.
The Federal Networking and Information
Technology Research and Development
Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
Patricia Moloney Figliola
Specialist in Internet and Telecommunications Policy
March 27April 20, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL33586
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
c11173008
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
Summary
In the early 1990s, Congress recognized that several federal agencies had ongoing highperformance computing programs, but no central coordinating body existed to ensure long-term
coordination and planning. To provide such a framework, Congress passed the High-Performance
Computing and Communications Program Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194) to enhance the
effectiveness of the various programs. In conjunction with the passage of the act, the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) released Grand Challenges: HighPerformance Computing and Communications. That document outlined a research and
development (R&D) strategy for high-performance computing and a framework for a
multiagency program, the High-Performance Computing and Communications (HPCC) Program.
The HPCC Program has evolved over time and is now called the Networking and Information
Technology Research and Development (NITRD) Program, to better reflect its expanded mission.
Current concerns are the role of the federal government in supporting IT R&D and the level of
funding to allot to it. Proponents of federal support of information technology (IT) R&D assert
that it has produced positive outcomes for the country and played a crucial role in supporting
long-term research into fundamental aspects of computing. Such fundamentals provide broad
practical benefits, but generally take years to realize. Additionally, the unanticipated results of
research are often as important as the anticipated results. Another aspect of government-funded IT
research is that it often leads to open standards, something that many perceive as beneficial,
encouraging deployment and further investment. Industry, on the other hand, is more inclined to
invest in proprietary products and will diverge from a common standard when there is a potential
competitive or financial advantage to do so. Proponents of government support believe that the
outcomes achieved through the various funding programs create a synergistic environment in
which both fundamental and application-driven research are conducted, benefitting government,
industry, academia, and the public. Supporters also believe that such outcomes justify
government’s role in funding IT R&D, as well as the growing budget for the NITRD Program.
Critics assert that the government, through its funding mechanisms, may be picking “winners and
losers” in technological development, a role more properly residing with the private sector. For
example, the size of the NITRD Program may encourage industry to follow the government’s
lead on research directions rather than selecting those directions itself.
The President’s FY2013 budget request for the NITRD Program is $3.808 billion, an increase of
$69 million more than the $3.739 billion FY2012 estimate. Actual NITRD spending in FY2011
totaled $3.727 billion.
TwoThree pieces of legislation have been introduced in the 112th Congress that would have an effect on
on the NITRD Program and its member agencies.: H.R. 2096, the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011, was
introduced by Representative Michael McCaul on June 2, 2011. The bill was referred to the
House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and was reported (amended) by voice vote
on October 31, 2011. Companion legislation, S. 1152, also called the Cybersecurity Enhancement
Act of 2011, was introduced by Senator Robert Menendez on June 7, 2011. The bill was referred
to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and no further action has
been taken. These bills3834, the Advancing America’s
Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2012; H.R. 2096, the
Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011; and S. 1152, also called the Cybersecurity Enhancement
Act of 2011. H.R. 2096 and S. 1152 are identical.
Two hearings have been held related to the NITRD Program, the first on federal R&D efforts to
protect information in the digital age (May 25, 2011) and the second on program oversight on
(September 21, 2011).
