement by 2010, following completion of its role in
ISS assembly. In concert with the new vision, NASA will refocus U.S.
Space Station research on activities that prepare human explorers to
travel beyond low Earth orbit, such as developing countermeasures
against space radiation and understanding long-term physiological
effects of reduced gravity.
As the United States implements the Vision for U.S. Space
Exploration, the Administration recognizes the value of effective
cooperation with Russia to further our space exploration goals. At the
same time, we have to appropriately reflect U.S. nonproliferation
policy and objectives in our relationship with Russia. The
Administration is thus interested in seeking a balanced approach that
continues to protect our nonproliferation goals while advancing
potential U.S. cooperation with Russia on the Vision for U.S. Space
Exploration. Such a balanced approach must include the Iran
Nonproliferation Act of 2000 (INA), which currently complicates
cooperation with Russia on the International Space Station (ISS), and
will also have an adverse impact on cooperation with Russia on our
future space exploration efforts related to human space flight. To that
end, the Administration looks forward to working with Congress to
ensure that the Vision for U.S. Space Exploration is able to succeed
while remaining fully consistent with broader U.S. national security
and nonproliferation goals.
Department of Commerce:
The 2006 Budget provides over $1 billion for R&D at the Department
of Commerce.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) ``core''
programs receive $485 million, an increase of eight percent over 2005
(22 percent after earmarks are excluded). The Administration continues
to insist on the highest priority for NIST lab research because it is
producing the scientific foundation for new technologies and providing
essential technical support through its standards activities for
industrial development and commercialization of new and emerging
technologies. The FY 2006 request is a 40 percent increase over 2001.
NIST is proposing a new strategic initiative in 2006, Advances in
Manufacturing, funded at $19.6 million, and a new NIST business plan is
being developed to better focus and address high leverage areas of
advanced manufacturing, nanotechnology, quantum computing, homeland
security, and biosystems and health.
The FY 2006 Budget again proposes to terminate the Advanced
Technology Program (ATP). The Administration believes firmly that other
NIST research and development programs have profoundly greater impact
than ATP, and are essential to the continued technical leadership of
U.S.-based businesses, American workers, and the domestic economy. The
Budget proposes to fund the Hollings Manufacturing Extension
Partnership Program at $47 million, a 50-percent reduction from the
2005 grant level. The Administration's approach will maintain a strong
national network of centers while focusing funding based on centers'
performance in providing information and consulting services to small
manufacturers. The program has also augmented funding through expanding
partnerships with other agencies and institutions. Given this new
operating environment, the Administration believes the program has
evolved to a stage at which less reliance on direct appropriations is
required.
For the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the
FY 2006 Budget provides $361 million for Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research (OAR), an 11 percent reduction from 2005 enacted, due mostly
to earmarks. This investment provides for ongoing research on climate,
weather, air quality, and ocean processes. For NOAA programs that
support the climate change science program, $181 million is provided,
and Sea Grants are sustained at the 2005 level of $61 million.
To improve efficiency, the Budget also streamlines administrative
layers within the Technology Administration (TA). The Budget reflects
TA's intent to evaluate its current operating practices and incorporate
methods to improve the effectiveness of its operations.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):
The FY 2006 EPA S&T request is $792 million, a two percent increase
over FY 2005, even before removing $70 million in earmarks. This
investment supports core Agency programs and strengthens the
application of science to EPA regulatory actions and other programs.
The Administration is directing $20 million of S&T funding to a new
pilot program within EPA that the program offices (e.g., Water, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Air) would then use to fund
applied research in the Office of Research and Development (ORD). This
is intended to improve the use of ORD (to avoid duplicative program
efforts), coordination between the program offices and ORD, and
responsiveness and accountability. This program contributes to the
overall increase in S&T funding.
$79 million in new funding will support homeland security projects
and research at EPA related to water security monitoring and
surveillance, post-incident building and environmental decontamination,
and Environmental Laboratory Preparedness and Response.
The FY 2006 Budget requests approximately $65 million for the
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, which includes a decrease in
exploratory research grants. Given the overall tightness of EPA's
budget (-6 percent from 2005 enacted), and the need to fun core
programmatic needs, STAR grants, which cannot focus on EPA program
needs, were reduced.
Department of Transportation (DOT):
The FY 2006 Budget request for highway-related research is $543
million, $23 million less than 2005, before removing significant
earmarks. Highway research includes the Federal Highway
Administration's transportation research and technology contract
programs, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration research and
analysis, and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration research and
technology.
The 2006 request for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Research, Engineering and Development is $130 million, virtually the
same as 2005's $131 million. In 2003, Congress created the Next
Generation Air Transportation System Joint Planning and Development
Office (JPDO) [Public Law 108-176] to coordinate the goals, priorities,
and research activities across the Federal Government relative to the
air transportation system. The JPDO vision was articulated in their
Integrated Plan released on December 12, 2004 and the research needs
identified to date are being addressed through prioritization and
leveraging of existing funds at FAA, NASA, and DOD.
PRIORITY INITIATIVES
The 2006 budget highlights priority interagency initiatives
described briefly below. These initiatives are coordinated through the
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) for which my office has
responsibility for day-to-day operations. The Council prepares research
and development strategies that cross agency boundaries to form a
consolidated and coordinated investment package.
Networking and Information Technology R&D--With President Bush's FY
2006 Budget request of $2.2 billion for the Networking and Information
Technology R&D (NITRD) program, the investment in this area over five
years will total more than $10.4 billion. Research in networking and
information technologies underpins advances in virtually every other
area of science and technology and provides new capacity for economic
productivity. Through active coordination, NITRD agencies mutually
leverage resources to make broader advances in networking and
information technology than any single agency could attain.
NSF continues to provide the largest share of federal
NITRD funding, reflecting the Foundation's broad mission as
well as its leadership role in coordinating NITRD activities.
The FY 2006 request for NSF is $803 million, an $8 million
increase from the 2005 estimate.
High-end computing continues to be a major focus
within the NITRD program. In FY 2004, the interagency High End
Computing Revitalization Task Force (HECRTF) produced the
Federal Plan for High-End Computing, which describes a roadmap
for progress in core technologies for high-end computing,
mechanisms for improving access to high-end computing
resources, and strategies for improving federal procurement and
coordination of high-end systems. The FY 2006 budget reflects
the continuation of NITRD activities that are consistent with
recommendations described in the Federal Plan, such as
investments in new high-end systems by NASA and DOE's Office of
Science.
NASA continues to emphasize high-end computing within
its NITRD portfolio through the recently-completed acquisition
of the Project Columbia supercomputer, a portion of which NASA
plans to make available to other federal users. Following
completion of the acquisition of Columbia, NASA's expenditure
in high-end computing is normalizing at a lower level.
DOE's Office of Science has also committed to operate
their new Leadership Class Computing facility at the Oak Ridge
National Laboratory as a national user facility. DOE's FY 2006
request of $25 million for the Leadership facility brings that
federal investment to $100 million.
National Nanotechnology Initiative--President Bush's FY 2006 Budget
provides over $1 billion for the multi-agency National Nanotechnology
Initiative (NNI), bringing the total NNI investment under this
Administration to $4.7 billion. This sustained investment will advance
our understanding of the unique phenomena and processes that occur at
the nanometer scale and expedite the responsible use of this knowledge
to achieve advances in medicine, manufacturing, high-performance
materials, information technology, and energy and environmental
technologies.
The largest investments continue to be made by NSF
where the FY 2006 NSF request is $344 million, an increase of
$6 million over the 2005 estimate.
DOE contribution to the initiative ramps up
dramatically with commencement of operations in four of its
five new major Nanoscale Science Research Centers located
across the country. The Centers will provide research equipment
and infrastructure that will be broadly available to
researchers from across the scientific research community.
Construction completion keeps total DOE NNI spending flat in FY
2006, but a portion of construction roll-off funds are made
available for operational support.
The FY 2006 request of $147 million by HHS includes
programs at NIH emphasizing nanotechnology-based biomedical
advances occurring at the intersection of biology and the
physical sciences, such as the National Cancer Institute's
Alliance for Nanotechnology in Cancer, and at the National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) that
address implications and applications of nanotechnology for
health and safety in the workplace.
With the addition of NIOSH, 11 federal agencies
currently fund nanotechnology research and development under
the NNI, and another 11 participate in coordination. Agencies
that have joined the NNI as participants over the past year
include the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the Consumer
Product Safety Commission, indicating the increasing importance
of commercialization activities.
Climate Change Research and Development--The FY 2006 Budget continues
strong support for the Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) and the
Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP).
The CCSP budget continues to support the goals
outlined in the CCSP Strategic Plan, which was released in July
2003. Beginning in FY 2006, CCSP will formally track the
expected actions, deliverables, and milestones for each of its
programs in order to assess overall performance.
The FY 2006 Budget proposes approximately $1.9
billion to fund CCSP, virtually the same as 2005 despite
reductions in NASA (-$102 million) due to re-prioritization of
programs. With this request, the Administration will have
invested more than $9 billion over five years to improve our
understanding of the global climate system.
The FY 2006 Budget provides approximately $2.9
billion for the U.S. Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP),
which supports research, development, deployment, and voluntary
programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions via renewable
energy, fossil energy and nuclear energy, efficiency
improvements, and carbon sequestration.
In 2005, the CCTP will publish a draft Strategic Plan
and solicit comments from the scientific community and the
public. The CCTP will also identify within its portfolio a
subset of National Climate Change Technology Initiative (NCCTI)
priority activities.
Hydrogen Fuel Initiative--The Hydrogen Fuel Initiative (HFI) seeks to
develop new science and technology to support a major shift toward the
use of hydrogen as an energy medium, particularly for transportation.
The FY 2006 Budget for HFI is $260 million, $35 million (16 percent)
greater than the FY 2005 level. The Initiative remains on track to meet
President Bush's five-year, $1.2 billion commitment to hydrogen
research and development announced in his 2003 State of the Union
address. Some highlights include:
$20 million, an $11 million (122 percent) increase
over FY 2005, will fund the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative. This
initiative will conduct the R&D on enabling technologies,
demonstrate nuclear-based hydrogen production technologies, and
study potential hydrogen production schemes to support the
President's vision for a future Hydrogen economy.
$33 million for fundamental research within DOE's
Office of Science. This research seeks to overcome key
technical hurdles in hydrogen production, storage, and
conversion, by seeking revolutionary breakthroughs in areas
such as non-precious-metal catalysts, high-temperature membrane
materials, multifunctional nanoscale structures, biological and
photoelectrochemical hydrogen production, and precision
manufacturing processes.
Congressional earmarking is slowing progress on HFI,
however, and may jeopardize the ability of the Administration
to achieve its goal of a 2015 decision by industry to
commercialize fuel cell vehicles and infrastructure. In 2005,
DOE's Hydrogen Technology Program, a key component of HFI,
received 17 earmarks totaling $37 million, about 40 percent of
the program's funding.
Homeland Security--Technology continues to help secure our nation
against terrorism. Research and development over the past three years
in detectors against weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat agents,
medical countermeasures to improve public health preparedness and to
protect our nation's food and livestock, and advances in protecting the
First Responders are moving from laboratory to operational use. The
President's FY 2006 Budget continues an aggressive investment in
research, development, and the research infrastructure so as to further
enhance our nation's security. Priority research areas include:
$227 million to fund the creation of a Domestic
Nuclear Defense Office (DNDO) in DHS, whose responsibility will
be to develop a comprehensive system to detect and mitigate any
attempt to import or transport a nuclear explosive device,
fissile material or radiological material intended for illicit
use within the U.S.
$1.8 billion to the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) to fund research and development of
countermeasures against biological, chemical and radiological
threat agents.
$596 million is allocated for the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, HHS and DHS to improve food and agriculture
defense. This includes funding for research on exotic and
emerging diseases of plants and animals and to prevent and
detect food contamination, expanding and improving laboratory
facilities, and enhancing disease monitoring, surveillance and
vaccine storage.
$94 million will fund new and ongoing research at EPA
related to their role in water security and post-incident
decontamination. Systems for monitoring and surveillance of
terrorist threat agents in drinking water will be piloted in
several U.S. cities. Decontamination capabilities will be
strengthened by testing new cleaning methods, systems and
antimicrobial products for buildings and outdoor areas and by
conducting risk assessment work to support decontamination/
revision of cleanup guidance goals.
MANAGING THE FEDERAL RESEARCH BUDGET
Consistent with the President's Management Agenda, the
Administration is improving the effectiveness of the Federal
Government's investments in R&D by applying transparent investment
criteria in analyses that inform recommendations for program funding
and management. R&D performance assessment must be done carefully to
avoid negatively impacting scientific productivity. Research often
leads scientists and engineers down unpredictable pathways with
unpredictable results. This characteristic of research requires special
consideration when measuring an R&D program's performance against its
initial goals.
Elements of good R&D program management include establishing
priorities with expected results, specifying criteria that programs or
projects must meet to be started or continued, setting clear milestones
for gauging progress, and identifying metrics for assessing results.
The R&D Investment Criteria accommodate the very wide range of R&D
activities, from basic research to development and demonstration
programs, by addressing three fundamental aspects of R&D:
Relevance--Programs must be able to articulate why
they are important, relevant, and appropriate for federal
investment;
Quality--Programs must justify how funds will be
allocated to ensure quality; and
Performance--Programs must be able to monitor and
document how well the investments are performing.
R&D projects and programs relevant to industry are expected to meet
criteria to determine the appropriateness of the public investment,
enable comparisons of proposed and demonstrated benefits, and provide
meaningful decision points for completing or transitioning the activity
to the private sector.
OSTP and OMB are continuing to assess the strengths and weaknesses
of R&D programs across the Federal Government in order to identify and
apply good R&D management practices throughout the government.
CONCLUSION
Making choices is difficult even when budgets are generous. But
tight budgets have the virtue of focusing on priorities and
strengthening program management. This year's R&D budget proposal
maintains levels of funding that allow America to maintain its
leadership position in science and move ahead in selected priority
areas. It is responsible in its treatment of security-related science
and technology, and it rewards good planning and management.
America currently spends one and a half times as much on federally
funded research and development as Europe does, and three times as much
as Japan, the next highest investor in R&D. Our scientists collectively
have the best laboratories in the world, the most extensive
infrastructure supporting research, the greatest opportunities to
pursue novel lines of investigation, and the most freedom to turn their
discoveries into profitable ventures if they are inclined to do so.
We lead not only in science, but also in translating science to
economically significant products that enhance the quality of life for
all people.
This budget will sustain this leadership and maintain science and
technology capabilities that are the envy of the world. I would be
pleased to respond to questions.
Biography for John H. Marburger, III
John H. Marburger, III, Science Adviser to the President and
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, was born on
Staten Island, N.Y., grew up in Maryland near Washington D.C. and
attended Princeton University (B.A., Physics 1962) and Stanford
University (Ph.D., Applied Physics 1967). Before his appointment in the
Executive Office of the President, he served as Director of Brookhaven
National Laboratory from 1998, and as the third President of the State
University of New York at Stony Brook (1980-1994). He came to Long
Island in 1980 from the University of Southern California where he had
been a Professor of Physics and Electrical Engineering, serving as
Physics Department Chairman and Dean of the College of Letters, Arts
and Sciences in the 1970's. In the fall of 1994 he returned to the
faculty at Stony Brook, teaching and doing research in optical science
as a University Professor. Three years later he became President of
Brookhaven Science Associates, a partnership between the university and
Battelle Memorial Institute that competed for and won the contract to
operate Brookhaven National Laboratory.
While at the University of Southern California, Marburger
contributed to the rapidly growing field of nonlinear optics, a subject
created by the invention of the laser in 1960. He developed theory for
various laser phenomena and was a co-founder of the University of
Southern California's Center for Laser Studies. His teaching activities
included ``Frontiers of Electronics,'' a series of educational programs
on CBS television.
Marburger's presidency at Stony Brook coincided with the opening
and growth of University Hospital and the development of the biological
sciences as a major strength of the university. During the 1980's
federally sponsored scientific research at Stony Brook grew to exceed
that of any other public university in the northeastern United States.
During his presidency, Marburger served on numerous boards and
committees, including chairmanship of the Governor's Commission on the
Shoreham Nuclear Power facility, and chairmanship of the 80 campus
``Universities Research Association'' which operates Fermi National
Accelerator Laboratory near Chicago. He served as a trustee of
Princeton University and many other organizations. He also chaired the
highly successful 1991/92 Long Island United Way campaign.
As a public spirited scientist-administrator, Marburger has served
local, State and Federal governments in a variety of capacities. He is
credited with bringing an open, reasoned approach to contentious issues
where science intersects with the needs and concerns of society. His
strong leadership of Brookhaven National Laboratory following a series
of environmental and management crises is widely acknowledged to have
won back the confidence and support of the community while preserving
the Laboratory's record of outstanding science.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Doctor.
Mr. Secretary, you are up.
STATEMENT OF DR. SAMUEL W. BODMAN, SECRETARY OF ENERGY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Secretary Bodman. Mr. Chairman, I am very grateful, sir, to
be here again before this committee and to discuss the
President's 2006 budget request for science in particular at
the Department of Energy.
As you are well aware, I believe very passionately in the
role that science has played over the last century, really, in
the economic growth of our country. And I really believe that
what occurs in this budget will continue that record on into
the future.
I appreciate very much what this committee has done to
advance American science over the years, and I want to thank
you all for that and let you know that I am very anxious in
providing leadership for the Department of Energy because of
the pivotal role that the Department plays in funding science
and technology throughout our country.
Scientists working for the Department's National
Laboratories and in universities funded by the Department of
Energy over the years have been awarded more than 80 Nobel
Prizes. And to my knowledge, no one else comes anywhere close
to being able to make that kind of statement.
I particularly want to recognize today, in public, the
extraordinary leadership that Dr. Orbach has provided, who is
our Director of the Office of Science. I think he is here
today. I saw him in the room earlier. And he has done just----
Chairman Boehlert. You know he is here.
Secretary Bodman. He has done quite an extraordinary job,
and I wanted to recognize him. He has really brought a sense of
mission and focus to that job, which is very admirable. The
truth be known, I am here in his--I pulled rank on him so that
I could come before this committee again.
This Department's responsibility for the future of science
is best illustrated by our stewardship of the Nation's
scientific infrastructure through our system of world-class
National Laboratories. In addition to the Office of Science,
the Department has a robust research and development portfolio
extending across our programs in fossil energy, in nuclear
energy, in renewable energy, in energy efficiency,
environmental management, and in fact, in national security. So
we cover a broad range.
The Department is the single largest supporter of research
in the physical sciences. And as such, we have a special and
particularly important role in this field of scientific
endeavor, and it is one that I take very seriously.
The budget request, as Dr. Marburger just mentioned, for
the Office of Science, is $3.5 billion, and it will maintain a
very solid foundation for scientific discovery in our country.
In light of the emphasis that this budget places on deficit
control, this level of funding for the Office of Science
signals a very strong commitment on the part of the
Administration to invest in the promise of basic research for
discoveries that leapfrog today's technology.
The priorities that we have set are very clear. Through the
2006 budget, we will fully support presidential initiatives in
fusion and hydrogen. We will continue strong support for other
Administration priorities, such as nanotechnology and
information technology. We will complete on time and within
budget unique scientific facilities that will maintain an
enhanced research in areas that we believe offer the greatest
potential for broad advances in future energy technologies.
These scientific facilities were prioritized in our 20-year
facilities outlook that was announced and published in November
of 2003.
We will continue moving ahead with our FreedomCAR research
and the President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative to develop
hydrogen-fueled vehicles and the infrastructure to support
them. We are also carrying forward with U.S. participation in
the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, or ITER
as it is known, a project that will pursue the potential of
energy from nuclear fusion.
One of the biggest science stories of the year 2006 will be
the start-up of the Spallation Neutron Source at our Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, which will provide the most intense
neutron beam in the world for cutting-edge research.
Our fiscal year 2006 will also bring four of our five
nanoscale science research centers on line, providing tools
found nowhere else in the world for exploration at the atomic
level, offering huge potential for the discovery of entirely
new ways to build materials.
We are fully funding construction of the Linac Coherent
Light Source at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, a
machine that will produce x-rays 10 billion times brighter than
any existing x-ray source on earth. When it comes on line in
2009, it essentially will allow stop-action photography of
atomic motion. Anyone that doubts the seriousness of this kind
of accomplishment should ask someone in the pharmaceutical
industry just how they could use a machine that shows the
chemical bonds that are formed during the course of a chemical
reaction.
The Office of Science will also fully fund the National
Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, a key center for
capacity supercomputing used by roughly 2,000 researchers every
year, and a separate open-access leadership class computing
facility focused on providing the capability to carry out a
limited number of massive simulations not possible on any other
civilian supercomputer in the United States.
The Department will also expand research underpinning
biotechnology solutions to the world's energy challenges and
research supporting the President's climate change science
program.
Our research programs in high-energy physics continue to
receive strong support. We have enhanced funding for future
accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider, scheduled to
begin operation in 2007, and the proposed International Linear
Collider, which is now in early research and development phase.
Our nuclear physics program will continue to offer world-class
facilities for use by thousands of researchers around the
world.
While this hearing focuses on civilian science and
technology programs that are authorized by this committee, I
want to note the significant contributions to science that also
occur at the National Nuclear Security Administration's, or
NNSA's, nuclear weapons laboratories, which are under the
jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee. Work at the
weapons laboratories primarily focuses on stockpile stewardship
and the Office of Science and the NNSA will work together on a
number of activities.
The President's budget request for the Office of Science
allows us to build on the solid foundation created over the
last four years, propels us into new areas of scientific
leadership, and maintains America's leadership in science,
something that we are very much committed to.
And I, too, would be happy to take questions at the
appropriate time.
Thank you, sir.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Bodman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Samuel W. Bodman
Chairman Boehlert, Congressman Gordon, Members of the Committee,
thank you for welcoming me back, this time in my new role as Secretary
of Energy. I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss the President's
fiscal year 2006 budget for science at the Department of Energy.
I come before you this morning with tremendous enthusiasm for the
Department's mission to maintain and enhance America's leadership in
science and technology.
That responsibility is best illustrated by the Department's Office
of Science stewardship of our nation's scientific infrastructure
through a system of 10 world-class National Laboratories. In addition
to the Office of Science, the Department has a robust research-and-
development portfolio extending across our programs in fossil energy,
nuclear energy, renewable energy, energy efficiency, environmental
management and national security.
The Department is the single largest supporter of research in the
physical sciences, and as such, we have a special and particularly
important role in this field of scientific endeavor.
The budget request for the Office of Science of $3.5 billion
maintains a solid foundation for scientific discovery. In light of the
emphasis that this Budget places on deficit control, this level of
funding for the Office of Science signals a strong commitment on the
part of the Administration to invest in the promise of basic research
for discoveries that leapfrog today's technology.
