CRS Report for Congress

Order Code RL32799 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Federal Research and Development Funding: Updated February 1, 2006 Michael E. Davey, Coordinator Specialist in Science and Technology Resources, Science, and Industry Division Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress

Federal Research and Development Funding: Summary The Bush Administration requested $132.4 billion in federal research and development (R&D) funding for. This sum represents a $400 million increase over the FY2005 estimated funding level of $132 billion. CRS estimates that Congress has approved a record $135.7 billion for federal R&D in, a 2.8% increase over the FY2005 estimated funding level. However, nearly all of that increase can be attributed to increases in defense weapons systems and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s $877 million increase for human space exploration technology. 1 (See Table 13) Basic research funding would decline by 0.5% below the FY2005 estimated level, declining to an estimated $26.7 billion in. Five agencies account for 90% of all federal basic research expenditures. Total federal research funding (the sum of basic and applied research) is projected to increase $1 billion to $57 billion. However, the majority of that increase would go to NASA, while most of the remaining federal agencies would receive below inflation increases for research funding. While the President essentially requested flat funding for the Department of Defense (DOD) R&D programs, Congress approved an estimated $ 72.1 billion DOD R&D, a 4.2 % increase over FY2005 funding levels. Most of that increase is a result of Congress increasing DOD s proposed science and technology budget by $2.5 billion more than was requested by the Administration. Funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) would decline, in nominal dollars for the first time in 36 years. Since the completion of doubling NIH s budget (between 1998-2003), funding has declined to the FY2003 funding level, after adjusting for inflation. Most R&D funding agencies now face budgets that are shrinking to levels of years past, in real dollars. While it has been 24 years since NIH s budget declined in real dollars, other agencies such as the National Science Foundation, DOE s Office of Science, NASA (excluding human space exploration), and Agriculture, have lived with stagnate budgets for several years. Consequently, in real dollars, all of these agencies will have less R&D funding in than they did in FY2003. 1 The R&D funding totals, in this section do not reflect the 1% across-the-board funding recision approved by Congress. see P. L. 109-148

Contents Recent Developments...1 Department of Agriculture (USDA)...1 Department of Energy (DOE)...4 Department of Defense (DOD)...6 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)...9 National Institutes of Health (NIH)...11 National Science Foundation (NSF)...15 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) R&D...19 Department of Commerce (DOC)...21 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)...21 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)...22 Department of Transportation (DOT)...24 Department of the Interior (DOI)...25 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)...27 List of Tables Table 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D...3 Table 2. Department of Energy R&D...5 Table 3. Department of Defense RDT&E...8 Table 4. NASA R&D Funding...10 Table 5. National Institutes of Health (NIH)...14 Table 6. National Science Foundation...17 Table 7. Department of Homeland Security R&D...20 Table 8. NOAA R&D...22 Table 9. NIST...24 Table 10. Department of Transportation R&D...25 Table 11. Department of Interior R&D...26 Table 12. EPA... 27 Table 13. Federal R&D Appropriation in the 109 th Congress...28

Federal Research and Development Funding: Recent Developments The Bush Administration requested $132.4 billion in federal research and development (R&D) funding for. This sum represents a $400 million increase over the FY2005 estimated funding level of $132 billion. CRS estimates that Congress has approved a record $135.7 billion for federal R&D in, a 2.8% increase over the FY2005 estimated funding level. However, nearly all of that increase can be attributed to increases in defense weapons systems and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s $877 million increase for human space exploration technology. 2 (See Table 13) Department of Agriculture (USDA) On November 10, 2005, the President signed into law the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (P.L. 109-97, H.R. 2744). The appropriation for research and education in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is $2,677.4 million, a decrease of $14.6 million from the FY2005 level. (See Table 1). The USDA conducts in-house basic and applied research. The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the lead federal agency for nutrition research, operating five major laboratories in this area, including the world s largest multi-disciplinary agricultural research center located at Beltsville, Maryland. There are approximately 100 research facilities throughout the U.S. and abroad. ARS laboratories focus on efficient food and fiber production, preservation of genetic resources, development of new products and uses for agricultural commodities, development of effective biocontrols for pest management, and support of USDA regulatory and technical assistance programs. The appropriation provides $1,266.2 million for ARS, a 3.1% decrease ($40.1 million) from the FY2005 level. The Administration had proposed reductions of $175 million in all projects earmarked by Congress in order to finance the Department s high priority program increases. However, conference report language continues funding at the FY2005 level for all of these projects, including hyperspectral imaging in New Orleans, LA. The ARS reports that the majority of its facilities, constructed prior to 1960, have become functionally obsolete. Many of the facilities are not in total compliance with current health and safety standards. Included in the appropriation for ARS is $131.2 million 2 The R&D funding totals, in this section do not reflect the 1% across-the-board funding recision approved by Congress. see P. L. 109-148

