Final Conference Report Language: National Science Foundation

With the release of House Report 103-273, the House and Senate conference committee on H.R. 2491 has made its final recommendations to the National Science Foundation. Barring any last minute changes, upcoming House and Senate floor votes on this report will conclude the final stage of congressional action on the fiscal year 1994 budget request.

Much anticipated has been what the conference committee would say about the future role of the NSF. The conference committee report is silent on this matter. The result is that the previous Senate Appropriations Committee report language stands. By not modifying this language, as the conference report did last year under a similar set of circumstances, the conferees are giving their general approval to the recommendations made by Senator Mikulski’s subcommittee (see FYIs #116 and 119) on the future of the NSF. The matters raised by the senator’s subcommittee remain an issue that the foundation must deal with in the coming year.

The NSF conference report language is about two pages long. Major items include:

The conference made a reduction of "-$204,800,000 to be taken as a general reduction at the agency’s discretion, subject to the normal reprogramming guidelines” from the administration’s original request for NSF.

As previously reported (see FYI #130), NSF’s Research and Related Activities budget will receive $1,986,000,000.

Also as reported, $12,500,000 was cut from the administration’s request for High Performance Computing and Communications. In one of the few instances of lengthy instructions, the report states: “The conferees direct the Foundation not to expend more funds on high-performance computing than it spent in fiscal year 1993 until it provides a written report to the Committees on Appropriations articulating specific and measurable goals in this area. This report must include timetables and milestones for achieving NSF’s goals, and should describe how these efforts relate to the Administration’s national information infrastructure initiative.”

The committees cut $6,500,000 for the acquisition of an arctic research vessel. The report later states: “The conferees have deferred further action on the arctic research vessel pending receipt of a report from the General Accounting Office on the costs and benefits associated with the various acquisition strategies (including lease, purchase, debt financing, and other mechanisms) which could be pursued by the NSF or its institutional operator.”

A “second round of funding for agile manufacturing” was given $5,000,000 more than the administration requested.

In regard to the issue of indirect costs, the conference committee states: “The conferees agree that GAO [General Accounting Office] complete a study on indirect costs consistent with the guidance in both House and Senate reports. GAO should report to both Committees on Appropriations concurrently.”

The report “deletes language proposed by the Senate prohibiting expenditures for the establishment of any new research centers in fiscal year 1994.”

In a new action, “The conferees expect that beginning in fiscal year 1995, the National Science Foundation will establish, through a competitive process, a Center for the Human Dimensions of Climate Change at a level of approximately $6,000,000 annually.”

For the newly named category of “Academic Research Infrastructure,” the conference committee increased funding to $100,000,000. The report continues, “The conferees note the great difficulty experienced by colleges and universities with significant populations of historically underrepresented groups in obtaining funding for research facilities and instruments. The conferees direct the Foundation to pay particular attention to the needs of these institutions when obligating funds under this title.”

Under the heading of Education and Human Resources, the following changes from the administration’s original budget request (see FYI #53) were made:

"+$7,500,000 for the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR).

+$10,000,000 for science and advanced technology grants to community colleges.

+$1,000,000 for minority summer science camps.

+$1,500,000 for systemic reform in rural areas. This program should complement the urban systemic initiative.”

A reduction of $3,000,000 from the request was made in curriculum development.

The conference committee directed NSF to reduce other Education and Human Resource activities by $3,500,000, to be taken at the agency’s discretion.

In another area, the Critical Technologies Institute received $1,500,000. Under this budget, an additional $250,000 was provided “for activities focused on the development of performance goals for federal investments in science and technology.” An additional $250,000 was provided “for a grant to the National Academy of Public Administration to review NSF’s various research centers, including, but not limited to, its science and technology, engineering, and supercomputer centers.”

After this legislation receives the president’s signature, the only step remaining will be the preparation by NSF staff of a “current plan,” which is a fairly detailed outline of how the agency will spend its appropriation in this fiscal year. The plan must be approved by the chairmen of both appropriations committees. It should be released later this year.