The priorities we have set are clear. Through the 2006 Budget, we
will fully support Presidential initiatives in fusion and hydrogen, we
will continue strong support for other Administration priorities such
as nanotechnology and information technology, we will complete. . .on
time and within budget. . .unique scientific facilities that will
maintain and enhance research in areas we believe offer the greatest
potential for broad advances in future energy technologies. These
scientific facilities were prioritized in our 20-year facilities
outlook, announced in November 2003.
We will continue moving ahead with our FreedomCAR research and the
President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative to develop hydrogen-fueled
vehicles and the infrastructure to support them. We are also carrying
forward with U.S. participation in the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor project to pursue the potential of energy from
nuclear fusion.
One of the biggest science stories of the year 2006 will be the
start-up of the Spallation Neutron Source at our Oak Ridge National
Lab, which will provide the most intense neutron beam in the world for
cutting-edge research.
Our FY 2006 budget will also bring four of our five nanoscale
science research centers on line, providing tools found nowhere else in
the world for exploration at the atomic level, offering huge potential
for the discovery of entirely new ways to build materials.
We are fully funding construction of the Linac Coherent Light
Source at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, a machine that will
produce x-rays 10 billion times brighter than any existing x-ray source
on Earth. When it comes on line in 2009, it essentially will allow
stop-action photography of atomic motion. Just ask the pharmaceutical
industry what they could do with a machine that shows them how the
chemical bond forms during a chemical reaction.
The Office of Science also will fully fund the National Energy
Research Scientific Computing Center, a key center for capacity
supercomputing used by roughly 2,000 researchers every year, and a
separate open-access leadership class computing facility focused on
providing the capability to carry out a limited number of massive
simulations not possible on any other civilian supercomputer in the
U.S.
The Department will also expand research underpinning biotechnology
solutions to the world's energy challenges and research supporting the
President's climate change science program.
Our research programs in high energy physics continue to receive
strong support. We have enhanced funding for future accelerators such
as the Large Hadron Collider, scheduled to begin operation in 2007, and
the proposed International Linear Collider, which is now in an early
R&D phase. Our nuclear physics program will continue to offer world-
class facilities for use by thousands of researchers from around the
world.
While this hearing focuses on civilian science and technology
programs that are authorized by this committee, I want to note that
significant contributions to science also occur at the National Nuclear
Security Administration's nuclear weapons laboratories, which are under
the jurisdiction of the Armed Services Committee. Work at the weapons
laboratories primarily focuses on stockpile stewardship, and the Office
of Science and the NNSA work together on a number of activities.
The President's budget request for the Office of Science allows us
to build on the solid foundation created over the last four years,
propels us into new areas of scientific leadership, and maintains
America's leadership in science.
I would be happy to answer your questions.
Biography for Samuel W. Bodman
Samuel Wright Bodman was sworn in as the 11th Secretary of Energy
on February 1, 2005 after the United States Senate unanimously
confirmed him on January 31, 2005. He leads the Department of Energy
with a budget in excess of $23 billion and over 100,000 federal and
contractor employees.
Previously, Secretary Bodman served as Deputy Secretary of the
Treasury beginning in February 2004. He also served the Bush
Administration as the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Commerce
beginning in 2001. A financier and executive by trade, with three
decades of experience in the private sector, Secretary Bodman was well
suited manage the day-to-day operations of both of these cabinet
agencies.
Born in 1938 in Chicago, he graduated in 1961 with a B.S. in
chemical engineering from Cornell University. In 1965, he completed his
ScD at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. For the next six years he
served as an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering at MIT and
began his work in the financial sector as Technical Director of the
American Research and Development Corporation, a pioneer venture
capital firm. He and his colleagues provided financial and managerial
support to scores of new business enterprises located throughout the
United States.
From there, Secretary Bodman went to Fidelity Venture Associates, a
division of the Fidelity Investments. In 1983 he was named President
and Chief Operating Officer of Fidelity Investments and a Director of
the Fidelity Group of Mutual Funds. In 1987, he joined Cabot
Corporation, a Boston-based Fortune 300 company with global business
activities in specialty chemicals and materials, where he served as
Chairman, CEO, and a Director. Over the years, he has been a Director
of many other publicly owned corporations.
Secretary Bodman has also been active in public service. He is a
former Director of M.I.T.'s School of Engineering Practice and a former
member of the M.I.T. Commission on Education. He also served as a
member of the Executive and Investment Committees at M.I.T., a member
of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, and a Trustee of the
Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum and the New England Aquarium.
Secretary Bodman is married to M. Diane Bodman. He has three
children, two stepchildren, and eight grandchildren.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Dr. Bement.
STATEMENT OF DR. ARDEN L. BEMENT, JR., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Dr. Bement. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Gordon,
and members of the Committee. I am pleased to appear before you
today to discuss NSF's fiscal year 2006 budget request. And I
want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your unabashed support and
that of your colleagues for NSF over the years. Thank you.
NSF's fiscal year 2006 budget request reflects the
Administration's support for our mission. In light of the tight
fiscal climate, we believe we have fared relatively well. For
the coming fiscal year, NSF requests $5.6 billion, an increase
of $132 million, or 2.4 percent over last year's appropriated
levels. The total funding for NSF's Research and Related
Activities [RRA] account in this request increases by $113
million, nearly three percent, to $4.33 billion.
Of this amount, $48 million is transferred to NSF from the
Coast Guard for operation and maintenance expenses related to
ice breaking in the Antarctic. We are currently working with
the Coast Guard to explore options for funding icebreaker
services in support of science within available NSF resources
for fiscal year 2006.
Maintaining strong and robust research programs in support
of individual investigators and small groups of researchers is
at the core of NSF's mission. In many scientific disciplines,
NSF is the major source of federal funding to academic
institutions. One goal in this year's request is to strengthen
our research support across all areas in our portfolio.
Research, however, is only part of the NSF equation. Our
mission includes education as well. In our request, we will
maintain a total investment of almost $400 million for programs
with a proven track record of broadening the participation of
under-represented groups in the science and engineering arena.
The Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation, the
Centers for Research Excellence in Science and Technology, the
Robert Noyce Scholarship program, the STEM Talent Expansion
Program, and EPSCoR, to name just a few, are protected from
reductions in this request.
Overall, the Education and Human Resources Directorate at
NSF will be funded at $737 million, down 12.4 percent from last
year. Although we have found it necessary to make cuts in these
programs, we are also finding ways to leverage other resources
in support of education. We will, for example, continue to
encourage the types of partnerships between researchers and
students in our RRA portfolio that provide hands-on learning
experiences.
We are committed to ensuring that future generations gain
the skills, knowledge, and insight that comes from working at
the frontier of discovery. We will also maintain our strong
working relationship with the Department of Education to
implement best practices in their initiatives supporting math
and science education.
While there are no new starts in our Major Research
Equipment and Facilities Construction account, NSF is
increasing funding in this account by $76 million for a total
of $250 million to continue to fund ongoing projects.
The NSF directly supports roughly 200,000 scientists,
educators, and students and processes over 40,000 proposals a
year. Balancing the needs of a growing, increasingly complex
portfolio with new requirements for security, e-business,
accountability, and award oversight presents an ongoing
challenge. In order to meet these management goals, NSF will
increase funding for activities that advance organizational
excellence by $46 million to a total of $336 million. This
increase will allow for the recruitment of 23 additional full-
time employees, enhancement and security of our e-government
systems, and continuing the implementation of the business
analysis recommendations that we have been working on during
the past three years.
Mr. Chairman, I have touched upon the variety and richness
of the NSF portfolio, but I have only scratched the surface.
NSF research and education efforts contribute greatly to the
Nation's innovation-driven economy and help keep America at the
forefront of science and engineering. NSF-supported researchers
produce leading-edge discoveries that serve society and spark
the public's curiosity and interest. Extraordinary discoveries
coming from dozens of NSF programs are enriching the entire
science and engineering enterprise and making education fun,
exciting, and achievement-oriented.
With that, I would be glad to answer any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Arden L. Bement, Jr.
Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member Gordon, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for this opportunity to discuss NSF's FY 2006
budget Request. It is a pleasure to appear before you today. For over
fifty years, NSF has been charged with being a strong steward of the
scientific discovery and innovation that has been crucial to increasing
America's economic strength, global competitiveness, national security,
and overall quality of life.
For many years, the United States economy has depended heavily on
investments in research and development--and with good reason.
America's sustained economic prosperity is based on technological
innovation made possible, in large part, by fundamental science and
engineering research. Innovation and technology are the engines of the
American economy, and advances in science and engineering provide the
fuel.
Investments in science and technology--both public and private--
have driven economic growth and improved the quality of life in America
for the last 200 years. They have generated new knowledge and new
industries, created new jobs, ensured economic and national security,
reduced pollution and increased energy efficiency, provided better and
safer transportation, improved medical care, and increased living
standards for the American people. Innovation and technology have
become the engines of the American economy, and advances in science and
engineering provide the fuel.
Investments in research and development are among the highest-
payback investments a nation can make. Over the past 50 years
technological innovation has been responsible for as much as half of
the Nation's growth in productivity.
Sustaining this innovation requires an understanding of the factors
that contribute to it. The Council on Competitiveness, a consortium of
industry, university, and labor leaders, has developed quantitative
measures of national competitiveness: the number of R&D personnel in
the available workforce; total R&D investment; the percentage of R&D
funded by private industry; the percentage of R&D performed by the
university sector; spending on higher education; the strength of
intellectual property protection, openness to international
competition; and per capita gross domestic product. A similar set of
indicators has been developed by the World Bank Group, and voluminous
data have been compiled by NSF. The important point underscored by
these indicators is that, for America to remain a prosperous and secure
country, it must maintain its technological leadership in the world.
Perhaps the Council on Competitiveness' 2004 National Innovation
Initiative report captured it best by simply stating, ``Innovation has
always been the way people solved the great challenges facing
society.''
Often times, the connection between an area of research, or even a
particular scientific discovery, and an innovation may be far from
obvious. Fundamental research in physics, mathematics and high-flux
magnets supported by NSF led to the development of today's Magnetic
Resonance Imaging (MRI) technology. Today, MRIs are used widely to
detect cancer and internal tissue damage. Fundamental research on
extremophiles, or microorganisms living in extreme environments, led to
the polymerase chain reaction, a procedure paramount to modern
biotechnology, as well as one that allows us to use DNA for forensic
evidence. Continuing progress in basic science and engineering research
promises more discoveries as well as further improvements in living
standards and economic performance.
And still, science and engineering is becoming an ever-larger
portion of our nation's productivity. In the early 1950s, Jacob
Bronowski wrote, ``The world today is powered by science.'' I would
take this premise one step farther, ``No science; no economic growth.''
Our current level of scientific and technological productivity is what
keeps us ahead of our global competitors as the playing field continues
to become more level.
NSF has helped advance America's basic science and engineering
enterprise for over fifty years. Despite its small size, NSF has an
extraordinary impact on scientific and engineering knowledge and
capacity. While NSF represents only four percent of the total federal
budget for research and development, it accounts for 50 percent of non-
life science basic research at academic institutions. In fact, NSF is
the only federal agency that supports all fields of science and
engineering research and the educational programs that sustain them
across generations. NSF's programs reach over 2,000 institutions across
the Nation, and they involve roughly 200,000 researchers, teachers, and
students.
NSF specifically targets its investments in fundamental research at
the frontiers of science and engineering. Here, advances push the
boundaries of innovation, progress and productivity.
Compared to other commodities, knowledge generated from basic
science investments is unique, long lasting and leverages on itself.
Knowledge can be shared, stored and distributed easily, and it does not
diminish by use. Incremental advances in knowledge are synergistic over
time. NSF is proud to have built the foundation for this knowledge base
through decades of peer-reviewed, merit-based research.
FY 2006 Budget Request
The Foundation's FY 2006 budget Request reflects the
Administration's confidence in our continuing with this mission. In
light of the tight fiscal climate, NSF fared relatively well. For the
coming fiscal year, NSF requests $5.6 billion, an increase of $132
million, or 2.4 percent, over last year's appropriated levels.
At a time when many agencies are looking at budget cuts, an
increase in our budget underscores the Administration's support of
NSF's science and engineering programs, and reflects the agency's
excellent management and program results.
With the wealth of benefits that investments in science and
engineering bring to the Nation, perhaps none is more powerful than the
capability to respond quickly and effectively to challenges of all
kinds. NSF's programs reach over 2,000 institutions across the Nation,
and they involve researchers, teachers, and students in all fields of
science and engineering and at all levels of education. They also keep
us abreast of scientific advances throughout the world. This breadth of
activity in and of itself creates a vital national resource, as it
provides the Nation with a constantly invigorated base of knowledge,
talent, and technology. For example, in areas ranging from terrorism
threats to natural disasters, NSF's ongoing support of research in
areas such as advanced information technologies, sensors, and
earthquake engineering ensures a broad base of expertise and equipment
that allows the science and engineering community to respond quickly in
times of need and in partnership with scientists and engineers from
other countries.
Four funding priorities centering this year's request are designed
to address current national challenges and strengthen NSF's core
research investments. They include: (1) Strengthening core disciplinary
research; (2) Providing broadly accessible cyberinfrastructure and
world-class research facilities; (3) Broadening participation in the
science and engineering workforce; and (4) Sustaining organizational
excellence in NSF management practices.
This year's investments will strengthen the core disciplines that
empower every step of the process from discovery at the frontier to the
development of products, processes, and technologies that fuel the
economy. At the same time, NSF's investments will enable increasing
connections and cross-fertilization among disciplines.
NSF's focus on a clear set of priorities will help the Nation meet
new challenges and take advantage of promising opportunities, while at
the same time spurring the growth and prosperity needed to secure the
Nation's long-term fiscal balance. The FY 2006 budget will emphasize
investments that address established interagency research priorities,
meet critical needs identified by the science and engineering
community, and advance the fundamental knowledge that strengthens the
Nation's base of innovation and progress. NSF will respond to these
challenges by supporting the best people, ideas, and tools in the
science and engineering enterprise, and by employing the best practices
in organizational excellence.
Research and Related Activities Account
For FY 2006, total funding for NSF's Research and Related
Activities account increases by $113 million--nearly three percent--to
$4.33 billion. This increase largely reflects NSF efforts to strengthen
fundamental research in the core scientific disciplines as well as
promote emerging areas of research. The FY 2006 portfolio balances
research in established disciplines with research in emerging areas of
opportunity and cross-disciplinary projects. The most fertile
opportunities sometimes lie in novel approaches or a collaborative mix
of disciplines.
Maintaining a strong and robust core is critical during such a
budget climate as certain segments of the academic community rely
heavily on NSF funding. In many scientific disciplines, NSF is a major
source of federal funding to academic institutions, including
mathematics (77 percent), computer sciences (86 percent), the social
sciences (49 percent), the environmental sciences (50 percent),
engineering (45 percent) and the physical sciences (39 percent).
Research, however, is only part of the NSF equation. Training the
Nation's next generation of scientists and engineers is another key
component of NSF's mission, and critical for maintaining economic
prosperity and global competitiveness. Here, we are finding ways to
leverage our resources. For example, as we strengthen our core
disciplinary research programs, we will continue to encourage the types
of partnerships between researchers and students that provide hands-on
experience while ensuring that future generations gain the skills,
knowledge and insight that come from working at the frontier of
discovery.
Providing Broadly Accessible Cyberinfrastructure and World-Class
Research Facilities
Twenty-first century researchers and the students who will bring
new skills into the workforce rely on cutting edge tools. In FY 2006,
NSF is placing a high priority on investments in cyberinfrastructure
and in unique, widely shared research equipment and facilities.
An infrastructure of power grids, telephone systems, roads, bridges
and rail lines buttressed this nation's industrial economy and allowed
it to prosper. However, cyberinfrastructure--a networked system of
distributed computer information and communication technology--is the
lynchpin of today's knowledge based economy. In FY 2006, NSF
cyberinfrastructure investments total $509 million, an increase of $36
million (7.6 percent) over the FY 2005 level.
Modeling, simulation, visualization, data storage and communication
are rapidly transforming all areas of research and education. NSF
investments in cyberinfrastructure support a wide mix of projects and
encourage participation from broad segments of the research community
that rely on such technology as they tackle increasingly complex
scientific questions. Thanks to cyberinfrastructure and information
systems, today's scientific tool kit includes distributed systems of
hardware, software, databases and expertise that can be accessed in
person or remotely. In fact, programs such as Teragrid, a multi-year
effort to create the world's largest distributed infrastructure for
open scientific research, are specifically designed to transcend
geographic boundaries and accelerate virtual collaborations.
NSF is also increasing funding for the Major Research Equipment and
Facilities Construction by $76 million or 44 percent, in FY 2006 for a
total of $250 million. There are no new starts, but we will continue to
fund ongoing projects. Work will proceed on five major facilities that
will serve a spectrum of the science and engineering community. These
include world-class astronomy, physics, and geosciences observatories
identified as the highest priorities for advancing science and
engineering.
The Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA), in Chile,
is a model of international collaboration. It will be the
world's largest, most sensitive radio telescope.
The EarthScope facility is a multi-purpose array of
instruments and observatories that will greatly expand the
observational capabilities of the Earth Sciences and permit us
to advance our understanding of the structure, evolution and
dynamics of the North American continent.
Ice Cube, the world's first high-energy neutrino
observatory will be located under the ice at the South Pole.
RSVP, the Rare Symmetry Violating Processes Project
will enable cutting edge physics experiments to study
fundamental properties of nature. Studies will probe questions
ranging from the origins of our physical world to the nature of
dark matter.
SODV, the Scientific Ocean Drilling Vessel, is a
state-of-the-art ship that will be a cornerstone of a new
international scientific ocean drilling program. Ocean core
sediment and rock collected by the vessel will help
investigators explore the planet's geological history and probe
changes in the earth's oceans and climate.
Additionally, In FY 2006, NSF will assume the responsibility, from
the U.S. Coast Guard, for funding the costs of icebreakers that support
scientific research in polar regions; $48 million was transferred for
those purposes.
Broadening Participation
To feed our knowledge-based economy, the Nation needs to capitalize
on all of its available talent to produce a workforce of skilled
technologists, scientists and engineers. That means developing the
largely untapped potential of those under-represented in the science
and engineering workforce--minorities, women and persons with
disabilities. It also means supporting science education and training
in all regions of the country--not just at large Universities or in a
handful of states.
To achieve these goals, the FY 2006 Request maintains a total
investment of almost $400 million. Funding will be targeted to programs
with a proven track record of progress in these areas. Included in this
is $8 million in additional support from the research directorates that
will supplement the Education and Human Resources Account to help
achieve our goal of broadening science and engineering participation.
Working closely with the directorates offers a dual benefit of
providing educational opportunities and hands-on research experience to
prepare students for the 21st century workforce.
NSF will invest $396.5 million in a range of programs with proven
track records. Several highly successful programs for broadening
participation--the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation,
the Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate, the Centers
for Research Excellence in Science and Technology (CREST), Robert Noyce
Scholarship program, STEM Talent Expansion Program and EPSCoR--just to
name a few, are secured in this request. Each of these serve as models
for integrating educational and research resources to improve
recruitment and retention in science and engineering to all sectors of
our diverse population.
Sustaining Organizational Excellence in NSF Management Practices
NSF directly supports over 210,000 scientists, educators and
students and processes over 40,000 proposals a year. Balancing the
needs of a growing, increasingly complex portfolio with new
requirements for e-business practices, security, accountability, and
award oversight presents a challenge. NSF sets high standards for its
business practices and strives to create an agile, innovative
organization through state-of-the-art business conduct and continual
review. In order to meet these management goals, NSF will be increasing
funding for activities that advance organizational excellence by $46
million, to a total of $336 million. In addition to critically needed
upgrades to our information technology infrastructure, this increase
will allow for the recruitment of 25 full-time employees--23 for NSF
and one each for the National Science Board and the Office of the
Inspector General--which will improve our ability to manage our
increasingly complex portfolio.
Expanding our e-government systems and the implementing of our
ongoing business analysis recommendations are high priorities for FY
2006.
Over the past two years, as part of the Administrations Program
Assessment Rating Tool, NSF has worked with OMB to rate eight of our
investment categories. All of these areas have received the highest
rating of Effective. As such, NSF programs fall within the top 15
percent of 600 government programs evaluated to date.
Crosscutting Activities
Beyond our budget priorities lie dozens of programs and initiatives
that cut across NSF directorates and enrich the overall science and
research enterprise. NSF sets priorities based on a continual dialogue
and exchange of ideas with the research community, NSF management and
staff and the National Science Board. Programs are initiated based on
several criteria: intellectual merit, broader impacts of the research,
balance across disciplines and synergy with research in other agencies.
The Committee of Visitors process ensures a continuous evaluation of
our merit review process and feedback on how NSF programs are
performing. In FY 2006, NSF will emphasize four crosscutting areas.
Crosscutting areas of emerging opportunity: Over several years, NSF
has funded exceptionally promising interdisciplinary efforts aimed at
advancing our knowledge, addressing national needs, and probing the
grand challenges of science. The FY 2006 request maintains or increases
FY 2005 levels of funding for the following priority areas: $84 million
for Biocomplexity in the Environment, $243 million for Nanoscale
Science and Engineering, $89 million for the Mathematical Sciences
Priority Area and $39 million for Human and Social Dynamics.
International Collaborations: Science and engineering research are
increasingly global endeavors. International partnerships are critical
to the United States in maintaining a competitive edge, capitalizing on
global opportunities, and addressing global problems. The Office of
International Science and Engineering's recent move to the director's
office, and the budget request reflects this important trend. The FY
2006 budget provides $35 million for NSF's Office of International
Science and Engineering.
The recent Indian Ocean Tsunami disaster represents the finest in
international cooperation--and clearly demonstrates an international
desire to develop scientific methods for natural disaster prediction
and ways to reduce losses when such catastrophic events do inevitably
occur. A network of more than 128 sensors--which NSF has a 20-year
investment in--recorded shock waves from the recent earthquake as they
traveled around the earth. This network is the primary international
source of data for earthquake location and tsunami warning and its data
forged the critical core of the early knowledge of this event. Within
days of the disaster NSF research teams deployed to the region to
gather critical data before it was lost to nature and reconstruction.
Their work will help scientists and engineers better understand the
warning signs of natural disasters, the design of safer coastal
structures, the development of early warning and response systems, and
effective steps for disaster recovery.
Interagency Initiatives: NSF will continue to play a lead role in
interagency collaborations to address national needs and take advantage
of economic growth opportunities. In FY 2006, NSF investments in the
National Nanotechnology Initiative increase by $6 million over FY 2005
levels to total $344 million. NSF participation in the Networking
Information Technology Research and Development initiative will
increase to $803 million--$8 million over the FY 2005 level. The NSF
contribution to the Climate Change Science Program decreases slightly
to $197 million.