CRS-2 for buildings and facilities, $66.4 million above the request, and $55.1 million below the FY2005 level. The appropriation provides support for several research priority areas and strategic goals. Priority has been given to the mapping and sequencing projects funded by USDA, such as sequencing genomes of agriculturally imported species. The sequencing projects will be coordinated with ongoing genomics initiatives supported by other federal agencies and facilitated by interagency working groups. Increases are provided animal genomes and plant genomes research. Also, the appropriation provides an increase in support of research on emerging and exotic diseases as part of the infrastructure to enhance homeland security. USDA states that this research is significant to protecting the Nation from deliberate or unintentional introduction of an agricultural health threat. The USDA has biocontainment complexes where research and diagnostic work is done on organisms that pose serious threats to the crop, poultry, and livestock industries. Other research areas receiving increased support by conferees include bovine spongiform encephalopathy, air and water quality, food safety, obesity/nutrition, biobased products/bioenergy research, and agricultural information. Conferees have instructed ARS not to redirect support for programs from one state to another without prior notification and approval of the Committee on Appropriations. The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) distributes funds to State Agricultural Experiment Stations, State Cooperative Extension Systems, land-grant universities, and other institutions and organizations that conduct agricultural research. Included in these partnerships is funding for research at the 1862 institutions, 1890 historically black colleges and universities, and 1994 tribal land-grant colleges. Funding is distributed to the states through competitive awards, statutory formula funding, and special grants. The appropriation for CSREES is $1,194.6 million, an increase of $153.4 million above the request and $10.6 million over the FY2005 enacted. Funding for formula distribution in to the state Agricultural Experiment Stations (and other eligible institutions) is $275.7 million, almost level with FY2005. The appropriation provides $37.6 million for the 1890 formula programs, an increase of $25.3 million over FY2005. The appropriation funds the National Research Initiative (NRI) Competitive Grants Program at $183 million, $67 million below the Administration s request and $3.4 million above the FY2005 level. The increase will support initiatives in agricultural genomics, human nutrition and obesity, nanotechnology, food safety, water quality, and pest related programs. Conferees provided $1.6 million for the Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute. Also, report language includes $9.5 million for the Tropical and Subtropical Research program, $600,000 for aquaculture research, $736,000 for grain sorghum research, and $300,000 for air quality research. Special research grants, which were proposed at $18.3 million in the request, were provided $128.2 million by the conferees. Report language detailed the need to address the many issues of American Indian tribal nations. Conferees directed the Department to work with the tribal nations and to develop staffing needs for additional Indian reservation extension agents. The Economic Research Service (ERS) is the principal intramural economic and social science research agency in USDA. The appropriation for ERS is $75.9 a $1.8 million increase over FY2005. The increase will continue the

CRS-3 development of a consumer data and information system. In addition, the increase will support a cooperative study with the National Academy of Sciences on the U.S. sheep industry. The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) conducts the Census of Agriculture and provides current data on agricultural production and economic indicators of the well-being of the farm sector. The appropriation for the NASS is $140.7 million, $4.5 million below the request and $12.3 million above the FY2005 level. Funding would support both Presidential and Department egovernment initiatives, such as etraining and etravel. NASS will continue the development of the USDA Enterprise Architecture and the USDA Enablers initiatives. (CRS Contact: Christine Matthews.) Table 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D ($ in millions) FY2004 Act. FY2005 Act. Req. a Approp. Agric. Research Service (ARS) Product Quality/Value Added $110.0 $104.6 97.7 Livestock Production 95.4 84.1 63.4 Crop Production 178.7 196.8 159.6 Food Safety 98.9 102.7 107.6 Livestock Protection 78.3 78.5 87.6 Crop Protection 183.6 193.0 180.1 Human Nutrition 81.5 83.7 81.7 Environmental Stewardship 212.8 219.4 178.2 National Agricultural Library 22.8 21.5 22.5 Funds for Homeland Security [20.8] [30.2] [69.2] Repair & Maintenance 17.9 17.8 17.8 Subtotal 1,088.1 1,102.0 996.1 1,135.0 d Buildings & Facilities 64.0 186.3 64.8 131.2 Trust Funds 14.0 18.0 18.0 0.0 Total, ARS 1,166.1 1,306.3 1,078.9 1,266.2 Coop. St. Res. Ed. & Ext. (CSREES) Research and Education Hatch Act Formula 179.1 178.7 89.4 178.8 Cooperative Forestry Research 21.8 22.2 11.1 22.2 1890 Colleges and Tuskegee Univ. 11.4 12.3 12.5 37.6 Special Research Grants 124.2 135.5 18.3 128.2 NRI Competitive Grants 164.0 179.6 250.0 183.0 Animal Health & Disease Res. 4.5 5.1 0.0 5.1 Federal Administration 37.5 42.5 8.8 50.5 Higher Education b 42.3 50.7 55.9 55.0 Total, Coop. Res. & Educ. c 626.7 655.5 545.5 676.8 Extension Activities Smith-Lever Sections 3b&c 277.7 275.5 275.9 275.7 Smith-Lever Sections 3d 80.6 86.7 91.4 88.9 Renewable Resources Extension 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 Integrated Activities 50.0 54.7 35.0 55.8 1890 Research & Extension 14.9 16.8 14.9 16.8 Other Extension Prog. & Admin. 7.8 7.8 10.4 14.7 Total, Extension Activities c 439.1 445.6 431.7 456.0 Total, CSREES c 1,132.8 1,184.0 1,041.2 1,194.6 Economic Research Service 71.0 74.2 80.7 75.9 National Agricultural Statistics Service 128.0 128.4 145.2 140.7 Total, Research, Education & Economics $2,497.9 $2,692.0 $2,346.3 $2,677.4