Congressional Research Service
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
Contents
The Federal NITRD Program .......................................................................................................... 1
Structure .................................................................................................................................... 1
Budget, Funding, and Spending ................................................................................................ 3
Reports, 2009-2011 ................................................................................................................... 3
Trustworthy Cyberspace: Strategic Plan for the Federal Cybersecurity Research
and Development Program............................................................................................... 4
Designing a Digital Future: Federally Funded Research and Development in
Networking Information and Technology ........................................................................ 4
High-Confidence Medical Devices: Cyber-Physical Systems for 21st Century
Health Care ...................................................................................................................... 5
Federal Technology Funding: Background and Context ................................................................. 5
Activity in the 112th Congress.......................................................................................................... 7
Legislation ................................................................................................................................. 7
House—Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011 (H.R. 2096).......................................... 7
Senate—Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011 (S. 1152)..............................................H.R. 3834—Advancing America’s Networking and Information Technology
Research and Development Act of 2012.......................................................................... 8
H.R. 2096 and S. 1152—Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011.................................... 8
Hearings..................................................................................................................................... 89
Protecting Information in the Digital Age: Federal Cybersecurity Research and
Development Efforts ........................................................................................................ 9 10
Oversight of the Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development Program and Priorities for the Future ........................................................ 9 10
Potential Issues for Congress........................................................................................................... 9 10
Figures
Figure 1. Management Structure of the NITRD Program ............................................................... 2
Appendixes
Appendix. NITRD Enabling and Governing Legislation .............................................................. 1011
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 1112
Congressional Research Service
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
The Federal NITRD Program
The federal government has long played a key role in the country’s information technology (IT)
research and development (R&D) activities. The government’s support of IT R&D began because
it had an important interest in creating computers and software that would be capable of
addressing the problems and issues the government needed to solve and study. One of the first
such problems was calculating the trajectories of artillery and bombs; more recently, such
problems include simulations of nuclear testing, cryptanalysis, and weather modeling. That
interest continues today. These complex issues have led to calls for coordination to ensure the
government’s evolving needs (e.g., homeland security) will continue to be met in the most
effective manner possible.
Structure
Established by the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194), the Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) Program is the primary mechanism
by which the federal government coordinates its unclassified networking and information
technology (NIT) research and development (R&D)R&D investments. Eighteen federal agencies,
including all of the large science
and technology agencies, are formal members of the NITRD
Program,1 with many other federal
entities participating in NITRD activities. The program aims
to ensure that the nation effectively
leverages its strengths, avoids duplication, and increases
interoperability in such critical areas as
supercomputing, high-speed networking, cybersecurity,
software engineering, and information
management. Figure 1 illustrates the organizational
structure of the NITRD Program.
The National Coordinating Office (NCO) coordinates the activities of the NITRD Program. The
NCO was first established in September 1992 and was initially called the National Coordination
Office for High Performance Computing and Communications (NCO/HPCC). Its name has
changed several times over the years; as of July 2005, it is referred to as the National
Coordination Office for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development
(NCO/NITRD). The NCO/NITRD supports the planning, coordination, budget, and assessment
activities of the Program. The NCO’s role in the NITRD enterprise is recognized in the National
Science and Technology Council (NSTC) charters, authorizing NITRD Program structures as
well as in legislation and Congressionalcongressional hearings. The Director of the White House Office of
Science Technology and Policy (OSTP) appoints a Director for the NCO. The Director of the
NCO reports to the Director of the White House Office on Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP). The NCO supports the National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on
NITRD (also called the NITRD Subcommittee).2 The NITRD Subcommittee provides policy,
1
Department of Commerce (DOC): National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); Department of Defense (DoDDOD): Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), National Security Agency (NSA), Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and Service Research
Organizations (Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR), Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Army
Research Laboratory (ARL), Office of Naval Research (ONR); Department of Energy (DOE): National Nuclear
Security Administration (DOE/NNSA), Office of Science (DOE/SC); Department of Homeland Security (DHS);
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), National
Institutes of Health (NIH), Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC);
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA); National Science Foundation (NSF).
Congressional Research Service
1
The Federal NITRD Program
(OSTP). The NCO supports the National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on
NITRD (also called the NITRD Subcommittee).2 The NITRD Subcommittee provides policy,
2
The NITRD Subcommittee was previously called the Interagency Working Group for IT R&D (IWG/IT R&D).
Congressional Research Service
1
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
program, and budget planning for the NITRD Program and is composed of representatives from
each of the participating agencies, OSTP, Office of Management and Budget, and the NCO.
