[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 65 (Friday, April 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16140-16141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8608]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Technology Administration


Department of Commerce Study for the Continuous Improvement of 
the Advanced Technology Program (ATP)

AGENCY: Technology Administration, Commerce.

ACTION: Request for Public Comments ATP 60 Day Study.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce's Technology Administration is 
seeking ways to make the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology's (NIST) Advanced Technology Program (ATP) operate more 
effectively. This notice provides the general public the opportunity to 
review the areas under consideration. This study will be presented to 
the Secretary of Commerce.

DATES: The due date for submission of comments is May 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to: National 
Institute of Standards and Technology, Program Office, Attention: ATP 
60 Day Study, Administration Building, Room A1000, Quince Orchard & 
Clopper Roads, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-0001; or via e-mail to: 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Leslie Smith, (301) 975-6762.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The ATP is a rigorously competitive, cost-sharing R&D program to 
provide incentives for the pursuit of high-risk, emerging and enabling 
technologies by U.S.-based businesses at the early, precompetitive 
stage when market forces do not generally provide private capital. The 
ATP provides multi-year funding to single companies and business-led 
joint ventures. It encourages interactions and teaming arrangements 
between businesses and universities and national laboratories. The ATP 
challenges businesses to leverage the significant U.S. investment in 
fundamental research to generate the nuclei of new industries and new 
enabling technologies for the future growth and competitiveness of the 
U.S. industrial base. Competitions are held for both general programs, 
where any technology area can be explored, and for focused programs 
where industry discussions have indicated that significant progress in 
new areas can be made by a set of intensive R&D activities in a 
specific area of emerging technologies. In all cases proposers must 
provide credible evidence of the potential for new technology 
breakthroughs and outline project feasibility. In addition, they must 
be able to demonstrate their capability to bring a successful project 
to commercial reality after the completion of the ATP funding. Small 
technology-intensive and high tech start-up companies are particularly 
encouraged to participate. In the global economy of today, ATP is 
designed to accelerate and broaden the U.S. technology base and to 
provide the foundation for the next century's new, exciting industries. 
It should also serve as a vehicle for infusing truly new research ideas 
into existing industries for the next generation of products and 
services.

Purpose and Scope of Study

    The Advanced Technology Program is a key component of the Nation's 
long term economic growth strategy. In a recent statement before a 
committee of the United States House of

[[Page 16141]]

Representatives, Secretary of Commerce William M. Daley stated that the 
Advanced Technology Program is critically important and provides 
enormous benefits to the United States' long-term economic prosperity. 
He noted that ATP projects planned, co-funded, and carried out by 
industry will play a special role in enabling technological 
developments that have long-term payoffs and widespread benefits for 
the economy.
    Secretary Daley has instructed the Department of Commerce to review 
certain current policies and procedures of the ATP to determine if, 
after the six years of experience with the program, there are 
modifications that could further strengthen the program. In undertaking 
this review, the Department intends to consult with experts and 
interested parties, and to gather and analyze industry's experiences 
with the ATP. The outcome of this review will be incorporated in the 
Department's recommendations to the Secretary on possible modifications 
of the program which would increase its effectiveness.

Request for Public Comment

    The Technology Administration has identified the following topics 
on which it requests public comments:

1. Company Participation

    Companies, both large and small, participate in the program in ways 
that offer broad based benefits as well as specific technology 
developments. The program pays only direct costs of single applicants 
while any indirect costs are borne by the company. Awards to single 
applicants are currently limited to a maximum of two million dollars 
and a three year period. Single applicant proposals often involve 
teaming arrangements, including subcontractors and business alliances, 
that in many ways resemble joint ventures.
    Joint ventures currently require the participation of two or more 
for-profit organizations which contribute to both the R&D and the cost 
share. Participants in joint ventures contribute at least half of the 
total costs and are allowed to apply for projects of up to five years 
duration and with no limit on funding. The appropriateness of the 
budget is one of the elements examined in determining the score of 
applicants.
    The program currently solicits proposals in both general 
competitions, open to all areas of technology, and in focused programs. 
The ATP develops focused programs by a process which identifies where a 
coordinated set of public-private technology partnerships could solve a 
major technology challenge lending to economic benefits to the U.S.
    Issues for comment include:

--Should large companies only participate as members of joint ventures 
or in other teaming arrangements?
--Should large companies who are single applicants be required to 
contribute a monetary cost share where current rules require them to 
pay only their indirect costs?
--Should the program simplify the rules by paying direct costs for both 
single applicants and joint ventures?
--Should teaming arrangements which do not meet the ATP requirements 
for joint venture funding but which apply as single applicants be 
allowed the same flexibility as joint ventures in the size and duration 
of their projects?
--Are there models for teaming arrangements other than these joint 
ventures that would work effectively for the ATP?
--Are there other advantages of the team building process involved in 
developing focused programs that are seen by industry as separate from 
the benefits of the specific ATP projects?
--What are the appropriate criteria to judge whether greater benefit 
would accrue by extending an existing focused program or by initiating 
a new one?
--Should participation in focused programs be limited to one 
competition after which further proposals would be evaluated as part of 
general competitions?

2. Private Capital Markets

    ATP projects are directed to high risk, enabling research and 
development that are typically conducted five to ten years before 
product commercialization. Such projects would not normally be able to 
secure private financing because of the long term nature of the work, 
the high risk, and the inability of any single investor to capture the 
wide range of potential technology uses from the early stage R&D.

--What are the possible sources of private funding available for such 
projects and how could those sources be made available to potential 
program applicants?

3. Regional Distribution of Awards

    Awards from the program are currently made on the basis of business 
and technical merit without regard to the geographic location of the 
participants. Some regions of the country have not received significant 
assistance from the program because they lack large numbers of R&D 
intensive companies.

--Are there mechanisms that the Department should explore to foster 
high quality proposals from companies in States that lack large numbers 
of R&D intensive companies?
--Should a separate program be set up specifically to aid States that 
are under-represented in the ATP and should it also apply to under-
represented States in other Federal R&D programs?

4. Other Assistance to Applicants

    The program holds conferences and workshops to explain the goals 
and requirements of the program to potential applicants. Proposal 
requirements are kept to a minimum but larger, more experienced 
companies may be able to write effective proposals more easily.

--What additional information could ATP provide to potential 
applicants, particularly smaller companies, that would assist them in 
developing proposals?
--Should the ATP provide information to unsuccessful applicants about 
other possible sources of financial assistance to pursue R&D that is 
judged meritorious?

    Dated: March 31, 1997.
Mary L. Good,
Under Secretary for Technology.
[FR Doc. 97-8608 Filed 4-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-M