Homeland Security Activities: The FY 2006 Request includes a $2
million increase for government-wide efforts in homeland security
research and development. This $344 million investment will strengthen
NSF's commitment to cyber security by supporting innovations to secure
today's computer and networking systems, embed cyber security into
future systems and preparing tomorrow's workforce with state-of-the-art
security skills.
Conclusion
Mr. Chairman, I've only touched upon the variety and richness of
the NSF portfolio. NSF research and education efforts contribute
greatly to the Nation's innovation economy and help keep America at the
forefront of science and engineering. At the same time, NSF supported
researchers produce leading edge discoveries that serve society and
spark the public's curiosity and interest. Extraordinary discoveries
coming from dozens of NSF programs and initiatives are enriching the
entire science and engineering enterprise, and making education fun,
exciting and achievement-oriented. In fact, just this month, two of the
most widely-read and e-mailed stories from the national press were the
discoveries of NSF-supported researchers.
In one, scientists using new bio-bar-code technology created a
detection method for a protein implicated in Alzheimer's disease. It's
the first test designed for use in living patients and holds promise
for diagnosing Alzheimer's at an early stage. In the second
development, scientists generated an entirely new classification system
for the brains of birds based on recent studies showing that birds are
much closer in cognitive ability to mammals than previously thought.
The new scheme will affect thousands of scientists, and help merge
research efforts on both birds and mammal. These two examples, fresh
off the press, illustrate NSF's motto ``Where Discoveries Begin.''
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I hope that this brief
overview conveys to you the extent of NSF's commitment to advancing
science and technology in the national interest. I am very aware and
appreciative of the Committee's long-standing bipartisan support for
NSF. I look forward to working with you in months ahead, and would be
happy to respond to any questions that you have.
Biography for Arden L. Bement, Jr.
Arden L. Bement, Jr., became Director of the National Science
Foundation on November 24, 2004. He had been Acting Director since
February 22, 2004.
He joined NSF from the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, where he had been director since Dec. 7, 2001. Prior to his
appointment as NIST director, Bement served as the David A. Ross
Distinguished Professor of Nuclear Engineering and head of the School
of Nuclear Engineering at Purdue University. He has held appointments
at Purdue University in the schools of Nuclear Engineering, Materials
Engineering, and Electrical and Computer Engineering, as well as a
courtesy appointment in the Krannert School of Management. He was
director of the Midwest Superconductivity Consortium and the Consortium
for the Intelligent Management of the Electrical Power Grid.
Bement served as a member of the U.S. National Science Board from
1989 to 1995. The board guides NSF activities and also serves as a
policy advisory body to the President and Congress. As NSF director,
Bement will now serve as an ex officio member of the NSB.
He also chaired the Commission for Engineering and Technical
Studies and the National Materials Advisory Board of the National
Research Council; was a member of the Space Station Utilization
Advisory Subcommittee and the Commercialization and Technology Advisory
Committee for NASA; and consulted for the Department of Energy's
Argonne National Laboratory and the Idaho National Engineering and
Environmental Laboratory.
Bement joined the Purdue faculty in 1992 after a 39-year career in
industry, government, and academia. These positions included: Vice
President of Technical Resources and of Science and Technology for TRW
Inc. (1980-1992); Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Research and
Engineering (1979-1980); Director, Office of Materials Science, DARPA
(1976-1979); Professor of Nuclear Materials, MIT (1970-1976); Manager,
Fuels and Materials Department and the Metallurgy Research Department,
Battelle Northwest Laboratories (1965-1970); and Senior Research
Associate, General Electric Co. (1954-1965).
He has been a Director of Keithley Instruments Inc. and the Lord
Corp. and was a member of the Science and Technology Advisory Committee
for the Howmet Corp. (a division of ALCOA).
Bement holds an engineer of metallurgy degree from the Colorado
School of Mines, a Master's degree in metallurgical engineering from
the University of Idaho, a doctorate degree in metallurgical
engineering from the University of Michigan, an honorary doctorate
degree in engineering from Cleveland State University, and an honorary
doctorate degree in science from Case Western Reserve University. He is
a member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Doctor.
Mr. Kassinger.
STATEMENT OF MR. THEODORE W. KASSINGER, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
COMMERCE
Mr. Kassinger. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Gordon, members of the
Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today on the
President's fiscal year 2006 budget request for research and
development at the Department of Commerce.
This Committee is a constant and strong voice for the
science and technology community. We look forward to continuing
to work with you to ensure that America remains the world
leader in science and technology.
The Commerce Department has many diverse responsibilities,
but collectively our programs constitute one of the Nation's
great science enterprises. The President's budget request for
fiscal year 2006 reflects his strong commitment to the
Department's science and technology programs.
Those programs continue to demonstrate remarkable
creativity. For example, NIST scientists recently created a new
form of matter, called a fermionic condensate, that could help
unlock the mysteries of superconductivity, a phenomenon with
the potential to improve energy efficiency. Other scientists
developed a series of clinical standards that will help make
diagnosing heart attacks more precise and demonstrated a low-
power, extremely sensitive magnetic sensor about the size of a
grain of rice.
NOAA also remains at the forefront of science in the public
interest. NOAA aircraft covered more than 100,000 nautical
miles of track lines and deployed over 1,200 drops into storms
during the busy 2004 hurricane season. NOAA commissioned the
U.S. Climate Reference Network, which now contains 72 stations
across the country, to reduce uncertainty of long-term
temperature and precipitation trends. In this past summer, NOAA
led hundreds of government and university scientists from
across the country and western Europe in the largest air
quality and climate study to date.
The world-class caliber of the Commerce Department
scientists and engineers was recognized this past year through
numerous prestigious publications and awards. For just two
examples, Susan Solomon, a NOAA atmospheric scientist, was
awarded the 2004 Blue Planet Prize for her pioneering work in
identifying the mechanism that produces the Antarctic ozone
hole and contributions towards the protection of the ozone
layer. NIST researcher, Deborah Gin, was selected as both the
Research Leader of the Year by Scientific American Magazine and
is the winner of the Service to America Medal for Science and
Environment, a prestigious national award recognizing
excellence among America's federal public servants.
The Department's fiscal year 2006 budget request supports
these researchers and other--and ongoing initiatives while
seeking further to provide the Nation with a strong foundation
for a healthy economy, enhanced competitiveness, and an
improved quality of life for all Americans.
Mr. Chairman, with that overview, let me summarize the
highlights of the proposed budget requests, beginning with the
Technology Administration.
For fiscal year 2006, the Administration requests $536
million for TA, including $4.2 million for the Office of the
Under Secretary and $532 million for NIST. Of the NIST request,
$420.6 million is for laboratory programs, a 12.6 percent
increase over the fiscal year 2005 appropriation. These
programs provide U.S. industry in the science and technology
community with the measurement capabilities, standards,
evaluated reference data, and test methods needed to support
innovation and to improve quality in virtually all technology-
intensive sectors.
Among other things, the fiscal year 2006 request proposes
an additional $40 million in funding for three areas that
target pressing national priorities. These include increases in
advances in manufacturing with components addressing
nanomanufacturing, measurements and standards for homeland
security, and new measurement horizons for the U.S. economy and
science.
Turning to NOAA, for fiscal year 2006, the Administration
request $3.6 billion. These funds will allow NOAA to advance
our understanding of our marine and atmospheric resources, and
in so doing, will help sustain this country's economic vitality
and environmental health. NOAA is leading efforts to better
understand the complex interactions on our planet through the
development of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems,
GEOSS. Our fiscal year 2006 budget request includes increases
of approximately $95 million to support the requirements of
GEOSS.
Included in this effort is $10 million to expand the U.S.
Tsunami Warning Network. NOAA will deploy 32 new advanced
technology buoys as part of a fully-operational tsunami warning
system by mid-2007. The new system will provide the United
States with nearly 100 percent detection capability for a U.S.
coastal tsunami, allowing notification to local managers within
minutes. The new system will also expand monitoring
capabilities throughout the entire Pacific and Caribbean
basins, providing tsunami warning for regions bordering half of
the world's oceans.
To implement the President's U.S. Ocean Action Plan, the
Administration's request includes significant resources for
NOAA's ocean and coastal programs as well as fisheries and
protected species activities. We request more than $1 billion
for these ongoing programs, including approximately $60 million
to address state and regional ecosystem research priorities at
the National Sea Grant College Program, $23 million in support
of the NOAA Ocean Exploration Program, $33 million for building
a new fisheries research vessel, and $25 million for fishery
stock assessment.
Mr. Chairman, that completes my statement. Thank you, once
again, for your continued support. And of course, I would be
pleased to take any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kassinger follows:]
Prepared Statement of Theodore W. Kassinger
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am pleased to join you
today as we examine the Administration's budget request for research
and development at the Department of Commerce and the Department's role
in reinforcing America's technological leadership. I want to thank the
Committee, especially Chairman Boehlert, for your continued support and
leadership on innovation issues, as well as your support for NOAA's
part in the Administration's tsunami initiative. You have been a
constant and strong voice for the science and technology community. I
look forward to continuing our work together with you and the other
Members of the Committee to ensure that America remains the world
leader in the science and technology field.
INTRODUCTION
The Department of Commerce works to create the conditions for
economic growth and opportunity for all Americans by promoting
innovation, entrepreneurship, competitiveness, and stewardship. We
provide tools to help maximize U.S. competitiveness and enable economic
growth for American industries, workers, and consumers. Of particular
importance to this committee is the work that Commerce does in
fostering America's science and technological leadership by conducting
basic research and experimentation, enhancing technical standards,
advancing measurement science, and promoting environmental stewardship.
Maintaining America's technological leadership is important not
just for our nation's national security, but also to ensure continued
U.S. economic growth. Science and technology are the pistons that help
propel the American engine of prosperity. This Administration's
commitment to science and technology continues to foster the conditions
for both economic growth and employment opportunity. These investments
in science and technology provide the catalyst that enables private
enterprises to provide our nation and our people with good jobs, a
better quality of life, and inventions that have established our
national identity.
The President understands the opportunity science and technology
provide to enhance the lives of all Americans. The President's focus in
the area of science and technology is reflected in the Department of
Commerce R&D portfolio. The Commerce budget maintains substantial R&D
investments in two of our bureaus, the Technology Administration (TA)
(which includes the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) and the National Technical Information Service) and the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The overall FY 2006
budget request for TA is $536.2 million, a small increase over our FY
2005 request. However, the request represents an increase of over $47
million from the FY 2005 enacted amount for NIST's core laboratory
programs, the NIST programs most effective and necessary in supporting
the fundamental scientific understanding and technological needs of
U.S.-based businesses, American workers, and the domestic economy. For
FY 2006, we will be seeking program increases of $19.6 million for
advanced manufacturing research, $3.0 million for measurements and
standards work related to homeland security, $17.2 million for
measurement infrastructure improvements, and $35.4 million for high
priority facilities modernization and maintenance needs. For NOAA, we
are requesting $3.6 billion, an increase of $205 million from our FY
2005 request. Of the increase, $94.7 million will support requirements
to build an integrated Earth observing system.
While the focus of this testimony is on TA/NIST and NOAA, I should
also note that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA) play significant roles in promoting the Department of Commerce's
technology goals. USPTO ensures that the intellectual property system
contributes to a strong global economy, encourages investment in
innovation, and fosters entrepreneurial spirit. NTIA works to spur
innovation by promoting efficient use of federal radio spectrum and
encouraging the development and implementation of new and emerging
telecommunications technologies, helping consumers and creating jobs.
The Technology Administration and its various components seek to
maximize technology's contribution to economic growth, high-wage job
creation, and the social well-being of the United States. TA and NIST
not only serve as advocates for technological innovation but also
analyze the factors that affect our competitiveness and develop the
tools needed to enhance productivity, trade, and, in the end, the
quality of life for all Americans. In addition, NIST is engaged in
critical research in high-priority areas of technological innovation
such as nanotechnology, information technology, biotechnology, and
manufacturing technology. NIST is also conducting research in response
to the World Trade Center tragedy and the February 2003 nightclub fire
in Rhode Island to better prepare facility owners, contractors,
architects, engineers, emergency responders, and regulatory authorities
to respond to future disasters.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's mission is to
understand and predict changes in the Earth's environment, as well as
to conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our
nation's economic, social, and environmental needs. The work performed
at NOAA touches the daily lives of every person in the United States
and in much of the world. The agency
provides weather, water, and climate services;
manages and protects marine resources ecosystems;
conducts atmospheric, climate, and ecosystems
research;
promotes efficient and environmentally safe commerce
and transportation; and
provides emergency response and vital information in
support of homeland security.
In addition to using science and technology to create jobs and
improve economic prosperity, the Department is also directing resources
toward disaster prevention, to better understand and minimize the loss
of life and property from disasters.
In January 2005, the Administration announced that the U.S. tsunami
detection and warning capabilities would be expanded as a contribution
to the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). NOAA's
advanced technology will create an expanded tsunami warning system that
is expected to be fully operational by 2007. These programs will help
NOAA improve public safety and economic security in the United States
and throughout the world.
Currently, NOAA leads the Nation and world in ocean and ecosystem
science, policy and management. In December 2004, the Administration
released the ``U.S. Ocean Action Plan,'' a response to the U.S.
Commission on Ocean Policy's report entitled, ``An Ocean Blueprint for
the 21st Century.'' Working under the leadership of the Council on
Environmental Quality, and with several other agencies, NOAA
substantially assisted in the development of this action plan. NOAA
will play a key role in implementing many of the ocean policy measures
that it contains, including supporting the establishment of a
coordinated ocean governance structure. Consistent with this approach,
the Administration continues to support Commerce's leadership role in
oceans policy and activities by promoting passage of a NOAA Organic
Act. We look forward to discussing this with you further when you
consider this legislation.
NOAA's global leadership also extends to monitoring the planet
through the development of the GEOSS. The GEOSS will provide NOAA and
others with the tools to better understand our planet through an
integrated, comprehensive, and sustained Earth observation program.
NOAA leads the Administration's interagency Climate Change Science
Program. As needs for water, climate, and air quality information
increase worldwide, NOAA has been working to improve our understanding
of climate and helping develop products and services that provide
useful information for national and regional management decisions. One
example of this is the National Integrated Drought Information System
(NIDIS), which provides early drought warning on a regional level.
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE FY 2006 BUDGET REQUEST
Technology Administration Programs
The mission of the Technology Administration (TA), which includes
the Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology and two major
components, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
and the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), is to maximize
technology's contribution to America's economic growth. In addition,
the agency seeks to encourage the development of the technological
infrastructure required to support U.S. industry through the 21st
Century; to foster the development, diffusion, and adoption of new
technologies; and to create a business environment conducive to
innovation.
The Department requests $4.2 million for the Office of the Under
Secretary for Technology (TA/US). The Administration proposes to
streamline the administrative and policy operations of the Technology
Administration's Office of the Under Secretary. The Office of the Under
Secretary, in its technology policy leadership role, will continue to
provide policy guidance to the Secretary of Commerce and the Technology
Administration's component agencies, serve as an interagency leader on
key Administration technology initiatives, lead the National Medal of
Technology Program, participate in the President's National Science and
Technology Council's Committee on Technology, promote Administration
policies for innovation and industrial competitiveness within and
outside government, and provide leadership within the Department as
chair of the Commerce Coordinating Council for Technology. The Under
Secretary's office will continue to coordinate the civilian science and
technology efforts of federal agencies and help to shape federal
civilian R&D priorities after considering the views of industry. The
Under Secretary will continue to provide counsel to the Secretary of
Commerce on all matters affecting innovation, and coordinate with
counterpart offices in the trade and economic agencies to create
unified, integrated trade and technology policies.
National Institute of Standards and Technology
NIST's proposed $532 million budget request for FY 2006 focuses the
Institute's resources on addressing the critical national priorities
that can best be served by the Institute's unique cross-disciplinary
expertise in science and technology. As noted above, the request
includes a $47 million increase for NIST's core laboratory programs.
The NIST budget request for FY 2006 also reflects the President's
concern for focusing intently on other national priorities. While the
request covers strategic investments in Institute capabilities, it
still helps meet the President's overall budget goals by reducing
NIST's budget more than $163 million compared with FY 2005
appropriations, accomplished by shifting resources from lower-priority
programs.
Advances in Manufacturing ($19.6 million increase)
The Department is requesting a $19.6 milllion increase for NIST in
Advanced Manufacturing research. The growth of the global economy--the
rapid exchange of goods and technologies--has placed unprecedented
pressures on the Nation's manufacturing sector. Most observers agree
that if the United States is to compete successfully, it must be on the
basis of sustained, superior innovation in all aspects of
manufacturing. We must lead the pack. Innovation must go further than
new products and processes, however. The United States must innovate in
the business of manufacturing, improving efficiencies and continuing
the productivity increases that have sustained the manufacturing sector
since the Second World War.
National Nanomanufacturing and Nanometrology Facility
(N3F) ($10 million). The largest major element of
NIST's advanced manufacturing initiative is the development of
a national ``user facility'' for nanotechnology research in the
AML. The N3F will give qualified collaborators from
industry and government access to the state-of-the-art
laboratories of the AML, the existing nanotechnology expertise
of the seven NIST laboratories, and mechanisms for partnering
on nanotech projects. Together with public and private sector
partners, NIST will use the N3F to investigate the
fundamental physics, mechanisms and metrology to manipulate
matter atom-by-atom, in order to build perfectly defined
nanostructures with predefined electronic, mechanical, and
quantum properties. N3F will offer U.S. industry in
a single institution an unmatched measurement infrastructure to
compete at the nanoscale.
Nanomanufacturing research ($4 million). As
manufacturing processes and products become ever more
sophisticated, the key battlefields of 21st-century
manufacturing will depend more and more on excellence in
measurement technology. This is true across the board in
manufacturing, but nowhere more so than in the rapidly
developing field of nanomanufacturing, where it can be
necessary to locate, track and manipulate individual molecules
and atoms. NIST's nanomanufacturing research effort will
concentrate on delivering the critical measurement technology
and standards infrastructure across the broad spectrum of
science and engineering that is ``nanotechnology,'' including
nanodevices (mechanical and electronic), nanomagnetics,
nanomanipulation, and nanoscale materials characterization.
NIST is uniquely positioned for this work not only because of
its long history of expertise in measurement research, but also
because of the recent completion of its Advanced Measurement
Laboratory (AML), which offers a unique collection of state-of-
the-art precision measurement labs.
Manufacturing enterprise integration ($1.6 million).
America's large manufacturers are globally distributed
enterprises. They rely on a system of small manufacturers, part
suppliers, shippers, and raw materials producers organized in
extended enterprises called supply chains. Successfully
managing production throughout the supply chain is critical to
the competitiveness of these extended enterprises. Production
costs are no longer the major cost drivers in these global
supply chains--the dominant factor is the cost of engineering
and business activities. But many small manufacturers not
equipped to do business in these sophisticated, distributed
enterprises are being left out and are in danger of failure.
One independent economic study commissioned by NIST shows that
the automotive supply chain alone loses $1 billion annually due
to inefficient engineering and business data exchanges. NIST
proposes a wide-ranging program to work with U.S. manufacturers
to create a ``roadmap'' for the development of open standards
for enterprise integration, to develop and test standards and
standard conformance tests, and to ensure that they are
integrated and consistent with developing international
standards.
Expanding access to global markets through
measurements and standards ($4 million). Even with superior
technology, American manufacturers can be effectively locked
out of profitable foreign markets through artificial barriers
of local standards and regulations. Knocking down these
barriers--or preventing them from being raised in the first
place--is an issue of international standards, harmonization,
and measurement compatibility, again, part of NIST's core
expertise. Eighty percent of global merchandise trade is
influenced by testing and other measurement-related
requirements of regulations and standards. U.S. manufacturers
need standards and calibrations to be aligned with
international standards to give them seamless access to foreign
markets. In addition, NIST monitors foreign and international
standards efforts for potential impact on U.S. exports. NIST
will develop leading-edge measurement capabilities for key
technologies and new, more efficient ways to deliver the highly
accurate measurements needed by U.S. industry to create and
market products based upon new technologies. NIST will continue
its efforts to support access to foreign markets through
technical leadership and coordination of key trade-related
documentary standards activities in specific technology
sectors.
Measurements and Standards for Homeland Security ($3 million increase)
Measurements and standards are increasingly understood to be an
important component of homeland security, whether in helping to
mitigate the effects of disasters, both natural and man-made, or in
helping to ensure the reliability of the new high-tech tools being
brought to bear in the war on terrorism. NIST will continue to
coordinate its work closely with the Department of Homeland Security
and other agencies.
Improved standards and guidelines for first
responders and buildings ($1 million). NIST has long been
recognized for its contributions to public safety in building
technology--the development of test methods and engineering
data to make buildings safer and more resistant to earthquakes
and fire, for example--but the increased risk of terrorist
attacks since September 11, 2001, has added to natural
disasters a new dimension of deadly, human-engineered threats.
A private-sector coalition representing the key industry,
standards, codes and professional organizations has worked with
NIST to establish a comprehensive program to identify and
address high priority national needs for building safety. Key
areas include increased structural integrity, standards for
first-responder equipment, enhanced fire resistance of
structures, building operations in emergencies, and improved
emergency egress and access. NIST will expand support for this
effort, developing the technical basis for needed improvements
in practice, standards, and codes for buildings and for
guidelines and equipment standards for first responders. The
Institute will develop simulation and decision-support tools
and technical guidelines, conduct trial designs to demonstrate
the effectiveness of technical solutions, and recommend
specific proposals for needed changes to codes and standards.
Biometrics ($1 million). Biometrics--positive
identification of individuals based on physical
characteristics--is a critical tool in the war on terrorism. As
terrorist and criminal databases become larger and larger, it
is more and more important that biometric technologies perform
accurately and quickly. As this dynamic technology continues to
evolve, the field must be constantly reassessed to ensure that
the government is using the most accurate biometric recognition
technology available for a given application. NIST will build
on its existing expertise in biometrics to certify facial
recognition technologies to make certain that all requirements
for border security are met, build on its testing program for
determining the accuracy of new multi-modal biometric systems
(those combining two or more biometric techniques), and develop
tests and guidelines to ensure that future biometric systems
are inter-operable and work efficiently in real-world
applications.
New Measurement Horizons for the U.S. Economy and Science ($17.2
million increase)
One of the most serious challenges NIST faces in its mission to
provide the measurement infrastructure needed by the Nation's
scientific and industrial communities is the requirement for the
relatively small Institute to stay not only abreast of but--in many
cases--ahead of rapidly changing developments across the broad range of
science and technology.
Biosystems and health ($7,195,000). The advances in
biology and biotechnology in the last few years--both new
understanding in fields like genomics and proteomics and new
capabilities and technologies such as gene engineering and
microarrays--constitute a technological revolution in fields as
diverse as material science, agriculture and health care. A
lack of measurement tools for ensuring accuracy and reliability
looms as a major roadblock that could prevent promising
biotechnologies from achieving their potential for mainstream
health care applications.