CRS-4 a. Funding levels are contained in U.S Department of Agriculture Budget Summary and other documents internal to the agency. b. Higher education includes payments to 1994 institutions and 1890 Capacity Building Grants program, the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, and the Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions Education Grants. c. Program totals may reflect set-asides (non-add) or contingencies. The CSREES total includes support for Integrated Activities, Community Food Projects, and the Organic Agriculture Research and Education Initiative. d. Funding levels for specific programs are not yet available. Department of Energy (DOE) The Department of Energy requested $8.4 billion for R&D in, including activities in each of the department s four business lines: Science, National Security, Energy Supply, and Environmental Quality. This request was 4.6% below the FY2005 level of $8.8 billion. The House provided $8.5 billion, the Senate $9.1 billion, and the final bill $8.9 billion. For details, see Table 2. The requested funding for Science was $3.5 billion, a 3.8% decrease from FY2005. The House and Senate each provided $3.7 billion; the final bill provided $3.6 billion. In the Basic Energy Sciences program, DOE expects to complete construction of the Spallation Neutron Source in the third quarter of, so funds will start to shift from construction to operations. In Fusion Energy Sciences, the congressional debate has centered on U.S. participation in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER).In June 2005, after an 18-month delay, the participating countries agreed to build ITER in France. Both House and Senate shifted funds from ITER to the domestic fusion program pending the decision on a site; the final bill provided the requested amount. In the Biological and Environmental Research program, the request was a decrease of $126 million, of which $80 million corresponded to one-time projects funded at congressional direction in FY2005. The House and Senate restored about half of this requested reduction and allocated $35 million and $51 million respectively for directed projects; the final bill restored the entire reduction, with $130 million for congressionally directed projects. To improve utilization of Office of Science research facilities in several programs, the House and Senate provided $66 million and $100 million respectively to fund increased facility operating time; the conference report was silent on this issue. The requested funding for R&D in National Security was $3.3 billion, a 3.8% decrease. The House decreased R&D in Weapons Activities by $224 million below the request, while the Senate increased it by $73 million; the final bill provided $3.4 billion, an increase of $147 million above the request. Within these totals, the House increased Inertial Confinement Fusion and reduced most other programs, the Senate did the opposite (completely eliminating funding for continued construction of the National Ignition Facility), and the final bill approximately accepted the House increase for Inertial Confinement Fusion but omitted most of the decreases. The request would have increased funding for R&D on nuclear proliferation detection by $46 million or 43%; the House, the Senate, and the final bill all increased funding for this activity even more than requested.

CRS-5 The requested funding for R&D in Energy Supply was $1.6 billion, down 6.4% from FY2005. Within this total, Fossil Energy R&D was down $80 million, with the natural gas and oil technology programs proposed for termination. The Senate provided $305 million more than the request, including increases of $150 million for Fossil Energy R&D ($91 million of it coal-related) and $60 million for Nuclear Energy R&D. The final bill provided $1.8 billion, with its increases allocated similarly to the Senate bill. The requested funding for R&D in Environmental Quality was $21 million. This was less than half the FY2005 level and followed several years of substantial reductions that resulted from a reorientation of the program after an internal review of the Office of Environment in 2002. The House provided the requested amount; the Senate provided $56 million; the final figure was $30 million. (CRS Contact: Daniel Morgan.) Table 2. Department of Energy R&D ($ in millions) FY2005 Estimate Request House Senate Enacted c Science 3599.5 3462.7 3666.0 3702.7 3632.7 Basic Energy Sciences 1104.6 1146.0 1173.1 1241.0 1146.0 High Energy Physics 736.4 713.9 735.9 716.9 723.9 Biological and Environmental Research 581.9 455.7 525.7 503.7 585.7 Nuclear Physics 404.8 370.7 408.3 419.7 370.7 Fusion Energy Sciences 273.9 290.6 296.2 290.6 290.6 Advanced Scientific Computing 232.5 207.1 246.1 207.1 237.1 Other 265.4 278.7 280.7 323.7 278.7 National Security 3392.8 3274.7 3126.9 3398.8 3421.3 Weapons Activities a 2367.4 2216.5 1992.2 2289.1 2309.8 Naval Reactors 801.4 786.0 799.5 799.5 789.5 Nonproliferation and Verification R&D 224.0 272.2 335.2 310.2 322.0 Energy Supply 1756.8 1644.6 1681.7 1949.8 1831.9 Fossil Energy R&D 571.9 491.5 502.5 641.6 598.0 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy b 922.8 890.3 915.7 928.8 870.2 Nuclear Energy R&D 170.6 191.0 186.5 251.0 226.0 Electric Transmission and Distribution R&D 91.5 71.8 77.0 128.4 137.7 Environmental Quality 59.7 21.4 21.4 56.4 30.1 Technology Development and Deployment 59.7 21.4 21.4 56.4 30.1 Total 8808.8 8403.4 8496.0 9107.7 8916.0 a. Includes Stockpile Services (R&D Support, R&D Certification and Safety, Advanced Concepts, Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, and Reliable Replacement Warhead only), Science Campaigns, Engineering Campaigns (except Enhanced Surety and Enhanced Surveillance),

CRS-6 Inertial Confinement Fusion, Advanced Simulation and Computing, and a prorated share of Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities. Additional R&D activities may take place in the subprograms of Directed Stockpile Work that are devoted to specific weapon systems, but these funds are not included in the table because detailed funding schedules for those subprograms are classified. b. Excluding Weatherization and Intergovernmental Activities. c. enacted figures do not reflect the government-wide 1% rescission enacted in the defense appropriations act (PL 109-148, Section 3801). Department of Defense (DOD) Nearly all of what the Department of Defense spends on Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) is appropriated in Title IV of the defense appropriation bill (see Table 3). For, the Bush Administration is requesting $69.4 billion for Title IV RDT&E. This is essentially unchanged from the $69.2 billion available for Title IV in FY2005. RDT&E funds are also requested as part of the Defense Health Program ($169 million) and the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program ($48 million). The six-year budget plan estimates spending $404.6 billion for RDT&E through FY2011. When compared to last year s budget estimate, funding for RDT&E would be reduced by nearly $9 billion between and FY2009, reflecting an overall reduction in the DOD s proposed budgets to help reduce the federal budget deficit. While the RDT&E request represents a modest increase in RDT&E funding over last year, Science and Technology (S&T) funding would drop significantly. S&T consists of basic and applied research and advanced development (6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 activities in the RDT&E account). The S&T request represents nearly a 20% reduction from FY2005 S&T funding, not counting inflation (all dollar figures and comparisons made in this discussion do not consider inflation). Congress increased the FY2005 appropriation for S&T above what the Administration had requested. The S&T budget request is $31 million (less than 1%) below the amount requested by the Administration for FY2005. The request for basic research is $1.3 billion, an overall reduction of 12.8% from FY2005. A noticeable exception is basic research within the Chemical and Biological Defense Program which would be increased by 34%. Over half of DOD s basic research budget is spent at universities and represents the major contribution of funds in some areas of science and technology. The S&T request is 2.5% of the overall Department of Defense budget request of $419.3 billion. This is below the 3% target that both the Bush Administration and Congress have set. The budget request for Missile Defense RDT&E is $7.8 billion (a decrease of $1 billion from the amount available for Missile Defense in FY2005). The House approved its Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 2863) on June 20, 2005. The House voted to appropriate $71.7 billion for Title IV RDT&E, or $2.3 billion above the Administration s request. In this appropriation the House also provided an additional $45 billion to cover expenses for the first six months of, for troops in the field and other support associated with the war on terrorism. This includes an additional $88.1 million for Title IV RDT&E ($13.1 million for the Navy account and $75 million for the Defense Agencies account.