Figure 1. Management Structure of the NITRD Program
NITRD Program Coordination
White House
Executive Office
of the President
Office of Science and Technology Policy
National
National Science
Science and
and Technology
Technology Council
Council
Committee
Committee on
on
Technology
Technology
National Coordination Office (NCO)
for Networking and
Information Technology
Research and Development
Subcommittee on
Networking and Information
Technology Research and
Development (NITRD)
High
High End
End Computing
Computing (HEC)
(HEC)
Interagency
Interagency Working
Working Group
Group
Large Scale
Networking (LSN)
Coordinating Group
High Confidence
Software and
Systems (HCSS)
Coordinating Group
Cyber
Cyber Security
Security and
and
Information
Information Assurance
Assurance (CSIA)
(CSIA)
Interagency
Interagency Working
Working Group
Group
Human Computer
Interaction and
Information
Management (HCI&IM)
Coordinating Group
Social, Economic,
and Workforce
Implications of IT
and IT Workforce
Development (SEW)
Coordinating Group
Software Design and
Productivity (SDP)
Coordinating Group
Source: NITRD Program website, http://www.nitrd.gov.
NITRD Program activities are described under a set of eight Program Component Areas (PCAs),3
four Senior Steering Groups (SSGs),4 and a Community of Practice (CoP).5 The PCAs are
identified as an Interagency Working Group (IWG) or a Coordinating Group (CG) and report
their R&D budgets as a crosscut of the NITRD agencies. They are charged with facilitating
interagency program planning, developing and periodically updating interagency roadmaps,
developing recommendations for establishing Federalfederal policies and priorities, summarizing annual
activities for the NITRD program’s Supplement to the President’s Budget, and identifying
potential opportunities for collaboration which has been identified by OMB and OSTP as
priorities for federal coordination and collaboration. In addition to the PCAs, NITRD has
established several Senior Steering Groups (SSGs). The SSGs allow a more flexible model for
2
The NITRD Subcommittee was previously called the Interagency Working Group for IT R&D (IWG/IT R&D).
3
Cyber Security and Information Assurance (CSIA); High-Confidence Software and Systems (HCSS); High-End
Computing Infrastructure and Applications (HEC I&A); High-End Computing Research and Development (HEC
R&D); Human-Computer Interaction and Information Management (HCI&IM); Large-Scale Networking (LSN);
Social, Economic, and Workforce Implications of IT and IT Workforce Development (SEW); Software Design and
Productivity (SDP).
4
Big Data SSG; Cyber Security and Information Assurance R&D SSG; Health Information Technology R&D SSG;
Wireless Spectrum R&D SSG.
5
Faster Administration of Science and Technology Education and Research (FASTER) Community of Practice (CoP).
3
Congressional Research Service
2
.
The Federal NITRD Program
: Background, Funding, and Activities
established several Senior Steering Groups (SSGs). The SSGs allow a more flexible model for
NITRD collaboration and are formed to focus on emerging issues as required by a mandate from
OSTP. SSGs do not report an R&D budget under NITRD. The CoP’s goal is to enhance
collaboration and accelerate agencies’ adoption of advanced IT capabilities developed by
government-sponsored IT research. The NITRD Subcommittee convenes three times a year and
the working groups meet approximately 12 times annually and provide input to the NITRD
Supplement to the President’s Budget.
Budget, Funding, and Spending6
The NITRD budget is an aggregation of the IT R&D components of the individual budgets of
NITRD-participating agencies and is reported in the annual release of “The Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development Program Supplement to the President’s
Budget.” The NITRD budget is not a single, centralized source of funds that is allocated to
individual agencies. In fact, the agency IT R&D budgets are developed internally as part of each
agency’s overall budget development process. These budgets are subjected to review, revision,
and approval by the Office of Management and Budget and become part of the President’s annual
budget submission to Congress. The NITRD budget is then calculated by aggregating the IT R&D
components of the appropriations provided by Congress to each federal agency.
The President’s FY2013 budget request for the NITRD Program is $3.808 billion, an increase of
$69 million more than the $3.739 billion FY2012 estimate. Actual NITRD spending in FY2011
totaled $3.727 billion.7 Differences between the President’s Budget request for a given year and
estimated spending for that year reflect revisions to program budgets due to evolving priorities, as
well as Congressionalcongressional actions and appropriations. In addition, the NITRD agencies have
continued continued
to work collectively on improving the PCA definitions, as reflected by changes in the
definitions definitions
outlined in OMB Circular A-11, and individually on improving the classification of
investments investments
within the PCAs, resulting in changes in the NITRD Program.