NIST has a unique, multidisciplinary expertise in
measurement science that is essential in a field like
biotechnology, which lies at the interface of biology,
chemistry, physics and mathematics. The Institute also has a
long history of working with the health care industry to
provide needed measurement technologies and reference standards
ranging from clinical standards for cholesterol and glucose to
DNA. Under this initiative, NIST will establish a systems
approach to identifying and removing measurement-related
barriers to the effective application of biotechnology in
health care. The Institute also will further the development of
bioinformatics--the computational and information science tools
needed to assemble, organize, summarize and analyze the
mountains of biological data produced by these new
technologies.
Inter-operability and security for emerging
scientific systems ($2 million). Sophisticated scientific
information systems are critical to the continued competitive
advantage of the United States. The systems that underlie the
Nation's research advances in science and engineering--the
``cyberinfrastructure''--are rapidly expanding in all
directions. Individual information devices--from radio-
frequency ID (RFID) tags to ``smart dust'' to micro-electro-
mechanical systems (MEMS)--are becoming ever smaller, more
capable, and more ubiquitous. At the other end of the scale,
system complexity--systems of systems of systems--is growing
rapidly as well. It is crucial that standards and measurements
for reliability, manageability, inter-operability and security
be included from the beginning of system design to avoid costly
retrofits.
As part of this initiative, NIST will develop the
technical support tools required to maximize the performance of
future components, systems and networks, including developing
metrics and standards for the performance, conformance and
usability of complex, multi-modal, distributed scientific
systems to ensure inter-operability. NIST will also develop
metrics and techniques for characterizing and assessing
emerging self-managing system technologies, and develop
mathematical models, measurement techniques and control systems
capable of detecting and reacting to emergent behaviors in
very-large-scale scientific systems. The initiative also calls
for NIST to develop test methods and protocols for detecting
and reporting malicious tampering of systems and components.
Quantum processing--beyond high-end computing ($4
million). Quantum information science, which seeks to exploit
the peculiar characteristics of quantum mechanics to create
information processing systems of almost unimaginable power, is
likely to revolutionize science and technology on a scale
comparable to the introduction of the laser, the integrated
circuit, and the computer. Currently intractable problems, such
as the factoring of very large numbers to decipher terrorist
communications, potentially could be done in less than a second
by a quantum computer. On the other hand, quantum cryptography
could provide perfectly secure defense communications.
NIST is a leader in fundamental research on quantum
information systems, having demonstrated laboratory-scale
quantum computing and quantum teleportation systems. There is
also a need for a significantly broader program to provide the
basic measurement tools and standards for quantum computing and
communications systems to support U.S. industry's research and
development of quantum systems. Quantum computing also will
require the development of whole new approaches to processor
and memory control, error management, and component
interconnections. Under this initiative, NIST will develop a
measurement infrastructure and the fundamental technologies
needed to build prototype quantum processors that could be
scaled up to true quantum computers, and develop metrics for
evaluating alternative computing architectures based on quantum
processing.
Building competence for advanced measurements ($4
million). Since the late 1970s, a key element of NIST's
planning strategy has been the Building Competence for Advanced
Measurements Program, a special research effort enabling NIST
to explore key developing areas of science and technology and
establish a base of technical expertise on which to build
future measurement services. The quantum physics research of
NIST's two Nobel laureates, the development of new cold neutron
instrumentation that ultimately led to the Institute's unique
Cold Neutron Research Facility, and NIST's Biotechnology
Division with its pathbreaking research in DNA forensics all
were fostered originally by Competence Program funding. The
Competence Program is an essential tool giving NIST's research
program the necessary agility to adapt to fast-moving
scientific developments. The proposed initiative will allow
NIST to expand and enhance the existing Competence Program.
Facilities Improvement Plan ($32 million increase)
NIST is engaged in a long-range facility modernization program to
make badly needed repairs and upgrades to its physical plant. NIST
maintains about 50 specialized laboratories, offices and support
buildings at its two major campuses in Gaithersburg, Maryland and
Boulder, Colorado. Most of the Gaithersburg structures were built in
the 1960s and the Boulder site is a decade older. The aging of these
facilities has become a serious impediment to the Institute's mission,
hampering not only NIST work on the research frontiers of
biotechnology, nanotechnology, and semiconductor technology, but even
routine activities such as the calibration of precision pressure gauges
used to ensure the accuracy of airplane altimeters and other industrial
pressure systems. NIST developed a long-range Facilities Improvement
Plan, as well as plans for the thorough renovation of existing
structures and a maintenance program designed to address long-term
maintenance needs and reduce an extensive backlog of needed maintenance
work.
Maintenance for the Advanced Measurement Laboratory ($3.4 million
increase)
Completed at the end of 2003, the NIST Advanced Measurement
Laboratory (AML) is one of the world's most sophisticated measurement
and standards laboratories. Specialized AML labs are able to control
environmental factors such as vibration, temperature, humidity, and
surface and air cleanliness to the demands of NIST's most advanced
research in areas. In some labs, for example, temperature can be
controlled to within one-hundredth of a degree Celsius across the
entire room.
Maintaining and operating the AML poses special challenges because
of the sophisticated and complex mechanical and electrical systems
needed to maintain the rigorous environmental controls. Thorough and
uncompromising preventive maintenance is required to keep the AML
operating as designed and protect the Nation's investment in this
unique laboratory. If the clean room mechanical systems ever slip from
their exacting design parameters, for example, it will likely cost over
$100,000 to decontaminate the clean room and return it to service. This
initiative covers the needed increase to NIST's research facilities
budget to maintain the AML.
Baldrige National Quality Program ($5.7 million request)
NIST also administers the Baldrige National Quality Program (BNQR).
Created by the Congress in 1987, the BNQP has established a standard
for performance excellence that helps U.S. businesses and other
organizations continuously improve their competitiveness and
productivity through rigorous quality and performance management
practices.
Only a relative handful of institutions have won the program's
centerpiece, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award--since 1988,
only 62 Baldrige Awards have been presented to 59 organizations.
Nonetheless, the BNQP has had a pervasive influence on U.S. industry,
schools and hospitals through the widespread dissemination of Baldrige
``best practices.'' Many thousands of organizations use the Baldrige
criteria internally to assess and improve their performance, deliver
greater value to their customers, and improve overall organizational
effectiveness. The BNQP has been copied widely by state governments and
other countries.
The Baldrige Award originally had categories for manufacturing,
service, and small business. In 1999, the award was expanded to include
categories in education and health care. In 2004, the award was
expanded to include all non-profit organizations, including Federal,
State and local government organizations.
Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership ($46.8 million request)
Since 1988, the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (HMEP)
at NIST has fostered a federal-State-local partnership program to give
small and medium sized manufacturers a nationwide network of not-for-
profit centers to help them become more competitive and productive.
HMEP centers serve all 50 States and Puerto Rico, promoting lean
manufacturing techniques such as zero-defect quality programs, and
helping even the smallest firms tap into specialists from across the
country with manufacturing and business expertise in plant operations
and on manufacturing floors. The FY 2006 budget request will fund the
program at $46.8 million. At this level, the Administration will
maintain a national network of centers, while focusing funding based on
a center's performance and need.
Advanced Technology Program ($0 request)
Since 1990, the Advanced Technology Program has used cost-shared
awards to encourage industry investment in high-risk, innovative
technology R&D that promise broad benefits to the Nation. While the
program has sponsored successful research projects over the years, this
budget proposes terminating the program in favor of more appropriate
and higher-priority needs of government funding. Our budget request
reflects our belief that the NIST core laboratory programs have a much
higher priority than the ATP because they support the fundamental
science and technology needs of U.S. businesses, workers and the U.S.
economy.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Programs
Americans look to NOAA for an incredible variety of services and
support ranging from the local weather forecast, to a sustainable
supply of quality seafood, to the safe transport of millions of tons of
weatherborne cargo. NOAA also helps to keep the coastline safe and
vibrant, and to maintain detailed research on the climate from the
frozen arctic to the depths of the oceans. NOAA's Strategic Plan
highlights focal areas for research under each of the agency's four
major cross-cutting strategic goals: ecosystems, climate, weather and
water, and commerce and transportation. NOAA's FY 2006 budget request
includes several initiatives that are research driven or science based
which are set out below in the context of NOAA's four major strategic
goals. I would like to begin by highlighting the Global Earth
Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), a program that brings together
elements of all four strategic goals.
Global Earth Observations ($94.7 million increase)
NOAA's FY 2006 budget includes increases of approximately $94.7
million to support requirements to build an integrated Earth observing
system, the GEOSS. Included in these efforts is the $65.6 million
requested for NOAA's Geostationary and Polar Orbiting Satellites, and
the $9.5 million to expand the U.S. Tsunami Warning Network. The new
'system of systems' will ``take the pulse of the planet'' by providing
critical scientific data needed to address important global economic,
social and scientific challenges. With this improved knowledge,
decision-makers around the world will be able to make more informed
decisions regarding climate, the environment, and a host of other
economic and social issues that are affected by Earth's systems.
Ecosystems ($74.52 million increase)
DOC requests an increase of $1.5 million to improve the condition
of coral reefs through support and implementation of locally driven
three-year action strategies in order to translate the broad national
goals proposed by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy into action. The
strategies are roadmaps for collaborative and cooperative action among
federal, state or territory and nongovernmental partners to address
specific threats to coral reef ecosystems, including land-based sources
of pollution, recreational overuse, lack of public awareness, climate
change, coral bleaching, disease, and issues addressed by fisheries
management, such as over-fishing.
DOC requests a net increase of $5.5 million for economic and social
science research to expand the agency's data collection capabilities.
This is critically important in the area of fishery management. With
the funds requested, NOAA expects to 1) complete economic analyses on
commercial harvesters for 26 Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) by FY
2006--a 46 percent increase over FY 2005 projections; 2) complete
profiles on 20 fishing communities--a threefold increase from FY 2005;
and 3) estimate economic impacts on recreational and commercial
fisheries that are economically displaced in 20 federal marine managed
areas--also a threefold increase from FY 2005. DOC also requests $32.5
million for a fourth Fisheries Survey Vessel (FSV 4) that will deploy
state-of-the-art acoustic technologies to enhance our ability to
collect fish stocks data to protect marine mammals.
DOC requests $61.2 million to sustain the operations of the
National Sea Grant College Program in FY 2006 to continue development
of a system of regional networks to organize multi-state responses to
regional/ecosystem-level problems.
DOC is also requesting level funding of $22.7 million to sustain
the operations of the Ocean Exploration Program. This program seeks to
increase our national understanding of unknown or poorly known ocean
systems and processes by conducting 25-30 expeditions per year. In FY
2005, the program will purchase a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) and
other infrastructure for NOAA's first designated exploration vessel,
which is scheduled for sea trials in 2007. With this infrastructure in
place, NOAA will be able to devote funding to support an expanded set
of expeditions and projects.
DOC also requests an increase of $2.5 million for the Aquatic
Invasive Species (AIS) Program. Zebra mussels have cost the Great Lakes
region $3 billion over the past decade, and they are just one of
hundreds of invasive species threatening the health of the Great Lakes
ecosystem.
DOC requests an increase of $1.6 million for its Marine Aquaculture
Program. This increase will spur environmentally safe domestic marine
aquaculture production, and help to offset the current $7 billion
annual U.S. trade deficit in seafood; will help in rebuilding wild
fisheries stocks; and will enhance job creation in both the production
and processing of fishery products, thereby revitalizing communities
devastated by collapsing fisheries industries.
Climate ($36.8 million increase)
DOC is requesting additional funds for its climate programs,
including an $18 million increase to support the President's Climate
Change Science Plan. This includes the following initiatives:
an increase of $3.2 million to conduct further
research on the Tropical Atmosphere Ocean (TAO) array of buoys
and the Pilot Research Moored Array of buoys in the Tropical
Atlantic (PIRATA). This funding will expand the TAO array into
the Indian Ocean and support the technological development of
the next generation of moored buoys.
$2 million to develop new climate re-analysis
datasets that will enable us to explain more adequately the
causes of observed climate variability and change. These
datasets will substantially reduce current uncertainty about
historical climate variations and improve our ability to
analyze and detect interannual-to-decadal variability and
weather-climate trends for the 20th century.
an increase of $800,000 for the Regional Integrated
Sciences and Assessment (RISA) program. This funding will
initiate a multi-year research effort to: (1) refine existing
regional integrated research and address new issues of
importance to decision-making communities in regions currently
served; and (2) link, in an integrated manner, climate research
and information to decision-making processes in regions not
currently supported by NOAA to ensure NOAA is providing
effective climate services across the Nation.
an increase of $3.5 million to continue building and
maintaining a global ocean observing system that will
accurately document climate-scale changes in ocean heat, carbon
and sea level. This effort will complete 55 percent of the
ocean observing system, keeping us on track with our
international commitment of completing the ocean climate
observing system by 2010.
an increase of $2.1 million for expanded research
efforts in Aerosols, Clouds, and Climate Change: Observations
and Predictions. This research effort is part of a multi-year
program of observations to quantify how aerosols (airborne fine
particles) influence climate change by their interactions with
clouds. The observations will be used to test, validate, and
improve aerosol-cloud and global climate models so that they
more accurately represent aerosol-cloud interactions.
$7.5 million to support other ongoing climate
research programs in Climate Research and Observations, Climate
Operations, and Climate Data and Information programs.
Weather and Water ($96.2 million increase)
In response to the tragedy that struck Southeast Asia on December
26, 2004, the Administration on January 14, 2005, announced a plan to
commit an additional $37.5 million over the next two years to tsunami
research and preparedness capabilities. NOAA's portion of the
Administration proposal is $24 million over two fiscal years: $14.5
million in FY 2005 and $9.5 million in FY 2006, which will be used to
expand the existing six buoy Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of
Tsunamis (DART) system that forms the Pacific Tsunami Warning Network.
The new funds provide for an additional 32 DART buoys by mid-2007--
seven in the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Basin and Gulf of Mexico, and 25
in the Pacific Ocean. The program will also procure 38 new sea level
monitoring/tide gauge stations, provide 24/7 warning coverage at the
Richard H. Hagemeyer Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and the West Coast/
Alaska Tsunami Warning Center, upgrade 20 seismometers used to improve
tsunami detection, and expand the TsunamiReady program to improve
community preparedness.
DOC also requests $4 million to begin developing a nationwide water
resources forecasting capability that is integrated and leveraged with
other federal water agency activities, forming the basis of a national
water information system. This initiative provides the water modeling
capability to support the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy mandate for a
national water quality monitoring and prediction system. Furthermore,
the initiative enables NOAA to deliver a national database of drought
analyses and predictions, and generate user friendly Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) products for monitoring drought. The
initiative will provide water users the ability to assess water
availability in real time and make informed decisions to mitigate
impacts of extreme water events, such as droughts.
DOC also requests $2.1 million to accelerate nationwide
implementation of ozone air quality (AQ) forecasting capability from FY
2009 to FY 2008 and to deliver an initial particulate matter
forecasting capability by FY 2011. The effect of poor air quality on
the national economy is estimated at $150 billion/year from health
effects alone. Accurate air quality forecast guidance, provided in time
to take action, can realize significant savings. Due to the magnitude
of this impact, even a 0.5 percent change due to air quality
forecasting would have a significant effect, saving about $750 million
a year nationally.
Commerce and Transportation ($35.1 million increase)
DOC requests a total of $7.5 million to maintain the operations of
the Joint Hydrographic Center, established in FY 1999 as a partnership
between NOAA and the University of New Hampshire. The Center's
activities focus on two major tasks: the creation of a learning center
that will promote and foster the education of a new generation of
hydrographers and ocean mapping scientists, and research to develop and
evaluate a wide range of state-of-the-art hydrographic and ocean
mapping technologies and applications.
An increase of $900,000 is requested for the South Carolina
Geodetic Survey and the California Spatial Reference Center. South
Carolina's exemplary State program works to establish horizontal and
vertical geodetic control throughout the State to allow land and land-
related items to be referenced to the national horizontal and vertical
coordinate system. The Survey's efforts improve land records
management, engineering, land planning, and economic development.
NOAA's support of the California Spatial Reference Center has enabled
the State to develop a plan to establish and maintain an accurate
state-of-the-art network of GPS control stations necessary to meet the
demands of government and private businesses for a reliable spatial
reference system in California. This infrastructure will aid public
health and safety, assist in the protection and preservation of natural
resources, and improve the productivity of government and private
business.
DOC also requests $2 million to implement the National Vertical
Datum Transformation tool database, or VDatum. This tool supports
NOAA's requirement for hydrographic and shoreline data for our nautical
techniques. VDatum will benefit NOAA's modernization efforts in
shoreline measurement and hydrographic surveying for navigation safety.
In addition, the tool will enable sharing of geospatial data sets among
federal/State/local agencies and academia by translating data between
disparate reference datums.
CONCLUSION
This completes my statement. The Department's research and
development budget includes a number of investments critical to our
nation. I look forward to working with you and Members of the Committee
in meeting the challenge of finding the necessary funds at a time when
the demands on the Federal Budget continue to increase.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear here today to present the
Department's R&D budget. I would be pleased to answer any questions you
may have.
Biography for Theodore W. Kassinger
Theodore W. (Ted) Kassinger serves as Deputy Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Commerce, a position to which he was nominated by
President George W. Bush in February 2004 and confirmed by the Senate
on November 21, 2004. Previously, Mr. Kassinger was nominated and
confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the General Counsel of the Department.
He served in that capacity from May 2001 until assuming his current
position.
As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Kassinger serves as the Department's Chief
Operating Officer, with responsibility for the day-to-day management of
its approximately $6.5 billion budget, 13 operating units, and 38,000
employees. Among the Department of Commerce's varied missions are
promoting U.S. exports, administering unfair trade laws, and
negotiating and enforcing international trade agreements; regulating
the export of sensitive goods and technologies and promoting
international cooperation on export control and strategic trade
matters; serving as effective stewards of the Nation's ocean, coastal,
and living marine resources while assisting their economic development;
forecasting the weather and conducting other climate research;
formulating technology and telecommunications policy and administering
the federal radio frequency spectrum; conducting the national censuses
and producing some of the Nation's most important economic data;
administering the patent and trademark system; developing and applying
technology, measurements, and standards; and promoting economic growth
in distressed communities and minority business development. As Deputy
Secretary, Mr. Kassinger supports Secretary of Commerce Donald L. Evans
in carrying out these Department responsibilities and other
Departmental policy and operational objectives.
Prior to joining the Bush Administration Mr. Kassinger practiced
law with the multinational law firm, Vinson & Elkins, L.L.P., from 1985
to 2001. His law practice focused mainly on the fields of international
trade and business law, and transnational disputes resolution. Earlier
in his career, Mr. Kassinger served as an attorney for the U.S. Senate
Committee on Finance, the U.S. Department of State, and the U.S.
International Trade Commission.
A native of Atlanta, Georgia, Mr. Kassinger received his B.L.A.
from the University of Georgia School of Environmental Design (1975)
and his J.D. from the University of Georgia School of Law (1978). He is
married to the author, Ruth G. Kassinger. The Kassingers are the
parents of three daughters.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you, sir, very much.
Dr. McQueary.
STATEMENT OF DR. CHARLES E. McQUEARY, UNDER SECRETARY FOR
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Dr. McQueary. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Gordon, and distinguished members of the Committee. It is a
pleasure to be here today to discuss the research and
development activities of the Department of Homeland Security
Science and Technology Directorate. And Mr. Chairman, thank
you, again, for your foresight in recognizing the need to have
the Science and Technology Directorate to be a part of the
Homeland Security Department.
The Nation's advantage in science and technology is key to
securing the homeland. The most important mission for the
Science and Technology Directorate is to develop and deploy
cutting-edge technologies and new capabilities so that the
dedicated men and women who serve to protect and secure our
homeland can perform their jobs more effectively and
efficiently.
I would like to give you just a quick summary of some of
the accomplishments that we have achieved since the last time I
was before you. And I will list those in order.
We have developed and documented a robust research
development testing and evaluation process that includes risk-
based planning, and you will see some of the effects of that as
we have adjusted the recommended funding levels across our
portfolios. We have continued the daily operation and
maintenance and deployment of BioWatch, which has been
exceedingly successful for us so far. We selected four cities
for the deployment of a new pilot program entitled the Regional
Technology Integration initiative, which was formerly called
``Safe Cities.'' We have selected over 100 undergraduate and
graduate students in the fall of 2004 for grants to assist the
study of science and technology issues that support the
homeland security mission. We launched three Homeland Security
Centers of Excellence to date with contract negotiations taking
place for the fourth. We issued ten major R&D solicitations to
industry through the first 20 months of our existence and
issued more than 200 contracts to do research work on behalf of
the Department. We stood up the Department's Office of Inter-
operability and Compatibility, and we collaborated--and I think
this is a key issue--we collaborated and assisted with other
components of the Department to enhance their abilities to meet
their missions. And I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, I believe
that the Department elements recognize the importance of
science in the missions that they have to accomplish.
As I mentioned, the Science and Technology RDT&E--the
Directorate's RDT&E process uses a risk-based approach to
planning and is oriented towards identifying critical
capability gaps before attempting to identify or develop
technology solutions. The process engages the end-user, the
operational units, throughout the requirements, definition,
development, testing, and transition, and the process considers
the product life cycle from the outset, including planning and
budgeting for production, deployment, operations, and support.
It is this process which allows us to prioritize both within
and across fields and our programs are derived from this
process.
The Science and Technology Directorate has organized its
efforts into research and development portfolios that span the
set of product lines of the Directorate. Four portfolios
address the development of countermeasures for specific
terrorist threats: biological countermeasures, chemical
countermeasures, explosive countermeasures, and radiological
and nuclear countermeasures.
We have four portfolios that support the operational units
of the Department. We have the standards, emerging threats, and
rapid prototyping portfolios that crosscut all of the terrorist
threats and enhance the research and development conducted in
the countermeasures portfolios.
The Directorate has three portfolios that focus on the
protection of the Nation's vital infrastructure and those are
threat and vulnerability, testing and assessment, and critical
infrastructure protection in cyber security, an area I know
that is very important to you and to other Members of the
Committee. The Directorate addresses many other areas as well,
such as our university and fellowships program. We have a
Counter-MANPADS program that is seeking to improve technologies
to protect commercial aircraft from the threat of man-portable
air defense systems. The Office of Inter-operability and
Compatibility, which is managed by the S&T group, oversees the
wide range of public safety inter-operability programs and
efforts currently spread across homeland security. The proposed
new Domestic Nuclear Detection Office is being established to
be a single entity responsible for coordinating and extending
our national efforts in nuclear and radiological detection.
At this time, I would like to briefly describe some of our
2006 plans. In my written testimony, I have included a listing
of 2004 accomplishments. In many of the things that we have
done, it goes into far more detail.