CRS-7 The House appropriated net increases for all of the major accounts, except for Missile Defense. Nearly half ($480 million) of the Army s $1.2 billion increase went to the Army s medical technologies programs. Major reductions were made to the Army s Future Combat System, the Navy s DD(X) Next Generation destroyer project, and the Air Force s Transformational Satellite and Spaced Based Radar programs. Missile Defense programs were reduced a net $143 million from what the Administration requested. The House appropriated $13 billion for S&T, over 3.6% of the total amount they recommend in the defense appropriations bill. The House appropriated more for basic research ($1.4 billion) than what was requested, but less than the estimated FY2005 amount. In 2005, the House reorganized its Appropriations Committee, combining Veteran s Affairs and Military Construction appropriations into a new Military Quality of Life and Veteran s Affairs and Related Agencies appropriation. This new appropriations also includes some accounts formerly falling within the Defense appropriations. In particular, the Defense Health Program was transferred to this new appropriation, including the program s RDT&E funding. The House passed the Military Quality of Life appropriations (H.R. 2528) on June 8, 2005. The House appropriated $444 million for the RDT&E portion of the Defense Health Program. This included $115 million for the Peer Reviewed Breast Cancer Research program and $80 million for the Peer Reviewed Prostrate Cancer Research program. The House provided $48 million, as requested, for the RDT&E portion of the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program, which remains in the Defense appropriations bill (H.R. 2863). The Senate passed its defense appropriations bills on October 7, 2005. The Senate provided $70.4 billion for Title IV RDT&E. In addition, it appropriated $516 million for RDT&E within the Defense Health Program (including $150 million for peer reviewed breast cancer research and $85 million for peer reviewed prostrate cancer research) and $73 million for RDT&E within the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program. As did the House, the Senate provided additional funds for contingency operations during the first six months of. The Senate, however, provided $50 billion, with $92 million going toward RDT&E. These are funds above and beyond Title IV funding. The Senate funded S&T at $12.2 billion, or roughly 3.1% of its total DOD appropriation, not counting the contingency funds. Basic research received $1.4 billion. However, an approved floor amendment (No. 1991) would allow additional funds from each RDT&E account to be spent on basic research. The amendment states a sense of congress that basic research should be 15% of the S&T budget. As appropriated, i.e. without using the authority granted by the amendment to allocate up to a certain amount in additional funds, basic research received approximately 11% of the S&T funding. The conference committee filed its report (H.Rept. 109-359 in support of H.R. 2863) on December 18, 2005. The House approved the bill on December 19, the Senate on December 21. The final bill provided $72.1 billion for Title IV RDT&E. It also provided $67.8 million for the RDT&E within the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program and $542 million for RDT&E in the Defense Health Program. In addition, the bill provided an additional $50.6 million in RDT&E as part

CRS-8 of the additional advanced supplemental funding (Title IX). Finally, the bill included Katrina-related emergency supplemental funding which included another $41.3 million in RDT&E to DOD. The final bill provided $13.4 billion in S&T funding, which included $1.5 billion for basic research. S&T funding remained 3% of the total DOD appropriation of $442.8 billion. (CRS Contact: John Moteff.) Table 3. Department of Defense RDT&E ($ in millions) FY2005 Estimate Request House Approp. f (H.R. 2863) Senate Approp. h Conf. Approp. i Accounts Army 10,558 9,734 10,827 10,521 11,172 Navy 16,907 18,038 18,482 18,558 18,993 Air Force 20,812 e 22,612 22,665 21,859 22,000 Defense Agencies 20,612 18,803 19,515 19,301 19,799 (DARPA) (2,977) (3,084) (3,104) (2,666) (3,024) (MDA a ) (8,783) (7,775) (7,632) (7,921) (7,797) j Dir. Test and Eval. 310 168 168 168 168 Total Ob. Auth. 69,199 69,355 71,657 70,407 72,132 Budget Activity Basic Research 1,513 1,318 1,453 1,446 1,491 Applied Research 4,850 4,139 5,057 4,842 5,244 k Advanced Dev. 6,708 5,064 6,462 5,880 6,480 Advanced Component Dev. 14,711 14,143 13,909 14,095 14,310 and Prototypes Systems Dev. and Demo. 17,222 19,754 19,179 19,363 19,588 Mgmt. Support b 3,721 3,777 3,941 3,990 4,071 Op. Systems Dev. c 20,475 21,160 21,655 20,790 20,948 Total Ob. Auth. d 69,200 69,355 71,656 70,406 72,132 Other Defense Programs Defense Health Program 507 169 444 g 516 542 Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction 205 48 48 72 68 Source: Figures based on Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2006 RDT&E Programs (R-1), February 2004. Figures for Defense Health Program and Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program come from OMB s Budget Appendix. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. a. Includes only BMD RDT&E. Does not include procurement and military construction. b. Includes funds for Developmental and Operational Test and Evaluation. c. Includes classified programs. d. Numbers may not agree with Account Total Obligational Authority due to rounding. e. Includes $100 million for Air Force Tanker Transfer Fund. f. H.Rept. 109-119. This does not include the separate $88.1 million in bridge funding allocated to the Navy and Defense Agencies RDT&E accounts. g. This program is now funded through the Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill (H.R. 2528). h. S.Rept. 109-141. i. H.Rept. 109-359. j. This includes a $200 million unspecified general reduction in ballistic missile defense programs.