Reports, 2009-2011
As explained earlier, the NCO provides technical and administrative support to the NITRD
Program and the NITRD Subcommittee. This includes supporting meetings and workshops and
preparing reports. The NCO interacts with OSTP and Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
on NITRD Program matters. Additionally, in accordance with a Presidentialpresidential executive order and
law, the NITRD Program is reviewed biannually. Two reports published in 2009 and 2010 about
the NITRD Program and by the NITRD NCO are discussed in this report. Older documents can
be found on the NITRD NCO website.8
6
The full history of NITRD Program funding, dating to 1991, is available online at http://www.nitrd.gov/pubs/
2009supplement/nitrd_history/NITRD-crosscut.pdf.
7
NITRD Supplement to the President’s Budget, FY2013, online at http://www.nitrd.gov/PUBS/2013supplement/
FY13NITRDSupplement.pdf.
8
http://www.nitrd.gov.
Congressional Research Service
3
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
Trustworthy Cyberspace: Strategic Plan for the Federal Cybersecurity Research
and Development Program
In December 2011, the NSTC released, “Trustworthy Cyberspace: Strategic Plan for the Federal
Cybersecurity Research and Development Program.” The report defines a set of interrelated
priorities for the agencies of the U.S. government that conduct or sponsor R&D in cybersecurity.
The priorities are organized into four thrusts: Inducing Change, Developing Scientific
Foundations, Maximizing Research Impact, and Accelerating Transition to Practice.
The thrusts provide a framework for prioritizing cybersecurity R&D in a way that concentrates
research efforts on limiting current cyberspace deficiencies, precluding future problems, and
expediting the infusion of research accomplishments into the marketplace. The principal
objectives of the thrusts include achieving greater cyberspace resiliency, improving attack
prevention, developing new defenses, and enhancing U.S. capabilities to design software that is
resistant to attacks.
The Inducing Change thrust includes a new priority theme named Designed-in Security, together
with the existing themes of Tailored Trustworthy Spaces, Moving Target, and Cyber Economic
Incentives. The Designed-in Security theme focuses on developing capabilities to design and
evolve high-assurance systems resistant to cyberattacks, whose assurance properties can be
verified. Such development capabilities offer the path to dramatic increases in the security and
safety of software systems.
Explicit in the execution of this plan is the coordination process across government agencies
through the NITRD Program and the leadership function of the NITRD Cyber Security and
Information Assurance Interagency Working Group (CSIA IWG), the federal government’s
principal group for coordinating cybersecurity R&D activities. In conjunction with OSTP, the
NITRD Senior Steering Group for Cybersecurity R&D, and the Special Cyber Operations
Research and Engineering SCORE Interagency Working Group, the CSIA IWG assures that the
execution of this plan by individual federal research agencies is coordinated, cohesive, and
complementary.
Designing a Digital Future: Federally Funded Research and Development in
Networking Information and Technology
In December 2010, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST)9
released, “Designing a Digital Future: Federally Funded Research and Development in
Networking and Information Technology.”10 This report fulfilled PCAST’s responsibility to report
on the status of the NITRD Program under Executive Order 13539 and the High-Performance
Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194).11 PCAST appointed an expert 14-member Working
Group, which consulted with more than 50 individuals, including government officials, industry
representatives, and experts from academia, to develop a comprehensive review of the program.
PCAST found that NITRD is well coordinated and that the U.S. computing research community,
9
The PCAST was acting in its role as the President’s Innovation and Technology Advisory Council (PITAC).
This report is available online at http://www.nitrd.gov/pcast-2010/report/nitrd-program/pcast-nitrd-report-2010.pdf.
11
As amended by the Next Generation Internet Research Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-305) and by the America COMPETES
Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-69).