The S&T Directorate has requested an overall fiscal year
2006 budget of $1.368 billion, which is an increase of $253
million, or 22.7 percent over the fiscal year 2005 budget. And
this request includes funding for requirements, review and
construction planning for the National Bio and Agro Defense
Facility, the development of a low-volatility agent warning
system, a radiological and nuclear countermeasures testing and
evaluation complex, additional development of the Counter-
MANPADS system, and the consolidation of the Department's RDT&E
units.
Let me just touch quickly upon the Homeland Security
Institute, because I think there may be questions about that
later. The Homeland Security Institute was stood up. It is an
FFRDC unit in support of the entire Department, not just
science and technology. An important contribution that they are
making to us now is to begin to examine the overall system
architecture for how we will put the various elements of the
homeland security system together to work as a system rather
than as a piece parts, where we have in some cases now.
We continue to be active participants in several ongoing
interagency working groups, and we may get a chance to talk
about some of those, but I think what I will do is wrap this up
now so we can get to the questions and answers, because I know
that is where we will have a chance to have an open dialogue.
So Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Gordon, thank you very much
for the opportunity to be here.
[The prepared statement of Dr. McQueary follows:]
Prepared Statement of Charles E. McQueary
Introduction
Good morning. Chairman Boehlert, Congressman Gordon, and
distinguished Members of the Committee. It is a pleasure to be with you
today to discuss the research and development activities of the
Department of Homeland Security's (DHS's) Science and Technology (S&T)
Directorate.
The Nation's advantage in science and technology is key to securing
the homeland. The most important mission for the Science and Technology
Directorate is to develop and deploy cutting-edge technologies and new
capabilities so that the dedicated men and women who serve to protect
and secure our homeland can perform their jobs more effectively and
efficiently--these men and women are my customers.
When I last reported to you about our activities, we were just over
one year old as a Department. Since my last report, the Science and
Technology Directorate has:
1) Developed and documented a robust Research, Development,
Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E) process that includes risk-based
planning for the S&T Directorate's programs and initiatives.
2) Continued daily operation, maintenance and deployment of
BioWatch, a biological agent detection system, to protect the
Nation's major population centers from the threat and
ramifications of a bioterrorist attack. BioWatch also provided
support during the G8, Democratic National Convention and
Republican National Convention.
3) Selected four cities for the deployment of a new pilot
program entitled the Regional Technology Integration (RTI)
initiative (formerly ``Safe Cities''). The selected cities
include: Memphis, TN; Anaheim, CA; Cincinnati, OH; and Seattle,
WA. RTI provides an integrated urban all-hazards detection and
emergency response system.
4) Established a dedicated National Bioforensics Center to
support ongoing Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other
law enforcement investigations.
5) Established the National Visualization and Analytics
Center and the Biological Knowledge Center to improve the
analysis of information and close knowledge gaps.
6) Established a test and evaluation capability for
Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures at the Nevada Test Site.
7) Selected over 100 undergraduate and graduate students, in
the fall of 2004, for grants to assist in the study of science
and technology issues that support the homeland security
mission.
8) Launched three Homeland Security Centers of Excellence to
date with negotiations taking place for a fourth and the
solicitation released for the fifth.
9) Issued ten major R&D solicitations to industry and
academia through the first 20 months and issued more than 200
contracts for research work to date.
10) Collaborated with and assisted other components of the
Department to enhance their abilities to meet their missions
and become active contributors in interagency working groups--
all while staffing this Directorate with some of this country's
brightest and most dedicated people.
11) Awarded four SAFETY Act designations and certifications,
received and responded to 72 full applications and 166 pre-
applications, and worked to streamline the process.
12) Stood up the Department's Office of Inter-operability and
Compatibility to address the wide range of public safety inter-
operability programs and efforts currently spread across
Homeland Security.
13) RapidCom improved incident-level, inter-operable emergency
communications in ten high-threat urban areas by helping to
establish command-level inter-operability within an hour or
less.
14) Completed Phase I of the Counter-MANPADS Program and
initiated Phase II which will advance the studies initiated in
phase I, build system prototypes and conduct effectiveness
testing.
I continue to be energized by and proud of the scientists,
engineers, managers, and support staff in the Science and Technology
Directorate. We have accomplished a great deal in a short amount of
time and are positioning the Directorate to make continuing
contributions to the homeland security mission of the Department.
However, the threats to our homeland remain diverse and daunting.
We must constantly monitor current and emerging threats and assess our
vulnerabilities to them, develop new and improved capabilities to
counter them, and mitigate the effects of terrorist attacks should they
occur. The Science and Technology Directorate must also enhance the
conventional missions of the Department to protect and provide
assistance to civilians in response to natural disasters, law
enforcement needs, and other activities such as maritime search and
rescue. Basically we assist in making DHS operations science based,
intelligence informed and technology enabled.
The Science and Technology Directorate's Research, Development,
Testing, and Evaluation Process
As I just mentioned, one of the Directorate's accomplishments over
the last year was the development and documentation of a robust
Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) process. The
goal of the RDT&E process is to provide a clearly defined, repeatable
method for assessing needs and risk, planning, allocating resources and
executing programs to produce high-impact, cost-effective and
critically needed homeland security technology solutions.
The S&T Directorate's RDT&E process uses a risked-based approach to
planning and is oriented toward identifying critical capability gaps
before attempting to identify or develop technology solutions. In
developing solutions, the process engages the end-user throughout
requirements definition, development, testing and transition. The
process considers the product life cycle from the outset, including
planning and budgeting for production, deployment, operations and
support. It is this process which allows us to prioritize both within
and across fields.
RDT&E consists of four main sub-processes: 1) needs and risk
assessment, 2) strategic planning, 3) program definition, and 4)
program execution. The first two sub-processes ensure that the Science
and Technology Directorate considers user needs, available
intelligence, big-picture risks, national goals and inputs from other
external agencies and advisory bodies to establish its annual RDT&E
program. The second two sub-processes provide a framework for program
execution using the best available systems engineering and program
management techniques.
Science and Technology Directorate Organization
We have four key offices in the Science & Technology Directorate,
each of which has an important role in implementing the Directorate's
research, development, testing and evaluation (RDT&E) activities. These
offices are: Plans, Programs, and Budget (PPB); Office of Research and
Development (ORD); Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency
(HSARPA); and Systems Engineering and Development (SED). In addition,
the S&T Directorate houses the Office of Weapons of Mass Destruction
Operations and Incident Management to offer scientific advice and
support to meet operational needs.
Crosscutting the four key offices, the Science and Technology
Directorate implements its activities through focused portfolios that
address biological, chemical, explosives, radiological and nuclear, and
cyber threats; support the research and development needs of the
operational units of the Department; support the development of
standards and inter-operability; develop an enduring R&D capability for
homeland security; and receive valuable input from private industry and
academia as well as national and federal laboratories. I will talk
about the offices first and then about the portfolios.
Office of Plans, Programs, and Budget
PPB is organized into the portfolios I just mentioned, each of
which is focused on a particular discipline or activity; taken
together, these portfolios span the Directorate's mission space. As I
will cover the portfolios in detail later in this testimony, I will
limit myself here to a summary explanation. The staff of each portfolio
is charged with being expert in their particular area; with
understanding the activities and capabilities extant in federal
agencies and across the broad research and development community; and
with developing a strategic plan for their particular portfolio, to
include near-, mid-, and long-range research and development
activities. In addition, we have staff that is charged with
understanding the threat from a technical perspective, with integrating
the various portfolios into a coherent overall plan, and with
developing the corresponding budget and monitoring its financial
execution.
Finally, PPB is responsible for executing the Directorate's
implementation responsibilities for the SAFETY (Support Anti-Terrorism
by Fostering Effective Technologies) Act.
Office of Research and Development
ORD provides the Nation with an enduring capability in research,
development, demonstration, testing and evaluation of technologies to
protect the homeland. ORD builds enduring RDT&E capability through
stewardship of the homeland security comple--people, places, and
programs--to anticipate, prevent, respond to and recover from terrorist
attacks.
Activities within ORD address the resources that can be brought to
bear to better secure the homeland through the participation of
universities, national laboratories, federal laboratories and research
centers.
Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency
HSARPA is an external research-funding arm of the Science and
Technology Directorate. It has at its disposal a full range of
contracting vehicles and the authority under the Homeland Security Act
of 2002 to engage businesses, federally funded research and development
centers, universities, and other government partners in performing its
mission to gather, generate and develop ideas, concepts and advanced
technologies to protect the homeland.
HSARPA's mission is to support basic, applied, and advanced
homeland security research to promote revolutionary changes in
technologies that would promote homeland security; advance the
development, testing and evaluation, and deployment of homeland
security technologies; and accelerate the prototyping and deployment of
technologies that would address homeland security vulnerabilities. Its
customers are State and local first responders and federal agencies
that are allied with homeland security such as the U.S. Coast Guard,
U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, and others.
About 60 percent of the Science and Technology Directorate's
appropriation in FY 2005 will be executed directly through the private
sector, with HSARPA managing about 40 percent of that.
Office of Systems Engineering and Development
SED is tasked with leading the implementation and transition of
large-scale or pilot systems to the field through a rapid, efficient
and disciplined approach to project management.
One of the Science and Technology Directorate's challenges is to
evaluate a wide spectrum of military and commercial technologies so
rapid, effective and affordable solutions can be transitioned to the
Department's customers that include first responders and federal
agencies. In some cases, military technologies could be candidates for
commercialization, but rigorous systems engineering processes need to
be applied to ensure a successful transition. SED's role is to identify
and then, in a disciplined manner, reduce risks associated with such
technologies to ready them for deployment to the field. In doing so,
the office must view each technology through the prism of
affordability, performance and supportability--all critical to end-
users.
SED must weigh considerations such as the urgency for a solution,
consequences of the threat, safety of the product, and life cycle
support as new products are introduced. Products must be user friendly,
have a minimum of false alarms, require little or no training and
consistently provide accurate results. SED will demonstrate and test
solutions before they are released to the field, and will validate that
those solutions meet user expectations. SED also operates our
Countermeasures Test Bed capability, which provides end-user ``in the
loop'' operational testing and evaluations to the Directorate's
portfolios.
Office of Weapons of Mass Destruction Operations and Incident
Management
We created the Office of Weapons of Mass Destruction Operations and
Incident Management as the Science and Technology Directorate's
operational arm for DHS support to incident management. Through this
Office, the Science and Technology Directorate exercises its scientific
and technical leadership role under the National Response Plan. This
Office provides rapid scientific and technical expertise and executive
decision support to the Secretary, DHS response units, interagency
partners, and the State and local jurisdictions that form the front
line response to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-
explosives threats and incidents.
Results From Current Research and Development (R&D) Spending and FY
2006 Plans: Portfolio Details
The Science and Technology Directorate has organized its efforts
into research and development portfolios that span the set of product
lines of the Directorate. Four portfolios address the development of
countermeasures for specific terrorist threats: Biological
Countermeasures, Chemical Countermeasures, Explosives Countermeasures,
and Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures.
In addition to the countermeasures portfolios, four portfolios
support the operational units of the Department: Border and
Transportation Security (BTS), Emergency Preparedness and Response
(EPR), United States Coast Guard (USCG) and United States Secret
Service (USSS) portfolios.
The Standards, Emerging Threats, and Rapid Prototyping portfolios
crosscut all terrorist threats and enhance the research and development
conducted in the countermeasures portfolio.
The Directorate has three portfolios that focus on the protection
of the Nation's vital infrastructure: Threat and Vulnerability, Testing
and Assessment, Critical Infrastructure Protection and Cyber Security.
The S&T Directorate addresses other areas as well:
Our University and Fellowship Programs portfolio
addresses the need to build an enduring science and technology
capability and support United States leadership in science and
technology.
Our Counter-MANPADS program is seeking to improve
technologies to protect commercial aircraft from the threat of
MAN-Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS).
The Office of Inter-operability and Compatibility
(OIC), managed by the Science and Technology Directorate,
oversees the wide range of public safety inter-operability
programs and efforts currently spread across Homeland Security,
including critical inter-operability issues relating to public
safety and emergency response, including communications,
equipment, training, and other areas as needs are identified.
The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) is being
established to be the single entity responsible for
coordinating and extending efforts in nuclear/radiological
detection. This office will consolidate functions within the
Department of Homeland Security and establish strong linkages
across the interagency for the deployment of a national
domestic nuclear detection architecture, the conduct of
transformational research and development, and the
establishment of protocols and training for the end users of
equipment developed and deployed through the new office.
At this time I would like to briefly describe some of our
accomplishments to date and our FY 2006 plans. As can be seen in the
following chart, we have an overall FY 2006 budget request of $1.368
billion, which is an increase of $253.0 million (22.7 percent) over the
FY 2005 levels. The request includes the construction of the National
Bio and Agrodefense Facility, the development of a Low-Volatility Agent
Warning System, a Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Testing and
Evaluation Complex, additional development of Counter-Man-Portable-Air-
Defense Systems (C-MANPADS), and the consolidation of the Department's
RDT&E activities.
Biological Countermeasures
Biological threats can take many forms and be distributed in many
ways. Aerosolized anthrax, smallpox, foot and mouth disease, and bulk
food contamination are among the threats that can have high
consequences for humans and agriculture. Our Biological Countermeasures
portfolio uses the Nation's science base to prevent, protect, respond
to, and recover from bioterrorism events. This portfolio provides the
science and technology needed to reduce the probability and potential
consequences of a biological attack on this nation's civilian
population, its infrastructure, and its agricultural system. Portfolio
managers and scientists are developing and implementing an integrated
systems approach with a wide range of activities, including
vulnerability and risk analyses to identify the need for vaccines,
therapeutics, and diagnostics; development and implementation of early
detection and warning systems to characterize an attack and permit
early prophylaxis and decontamination activities; and development of a
national bioforensics analysis capability to support attribution of
biological agent use.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Biological Countermeasures portfolio:
Deployed the BioWatch environmental sensor system to
protect our nation's cities from the threat and ramifications
of a bioterrorist attack. BioWatch activities were
significantly increased during the National Code Orange Alert
(December 2003-January 2004), with twice daily samplings in the
high threat cities, additional collectors for special New
Year's events and Bowl Games, and deployment of temporary
BioWatch systems to non-BioWatch cities of special concern.
BioWatch also provided field and laboratory support to the G8,
the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National
Convention in Boston and New York.
Engaged in creating more near real-time monitoring of
critical infrastructure facilities such as major transportation
hubs. New infrastructure protection efforts include shorter
response time biological agent detection capabilities for
BioWatch. This pilot is in the process of being deployed in New
York City and will join a three-to-five expansion of the number
of collectors in that city.
Initiated the design of the National Biosurveillance
Integration System (NBIS) as part of an interagency process.
Recently completed in the first quarter of FY 2005, we will
work with the Information Analysis and Infrastructure
Protection (IAIP) Directorate to implement this system.
Conducted preliminary analyses, using the reference
scenario approach recommended by Homeland Security Presidential
Directive (HSPD)-10 for understanding the requirements of an
integrated national biodefense architecture, of four baseline
reference cases: a large outdoor release of a non-contagious
agent (anthrax); a large indoor release of a contagious agent
(smallpox); contamination of a bulk food supply; and two highly
virulent agricultural attacks, one on livestock (Foot and Mouth
Disease) and the other on plants (soy bean rust).
Established the Biodefense Knowledge Center, an
operational hub for enabling collaboration and communication
within the homeland security complex. The Biodefense Knowledge
Center will meet the operational and planning requirements of
government decision-makers and program planners, the
intelligence community, law enforcement officers, public health
practitioners, and scientists. Specific capabilities offered to
these end-users include knowledge services, modeling and
simulation, situational awareness and a pathway to accelerate
research and development.
In FY 2006, the Biological Countermeasure portfolio plans to:
Complete the three high level architectures initiated
in FY 2005 (multiple small attacks, an engineered organism, and
an intentional spread of a zoonotic disease), identifying key
requirements for each major element, a ``report card'' on the
current and projected status in that area and performing
detailed design tradeoffs for those areas in which DHS has
execution responsibility.
Complete the first formal risk assessment required
under HSPD-10 and close many of the key remaining experimental
gaps in our knowledge of the classical biological threat
agents. Near-, mid-, and long-term plans for dealing with
engineered agents will be developed, and R&D on addressing the
gaps in responding to modified organisms (e.g., antibiotic
resistant) initiated.
Complete the deployment of Generation 2 BioWatch
systems to the top threat cities while continuing to operate
and optimize already extant BioWatch systems. Complete test and
evaluation of laboratory prototypes of the Generation 3
BioWatch detection systems which will be ready for down-
selection those which will go on to develop fieldable
prototypes in FY 2007.
Continue operation of the interim National
Bioforensic Analysis Center. International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) certification is expected to have been
achieved, giving the analyses conducted additional credibility
and authenticity in both the national and international
community and courts of law. R&D will continue on the physical
and chemical signatures of the ``matrix'' materials associated
with biological agents so as to develop methods for
understanding tell-tale remnants of enrichment media, culture
conditions, metabolites, and dispersion technology.
Continue operation of the Plum Island Animal Disease
Center (PIADC) and essential upgrades to the facility and
initiate design of the National Bio and Agrodefense Facility
(NBAF). R&D will continue on next generation vaccines and
antiviral therapeutics for foot and mouth disease (FMD) and
other high priority foreign animal diseases.
Continue to develop bioassays for FMD and look-alike
animal diseases. The initial agricultural forensic capability
established in FY 2004 at PIADC will be enhanced and
epidemiologic capability added. A High Throughput Diagnostics
Demonstration will be initiated to work with regional and State
laboratories to demonstrate a capability of analyzing thousands
of samples per day in support of response to a suspected case
or an outbreak. A FMD table top exercise of DHS Directorates
will be initiated, and development of a coupled epidemiological
and economic model for FMD will begin. The end-to-end systems
study initiated in FY 2004 for Soybean Rust and FMD will be
completed, and system studies initiated for highly pathogenic
avian influenza.
National Bio-Defense Analysis and Countermeasures Center (NBACC)
The NBACC, a key component of the National Strategy for Homeland
Security, addresses the need for scientific research to better
anticipate, prevent, and mitigate the consequences of biological
attacks. The need for the NBACC facility is further defined in the
Presidential Directive Biodefense for the 21st Century, the Nation's
blueprint for future biodefense programs. The NBACC's mission will
support two pillars of this blueprint--threat awareness and
surveillance and detection. The NBACC is made up of two centers, the
Biological Threat Characterization Center and the National Bioforensic
Analysis Center to carry out these missions. Specifically, NBACC's
mission is to:
Understand current and future biological threats,
assess vulnerabilities, and determine potential impacts to
guide the research, development, and acquisition of biodefense
countermeasures such as detectors, drugs, vaccines and
decontamination technologies; and
Provide a national capability for conducting forensic
analysis of evidence from bio-crimes and terrorism to attain a
``biological fingerprint'' to identify perpetrators and
determine the origin and method of attack.
In FY 2004, the Department completed the planning and conceptual
design of the NBACC facility. Additionally, the Department has been
working through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process
during the year, which culminated in the signing of the Record of
Decision in January 2005 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the construction project and subsequent operations. It was
decided to delay the award of any contracts for design and construction
until further in the EIS process. As the public concerns are analyzed
and considered it is anticipated that contracts will be awarded in FY
2005 to initiate design and construction of the NBACC facility.
In FY 2005, the solicitations of contracts for the design and
construction of the NBACC facility are expected to be awarded. The
design of the NBACC facility will commence in March 2005. $35M was
appropriated to obligate funds for award of the construction contract
in the fourth quarter of FY 2005. Construction of the facility is
planned for completion by the fourth quarter of FY 2008.
In FY 2006, funding was not requested for the construction of the
NBACC facility.
Chemical Countermeasures
The National Research Council Report, Making the Nation Safer,
points out that ``chemicals continue to be the weapon of choice for
terrorist attacks.'' Until recently, the chemical threat spectrum was
limited to the threats posed by chemical warfare agents (CWAs) in a
military context and the threats posed by the accidental or inadvertent
release of toxic materials in the homeland domain. Now, the chemical
threat spectrum has expanded to include chemical warfare agents (CWAs),
toxic industrial chemicals (TICs), non-traditional agents (NTAs) and
toxins. As with the threat materials themselves, the range of
potentially attractive targets is large. The potential for chemical
warfare agents and emerging threat agents constitute a broad range of
threats that may be applied to virtually any civilian target.
The Chemical Countermeasures portfolio works to enhance the
Nation's capability to anticipate, prevent, protect, respond to and
recover from chemical threat attacks through interagency leadership and
conduct of innovative research, development, and technology transition.
The portfolio works through the interagency environment to shape a
comprehensive strategy for enhancing the Nation's defensive posture and
to develop bases for enhanced R&D program integration and leverage. The
R&D activities include prioritization of efforts among the many
possible chemical threats and targets, and development of new detection
and forensic technologies and integrated protective systems for high-
value facilities such as airports and subways. These activities are
informed by end-user input and simulated exercises.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Chemical Countermeasures portfolio:
Conducted preliminary activities toward the
development of a Chemical Security Analysis Center (CSAC) that
will provide threat awareness and assessment. An overall
structure, similar to that characterizing the NBACC and its
supporting threat characterization, forensics, knowledge
management and reachback, is envisioned.
Initiated system studies around three defining
scenarios: indoor chemical agent release, outdoor toxic
industrial chemical release, and release of toxin in the water
system.
Initiated three demonstration projects: the Facility
Restoration Demonstration Project to develop and demonstrate a
capability to rapidly restore a facility that has been
contaminated with a classical chemical agent or persistent
toxic industrial chemical (TIC); a Water Security Demonstration
to identify and characterize technologies with the potential to
provide warning of chemical contamination of the water system;
and a National Security Special Event (NSSE) Deployable
Detection System Demonstration to develop a flexible
architecture chemical detection system that can be utilized for
the warning and situational awareness of chemical threats in
temporary deployments.
Initiated key development programs targeting leap-
ahead advancements in detection capabilities. These programs
will develop two principal capabilities: a facility monitoring
detector and a responder detection tool. In both cases, the
detectors will provide detection and discrimination of up to 20
different chemical threats, including classical chemical
warfare agents (CWAs) and toxic industrial chemicals (TICs) in
a single unit across a wide range of concentrations.
In FY 2006, the Chemical Countermeasure portfolio plans to:
Reach full operational status at the CSAC where
chemical threat databases will be centrally located and
accessible.
Complete technology down-select and draft candidate
decontamination protocols in concert with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) through the Facility Restoration
Technology Demonstration. Transition the Water Security
Demonstration to EPA for continuation and conduct technology
down-select for the next-generation deployable capability
through the NSSE Technology Demonstration.
Complete the critical design review of technologies
for the rapid facility monitor and the first responder tool and
conduct a technology down-select supporting prototype selection
and build.
Initiate and demonstrate operational solutions to the
challenge of decontaminating non-traditional agents and
initiate next-generation decontamination research.