CRS-9 k. Most of the ballistic missile defense programs are funded in the Advanced Development account. This figure includes the $200 million unspecified general reduction. However, some of the reduction could be taken from other accounts. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) NASA s total congressionally-approved funding is a combination of $16.456 billion provided in the Science, State, Justice, Commerce (SSJC) appropriations Act ( P.L. 109-108), minus a 0.28% across-the-board rescission in that act, minus a 1% across-the-board rescission in the Department of Defense appropriations and hurricane recovery act (P.L. 109-148), plus $350 million added for NASA for hurricane recovery in P.L. 109-148. The figures in Table 4 do not reflect the hurricane recovery addition, or the across-the-board rescissions. Congress also passed a NASA authorization act in 2005 (P.L. 109-155), but it authorizes funding for FY2007-2008, not, so it is not discussed further in this report. For the purposes of this report, NASA s R&D budget is NASA s total budget minus the space shuttle program, space flight support, and Inspector General. Using that definition, NASA received an estimated $10.7 billion for R&D in FY2005, the R&D request was $11.5 billion, and Congress appropriated approximately $11.5 billion for R&D. Those numbers should be used cautiously, however. NASA has repeatedly changed its budget structure, and shifted programs from one account to the other, making comparisons across fiscal years, and between requested and appropriated levels, difficult. In addition, funding requirements for the space shuttle program during the return to flight effort following the 2003 Columbia tragedy remain unsettled, meaning that funds might be shifted into the shuttle program from R&D programs. More definitive figures may become available when the FY2007 budget request is submitted. In January 2004, President Bush directed NASA to focus its efforts on returning humans to the Moon by 2020, and someday sending them to Mars and worlds beyond. Most of the funding for this Vision for Space Exploration would come from redirecting money from other NASA activities. For example, the space shuttle program would be terminated in 2010, when space station construction is expected to be completed; U.S. space station research activities would be descoped from the broadly-based program that was planned, to only research needed to support extended stays by humans on the Moon and eventual trips to Mars; and NASA would end its involvement in the space station program by 2016. By terminating the shuttle and space station earlier than expected, and reducing funding for space station research, those funds can be redirected to accomplishing other aspects of the Vision. NASA is building a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), and a launch vehicle for it (the Crew Launch Vehicle or CLV), whose primary purpose is transporting astronauts to and from the Moon. It also could be used to take astronauts to and from the space station. The President directed that the CEV be available by 2014, but NASA Administrator Michael Griffin wants to accelerate that to 2012 in order to minimize the gap between the end of the space shuttle and the availability of the CEV. During that gap, U.S. astronauts would have to rely on Russia to take them to and from space. NASA s support for activities in the fields of aeronautics, and Earth and

CRS-10 space science, also could be affected by the need to fund the Vision. In the SSJC appropriations act, and the 2005 NASA authorization act, Congress expressed its support for the Vision, but stressed that NASA needs to maintain a balanced program that includes aeronautics and science. Other issues include whether the shuttle should be terminated in 2010, or retained until the CEV is available, and whether U.S. use of the space station should end in 2016 and its research agenda narrowed, or if NASA should continue using it as originally planned. See CRS Issue Brief IB93062, Space Launch Vehicles: Government Activities, Commercial Competition, and Satellite Exports; and CRS Issue Brief IB93017, Space Stations, both by Marcia S. Smith, for more information. Another issue is whether NASA should send a servicing mission to the Hubble Space Telescope so it can continue scientific operations with new instruments. A shuttle servicing mission had been planned prior to the 2003 space shuttle Columbia accident, but then-nasa Administrator O Keefe canceled that mission, primarily because of shuttle safety concerns. Hubble advocates sought a reversal of that decision, arguing that Hubble can continue to deliver important scientific data for many more years if the new instruments and other equipment are installed. NASA s current Administrator, Dr. Griffin, pledged to revisit the Hubble issue after the space shuttle completes its two return to flight missions and its current safety characteristics are better understood. The first return to flight mission, in July- August 2005, experienced problems during launch, but was generally judged to be a success. The second return to flight mission is expected some time in 2006. See CRS Report RS21767, Hubble Space Telescope: Should NASA Proceed with a Servicing Mission?, by Daniel Morgan, for more on the Hubble issue. (CRS Contacts: Marcia Smith and Daniel Morgan.) Table 4. NASA R&D Funding ($ in millions of Budget Authority) Category FY2005 Est. a Req. b (P.L. 109-108) SSJC Approps. Science, Aeronautics, and Exploration 7,889. 9,661. 9,761. Exploration Capabilities (R&D only) 2,772. 1,857. c 1,777. Total R&D 10,661. 11,518. c 11,538. Total NASA d 16,196. 16,456. e 16,457. Sources: NASA FY2005 and budget documents; congressional bills and reports; and CRS (for R&D estimates). Note: Column totals may not add due to rounding. a. Figures in this column are based on NASA s September 30, 2005 operating plan update for FY2005 and are not final. NASA continues to change its budget structure and shift programs from one account to the other, making comparisons across fiscal years, and between requested and appropriated amounts, difficult. The figures in this table should be used cautiously. b. NASA submitted an amended request in July 2005, but the appropriations committees acted on the original request, so the original request is shown here. c. The amounts shown here are estimates, based on appropriations conference committee report language (H.Rept. 109-272) stating that the final bill cuts $80 million from the International