10
Congressional Research Service
4
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
coupled with a vibrant NIT industry, has made seminal discoveries and advanced new
technologies that are helping to meet many societal challenges. Importantly, however, PCAST
also found that:
a substantial fraction of the NITRD multi-agency spending summary represents spending
that supports R&D in other fields, rather than spending on R&D in the field of NIT itself. As
a result, the United States is actually investing far less in NIT R&D than the $4 billion-plus
indicated in the Federal budget. To achieve America’s priorities and advance key research
frontiers to support economic competitiveness in NIT, this report calls for a more accurate
accounting of this national investment and recommended additional investments in NIT
R&D, including research in networking and information technology for health, energy and
transportation, and cyber-infrastructure.12
The PCAST stated its belief that NIT has yielded enormous benefits for the nation’s economic
competitiveness, national security, and quality of life. It stressed the importance of maintaining
the country’s leadership in NIT in an ever more competitive global environment, encouraging the
federal government to be bold in its investments, including funding of high risk/high reward
research with the potential to move NIT in unanticipated directions.
High-Confidence Medical Devices: Cyber-Physical Systems for 21st Century
Health Care
This report, published in February 2009, presents the perspectives of the senior scientists of the
NITRD Program’s High Confidence Software and Systems (HCSS) Coordinating Group (CG),
with input from experts from other federal agencies, on the R&D challenges, needs, and strategies
for developing and deploying the next generations of high-confidence medical devices, software,
and systems.13 HCSS agencies whose missions are not medical device-specific have found it
beneficial to partner in this area because medical device research challenges are similar, if not
identical, to those within their purview. Digital technologies are increasingly being assigned highlevel control over the monitoring, sensing, actuation, and communications of medical devices—
often with human life in the balance. Through this report and associated HCSS-sponsored
national workshops, the HCSS agencies are seeking to illuminate fundamental scientific and
technical challenges that they believe must be addressed before high-confidence devices,
software, and systems that operate flawlessly from end to end can be designed and built. The
report authors sought to paint the landscape of the evolution of medical device technology and the
federal investments that have benefitted medical device R&D over time.
Federal Technology Funding: Background and
Context
In the early 1990s, Congress recognized that several federal agencies had ongoing highperformance computing programs,14 but no central coordinating body existed to ensure long-term
12
Designing a Digital Future: Federally Funded Research and Development in Networking and Information
Technology, p. v.
13
This report is available online at http://www.nitrd.gov/About/MedDevice-FINAL1-web.pdf.
14
“High-performance” computing is a term that encompasses both “supercomputing” and “grid computing.” In general,
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
5
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
coordination and planning. To provide such a framework, Congress passed the High-Performance
Computing Program Act of 1991 to improve the interagency coordination, cooperation, and
planning of agencies with high performance computing programs.
In conjunction with the passage of the act, OSTP released, “Grand Challenges: High-Performance
Computing and Communications.” That document outlined an R&D strategy for highperformance high-performance
computing and communications and a framework for a multi-agency program, the
HPCC HPCC
Program.
The NITRD Program is part of the larger federal effort to promote fundamental and applied IT
R&D. The government sponsors such research through a number of channels, including
•
federally funded research and development laboratories, such as Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory;
•
single-agency programs;
•
multi-agency programs, including the NITRD Program, but also programs
focusing on nanotechnology R&D and combating terrorism;
•
funding grants to academic institutions; and
•
funding grants to industry.
In general, supporters of federal funding of IT R&D contend that it has produced positive results.