Explosives Countermeasures
The Explosives Countermeasures portfolio addresses the threat that
terrorists will use explosives in attacks on buildings, critical
infrastructure, and the civilian population of the United States. The
Science and Technology Directorate's Explosives portfolio has been
closely coordinated with the activities ongoing in the Transportation
Security Administration to ensure that research and development (R&D)
activities are complementary, not duplicative; in FY 2006, these
activities will be consolidated within the S&T Directorate. R&D
priorities in the Explosives Countermeasures portfolio focus on the
detection of vehicle bombs and suicide bombers and on providing the
science and technology needed to significantly increase our ability to
prevent an explosives attack on buildings, infrastructure or people.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Explosives Countermeasures portfolio:
Addressed terrorist attacks against buildings and the
general population. The portfolio initiated the development of
a prototype explosive detector for vehicle bombs, and
accelerated the development of hardened overhead storage bins
for passenger aircraft. Additionally, it initiated a survey and
evaluation of commercial-off-the-shelf equipment to detect,
interdict and mitigate the consequences of suicide bombers and
vehicle bombs, and conducted a cost-benefit analysis of
approaches to aircraft hardening.
Funded the demonstration in FY 2005 of the
capabilities identified in FY 2004, used to provide the ability
to detect, interdict, and mitigate the consequences from
suicide bombers, truck, and car bombs approaching high profile
targets and densely populated areas.
In FY 2006, the Explosives Countermeasure portfolio plans to:
Continue to consolidate explosives management
functions as outlined above. Efforts will focus on developing
the ability to detect, interdict and mitigate the consequences
from suicide bombers, truck and car bombs approaching high
profile targets and densely populated areas. Additonally, the
portfolio will provide the ability to detect, interdict and
mitigate the consequences of explosives and weapons on aircraft
transporting (domestic and foreign inbound) passengers and
their baggage as well as cargo containers/bays. Specific areas
to be pursued are infrastructure protection, suicide bombers/
leave behind improvised explosive devices, and vehicle bombs.
Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures
Potential radiological and nuclear threats range from the
deliberate dispersal of small amounts of radioactive material to the
detonation of an improvised or stolen nuclear weapon to an attack on
our nuclear power industry. Our Radiological and Nuclear
Countermeasures portfolio provides the science and technology needed to
reduce both the probability and the potential consequences of a
radiological or nuclear attack on this nation's civilian population or
our nuclear power facilities. Many of the on-going activities conducted
in the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Portfolio are being
transferred in FY 2006 to the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO).
Those activities are indicated in the next section.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures
portfolio:
Formally assumed management of the Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey radiation detection test bed from the
Department of Energy in August, 2003. Following the transfer,
the portfolio broadened the project scope beyond testing and
evaluating individual pieces of technology to a systems
approach, including response protocols and operational
concepts. This program has been renamed the Countermeasures
Test Bed to more accurately reflect that this program supports
DHS's enduring operational testing and evaluation needs for all
threat countermeasures technology, not just Radiological/
Nuclear threats.
Focused detection technology efforts on the detection
of shielded special nuclear material (SNM) in cargo containers,
based on the detection of both neutrons and delayed high-energy
fission product gamma rays, and a portable neutron source,
based on a mixed alpha-Be source in a switchable configuration
for use in active interrogation; both currently are still in
conceptual design and experiment phases.
Preplanned product improvement efforts in this area
were directed towards improvements in two current Customs and
Border Protection-deployed radiographic imaging systems. This
included software improvements and systems upgrades for local
data integration, threat image projection (TIP), and assisted
imaging processing (AIP).
Incident management/recovery efforts include a joint
DHS/HSARPA and DOD/DARPA (Department of Defense/Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency) project focusing on
radiological and nuclear decontamination, consisting of four
main tasks: (1) Radionuclide capture decontamination; (2) Wide
area radionuclide decontamination; (3) Verification; and (4)
Modeling.
A major goal of FY 2005 is to establish a test and
evaluation capability at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) for testing
against SNM, and, as appropriate, to test and evaluate relevant
FY 2005 prototype technologies developed in the portfolio's
programs.
In FY 2006, the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasure portfolio plans
to:
Redirect all detection related missions and
corresponding funding to the establishment of the Domestic
Nuclear Detection Office. The remaining, non-detection research
and development will continue to be funded through the
Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures portfolio. The two
programmatic thrust areas remaining are Incident Management and
Recovery, and Attribution and Forensics on Contaminated
Evidence (formerly part of the Systems Analysis and Pilot
Deployments programmatic area).
Complete the laboratory improvements that are
necessary to carry out the attribution mission.
Complete all field studies for the New York City
Urban Dispersion Program with a technology transfer following
to NYC Office of Emergency Management in late 2006.
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
The risk that terrorists will acquire and use a Nuclear/
Radiological device is one of the gravest threats that confronts the
Nation. Acquiring nuclear weapons and materials is the hardest step for
terrorists to take, and the easiest for us to stop. By contrast, every
subsequent step in the process becomes easier for the terrorists, and
harder for us to stop. Our defensive posture must begin with
eliminating excess stocks of nuclear material and weapons throughout
the world, protecting existing stocks from theft or diversion, and
detecting illicit movement of nuclear/radiological material overseas
before it reaches our borders. However, recognizing that even the best
efforts to secure weapons and fissile material may not achieve 100
percent success, we must supplement these efforts abroad with a
stronger layer of protection at home.
We must move swiftly to deploy a well-integrated system of
detectors for nuclear/radiological materials and improve this system
over time. While such a system will never be foolproof, it can
dramatically improve the probability that we could detect illicit
nuclear or radiological materials being brought covertly into position
for use by an adversary. The gravity of the risk demands the focused,
aggressive program envisioned here, with its mutually supportive
elements of deploying and knitting together current technology so as to
exact the greatest possible protection for our population while working
continuously to improve that technology over time.
Since 9/11, many agencies have expanded their activities and
operations to help build the domestic layers of the Nation's defense
against nuclear terrorism. To optimize and advance these efforts, a new
national-level, jointly staffed Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
(DNDO) is being created to coordinate and extend the efforts in
nuclear/radiological detection. This office will consolidate functions
within DHS and establish strong linkages across the interagency for the
deployment of a national domestic nuclear detection architecture, the
conduct of transformational research and development (R&D), and the
establishment of protocols and training for the end users of equipment
developed and deployed through the new office. The office will further
serve as the primary entity to
Further develop, acquire, and support the deployment
of an enhanced domestic system to detect and report on any
attempt to import, possess, store, transport, develop, or use
an unauthorized nuclear explosive device, fissile material, or
radiological material in the United States;
Enhance and coordinate the nuclear detection efforts
of Federal, State, and local governments and the private sector
to ensure a managed, coordinated response;
Jointly establish and coordinate additional protocols
and procedures for domestic use to ensure that the detection of
unauthorized nuclear explosive devices, fissile material, or
radiological material is promptly reported to the Attorney
General, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Secretary of Energy, and other appropriate
officials or their designees for appropriate action by law
enforcement, military, emergency response, or other
authorities;
Jointly develop and coordinate an enhanced global
nuclear detection architecture with the following
implementation: (i) the DNDO will be responsible for the
implementation of the domestic portion of the global
architecture, (ii) the Secretary of Defense will retain
responsibility for implementation of DOD requirements, and
(iii) the Secretaries of Defense, Energy, and State will
maintain their respective responsibilities for policy guidance
and implementation of the overseas portion of the global
architecture, which will be implemented consistent with
applicable law and relevant international conditions;
Conduct, support, coordinate, and encourage an
aggressive, expedited, evolutionary, and transformational
program of research and development efforts to support the
policy;
Support and enhance the effective sharing and use of
appropriate information generated by the intelligence
community, law enforcement agencies, counterterrorism
community, other government agencies, and foreign governments
as well as provide information to these entities; and
Further enhance and maintain continuous awareness by
analyzing information from all DNDO mission-related detection
systems.
Building upon the redirected base funding of $113 million for
detection related RDT&E in the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures
Portfolio, the FY 2006 request includes an additional $105.0 million to
support the DNDO's mission and objectives (plus the $9 million
requested increase for the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test
and Evaluation Complex (Rad/NUc CTEC) discussed later in the FY 2006
Science and Technology Directorate Initiatives section.
Although the DNDO is principally focused on domestic detection, its
coordinating work will enhance U.S. efforts overseas through the design
of a global architecture implemented under current agency
responsibilities. The new investments will speed the development and
improvement of equipment and protocols, much of which will be
applicable overseas.
Because multiple agencies share the resources or expertise
necessary for the success of the office, the DNDO will be located
within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), but will be jointly
staffed with representatives from DHS, the Department of Energy (DOE),
the Department of Defense (DOD), and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), with coordination between the Department of
Justice (DOJ), the Department of State (DOS), the Intelligence
Community (IC), and other departments as needed.
The DNDO mission will be carried out through an organization that
includes a Director supported by five major offices: Systems
Engineering and Planning, Systems Development and Acquisition,
Assessments, Joint Center for Global Connectivity, and Transformational
Research & Development. These offices would be staffed jointly by
appropriate agencies.
In FY 2006, the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office plans to:
Develop the system architecture, conduct all
associated systems engineering, develop technology roadmaps,
and develop a strategic plan for the DNDO.
Define the domestic nuclear detection architecture.
Conduct research and development in support of the
DNDO mission.
Coordinate with other federal, State, and local R&D
organizations.
Develop concepts for innovative technologies and
coordinate with interagency R&D organizations on all advanced
detection technologies, development concepts, and programs.
Develop and provide technical standards and protocols
for detection systems, reporting systems, and information
sharing systems.
Design and conduct technical and operational test and
evaluation of related detection equipment, technologies,
systems, procedures, concepts of operation, and protocols for
the domestic nuclear detection system.
Prepare and maintain the DNDO Test and Evaluation
Master Plan.
Oversee the Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures
Test and Evaluation Complex (Rad/NucCTEC) and use other Rad/Nuc
test infrastructure as needed to execute the Office's
assessment responsibilities.
Provide operational support, to include: (1)
information collection, coordination, and analysis; (2)
coordinated technical reachback; and (3) and the development of
standards, protocols, concepts of operations, training, safety
and security procedures, and State and local support.
Identify technology opportunities and execute
programs to dramatically improve the domestic nuclear detection
system overall and component-wise performance, especially high-
risk, high-payoff technology investments.
Threat and Vulnerability, Testing and Assessment
Our Threat and Vulnerability, Testing and Assessment (TVTA)
portfolio is designed to develop, test, and deliver--in collaboration
with intelligence, law enforcement, and homeland security community
agencies--tools and methodologies for assessing terrorist threats and
understanding terrorism. The TVTA portfolio focuses on the following
five areas:
Threat Assessment: Create and establish coherent
capabilities for analysis, dissemination, visualization,
insight, synthesis, and enhancement of terrorism-related
information.
Data Sharing: Enable tactical and strategic sharing
of terrorism-related intelligence, information, and data among
all elements of the homeland security community.
Forecasting: Identify, understand, and forecast
terrorist motives, intentions, behaviors, capabilities,
processes, and tactics; understand individual and societal
resilience to terrorism.
Scalable Analyses: Enable scalable, integrated
simulation and information analyses for threat identification
and assessment; develop innovative computational technologies
for deployment in next-generation knowledge management and
threat assessment tools.
System Optimization: Create optimized knowledge
system designs and architectures that enhance the Nation's
countermeasures.
This portfolio provides the science and technology needed to
develop methods and tools to test and assess threats and
vulnerabilities to protect critical infrastructure and enhance
information exchange; this portfolio also includes a Biometrics
Program.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the TVTA Countermeasures portfolio:
Delivered two operational components, the Threat
Vulnerability Integration System (TVIS) and the Threat-
Vulnerability Mapper (TVM), to the Information Analysis and
Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) Directorate. The TVM provides
counterterrorism analysts with a simple, straightforward way to
depict the geographic distribution of threats across the U.S.
and to search the underlying databases for information on
terrorists and attacks. TVIS integrates high-volume information
analysis capabilities with specialized visualization tools that
enable analysts to process large amounts of disparate
intelligence data.
Created the knowledge management architecture, known
as ADVISE (Analysis, Dissemination, Visualization, Insight, and
Semantic Enhancement) to integrate the various information
analysis and synthesis, visualization, and knowledge discovery
component capabilities. ADVISE will incorporate a comprehensive
encyclopedia of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and
explosive (CBRNE) threat and effects data. Pilot ADVISE systems
for the BTS Directorate will be installed in FY 2005. Update
the initial TVIS system at the Biodefense Knowledge Center with
the enhanced ADVISE capability.
Created the Interagency Center for Applied Homeland
Security Technology (ICAHST) capable of addressing the
technical needs of the Department and other members of the
Homeland Security community. The center and its interconnected
laboratories provides detailed technical information and guides
research, strategy, and systems design for the broad range of
technologies and techniques necessary to identify, understand,
and remediate CBRNE threats.
Completed an initial set of 120 all-CBRNE capability
assessments for 20 terrorist organizations on the five CBRNE
plus cyber threat agents. Continued support to the Nuclear
Assessment Program (NAP) that judges the credibility of
communicated nuclear threats for such clients as the FBI, DOE,
and Department of State (DOS). In FY 2005, continue to produce
all-CBRNE capability assessments. An additional 20 terrorist
groups' capabilities and intentions will be analyzed using
information from the intelligence community.
Continued to implement the capability to analyze
terrorist threats and stimulate analytical insight using
visualization tools and techniques in FY 2005. The National
Visualization and Analytics Center (NVAC), established in FY
2004, will produce a national agenda for visual analytics with
broad input and support from the government, national
laboratories and universities. The four NVAC core functions
include research and development, education, technology
evaluation and implementation, integration and coordination.
Three Regional Visual Analytics Centers (RVACs) will also be
established, to implement the visualization agenda on a
regional scale. The RVACs will incorporate university research
activities as well as commercial and other government visual
analytics research into the national lab-oriented work of the
NVAC.
Established an integrated, national capability,
called the Institute for Discrete Sciences (IDS), to
investigate and develop the specialized computing algorithms
and hardware architectures necessary to analyze massive amounts
of diverse data from multiple, disparate, distributed data
sources, and to model terrorist attacks and simulate
consequences on a real-time, high-resolution basis. Like the
NVAC, the IDS will have broad interaction and support from the
government, national laboratories and universities.
Completed an engineering design for the Enhanced
International Travel Security (EITS) system, initiated in FY
2004, which will enable several pilots to be implemented with
the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. EITS allows the
validity of travel documents and the identity of travelers to
be determined in real-time at U.S. borders and other points of
entry.
Provided the science and technology needed in the
development of biometrics for precise identification of
individuals, and develop prototype instrumentation to aid
authorized officials in detecting individuals with potentially
hostile intent.
Enabled a comprehensive capability for determining
terrorist motivations, based on social, behavioral, and
economic factors. Integrate this with techniques for
determining terrorist or hostile intent as well as detecting
deception.
In FY 2006, the Threat and Vulnerability, Testing and Assessment
portfolio plans to:
Enable the development of analytic resources and
technologies to characterize terrorist capabilities, detect
their activities, predict their intentions based on
infrastructure vulnerabilities, strengthen preventive measures,
and increase the ability to respond.
Provide an enhanced, integrated capability for
information synthesis, relying on a foundation of advanced
semantic processing and visual analytics and supported by
specialized discrete mathematics techniques and technology.
This will provide comprehensive knowledge discovery and
dissemination capabilities to a diverse set of users--from
first responders to intelligence analysts.
Develop a capability for information extraction,
pattern discovery, group detection, and visualization for
unstructured text as well as audio and video information to
complement the existing capability for structured data.
Continue expanding the roles of the NVAC and IDS by
providing integrated capabilities to multiple DHS components,
setting national agendas in visual analytics and discrete
sciences, and furthering interagency cooperation.
Create a National Homeland Security Support System
(NH3S) using the ADVISE architecture and providing quantitative
risk analysis and decision support capabilities.
Create a CBRNE threat encyclopedia and integrate with
the ADVISE (Analysis, Dissemination, Visualization, Insight,
and Semantic Enhancement) system. Create a National Homeland
Security Support System (NH3S) using the ADVISE architecture
and providing quantitative risk analysis and decision support
capabilities.
Standards Program
Ensuring that standards are created and adopted is critically
important for homeland security. We need consistent and verifiable
measures of effectiveness in terms of basic functionality,
appropriateness and adequacy for the task, inter-operability,
efficiency, and sustainability. Standards will improve the quality and
usefulness of homeland security systems and technologies. Our Standards
Program cuts across all aspects of the S&T Directorate's mission and
all threats to improve effectiveness, efficiency, and inter-operability
of the systems and technologies developed.
Our Standards Program continues to actively engage the federal,
State, and local first responders to ensure that developed standards
are effective in detection, prevention, response, management, and
attribution. This program office also conducts the essential activities
in order to meet the requirement of the SAFETY (Support Anti-Terrorism
by Fostering Effective Technologies) Act in developing certification
standards for technologies related to homeland security.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Standards Program:
Composed three management directives to establish DHS
policy with regards to the adoption and development of national
standards.
Formed an interagency task force to address the
controversy over the effectiveness and use of lateral flow
immunoassays for the detection of Bacillus anthracis (anthrax)
by emergency responders.
Evaluated a five step method to pre-screen suspicious
white powders through an effort with Edgewood Chemical
Biological Center (ECBC) and an additional effort with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to look
at the effectiveness of biological agent simulants, and the
establishment of a program to address both chemical and
biological decontamination standards for the first responder
community.
Supported efforts with American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) to coordinate the development of a draft
standard for hospital preparedness and to develop a multi-
disciplinary Mission Essential Task List (METL) based on
Emergency Responder Guidelines developed by the Office of
Domestic Preparedness.
Within Standards for Personal Protective and
Operational equipment, the program supported the development of
a number of respiratory standards including three National
Institute for Occupation Safety and Health (NIOSH) standards
and one National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standard
adopted by DHS in February 2004.
In FY 2006, the Standards Program plans to:
Continue to maintain and improve the process by which
homeland security standards are developed and promulgated at
the federal level. Incorporate the appropriate conformity
assessment program development into the standards development
process. Maintain and update the homeland security standards
database available to the homeland security community.
Continue to utilize interagency working groups to re-
evaluate requirements and prioritize needs for CBRNE
countermeasures standards. Focus on developing sampling
protocols and guidelines and standardized sample triage methods
for CBRNE countermeasures. Focus on standards for emerging
CBRNE countermeasures technologies including CBRNE point
detectors; CBRNE stand off detectors and urban surveillance
technologies such as BioWatch, CBRNE facility monitors, and
water distribution monitors. Continue programs to address
multimodal biometrics, latent fingerprints, rapid biometric
evaluations, and biometric image and feature quality. Also
explore and evaluate ergonomics, human factors, and usability
issues of biometric sensors, software, and systems.
Continue with the completion of a standard guide for
building event dispersion and health assessment preparedness
and response planning and the standard guide for conducting
emergency preparedness drills and exercises.
Continue current CBRNE personal protective and
operational equipment specifically focusing on completing the
suite of respiratory protection equipment standards to include
powered air purifying respirators, closed-circuit self
contained breathing apparatus, supplied air respirators and
combination respirators.
Support to Department of Homeland Security Components
As I have mentioned, the operational components of the Department
are my customers.
To ensure we meet customer needs, the S&T Directorate has
established the Science and Technology Requirements Council (SRC) to
bring forward a set of vetted needs from the entire Department. This is
an Assistant Secretary level committee with representation from across
DHS that has been chartered to assist in the solicitation, validation,
and prioritization of all science and technology requirements. This
council is intended to help the S&T Directorate identify those needs
most crucial to the DHS mission and to develop the most effective S&T
program possible using existing resources. As part of their mission,
the SRC reviews DHS operational requirements and needed capabilities
that require S&T solutions, and identifies those opportunities that
have cross-cutting technology solutions. Prioritized Departmental needs
are then presented to me as a recommendation for consideration, in
conjunction with all externally derived S&T requirements (e.g.,
statutory, national guidance), for inclusion in the S&T Directorate's
Planning, Programming, and Budgeting Cycle Guidance.
The inaugural meeting of the SRC took place September 30, 2004, and
was attended by representatives from Border and Transportation Security
(BTS), Emergency Preparedness and Response (EP&R), Information Analysis
and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP), the Office of Domestic
Preparedness (ODP), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (CIS),
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and U.S. Secret Service (USSS). Our initial
meeting resulted in new requirements and a validation of the needs that
our portfolios had already identified through their interactions with
the rest of the Department. It further served to bring together the
many disparate groups from across DHS and facilitated a new dialogue
that will be necessary to produce a successful S&T RDT&E program. The
input we received at the September 30, 2004, meeting was used to adjust
the FY 2006 budget request and is currently being integrated into our
FY 2007-2011 Planning, Programming and Budgeting cycle.
I will now address the specific programs being conducted by our
mission support portfolios.
Support to Border and Transportation Security
The Science and Technology Directorate supports all elements of BTS
enforcement and facilitation processes through identifying operational
requirements, developing mission capabilities-based technological
needs, and implementing a strategic plan. We are providing systems
engineering support to various BTS programs including US VISIT and
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.
The Science and Technology Directorate's support to the BTS
Directorate is accomplished by implementing a capabilities-based
technology planning process. The capabilities-based approach
establishes the scope of effort and framework for a technology plan.
Through a series of user conferences and technology opportunity
conferences, requirements are developed and prioritized for new and
improved capabilities. Operational personnel identify capabilities and
technology personnel identify potential development opportunities.
Capability gaps and possible technology solutions are proposed, and a
budget is developed to distinguish between both funded and unfunded
needs.
The Science & Technology Directorate, in collaboration with BTS,
co-chairs the Department's Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Working Group.
This group is currently focused on developing the Border and
Transportation Security operational requirements for UAVs and related
technologies, e.g., aerostats, blimps, lighter than air (LTA) ships,
and fixed and mobile towers. The UAV Working Group has identified the
following six BTS capability objectives that could benefit from the
utilization of UAVs:
surveillance and monitoring
communications
apprehension
targeting
intelligence
deterrence
officer safety
Based on these high-level requirements, the Science and Technology
Directorate is developing concepts of operations and assumptions that
will be used in conducting an Analysis of Alternatives that will
include UAVs as well as other technologies.
Over the past two years, the Science & Technology
Directorate has sponsored two major evaluations of Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (UAV) technology as part of the Arizona Border
Control Initiative.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Border and Transportation Security R&D
portfolio:
Issued a solicitation for an Advanced Container
Security Device to develop and field test (within the
Directorate's CounterMeasures Test Bed) the next generation of
shipping container security devices, building on the current
efforts through Operation Safe Commerce as well as current
Border and Transportation Security policy efforts to develop
and implement performance requirements for container security.
The Advanced Container Security Device program is part of a
``Future Smart Container'' initiative encompassing container
security, communications, and data systems for the future.
