Frist Expresses Support for NSF, NIST

“The country’s future is dependent on the success of federal agencies such as the two that we have before us today.”
-- Sen. Bill Frist

In preparation for drafting authorizing legislation, Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN), chairman of the Senate Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee, invited officials from the science agencies under his jurisdiction to testify about their FY 1998 budget requests. On April 24, he reviewed NASA (see FYI #60 ), and on May 7 he examined the National Science Foundation and the Department of Commerce’s Technology Administration, which includes NIST. Frist plans a later hearing specifically on NASA’s space station.

A founding member of the Senate Science and Technology Caucus, Frist has spoken frequently about the value of federal investment in science and technology. Opening the May 7 hearing, he cited NSF and the Commerce Department’s Technology Administration as two agencies whose programs “affect those activities characterizing the beginning and the end of the technology development process.” NSF Director Neal Lane said that his agency’s request for a three percent increase (to $3.367 billion) will enable it to pursue several areas with increased emphasis: knowledge and distributed intelligence; life in extreme environments; and the coupling of research and education. Funding for these new initiatives, he explained, will ensure the nation does not miss out on opportunities afforded by new technologies in these areas. Lane said NSF “has learned through experience” that the best way to speed improvement and utilization of new technologies is to make them available as tools to researchers.

Ranking Minority Member Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), also a Science and Technology Caucus member, noted that NSF’s EPSCoR (Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research) requested a small amount of funding directly through the Research Directorates. Lane responded that while the program was designed to improve the ability of institutions and faculty in less-competitive states to win research grants, researchers seemed to have difficulty “graduating” to traditional award competitions. He hoped that by involving the research directorates, which make traditional NSF grants, the transition out of the EPSCoR program could be smoothed. Frist also inquired about funding and operating budgets for new construction starts such as the Polar Cap Observatory. Lane explained that in times of constrained budgets, the Foundation will likely have to shut down some old facilities to free up operating funds for new facilities.

The Commerce Department’s Under Secretary for Technology, Mary Good, discussed the Technology Administration request, which Frist said “plays a critical role in the development of the technological infrastructure...to ensure that a constant flow of technological advances are enjoyed by the American people.” Good was pleased with the requested amount ($271.6 million) for NIST’s laboratories, and said she was “not going to complain” that the House, in its authorization bill, approved a slightly higher amount ($278.6 million.) She added that NIST desperately needs funding to build and renovate facilities, and called it “a disgrace” that NIST’s measurement facilities are not on par with others around the world.

Questioned about the contentious Advanced Technology Program (ATP), Good said the nation needs to learn how to better exploit its investments in research at universities and national labs. Frist agreed that while America supports much of the world’s basic research, foreign scientists are making many of the technological breakthroughs from it, leading to job creation and economic growth in other countries. The U.S. must use all the tools it has, Good stated, including ATP, cooperative R&D agreements (Cradas) and the small business program (SBIR.) When Rockefeller noted that ATP is criticized because much of its funding goes to large companies, Good said that over one-half of its award recipients are small businesses, and many recipients are consortia including small firms, universities, and laboratories. The U.S. needs the manufacturing and technological base to remain in this country, she said. If that can be achieved by encouraging big companies to work on emerging technologies “for fifty cents on the dollar,” with the promise that they’ll be manufactured in the U.S., Good declared, “that’s a bargain for the country.”

Good also noted that her office is requesting funding to begin EPSCoT (Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Technology.) Intended as a technology compliment to NSF’s EPSCoR, EPSCoT would build upon the university infrastructure being fostered in EPSCoR states to encourage the development of technology-intensive industries and help those states become economically as well as educationally competitive.