In 2003, the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) of the National Research
Council (NRC) released a “synthesis report” based on eight previously released reports that
examined “how innovation occurs in IT, what the most promising research directions are, and
what impacts such innovation might have on society.”15 The CSTB’s observation was that the
unanticipated results of research are often as important as the anticipated results. For example,
electronic mail and instant messaging were by-products of [government-funded] research in the
1960s that was aimed at making it possible to share expensive computing resources among
multiple simultaneous interactive users. Additionally, the report noted that federally funded
programs have played a crucial role in supporting long-term research into fundamental aspects of
computing. Such “fundamentals” provide broad practical benefits, but generally take years to
realize. Furthermore, supporters state that the nature and underlying importance of fundamental
research makes it less likely that industry would invest in and conduct more fundamental research
on its own. As noted by the CSTB, “companies have little incentive to invest significantly in
activities whose benefits will spread quickly to their rivals.”16 Further, in the Board’s opinion:
(...continued)
high-performance computers are defined as stand-alone or networked computers that can perform “very complex
computations very quickly.” Supercomputing involves a single, stand-alone computer located in a single location. Grid
computing involves a group of computers, in either the same location or spread over a number of locations, that are
networked together (e.g., via the Internet or a local network). House of Representatives, Committee on Science,
Supercomputing: Is the United States on the Right Path (Hearing Transcript), http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/
science/hsy88231.000/hsy88231_0f.htm, 2003, pp. 5-6.
15
National Research Council, Innovation in Information Technology, 2003, p. 1. This report discusses all federal
funding for R&D, not only the NITRD Program.
16
Ibid, p. 4.
Congressional Research Service
6
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
government sponsorship of research, especially in universities, helps develop the IT talent
used by industry, universities, and other parts of the economy. When companies create
products using the ideas and workforce that result from Federally-sponsored research, they
repay the nation in jobs, tax revenues, productivity increases, and world leadership.17
Another aspect of government-funded IT R&D is that it often leads to open standards, something
that many perceive as beneficial, encouraging deployment and further investment. Industry, on
the other hand, is more likely to invest in proprietary products and will typically diverge from a
common standard if it sees a potential competitive or financial advantage; this happened, for
example, with standards for instant messaging.18
Finally, proponents of government R&D support believe that the outcomes achieved through the
various funding programs create a synergistic environment in which both fundamental and
application-driven research are conducted, benefitting government, industry, academia, and the
public. Supporters also believe that such outcomes justify government’s role in funding IT R&D,
as well as the growing budget for the NITRD Program.
Critics have asserted that the government, through its funding mechanisms, may set itself up to
pick “winners and losers” in technological development, a role more properly residing with the
private sector.19 For example, the size of the NITRD Program could encourage industry to follow
the government’s lead on research directions rather than selecting those directions itself.
Overall, CSTB stated that government funding appears to have allowed research on a larger scale
and with greater diversity, vision, and flexibility than would have been possible without
government involvement.20
Activity in the 112th Congress
Two bills have been introduced that would affect the NITRD Program and one hearing has been
held that addressed the activities of the NITRD Program member agencies.
Legislation
Two bills related to the NITRD Program have been introduced in the 112th Congress. They are
companion legislation and are identical.
House—Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011 (H.R. 2096)
This bill was introduced by Representative Michael McCaul on June 2, 2011. The bill was
referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, was reported (amended) on
October 31, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-264), and placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 177.
Three pieces of legislation have been introduced in the 112th Congress that would have an effect
on the NITRD member agencies: H.R. 3834, the Advancing America’s Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2012; H.R. 2096, the Cybersecurity
Enhancement Act of 2011; and S. 1152, also called the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011.
H.R. 2096 and S. 1152 are identical.
17
Ibid, p. 4.
Ibid, p. 18.
19
Cato Institute, Encouraging Research: Taking Politics Out of R&D, September 13, 1999, http://www.cato.org/pubs/
wtpapers/990913catord.html.
20
National Research Council, Innovation in Information Technology, 2003, p. 22.
18
Congressional Research Service
7
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
H.R. 3834—Advancing America’s Networking and Information Technology
Research and Development Act of 201221
H.R. 3834 was introduced by Representative Ralph Hall on January 27, 2012. The bill was
referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology; was reported on March 22,
2012 (H.Rept. 112-420); and was placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 289.
This bill would:
•
Amend the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 to rename the National
High-Performance Computing Program as the NITRD Program.