Supported the BTS Directorate in putting technology
in the field to support the Arizona Border Control Initiative.
The portfolio demonstrated other technologies such as a long-
range acoustic device that allows agents to communicate from a
safer standoff distance to determine the intent of people.
Continued development and refinement of BTS
technology requirements and planning. Using a capabilities-
based process, the portfolio's goal was to ensure that federal
technology planners understood the capabilities that BTS agents
and officers view as essential for mission success and to help
planners focus technology development on filling the identified
gaps in those capabilities.
Developed the BTS Technology Vision which include
Border Watch, Transportation Watch and Border Net which
significantly improves our ability to provide the information
necessary to secure our borders. The foundation of the vision
is an architecture and a set of technology programs that will
gather, process and distribute real-time knowledge of the
border and transportation situation and provide decision
support tools and labor saving devices for our security forces.
In FY 2006, the Border and Transportation Security R&D portfolio
plans to:
Build on the sensor trade studies and modeling
conducted in FY 2005 to develop and test advanced sensor suites
including improved visual and non-visual sensors (video,
infrared, seismic, acoustic and radar). These sensors may be
deployed on the ground, at sea, and in the air. In addition,
evaluate data produced by Ports-of-Entry (POE) inspectors, such
as traffic and incident information, along with data produced
by border inspection systems will be evaluated as part of the
surveillance system.
Build on the design and development effort
accomplished in FY 2005 on the next generation of container
security and communications systems to detect intrusion,
location, contents and tampering. The requirements for this
system include recording and reporting location; detection of
intrusion and communication of log history, and sensor and
inspection data.
Integrate Transportation Watch capabilities across
the transportation domains enabling a Common Operational
Picture (COP) across the entire transportation environment.
Extensive data sharing, including the ability to discover links
in criminal or suspicious activities across domains will be a
key requirement to providing an effective Transportation COP.
Initiate development and integration of smart portals
and sensors for detection of explosive threats to shipping.
Utilize rapid prototyping processes, focusing initially on
passenger and vehicle ferries.
Define system architecture that fully supports the
Border Watch Common Operational Picture with multi-modal access
to essential databases, remote communications and intelligence
fusion.
Support to Emergency Preparedness and Response
The S&T Directorate's Emergency Preparedness and Response (EP&R)
portfolio supports the Department's EP&R Directorate with a mission to
improve the ability of the Nation to prepare for, respond to, and
recover from all-hazards emergencies through development and deployment
of enabling capabilities. Particular emphasis is placed on technology
integration at all levels of government, detection and monitoring
systems for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive
(CBRNE) threats, and long-term sustained performance and inter-
operability enhancement of State and local preparedness. The most
important customers of EP&R technologies are the federal, State and
local emergency responders and emergency managers who are first into an
emergency zone and often last to leave. Specific objectives of the
portfolio are to:
Identify and develop relevant technology solutions
through partnerships with operational end-users;
Integrate advance all-hazards technology into
federal, State, and local emergency response infrastructures;
and
Provide scientific and technology leadership for
implementation of HSPD-5 (Management of Domestic Incidents) and
HSPD-8 (National Preparedness) efforts.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Emergency Preparedness and Response R&D
portfolio:
Initiated operation of the Interagency Modeling and
Atmospheric Assessment Center (IMAAC) and supported the
National Exercise Program and special events, such as the
Democratic and Republican National Conventions. IMAAC
established connectivity to the Department of Homeland Security
Operations Center and the FEMA National Emergency Operations
Center to provide near real time hazards predictions for
airborne releases.
Selected four urban areas for the pilot of the
Regional Technology Integration (RTI) Initiative. These
locations provide an opportunity to evaluate geographic and
governance diversity as well as variability in threats and
vulnerabilities. Initiated an integrated assessment process in
collaboration with these communities.
Focused activities on the identification of
simulation based training and education requirements through
interaction with the responder community. The portfolio
leveraged the work initiated by Office of Domestic Preparedness
and the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, the
National Institute of Justice and the Department of Defense in
identifying needs and gaps as well as existing technology
development programs that can be utilized for incident
management training
In FY 2006, the Emergency Preparedness and Response R&D portfolio
plans to:
Leverage federal resources to provide dynamic venue
for collaborative research, development, testing and evaluation
of atmospheric transport and dispersion (ATD) models for
hazards predictions. IMAAC will host researchers from
throughout the Nation at its facility as well as participate in
virtual collaboration both nationally and internationally.
Complete implementation of technology systems
solutions for the first four pilot locations of the RTI
initiative; prepare test and evaluation plans and conduct
operational readiness exercises to evaluate the overall system
performance.
Develop the system requirements that support
national, inter-operable simulation based training and
exercise. This capability will focus on large scale, multi-
jurisdictional incidents and will facilitate the implementation
of the National Incident Management System and the National
Preparedness Goal.
Demonstrate several revolutionary and highly
innovative materials for emergency personal protective
equipment (PPE) applications. Demonstrate prototype material/
technologies that can that can be made into functional garments
and/or integrated personal protective systems will be
demonstrated.
Initiate an Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration
of a candidate Unified Incident Command (UIC) architecture that
will achieve revolutionary advances in Unified Incident Command
and Decision Support and bring analytical tools to bear on
real-time information in-flows and out-flows for incident
commanders and emergency responders. Advanced capability will
be applicable to a variety of response paradigms, including
single incidents, multiple simultaneous incidents, long
duration response and recovery operations, and large-scale
public health events.
Support to United States Coast Guard
The mission of the United States Coast Guard (USCG) R&D portfolio
is to develop technology and systems to provide the capability to
safeguard lives, property and environment from intentional and
accidental maritime threats and protect maritime mobility through the
free flow of goods and people while maximizing the recreational use of
the Nation's waterways.
The USCG R&D portfolio covers the Homeland Security (HLS) and Non-
HLS missions performed by Coast Guard operational forces. HLS
priorities include research programs that address a defense in depth,
or layered approach, to Maritime Domain Awareness, Prevention/
Protection, Response and the management, analysis and distribution of
information, (e.g., Sea Guardian, Coastal Shield, Port Protector and
Smart Commander). Similarly, USCG non-HLS mission research needs (e.g.,
Search & Rescue, Maritime Oil Spill Response, Aquatic Nuisance Species,
Waterways Navigation, etc.) are addressed through programs like Safe
Voyage, Clean Sweep, ANS Eradicator and Able Navigator. Together these
programs support the five Strategic Goals of the USCG (Maritime Safety,
Protection of Natural Resources, Maritime Security, National Defense,
and Maritime Mobility).
The USCG portfolio expects in FY 2006 to see the continuation of
HLS mission research in the following areas:
Situational Awareness for Maritime Domain Awareness--
develop automated classification and prediction capability for
vessel intent with a port area.
Compel Compliance--field new capability to
communicate and stop at-sea small prop-driven vessels and in
port swimmers/divers.
Boarding Capability--improve space accountability for
non-ferrous vessels.
Personnel Alerting and Contraband Detection and
Identification--adapt breakthrough. Technologies in CBRNE
countermeasures for the maritime environment.
For non-HLS mission support, this portfolio will continue to place
its highest priorities on high-risk, high-reward research and
development relevant to the Coast Guard's traditional mission set that
might not otherwise be addressed in order to enhance operational
components within the Coast Guard. Non-HLS mission support will address
Coast Guard Strategic Goals (i.e., Maritime Safety, Security and
Mobility, and Protection of Natural Resources) through RDT&E efforts
that will provide increased knowledge, capability and performance
improvements in the following areas:
Aquatic Nuisance Species Eradication: non-invasive
treatment of ballast water;
Oil Spill Detection & Response: fielding of new
technology, equipment and devices to detect subsurface and
submerged (heavy) oils from standoff distances;
Rapid Hazardous Material (HAZMAT) Response
Information: evaluate airborne detection capability for heavy
oil spills and identify Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS)
technologies for HAZMAT identification by USCG inspection
personnel; and
Search & Rescue: incorporate environmental/
meteorological data into CODAR improving current analysis and
short-term forecasting for target movement and search area
predictions; develop improved Last Known Position estimators in
support of USCG Search Area Planners resulting in reduced
search areas and increasing survivability of persons lost at
sea.
Support to the United States Secret Service
The mission of the United States Secret Service (USSS) portfolio of
the S&T Directorate is intended to support the unique USSS mission by
development and deployment of advanced technologies to enhance
protective and investigative capabilities. This portfolio is
coordinated with the United States Secret Service and has established
its first direct-funded R&D program. The USSS portfolio effort focuses
upon input from the intelligence community (threat based model) and
direct operational experience obtained over the last century. As a
result, this funded technology program is subject to re-evaluation and
change based upon the perceived threats to the safety of those
protected by the USSS.
In 2004, the portfolio addressed four projects/programs. The
Emerging Threats Program supports the Secret Service's continuing,
comprehensive assessments of emerging threats and evolving technologies
that pose a threat to dignitaries and assets protected by USSS
personnel. The Law Enforcement Virtual-Reality Training Model program
supports prototyping and deployment of a law enforcement security-
oriented simulation training system for the USSS-specific training and
modeling. Additionally, this system will enhance the effectiveness of
emergency responders during actual events. The Critical Structure
Protective Initiative (CSPI) program will ensure continued research and
development of network protection systems and procedures designed to
mitigate exploitation of site-specific ``Very Large Scale Integration''
(VLSI) control architectures. The Wireless Tracking Device program
supports development of a handheld, man-portable wireless tracking
device for locating operators of wireless communication device(s) in
difficult radio frequency environments such as an office building or
event stadium.
In FY 2006, the U.S. Secret Service Portfolio plans to continue
development of appropriate escape hood technology, begin the
development of a mobile platform that will be required to detect,
exploit, and defend against covert and overt electronic surveillance
systems, continue (given a successful proof of concept in FY 2005) with
the development of a ubiquitous mobile computing system that would
allow secure wireless networked communication between unlike devices
with high fidelity data transmission; and initiate an Optical &
Chemical Tagging/Tracking Project under this program. This project's
objective will be the development of optical and chemical tags that are
robust and covertly deployable.
Homeland Security University and Fellowship Programs
In this portfolio we seek to develop a broad research capability
within the Nation's universities to address scientific and
technological issues related to homeland security. The portfolio places
a high priority on developing academic programs and supporting students
in order to build learning and research environments in key areas of
Departmental interest.
In FY 2004, the Homeland Security University Programs established
three Centers of Excellence:
The Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of
Terrorism Events, at the University of Southern California and
its partners will receive $12 million over three years to
evaluate the risks, costs and consequences of terrorism and to
guide economically viable investments in countermeasures.
The National Center for Foreign Animal and Zoonotic
Disease Defense at Texas A&M and its partners will receive $18
million over three years to address potential threats to animal
agriculture including Foot and Mouth Disease, Rift Valley
fever, Avian influenza and Brucellosis. In addition to working
closely with industry and government, they will work with DHS's
Plum Island Animal Disease Center.
The National Center for Food Protection and Defense
at the University of Minnesota and its partners will receive
$15 million over three years to establish best practices and
attract new researchers to manage and respond to food
contamination events, both intentional and naturally occurring.
In FY 2005, DHS announced the selection of the University of
Maryland (UMD) and its partners as the Center for Behavioral and Social
Research on Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism. This Center will be funded
at $12 million for three years following contract award
During late FY 2005 and early FY 2006, the S&T Directorate expects
to establish at least three additional Centers of Excellence. Each
Center is awarded an initial three-year grant whose annual cost we
account for in our planning.
As part of the Department's mission to maximize collaboration with
other federal agencies, University Programs and EPA's Science to
Achieve Results (STAR) Program have collaborated on the topic of
microbial risk assessment. The DHS-EPA cooperative Center on Microbial
Risk Assessment will result in one five-year grant to a university-
based consortium will be jointly funded by both agencies for a total of
$10 million.
Last fall, University Programs selected approximately100 students
for the 2004 class of DHS Scholars and Fellows bringing the total of
students to about 200. Students from the 2003 and 2004 class
participated in a DHS orientation for the purpose of learning about DHS
mission objectives, the critical research needs, and meeting scientists
from DHS laboratories, Centers of Excellence and DOE national
laboratories. Students from both classes are attending 93 institutions
(including Historically Black Colleges and Universities/Minority
Serving Institutions) in 38 states and the District of Columbia.
Seventeen of the institutions are located in Experimental Program to
Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) states. Besides making
immediate contributions to homeland security-related R&D, these
students will be part of the development of a broad research capability
within the Nation's universities to address scientific and
technological issues related to homeland security.
Beginning in FY 2006, the steady state of up to 300 highly talented
and diverse students will be maintained.
Emerging Threats
It is truly the threats we do not yet know that are often the most
terrifying. Our Emerging Threats portfolio addresses the dynamic nature
of terrorist threats, as science and technology advancements enable new
agents of harm and new ways to employ them. This portfolio places high
priority on developing the capability to use innovative, crosscutting,
out-of-the-box approaches for anticipating and responding to new and
emerging threats. Successful identification of emerging threats will
permit capabilities to be developed to thwart these emerging threats
before they are used.
Relevant R&D is underway at other agencies and organizations; thus,
partnerships in this area hold great potential for synergistic focus on
homeland security. Work is being done and will continue to be pursued
in partnership with the Departments of Energy, Defense, Justice, and
Agriculture, the intelligence community, and the National Institutes of
Health.
In FY 2004 and 2005, the Emerging Threats portfolio:
Established informal partnerships with the
intelligence community and with the USSS portfolio to leverage
ongoing activities in support of over-the-horizon assessment.
Initiated efforts, in combination with Rapid
Prototyping, in both near-term and breakthrough solutions to
homeland security issues. Near-term projects are funded out of
the Rapid Prototyping Portfolio. Breakthrough projects are
funded from the Emerging Threats Portfolio.
Held a privacy protection workshop in which the
technical and policy communities interacted to identify
important technical challenges and high impact solution areas.
Information from this workshop will form the basis of upcoming
programs in this area.
Analyzed multiple radar technologies and other
surveillance strategies to determine which combination of
technologies would best support coastal surveillance by the
USCG.
Conducted three sensitive projects, two in
collaboration with the USSS and one addressing a critical
infrastructure.
Sponsored studies at the Homeland Security Institute
to identify threat and technology trends and develop a
framework for analyzing emerging and future threats to homeland
security.
In FY 2006, the Emerging Threats portfolio plans to:
Sponsor comprehensive assessments to identify and
prioritize emerging threats. The outcomes of the assessments
lead the strategic programs to integrate multiple disciplines
and threat scenarios and comprehensively use intelligence-based
information to establish organizational foresight.
Fund research dedicated to long-term, undefined
threats as a means to exercise technology influence in the
marketplace and build infrastructure to incentivize non-
requirements driven, high-risk, high-payoff R&D, thereby
promoting technology push and collaboration to solve otherwise
intractable problems.
Complete development of projects initiated in FY
2005, and test and evaluate the products from these projects.
Develop technologies and systems against emerging threats
identified as a result of FY 2005 emerging threats analysis.
Rapid Prototyping
By accelerating the time needed to develop and commercialize
relevant technologies, the Science and Technology Directorate will
ensure that operational end-users will be better able to prevent
terrorist attacks, reduce the Nation's vulnerability, and minimize the
damage and assist in recovery if attacks occur. Our Rapid Prototyping
portfolio advances the Directorate's mission to conduct, stimulate and
enable RDT&E and timely transition of homeland security capabilities to
federal, State and local operational end-users.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Rapid Prototyping portfolio:
Solicited ideas, concepts and technologies for 50
requirement areas of interest to both the Department and other
agencies. Initiated efforts to address chemical and biological
threats, explosive detection, training technology tools,
improvised nuclear device defeat, and investigative and
forensic support topics.
Developed a joint port and coastal surveillance
prototype designated HAWKEYE with the United States Coast Guard
(USCG) that provides an integrated maritime surveillance system
covering Port Everglades, Miami, and Key West, Florida. This
first-of-its-kind integrated command center and maritime
surveillance facility opened in July 2004.
Initiated the implementation of the Technology
Clearinghouse as required in the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
This clearinghouse serves as the central nexus to the public
safety and first responder community on: (1) Information
services supporting access to, and dissemination of,
information regarding innovative technologies serving the DHS
mission; (2) Resources designed to support the collaborative
needs of teams serving the mission of DHS; and (3) Technology
programs and resources themselves, designed to serve the
mission of DHS and distributed via a central DHS mechanism.
In FY 2006, the Rapid Prototyping portfolio plans to:
Transition mature programs from the development phase
to operational testing and evaluation programs and commercial
or government entities for deployment. Identify new technology
candidates and capabilities to meet the existing and emergent
technical requirements of the Department.
Continue support of the Technology Clearinghouse in
FY 2006 and continue to fund projects initiated under the Near
Term and Future Technologies solicitation released in FY 2004.
Complete the development of projects, within the
Support to State and Local Responders project, initiated in FY
2005, and test and evaluate the products from these projects.
Counter-MANPADS
The Counter-MANPADS program is focused on demonstrating the
viability, economic costs, and effectiveness of adapting existing
military technology to protect commercial aircraft from the threat of
Man Portable Air Defense Systems (MANPADS). The major thrust of this
program is to demonstrate and evaluate the possible migration of
existing technologies to the commercial airline industry, not to
develop new technologies. The resulting countermeasure systems must
have minimal impact on air carrier and airport operations, maintenance,
and support activities. The re-engineering of existing countermeasure
technologies and components is necessary to meet commercial air carrier
operation requirements, including protection of critical military
technology. The program balances cost, schedule, and performance with
the needs and requirements of the aviation community stakeholders. Upon
completion of a two-phase analysis, prototype and testing program, DHS
will provide the Administration and Congress with a recommendation for
the most viable solution to defend against shoulder-fired missiles.
To mature the reliability of the underlying military technology to
commercial standards, validate system effectiveness and suitability in
an operational environment, and to develop and implement a
comprehensive approach to technology protection, a follow-on Phase III
has been planned. Phase III will include delivery and installation of
pre-production Counter-MANPADS equipment on commercially operated
aircraft by U.S. cargo carriers similar to those aircraft dedicated to
meet Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) requirements. This will integrate a
limited number of systems on multiple airframes in actual revenue
service across the different carriers for the purpose of operational
testing and evaluation, data collection, and the certification of a
number of different aircraft types. Phase III remains subject to
approval by the Administration and Congress.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Counter-MANPADS program:
Initiated and completed Phase I following a
competitive bidding process. DHS awarded Other Transaction (OT)
for Prototype Agreements (OTA) to three companies--BAE Systems,
Northrop Grumman, and United Airlines--for Phase I of a two-
year System Development and Demonstration (SD&D) effort. The
contractors focused on proving the feasibility of migrating
existing DOD technology into the commercial sector and
exploring other technology as appropriate. Following
Preliminary Design Reviews with all three companies in July
2004, the Phase I portion of the twenty-four month SD&D effort
concluded and DHS initiated a selection evaluation process to
determine which of the three companies would be selected to
further mature their preliminary designs, build representative
prototypes, install them on aircraft, and conduct formal
testing during the Phase II eighteen month effort.
Involved the stakeholder community beginning in FY
2004. In late 2004, the Program Office hosted a Stakeholders'
Meeting, attended by representatives of the airlines, the
equipment manufacturers, and other affected sectors, including
representatives of multiple Federal Government Departments and
Agencies.
In FY 2006, the Counter-MANPADS program plans to:
Build, deliver, install, and fly pre-production
Counter-MANPADS equipment on commercially-operated aircraft by
U.S. cargo carriers similar to those aircraft used for the
Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) operations.
Conduct operational testing and evaluation and data
collection on multiple aircraft types to capture operational
and maintenance costs as well as technical performance and
reliability data in a commercial operational environment.
Modify Phase II systems to incorporate new design
requirements including reliability, technology protection, and
emergency ground notification improvements based on test and
evaluation results.
Examine maintaining two contractors in Phase III to
foster competition, and to promote manufacturing should a full-
rate decision be made.
Conduct an aggressive reliability growth effort to
increase system reliability to 3000 hours and reduce recurring
support costs.
During FY 2006, conduct Live-Fire Test and Evaluation
assessment.
Continue on-going dialogues with Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEM) such as Boeing and Airbus and conduct
studies to scope the effort required to include provisions for
Counter-MANPADS systems on future production aircraft.
Pursue Federal Aviation Administration certification
for additional aircraft types/models/series not addressed in
Phase II.
Office of SAFETY Act Implementation
The mission of the Office of SAFETY Act Implementation (OSAI) is to
evaluate technologies submitted to it by applicants in accordance with
the criteria set forth in the Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering
Effective Technologies Act of 2002 (SAFETY Act) and Interim
Regulations. As part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law
107-296, Congress enacted the SAFETY Act to provide ``risk management''
and ``litigation management'' protections for sellers of qualified
anti-terrorism technologies. The purpose of the Act is to encourage the
development and deployment of anti-terrorism technologies (ATT) that
will substantially enhance the protection of the Nation. Specifically,
the SAFETY Act creates certain liability limitations for ``claims
arising out of, relating to, or resulting from an act of terrorism''
where qualified anti-terrorism technologies have been deployed.
Although there are many technologies that are important to
protecting our homeland, the SAFETY Act Designation and Certification
are designed to support effective technologies aimed at preventing,
detecting, identifying, or deterring acts of terrorism, or limiting the
harm that such acts might otherwise cause, and which also meet other
prescribed criteria.
OSAI evaluations are designed to generate advice to the Under
Secretary on the appropriateness of granting protections under the
SAFETY Act. In support of this mission, OSAI undertakes efforts to
raise public awareness of the benefits of the protections available
under the SAFETY Act. In addition, OSAI coordinates its process with
other offices within DHS and other federal agencies to both support
those offices in their missions and to minimize the burden on
applicants for SAFETY Act protections.
The Department moved quickly to create OSAI. In July 2003, a notice
of proposed rulemaking was published for comment, and on October 16,
2003, an interim rule was published with a request for public comments,
thus implementing the program. Facilities to house the program were
selected and OSAI has identified and entered into agreements with the
lead implementation contractor and lead web site development/management
contactor. OSAI designed and implemented a web-based application kit
and process with an interactive help desk. OSAI executed a robust
outreach program to introduce the industry to the SAFETY Act program
and to encourage its participation. OSAI has received and has responded
to 72 full applications and 166 pre-applications. Four applicants have
been awarded SAFETY Act designation and certification: Northrop
Grumman; Michael Stapleton Associates; Teledyne Brown Engineering; and
Lockheed Martin.
The Office intends to refine its operations throughout FY 2005.
OSAI, in consultation with the Department's Office of the General
Counsel, has been revising the Interim Rule based on the comments
received from the public and our experiences with applicants over the
past year. OSAI will revise the application kit to make it clearer and
more user-friendly, and will work to streamline the process based on
lessons learned from the previous year. The number of applications is
expected to increase significantly with the introduction of the revised
kit, implementation of the Final Rule, and higher visibility.