CRS-11 Space Station. However, a $10 million general reduction also was made to this account, which may or may not impact R&D funding. d. Includes $126 million from a FY2005 supplemental for recovery from the 2004 hurricanes; regular appropriations were $16.07 billion (adjusted for an across-the-board rescission)..e. Does not include additional NASA funding for recovery from the 2005 hurricanes in P.L. 109-148 ($350 million), or cuts to NASA funding from across-the-board rescissions in P.L. 109-108 (0.28%) and P.L. 109-148 (1.0%). National Institutes of Health (NIH) In final action for, NIH received a program level budget of $28.47 billion, which is $81 million (0.3%) lower than the FY2005 level of $28.55 billion (see Table 5). It was the first decrease in NIH s appropriation since 1970. The conference report (H.Rept. 109-337) on the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations act (H.R. 3010, P.L. 109-149) had given NIH enough of an increase that the overall budget would have grown by $205 million (0.7%), but the 1% across-the-board rescission mandated by P.L. 109-148 reduced NIH s budget by $286 million, resulting in the net loss of $81 million. The President had requested a total budget for NIH of $28.745 billion, an increase of $195 million (0.7%) over the FY2005 level. The House (H.Rept. 109-143) accepted the President s funding levels, while making some shifts in the accounts that supply the funds. The Senate (S.Rept. 109-103) provided a higher program level of $29.553 billion, an increase of $1,003 million (3.5%) over FY2005 and $808 million over the request and House levels. The conferees on H.R. 3010 set the increase at $10 million over the request. The bulk of NIH s budget comes through the Labor-HHS-Education appropriation. An additional small amount for environmental work related to Superfund comes from the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriation (H.R. 2361, P.L. 109-54). (Formerly, the funding came through the VA-HUD appropriations bill.) Those two sources constitute NIH s discretionary budget authority. In addition, NIH receives $150 million preappropriated in separate funding for diabetes research, and has other funds transferred to and from other appropriations (see Table 5). FY2003 was the final year of the five-year effort to double the NIH budget from its FY1998 base of $13.6 billion to the FY2003 level of $27.1 billion. The annual increases for FY1999 through FY2003 were in the 14%-15% range each year. For FY2004 and FY2005, faced with competing priorities and a changed economic climate, Congress and the President gave increases of between 2% and 3%, levels which were below the estimated 3.5% and 3.3% biomedical inflation index for those two years. The research advocacy community had originally urged that the NIH budget grow by about 10% per year in the post-doubling years. For, advocates modified their recommendation, maintaining that a 6% increase would be needed to keep up the momentum of scientific discovery made possible by the increased resources of the doubling years (the projected biomedical inflation index for is 3.2%). The agency s organization consists of the Office of the NIH Director and 27 institutes and centers. The Office of the Director (OD) sets overall policy for NIH and coordinates the programs and activities of all NIH components. The individual institutes and centers (ICs), each with a focus on particular diseases, areas of human

CRS-12 health and development, or aspects of research support, plan and manage their own research programs in coordination with the Office of the Director. As shown in Table 5, Congress provides a separate appropriation to 24 of the 27 ICs, to OD, and to a buildings and facilities account. (The other three centers, not included in the table, are funded through the NIH Management Fund, financed by taps on other NIH appropriations.) On average, the ICs devote over 80% of their budgets to supporting peer-reviewed extramural research by awarding research project grants (RPGs), research center grants, contracts, training grants, construction grants, and many other types of funding to researchers in universities and other institutions around the country. The other 15%-20% of the IC budgets supports their intramural research programs and research management costs. An alternate way, therefore, to describe the NIH budget is by funding mechanism, which reveals the balance between extramural and intramural funding, as well as the relative emphasis on support of individual investigator-initiated research versus funding of larger projects, comprehensive research centers, agency-directed research contracts, research career training, facilities construction, and so forth. When the final shape of the budget became clear, NIH announced the policies it would apply for funding RPGs and other award mechanisms. All noncompeting RPG awards will be reduced by 2.35% below committed levels. The average cost of competing RPGs (new and renewal awards) will be maintained at FY2005 levels, with the number of awards at 1% below what the conference level would have supported. All other funding mechanisms will be reduced by 1.1% from the conference level, with the exception of Research Management and Support, which will be level with the conference amount. By undertaking these measures, NIH expects that the success rate of applicants receiving funding will be about 19.5% compared to 22.3% in FY2005. They expect to fund a total of about 38,300 competing and non-competing RPGs, representing a decrease of about 570 RPGs, or 1.5%, below FY2005. NIH is quite concerned about the support of new investigators, particularly younger scientists making the transition from training to independent research. In January 2006, NIH announced a new Pathway to Independence Award program to support promising postdoctoral scientists. The fiveyear awards will have a two-year mentored phase and a three-year independent phase. NIH expects to support 150-200 awards beginning in Fall 2006, and a similar number in each of the following five years, for a total commitment of almost $400 million. As shown in Table 5, only two accounts received an increase in the final appropriation compared to FY2005. Most of the institutes and centers received decreases in the 0.3% to 0.7% range. The National Center for Research Resources was decreased by 1.4% because of the elimination of the $30 million program for non-biodefense extramural research facilities construction. The 26.5% decline in NIH s intramural Buildings and Facilities account reflects completion of several construction and renovation projects. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), home to almost all of NIH s biodefense research, received a 0.3% increase. As in past years, the NIAID budget includes $100 million to be transferred to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. The Office of the NIH Director (OD) received the only large increase, growing 33.5% to $478 million. Of the $120 million increase, $97 million is biodefense funding previously included in the Office of the HHS Secretary. It targets research on countermeasures against nuclear and radiological threats ($47 million, same as