•
Direct the federal agencies participating in the Program to (1) periodically assess
the contents and funding levels of program component areas and restructure the
Program when warranted; and (2) ensure that the Program includes large-scale,
long-term, interdisciplinary R&D activities.
•
Require the participating federal agencies to develop, and update every three
years, a five-year strategic plan to guide activities provided for under the
Program.
•
Require the Director of the OSTP to encourage and monitor the efforts of
participating agencies to allocate the resources and management attention
necessary to ensure that the strategic plan is executed effectively and that
Program objectives are met.
•
Require the Program, in addition to its current requirements, to provide for (1)
increased understanding of the scientific principles of cyber-physical systems and
improve the methods available for the design, development, and operation of
such systems; and (2) research and development on human-computer
interactions, visualization, and big data.
•
Require continuation of an NCO and require the Director of the Office to
convene (1) a task force to explore mechanisms for carrying out collaborative
R&D activities on cyber-physical systems; and (2) through the NTSC, an
interagency working group to examine issues around funding mechanisms and
policies for the use of cloud computing services for federally funded science and
engineering research.
H.R. 2096 and S. 1152—Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011
H.R. 2096 was introduced by Representative Michael McCaul on June 2, 2011. The bill was
referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology; was reported (amended) on
October 31, 2011 (H.Rept. 112-264); and was placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 177.
21
H.R. 4263, the SECURE IT Act of 2012, is a related bill to H.R. 3834. Section 407 of the bill contains conforming
and technical amendments to the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991. However, it does not change the functions
of the program or its management structure. That bill was introduced by Representative Mary Bono on March 27, 2012,
and referred to the House Committees on Science, Space, and Technology; Oversight and Government Reform;
Judiciary; Armed Services; and Intelligence (Permanent Select). It was referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security on April 9, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
8
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
S. 1152The Federal NITRD Program
Senate—Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2011 (S. 1152)
This bill, which is companion legislation to H.R. 2096, is also called the Cybersecurity
Enhancement Act of 2011. It was introduced by Senator Robert Menendez on June 7, 2011. The
bill was referred to the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and no
further action has been
taken.
These bills would—
•
Require NITRD member agencies to provide to Congress a cybersecurity
strategic research and development plan and triennial updates, and develop and
annually update an implementation roadmap for such plan.
•
Expand permitted National Science Foundation (NSF) grants for basic research
on innovative approaches to the structure of computer and network hardware and
software that are aimed at enhancing computer security to include research into
identity management, crimes against children, and organized crime.
•
Require applications for the establishment of Computer and Network Security
Research Centers to include a description of how such Centers will partner with
government laboratories, for-profit entities, other institutions of higher education,
or nonprofit research institutions.
•
Repeal the Cyber Security Faculty Development Traineeship Program.
•
Require the NSF Director to continue carrying out a Scholarship for Service
program under the Cyber Security Research and Development Act.
•
Direct the President to transmit a report to Congress addressing the cybersecurity
workforce needs of the federal government.
•
Require the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Director to
convene a cybersecurity university-industry task force to explore mechanisms for
carrying out collaborative R&D activities.
•
Revise provisions concerning the development and dissemination by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of security risk checklists
associated with computer systems that are, or are likely to become, widely used
within the federal government.
•
Require conducting intramural security research activities under NIST’s
computing standards program.
•
Require the NIST Director to (1) ensure coordination of U.S. government
representation in the international development of technical standards related to
cybersecurity; (2) maintain a cybersecurity awareness and education program
through the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership program; and (3)
continue a program to support development of technical standards, metrology,
testbeds, and conformance criteria with regard to identity management research
and development.
Hearings
Two hearings have been held related to the NITRD Program.