In FY 2006, OSAI plans to expand its coordination of the program
with pending federal, State, and local procurements. It also plans to
work with recognized procurement organizations and appropriate industry
associations to educate them on the availability of SAFETY Act
protections to potential vendors.
Office of Inter-operability and Compatibility
The Office of Inter-operability and Compatibility (OIC), managed by
the S&T Directorate, was tasked to lead the planning and implementation
efforts in coordination with other DHS programs. It oversees the wide
range of public safety inter-operability programs and efforts currently
spread across Homeland Security. These programs address critical inter-
operability issues relating to public safety and emergency response,
including communications, equipment, training, and other areas as needs
are identified.
Creating inter-operability requires coordination and partnerships
among managers, partners, and stakeholders at all levels of government.
OIC will establish partnerships with all relevant offices and agencies
to ensure that the programs address all possible issues related to
public safety inter-operability and compatibility. These partners and
additional relevant stakeholders include representatives from the
emergency response providers represented by their national
associations, State and local government agencies, DHS and other
Federal Government agencies, standards development organizations, and
industry.
Since October 2004, the OIC has interviewed key stakeholders across
federal and practitioner communities to validate findings, uncover
additional inter-operability initiatives, and determine key issues for
first response; identified a core group of federal programs that test
and evaluate first responder equipment; began developing a plan to
establish a Joint Evaluation and Testing Program to coordinate with
other federal agencies; and conducted an initial scan of existing
programs for first responders and collected information at the local,
State, and federal levels.
Critical Infrastructure Protection Portfolio
The Science and Technology Directorate's Critical Infrastructure
Protection (CIP) portfolio protects the Nation's critical
infrastructure and key assets from acts of terrorism, natural
disasters, or other emergencies by developing and deploying tools to
anticipate, identify and analyze risks, and systems to reduce those
risks and the consequences of an event. The portfolio puts a focus on
scientific prioritization of components of critical infrastructure and
key resources/assets and partners with other organizations to catalyze
development of critical infrastructure protection technologies.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Critical Infrastructure Protection R&D
portfolio:
Developed a CIP Decision Support System (DSS) focused
on prioritizing investment, protection, mitigation, response,
and recovery strategies related to Critical Infrastructure
Protection. The prototype model includes representation of all
14 critical infrastructure sectors, as outlined in the National
Strategy for the Protection of Critical Infrastructures and Key
Assets, as well as their interdependencies. Preliminary test
cases have been used to develop consequence estimation features
of the CIP-DSS at both national and metropolitan scales.
Initiated a system study to find potential solutions
for personnel surety for security guards that guard our
nation's Critical Infrastructure, as well as insiders with
access to sensitive areas of, or information about the
infrastructure.
Supported a System Study for Municipal Domestic Water
Security, along with the Biological Countermeasures Portfolio,
Chemical Countermeasures Portfolio, and Radiological/Nuclear
Countermeasures Portfolio.
Initiated interagency development of the first annual
National Critical Infrastructure Protection R&D Plan using the
Infrastructure Subcommittee of the National Science and
Technology Council.
Initiated cooperative and collaborative research and
development project with the Kentucky Homeland Security
University Consortium comprised of the University of Kentucky,
the University of Louisville, Eastern Kentucky University,
Western Kentucky University, Northern Kentucky University,
Morehead State University, Murray State University, Kentucky
State University and the Kentucky Community & Technical College
System.
In FY 2006, the Critical Infrastructure Protection R&D portfolio
plans to:
Incorporate a fully parameterized metropolitan area
modeling capability into the CIP-DSS. Integrate adversary-
defender constraint and information dynamics models into CIP-
DSS. Add an enhanced threat spectrum capability to CIP-DSS and
complete pilot tests of the CIP-DSS in several State and
regional areas.
Publish the National Academy Study on Security of the
Electrical Industry.
Complete the quick-look system studies of all 14
Critical Infrastructures and Key Resources, and the end-to-end
System Study for Municipal Domestic Water Security.
Deliver improved closed circuit TV (CCTV) components
for object identification and behavior recognition. Deliver an
enhanced threat detection CCTV system based on video image
understanding architecture, including the improved CCTV
components.
Deliver the second annual National CIP R&D Plan with
agency budget information and a roadmap for deliverables.
Incorporate relevant inputs from: a) federal agencies including
activities, and levels of effort; b) critical infrastructure
sector owners and operators; and c) private and public research
institutions and universities.
Cyber Security R&D Portfolio
The Cyber Security R&D Portfolio supports the mission of the
Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate and is
focused on leading cyber security research, development; testing and
evaluation endeavors to secure the Nation's critical information
infrastructure through coordinated efforts that will improve the
security of the existing cyber infrastructure, and provide a foundation
for a more secure infrastructure. This will be accomplished by focusing
on R&D aimed at preventing, protecting against, detecting, responding
to, and recovering from large-scale, high-impact cyber attacks,
supporting the development and accelerating the deployment and use of
more secure Internet communication protocols, addressing cyber security
R&D needs that are unique to critical infrastructure sectors, and
provide novel and next-generation secure information technology
concepts and architectures.
In FY 2004 and FY 2005, the Cyber Security R&D portfolio:
Initiated dialog aimed at international collaboration
on cyber security R&D with Canada, the United Kingdom, and
Japan. Interactions with the United Kingdom and Japan are at
early stages and have not yet reached the point where potential
joint R&D activities have been identified.
Worked with federal researchers and officials and the
private sector to develop a roadmap to accelerate the
development and deployment of a secure domain name
infrastructure. Current work also includes the identification
of technology requirements and development of models to aid in
assessing the performance impact of utilizing Domain Name
System Security Extensions (DNSSEC) in operational
environments.
Initiated a program to address different facets of
the need for improved methods for cyber security assessment and
testing, in order to provide a foundation for the long-term
goal of economically-informed risk-based cyber security
decision-making.
Provide technical support funding through the
``virtual'' Cyber Security R&D Center for the S&T Directorate
in pre-research activities (such as developing roadmaps,
organizing workshops and meetings, aiding in drafting research
solicitations and proposal review), as well as post-research
activities (such as facilitating pilot tests and exercises,
venture capital community outreach, private sector outreach,
and interfacing with non-government R&D communities).
In FY 2006, the Cyber Security portfolio plans to:
Continue to provide support to the Directorate
through the ``virtual'' Cyber Security R&D Center in pre-
research activities and post-research activities. FY 2006
activities will have a significant focus on private sector and
venture capital community outreach.
Initiate a new two-year R&D program phase, again
overlapping with the program started in FY 2005. As the FY 2004
program comes to a close in FY 2006, progress against the FY
2004 technical topic areas will be evaluated.
Complete full-scale operational test bed, acquisition
and generation of network data sets, enhancement of remote
management and configuration capabilities, and a final project
report.
Focus on system-level DNSSEC implementation, with the
development of software reference implementations for servers
and client applications, and planning for pilot deployments of
DNSSEC. Direct investments in the area of routing protocol
security at the development of a modeling and simulation
framework for impact assessment of secure routing protocols on
the Internet performance.
Focus on pursuing partnerships that allow broader
non-government participation, accompanied by a greater role of
non-government organizations and funding sharing responsibility
for oversight and financial support for this capability.
R&D Consolidation
Funds originally requested by the U.S. Coast Guard to support
operations, maintenance and salaries for the assigned science staff for
the Coast Guard Research and Development Center will be integrated into
the Science and Technology Directorate mission space to support the
continued operations and scientific activities at the Coast Guard
Research and Development Center. Funds originally requested by the
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to support salaries for those
assigned to the Research, Development, and Evaluation Branch will
likewise be integrated into the S&T Directorate mission
In FY 2006, DHS's Science and Technology Directorate will unite the
RDT&E functions of the existing S&T explosives countermeasures
portfolio along with those of the Transportation Security
Administration program. The resulting integrated portfolio will then
encompass and support the true objective of the explosives
countermeasures technology program: to prevent, detect, respond, and
mitigate the use of explosives in attacks against the population, mass
transit, civil aviation, critical infrastructure and key assets. This
consolidation allows for an expansion of the scope and number of
programs within the explosives countermeasures portfolio in comparison
to the current FY 2004 and FY 2005 and planned FY 2006 activities.
Programs include explosives marking, smuggling, aviation security,
suicide bomb interdiction, and vehicle bomb interdiction.
FY 2006 Science and Technology Directorate Initiatives
The S&T budget request includes funding for a number of mission-
critical initiatives.
National Bio and Agrodefense Facility [$23 million]
The National Bio and Agrodefense Facility (NBAF) will extend
the capabilities of the National Biodefense Analysis and
Countermeasures Center (NBACC) for threat characterization,
forensics, and detection to defend both animal and public
health. Research, development, test and evaluation at the NBAF
will strengthen the Nation's ability to anticipate, prevent,
respond to, and recover from the intentional introduction of
high consequence biological threats, such as Foreign Animal
Diseases. The S&T Directorate will focus on developing and
testing the technical means to prevent attacks on agriculture
and humans and strengthening the capability to respond to an
attack, recover from an attack, reconstitute the agricultural
economy and infrastructure, and provide a means to identify the
bioterrorists and bring them to justice. The NBAF will enhance
situational awareness of the health of the American populace,
animals, plants, food supply, and environment, and result in
better informed decision-making and a quicker federal, State,
and local response to foreign animal and zoonotic diseases. The
capabilities provided by the NBAF meet the requirements of
HSPD-9 and HSPD-10. The National Bio and Agrodefense Facility
will ensure healthy livestock for the 21st century and protect
the public.
Low Volatility Agent Warning System [$20 million]
An additional $20 million is provided to develop the Low
Volatility Agent (LVA) Warning System, which will serve as the
basis for a warning and identification capability against a set
of chemical threat agents whose vapor pressure is sufficiently
low that detection by conventional approaches is exceptionally
difficult. This set of low volatility agents includes some of
the most toxic materials currently known. The Chemical
Countermeasures portfolio has initiated an effort to develop a
transportable capability for the detection of these materials
in a response and recovery mode. This R&D effort is referred to
as LVA Surface Contamination Monitor. The additional FY 2006
funding will be used to develop a protection-mode capability to
detect these materials upon release in specific environments.
This detect-to-warn system will alert the response system of
the imminent hazard and enable protection of potential victims
from exposure and permit application of prompt medical
countermeasures to minimize or eliminate casualties. This
system will be a network of detectors to provide a protect-to-
warn capability for specific venues, such as high-value
buildings and transit systems. The LVA Warning System will both
detect and identify the agent to ensure correct medical
countermeasures are engaged.
Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and
Evaluation Complex [$9 million]
The Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and Evaluation
Complex (Rad/NucCTEC), part of the DNDO, will provide the
Nation with the necessary facilities and capabilities to
validate the performance of systems under development, and
already deployed, to protect the United States from the threat
of a terrorist radiological or nuclear attack. Located on the
Nevada Test Site, the Rad/NucCTEC will be a unique national
asset, permitting classified high-fidelity testing of
radiological/nuclear sensors and sensor systems utilizing
strategic quantities of special nuclear materials in realistic
configurations. The Rad/NucCTEC will provide the Nation with
the capacity to rapidly evaluate the performance of our current
and developing homeland defenses against validated threats,
using actual radiological and nuclear materials, for which no
facility currently exists.
Counter-MAN Portable Air Defense Systems (C-MANPADS)
[$49 million]
C-MANPADS' increase of $49 million plus $61 million of base
funding equal to a total funding level of $110 million in FY
2006. If deemed appropriate based on the Phase II results and
approval from Congress, the Counter-MANPADS Program will
initiate Phase III to include delivery and installation of pre-
production Counter-MANPADS equipment on commercially operated
aircraft by U.S. cargo carriers similar to those aircraft
dedicated to meet the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF)
requirement. To foster competition, the additional funds will
be used to maintain two contractors in Phase III. In FY 2006,
each contractor will update its designs to incorporate new
design requirements including reliability improvements,
technology protection, and emergency ground notification.
Operational testing and evaluation will be performed on
multiple aircraft types to capture true operational and
maintenance costs as well as technical performance and
reliability data. In FY 2006, twenty operational aircraft will
be modified and sixteen Counter-MANPADS systems will be
procured to support reliability and test data collection and
critical technology protection measures. This information is
critical to further maturing the life cycle cost impact
analysis to the airlines, and the extensive reliability
analysis will be used to validate and improve system
reliability. Dialogue with Original Equipment Manufacturers
(OEM), such as Boeing and Airbus, will be initiated and studies
conducted to scope the effort required to include provisions
for Counter-MANPADS systems on future production aircraft.
Additionally, live fire test evaluations will provide insight
into the overall effectiveness of the system installed on
commercial aircraft. Finally, Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) certification will be completed for additional relevant
aircraft types/models/series not addressed in Phase II.
Research and Development Consolidation [$127.5
million] (67 FTE)
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the United
States Coast Guard (USCG), the Bureau of Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) and the Information Analysis and
Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) will integrate their RDT&E
activities with those conducted within the Department of
Homeland Security's S&T Directorate. This consolidation will
bring the scientific and engineering personnel and other RDT&E
resources of the Department under a single accountable
authority. The S&T Directorate's vision for this RDT&E
integration will be to start the development and expansion of
collaborative relationships, foster and leverage an environment
of collective capabilities, maximize the efficiency and
effectiveness of the Department's RDT&E capacity as well as
develop and expand synergistic RDT&E programs that cut across
the Department's activities. Bringing RDT&E under the S&T
Directorate will allow the other organizational elements to
collaborate in the RDT&E integration and to focus on their
operational missions, and eliminate within them the specialized
management infrastructure required to manage RDT&E. The FY 2006
R&D Consolidation budget is $127,497,000 of which $10,600,000
is in support of 67 FTEs and $116,897,000 is for RDT&E.
In addition to the RDT&E activities conducted at the portfolio
level, the Science and Technology Directorate is committed to
additional activities that both facilitate and enhance the research
efforts of the portfolios. The Directorate places significant emphasis
on its interfaces with other government agencies as well as the
transfer of technology to other directorates and agencies.
Studies and Analysis
The Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee
(HSSTAC) and the Homeland Security Institute (HSI) constitute the major
activities of Studies & Analysis. Both were established under the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide independent scientific &
technical analytic expertise to the Department through the Under
Secretary for Science and Technology. HSSTAC operates under the Federal
Advisory Committee Act. HSI operates in accordance with regulations
governing Federally Funded Research and Development Centers. By
charter, each engages in substantial contact with other agencies,
private sectors, and other entities to facilitate communication,
identify issues, and bring the best advice to the Department and the
Government.
The Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee
(HSSTAC)
The HSSTAC, established in November 2003, was chartered to be a
source of independent scientific and technical planning advice for the
Under Secretary for Science and Technology. It is solely advisory in
nature and focuses on the responsibilities of the Under Secretary for
Science and Technology to organize the Nation's scientific and
technological resources to prevent or mitigate the effects of
catastrophic terrorism against the United States; identify research
areas of potential importance to the security of the Nation; assist in
establishing mission goals for the future; advise on whether the
policies, actions, management processes, and organization constructs of
the Science and Technology Directorate are focused on mission
objectives; advise on whether the research, development, test,
evaluation, and systems engineering activities are properly resourced
(capital, financial, and human) to accomplish the objectives; identify
outreach activities; and, review the technical quality and relevance of
the Directorate's programs.
During the past year HSSTAC met, either in part or in whole, with
the following:
Port Authority of New York & New Jersey--To evaluate
the needs and operational requirements of the BioWatch and Rad/
Nuc detection programs.
Port Authority Police Department
George Washington Bridge
Holland Tunnel
Howland Hook Marine Terminal
NYC Office of Emergency Management--To meet with
senior leaders and gauge their assessment of the BioWatch
program
NYC Public Health Laboratory--To observe the sample
testing phase of the BioWatch program.
Department of Energy National Laboratories (Sandia
National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Los Alamos National
Laboratory)--To learn about the various homeland security
technology capabilities found in the National Labs and discuss
with senior leaders how such laboratories can best serve the
Nation.
Food & Drug Administration--The Acting Commissioner
and other senior leaders to assess how DHS and FDA determine
and implement respective roles and responsibilities regarding
disease detection.
Department of Health and Human Services--Assistant
Secretary and senior staff from the Centers for Disease Control
to discuss how DHS and HHS determine and implement respective
roles and responsibilities regarding disease detection.
Annual Report to Congress: The Committee's overarching conclusions
are:
The S&T Directorate has made notable progress in
organizing, establishing processes, establishing relationships
with other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) activities and
with the broader community relevant to homeland security.
The Directorate's strategic planning process is
underway but needs staffing, clear intent and guidance, metrics
useful to set priorities, and methodologies for planning and
assessments.
The Directorate has become the default operator of
some fielded systems; focusing on operating fielded systems
will divert both attention and resources needed to develop the
needed new and improved capabilities.
The Directorate needs to focus on the needs of
multiple publics with distinctly different needs.
A major objective of homeland security activities
should be to build public resiliency to a wide range of
possible attacks.
Understanding a wide range of specific threats is
essential to understanding and addressing vulnerabilities to
potential disruptive assaults.
To achieve the national goals in homeland security,
DHS needs to take the lead in fashioning a mechanism for
coordination and cooperation among the relevant federal
research and development (R&D) activities.
A larger growth rate is needed to build programs,
infrastructure and capabilities.
The S&T Directorate needs to define in some detail
what kind of relationship it believes is needed with the DOE
labs to meet DHS needs.
Homeland Security Institute
The Homeland Security Institute is a Federally Funded Research and
Development Center (FFRDC) operated and managed by Analytic Services
Inc. to provide independent, objective studies and analyses to address
critical homeland security issues, particularly those that require
scientific, technical, business systems, and analytical expertise. The
HSI is a strategic resource for the Department with the Under Secretary
for Science and Technology (S&T) serving as primary sponsor on behalf
of the Secretary. HSI programs crosscut DHS organizational lines and
involve Coast Guard, BTS, EP&R, IAIP, as well as S&T Directorate
components. In order to provide dedicated, multi-disciplinary, critical
analysis and decision support capability for DHS department-wide, HSI
engages other agencies and broader communities as necessary to better
inform DHS and to apply ``dual-benefit'' approaches directly into
program planning.
During the past year HSI conducted the following studies that
involved other federal agencies:
National laboratory capabilities assessment--
conducted an extensive survey of homeland security capabilities
resident in the Department of Energy national laboratories.
Cargo summit--facilitated private sector
communications and provided analysis on the national cargo
security strategy including Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, Department of State, Department
of Defense.
Critical Infrastructure Protection Vulnerability
Studies with Department of Energy (to include the National
Laboratories), United States Department of Agriculture, Food
and Drug Administration, Department of Transportation, United
States Coast Guard, National Transportation Safety Board, White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Amtrak.
Wide Area Biological Restoration study involves
Environmental Protection Agency, Health and Human Services,
National Institute of Health, Department of Defense (U.S. Army
Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine), United
States Postal Service, Department of State, Department of
Energy National Laboratories, Department of Justice, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, United
States Department of Agriculture, General Services
Administration, Technology Surprise Working Group, Department
of Labor.
Reasons for Successful and Unsuccessful Terrorist
Incidents Against the U.S.--Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Department of Justice, Department of State.
Threat and Technology Assessments--Central
Intelligence Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, U.S. Army,
U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, National
Aeronautics Space Agency, Technology Surprise Working Group,
National Ground Intelligence Center, Office of Science and
Technology Policy.
Division of Effort Among the DHS S&T Directorate and Research Efforts
at Other Government Agencies
One of the accomplishments of which I am personally most proud is
the emphasis our new Directorate has put on interacting with other
federal departments and agencies. Knowledge of other science and
technology programs and their results, appropriate collaboration
between agencies, coordination of relevant programmatic activities, and
information sharing are essential for us to best meet our mission
requirements.
The Science and Technology Directorate recognizes that many
organizations are contributing to the science and technology base
needed to enhance the Nation's capabilities to thwart terrorist acts
and to fully support the conventional missions of the operational
components of the Department. Congress recognized the importance of the
research and development being conducted by numerous federal
departments and agencies, and, in the Homeland Security Act of 2002,
directed the Under Secretary for Science and Technology to coordinate
the Federal Government's civilian efforts to identify and develop
countermeasures to current and emerging threats.
We take this responsibility very seriously.
Over the last year, the Science and Technology Directorate has
worked with the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Homeland
Security Council, the National Security Council, the Office of
Management and Budget and the Office of the Vice President to initiate
the effort to coordinate homeland security research and development
across the entire United States Government. It will come as no surprise
to the members of this Subcommittee that good, solid, effective
research and development relevant to homeland security is being
conducted by the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy,
Justice, Health and Human Services, State, and Veteran's Affairs;
within the National Science Foundation, the Environmental Protection
Agency and other federal agencies; and by members of the Intelligence
Community.
Several interagency working groups already exist that are
addressing issues important to homeland security. The Science and
Technology Directorate has been, and continues to be, an active
participant in these working groups, and in most cases has taken a
leadership role. These fora foster an active exchange of information
and assist each participating agency in identifying related needs and
requirements, conducting research and development of mutual benefit,
and avoiding duplication of effort.
We also continue to have discussions at multiple levels of
management with federal departments and agencies, as well as with the
Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Science and Technology
Policy, and the Homeland Security Council. These discussions ensure
that the strongest possible links are made and the best possible
coordination occurs between our Department and those who are conducting
sector-specific research.
A full list of S&T Directorate interagency interactions and their
results are listed in the Appendix.
Technology Transfer
We are often asked about the transfer of technologies between
Departments. I want to assure you that the Science and Technology
Directorate is very concerned about technology transfer. Often,
technology developed for one purpose, such as a military application,
cannot be transferred in a straightforward manner to civil operations.
The requirements for maintenance and support, for performance, and for
total cost of ownership often inhibit such transfers. Although the
basic scientific principles that underpin a particular technology may
be leveraged, nevertheless significant re-engineering is required to
make the technology suitable for homeland security purposes.
Other issues associated with transferring technologies to the
homeland security operating environment include the need for ease of
operations, extremely low total cost of ownership, providing liability
relief, providing incentives for non-federal actors to purchase useful
technologies, developing and promulgating standards and providing
technical assistance to aid those purchasers in their procurement
decisions. While the Department has made tremendous progress in all
these areas, much remains to be done, and sustained effort is needed.
Short-Term and Long-Term Research
In the two years that this Department has been in existence, the
Science and Technology Directorate has focused its efforts on near-term
development and deployment of technologies to improve our nation's
ability to detect and respond to potential terrorist acts. However, we
recognize that a sustained effort to continually add to our knowledge
base and our resource base is necessary for future developments. Thus,
we have invested a portion of our resources, including our university
programs, toward these objectives. The following table indicates our
expenditures in basic research, applied research, and development to
date.