CRS-13 FY2005) and chemical threats ($50 million, new in ). The remaining increase for OD provides an 8% boost for OD s portion of the initiatives collectively known as the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. The Roadmap addresses scientific gaps in biomedical research that need to be approached on an NIH-wide basis. A list of initiatives in high-risk basic research, clinical research, and multidisciplinary collaborative research will receive up to $333 million for ($250 million from the institutes and centers and $83 million from the Office of the Director), up $98 million, or 42%, from FY2005. NIH and other Public Health Service (PHS) agencies are subject to a budget tap called the PHS Program Evaluation Transfer (section 241 of the PHS Act), which has the effect of redistributing appropriated funds among PHS agencies. The appropriation keeps the tap at 2.4%, the same as in FY2005. After a hiatus of a dozen years, there has been some congressional movement toward action on reauthorization legislation for NIH. A number of hearings have been held in the past several years, and evolving drafts of proposed legislation are fostering discussions on such issues as the balance of authority and control between the central NIH Director s Office and the individual institutes and centers; the best methods of facilitating and funding cross-institute research initiatives; and possible changes in how authorization and appropriations levels for the institutes and centers are handled. (CRS Contact: Pamela Smith.)

CRS-14 Table 5. National Institutes of Health (NIH) ($ in millions) Institutes and Centers (ICs) FY2005 approp. a request enacted b % change FY06/05 Cancer (NCI) $4,825.3 $4,841.8 $4,793.4-0.7% Heart/Lung/Blood (NHLBI) 2,941.2 2,951.3 2,921.8-0.7% Dental/Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) 391.8 393.3 389.3-0.6% Diabetes/Digestive/Kidney (NIDDK) 1,713.6 1,722.1 1,704.9-0.5% Neurological Disorders/Stroke (NINDS) 1,539.4 1,550.3 1,534.8-0.3% Allergy/Infectious Diseases (NIAID) c 4,402.8 4,459.4 4,414.8 0.3% General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) 1,944.1 1,955.2 1,935.6-0.4% Child Health/Human Development (NICHD) 1,270.3 1,277.5 1,264.8-0.4% Eye (NEI) 669.1 673.5 666.8-0.3% Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) 644.5 647.6 641.1-0.5% Aging (NIA) 1,052.0 1,057.2 1,046.6-0.5% Arthritis/Musculoskeletal/Skin (NIAMS) 511.2 513.1 507.9-0.6% Deafness/Communication Disorders (NIDCD) 394.3 397.4 393.5-0.2% Nursing Research (NINR) 138.1 138.7 137.3-0.5% Alcohol Abuse/Alcoholism (NIAAA) 438.3 440.3 435.9-0.5% Drug Abuse (NIDA) 1,006.4 1,010.1 1,000.0-0.6% Mental Health (NIMH) 1,411.9 1,417.7 1,403.5-0.6% Human Genome Research (NHGRI) 488.6 491.0 486.0-0.5% Biomedical Imaging/Bioengineering (NIBIB) 298.2 299.8 296.8-0.5% Research Resources (NCRR) 1,115.1 1,100.2 1,099.1-1.4% Complementary/Alternative Med (NCCAM) 122.1 122.7 121.5-0.5% Minority Health/Health Disparities (NCMHD) 196.2 197.4 195.4-0.4% Fogarty International Center (FIC) 66.6 67.0 66.4-0.4% Library of Medicine (NLM) 315.1 318.1 314.9-0.1% Office of Director (OD) d 358.0 385.2 478.1 33.5% Buildings & Facilities (B&F) 110.3 81.9 81.1-26.5% Subtotal, Labor/HHS Appropriation $28,364.5 $28,509.8 $28,331.3-0.1% Superfund (Interior approp to NIEHS) e 79.8 80.3 79.1-0.9% Total, NIH discretionary budget authority $28,444.4 $28,590.1 $28,410.4-0.1% Pre-appropriated Type 1 diabetes funds f 150.0 150.0 150.0 0.0% NLM program evaluation g 8.2 8.2 8.2 0.0% Public Health/Soc Serv Emergency Fund g 47.0 97.0 0.0-100.0% Global Fund transfer (AIDS/TB/Malaria) c -99.2-100.0-99.0-0.2% Total, NIH program level $28,550.4 $28,745.3 $28,469.6-0.3% Source: H.Rept. 109-337 on H.R. 3010, Labor-HHS-Education appropriations. a. FY2005 reflects across-the-board reduction (0.8%) totaling $229.390m, and Labor/HHS/Ed reduction of $6.787m for salaries and expenses. b. reflects across-the-board rescission (1%) totaling $285.974m. Does not reflect $18m pandemic flu supplemental funding (P.L. 109-148). Before rescission, NIH total program level was $28,745m from the House, $29,559m from the Senate, and $28,756m from the conferees. c. NIAID totals include funds for transfer to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria. d. OD has Roadmap funds for distribution to ICs (FY2005, $59.5m;, $83.0m). In the appropriation, OD includes $96.0m for terrorism countermeasures (see note g). e. Separate account in the Interior/Related Agencies appropriation for NIEHS activities mandated in Superfund legislation (formerly in VA/HUD appropriation). f. Funds available to NIDDK for diabetes research in accordance with P.L. 107-360. g. Additional funds available: From the program evaluation set-aside (sec. 241 of the Public Health Service Act), $8.2m for NLM each year; from the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund appropriation, $47m in both the FY2005 appropriation and the request for NIH research on nuclear and radiological countermeasures, and $50m in the request for chemical countermeasures. The bill placed the $97m (reduced to $96m) in OD instead.