Congressional Research Service
8
9
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
Protecting Information in the Digital Age: Federal Cybersecurity Research and
Development Efforts
“Protecting Information in the Digital Age: Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development
Efforts,” was held by the House Committee on Science and Technology Subcommittees on
Technology and Innovation and Research and Science Education, on May 25, 2011, on issues
relating specifically to cybersecurity R&D.2122
Oversight of the Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development Program and Priorities for the Future
“Oversight of the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program
and Priorities for the Future,” was held by the House Committee on Science and Technology
Subcommittee Research and Science Education, on September 21, 2011, on issues relating to
future research directions.2223
Potential Issues for Congress
Federal IT R&D is a multi-dimensional issue, involving many government agencies working
together towards shared, complementary, and disparate goals. Many observers believe that
success in this arena requires ongoing coordination among government, academia, and industry.
Issues related to U.S. competitiveness in high-performance computing and the direction the IT
R&D community has been taking have remained salient over the last five5 to ten10 years and
include:
•
the United States’ status as the global leader in high-performance computing
research;
•
the apparent ongoing bifurcation of the federal IT R&D research agenda between
grid computing and supercomputing capabilities;
•
possible over-reliance on commercially available hardware to satisfy U.S.
research needs; and
•
the potential impact of deficit cutting on IT R&D funding.
2122
The hearing main page can be found at http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-research-and-scienceeducation-subcommittee-technology-and-innovation-%E2%80%93-joint. Information includes the hearing charter, the
opening statements, and the witness testimony.
2223
The hearing main page can be found at http://science.house.gov/hearing/research-and-science-educationsubcommittee-hearing-oversight-networking-information-tech.
Congressional Research Service
9
10
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
Appendix. NITRD Enabling and Governing
Legislation
The NITRD Program is governed by two laws. The first, the High-Performance Computing Act
of 1991, P.L. 102-194,2324 expanded federal support for high-performance computing R&D and
called for increased interagency planning and coordination. The second, the Next Generation
Internet Research Act of 1998, P.L. 105-305,2425 amended the original law to expand the mission of
the NITRD Program to cover Internet-related research, among other goals.
High-Performance Computing Act of 1991
This law was the original enabling legislation for what is now the NITRD Program. Among other
requirements, it called for the following:
•
Setting goals and priorities for federal high-performance computing research,
development, and networking.
•
Providing for the technical support and research and development of highperformance computing software and hardware needed to address fundamental
problems in science and engineering.
•
Educating undergraduate and graduate students.
•
Fostering and maintaining competition and private sector investment in highspeed data networking within the telecommunications industry.
•
Promoting the development of commercial data communications and
telecommunications standards.
•
Providing security, including protecting intellectual property rights.
•
Developing accounting mechanisms allowing users to be charged for the use of
copyrighted materials.
This law also requires an annual report to Congress on grants and cooperative R&D agreements
and procurements involving foreign entities.2526
Next Generation Internet Research Act of 1998
This law amended the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991. The act had two overarching
purposes. The first was to authorize research programs related to high-end computing and
computation, human-centered systems, high confidence systems, and education, training, and
2324
High Performance Computing Act of 1991, P.L. 102-194, 15 U.S.C. 5501, 105 Stat. 1595, December 9, 1991. The
full text of this law is available at http://www.nitrd.gov/congressional/laws/pl_102-194.html.
2425
Next Generation Internet Research Act of 1998, P.L. 105-305, 15 U.S.C. 5501, 112 Stat. 2919, October 28, 1998.
The full text of this law is available at http://www.nitrd.gov/congressional/laws/pl_h_105-305.html.
2526
The first report mandated information on the “Supercomputer Agreement” between the United States and Japan be
included in this report. A separate one-time only report was required on network funding, including user fees, industry
support, and federal investment.
Congressional Research Service
10
11
.
The Federal NITRD Program: Background, Funding, and Activities
human resources. The second was to provide for the development and coordination of a
comprehensive and integrated U.S. research program to focus on (1) computer network
infrastructure that would promote interoperability among advanced federal computer networks,
(2) economic high-speed data access that does not impose a “geographic penalty.,” and (3) flexible
and extensible networking technology.
Author Contact Information
Patricia Moloney Figliola
Specialist in Internet and Telecommunications
Policy
pfigliola@crs.loc.gov, 7-2508
Congressional Research Service
1112