CRS-15 National Science Foundation (NSF) The request for the National Science Foundation (NSF) is $5,605 million, a 2.4% ($132.2 million) increase over the FY2005 level of $5,472.8 million (See Table 6). In the request, the NSF will increase the funding rate to 21%, while maintaining current gains in award size and duration. In, grant size will approximate $136,800, and the length will be three years. NSF asserts that international research partnerships are critical to the Nation in maintaining a competitive edge, addressing global issues, and capitalizing on global economic opportunities. To address these particular needs, the request proposes $35 million for the Office of International Science and Engineering. Also, in, NSF will provide leadership in planning U.S. participation in observance of the International Polar Year scheduled during 2007. Additional highlights include funding for the National Nanotechnology Initiative ($343.8 million), investments in Climate Change Science Program ($196.9 million), continued support for homeland security ($344 million), and funding for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development ($803.2 million). Included in the request is $4,333.5 million for Research and Related Activities (R&RA), a 2.7% increase ($112.9 million) over the FY2005 level of $4,220.6 million. R&RA funds research projects, research facilities, and education and training activities. Partly in response to concerns in the scientific community about the imbalance between support for the life sciences and the physical sciences, the request provides increased funding for the physical sciences $230.1 million, a 2.3% increase ($5.2 million) over the FY2005 estimate. Research in the physical sciences often leads to advances in other disciplines. R&RA includes Integrative Activities (IA), and is a source of funding for the acquisition and development of research instrumentation at U.S. colleges and universities. It funds also Partnerships for Innovation, disaster research teams, and the Science and Technology Policy Institute. The request for IA is $134.9 million, a 3.8% increase ($5 million) over the FY2005 estimate. The Office of Polar Programs is funded in the R&RA. The request would transfer responsibility to NSF from the U.S. Coast Guard for funding the maintenance and operation of polar ice breaking activities. Research project support in the request totals $2,757.1 million. Support is provided to individuals and small groups conducting disciplinary and crossdisciplinary research. Included in the total for research projects is support for centers, proposed at $358.5 million. NSF supports a variety of individual centers and center programs. The request provides $51 million for Science and Technology Centers, $58 million for Materials Centers, $61.8 million for Engineering Research Centers, $19.5 million for Physics Frontiers Centers, $36 million for the Plant Genome Virtual Centers, and $17.2 million for the Mathematical Science Research Institutes. The Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) account is funded at $250 million in the request, a 44% increase ($76.4 million) over the FY2005 level. The MREFC supports the acquisition and construction of major research facilities and equipment that extend the boundaries of science, engineering,

CRS-16 and technology. Of all federal agencies, NSF is the primary supporter of forefront instrumentation and facilities for the academic research and education communities. First priority for funding is directed to ongoing projects. Second priority is given to projects that have been approved by the National Science Board (NSB) for new starts. NSF requires that in order for a project to receive support, it must have the potential to shift the paradigm in scientific understanding and/or infrastructure technology. NSF contends that the projects receiving support in the request meet that qualification. There are no new starts proposed in the request. However, two new starts are requested in FY2007, and one start is requested in FY2008. In the order of priority, they are the Ocean Observatories in FY2007; the Alaska Region Research Vessel in FY2007; and the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO) in FY2008. Those projects receiving support in the request are Atacama Large Millimeter Array Construction ($49.2 million), EarthScope ($50.6 million), IceCube Neutrino Observatory ($50.5 million), Rare Symmetry Violating Processes ($41.8 million), and Scientific Ocean Drilling Vessel ($57.9 million). The request provides support for several interdependent priority areas: biocomplexity in the environment ($84 million), human and social dynamics ($39 million), and mathematical sciences ($89 million). Additional priority areas include those of strengthening core disciplinary research, providing broadly accessible cyberinfrastructure and world-class research facilities, broadening participation in the science and engineering workforce, and sustaining organizational excellence in NSF management practices. The NSF states that researchers need not only access to cutting-edge tools to pursue the increasing complexity of research, but funding to develop and design the tools critical to 21 st century research and education. An investment of $509 million in cyberinfrastructure will allow for funding of modeling, simulation, visualization and data storage, and other communications breakthroughs. NSF anticipates that this level of funding will make cyberinfrastructure more powerful, stable, and accessible to researchers and educators through widely shared research facilities. Increasing grant size and duration has been a long-term priority for NSF. The funding rate for research grants applications has declined from approximately 30% in the late 1990s to an estimated 20% in FY2005. The NSF was directed to improve its oversight of large projects by developing an implementation plan that included comprehensive guidelines and project oversight review. One continuing question focused on the selection process for including major projects in the upcoming budget cycle. In February 2004, the National Academies released the congressionally mandated study of the process for prioritization and oversight of projects in the MREFC account. The report recommended a more open process for project selection, broadened participation from various disciplines, and well-defined criteria for the selection process. In May 2005, the National Science Board (NSB) approved a report detailing the new guidelines for the development, review, and approval of major projects Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported by the National Science Foundation. 3 Also at the May 2005 meeting, the NSB approved a facility plan, 3 National Science Board, Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported (continued...)