Order Code 95-30 SPR
Updated February 9, 2005
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
The National Institute of Standards and
Technology: An Overview
Wendy H. Schacht
Specialist in Science and Technology
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Summary
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a laboratory of the
Department of Commerce, has the mandate to increase the competitiveness of U.S.
companies through appropriate support for industrial development of pre-competitive
generic technologies and the diffusion of government-developed technological advances
to users in all segments of the American economy. NIST research also provides the
measurement, calibration, and quality assurance techniques that underpin U.S.
commerce, technological progress, improved product reliability, manufacturing
processes, and public safety. Congressional debate has focused on the merits of the
external R&D programs supported by NIST and directed toward increased
commercialization in the private sector, including the Advanced Technology Program
(ATP) and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). The level of funding for
internal research efforts has also come under scrutiny by the Congress during the
appropriations process. P.L. 108-447, the FY2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act,
provides NIST with $695.3 million (after mandated rescissions), an increase of 14%
over the earlier fiscal year. For FY2006, the Administration’s budget request proposes
funding NIST at $532 million, a 23% decrease from the current fiscal year due primarily
to an absence of support for ATP and a significant cut in financing for MEP. This
report will be updated as events warrant.
Mission and Background
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, formerly the National Bureau
of Standards (NBS), was established by the NBS Organic Act of 1901 (P.L. 56-177).
NIST is part of the Technology Administration of the Department of Commerce. Unlike
most national laboratories, NIST has a mission specified by statute (15 U.S.C. 271-282a),
has its own authorization and appropriation, and is headed by a Senate-confirmed
presidential appointee. Prior to 1988, the mission of NBS was to develop and maintain
standards and measurement support for scientific investigations, engineering,
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CRS-2
manufacturing, commerce and educational institutions, as well as to provide technical and
advisory services to other government agencies on scientific and engineering problems.
The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-418) changed the
name of the National Bureau of Standards to the National Institute of Standards and
Technology and explicitly charged the agency with providing technical services to
facilitate the competitiveness of U.S. industry. The law directs NIST to offer appropriate
support to the private sector for the development of pre-competitive generic technologies
and the diffusion of government-developed technological advances to users in all
segments of the American economy. Research performed in the laboratory is to generate
the measurement, calibration, and quality assurance techniques that underpin U.S.
commerce, technological progress, improved product reliability, manufacturing processes,
and public safety.
NIST Budget
Beginning in FY1991, the NIST budget experienced marked growth as Congress
funded external grant programs — the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) — authorized by P.L. 100-418. However,
the 104th Congress curtailed the expansion of support for NIST and overall funding levels
decreased 18% between FY1995 and FY1997. In FY1998, the NIST budget again
increased as P.L. 105-119 appropriated $677.9 million (of which $5 million from the
Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) budget was vetoed by the
President). Under P.L. 105-277, NIST received $641.1 million in funding, approximately
5% less than the previous year. For FY2000, P.L. 106-113 provided NIST with $635.8
million after the rescission mandated by law. The FY2001 appropriations legislation, P.L.
106-553, funded NIST at $598.3 million. The total included $312.6 million for the STRS
account that supports intramural R&D (an 11% increase), $105.1 million for MEP, $145.7
million for ATP (a 2% increase), and $34.9 million for construction. The following
fiscal year, P.L. 107-77 funded NIST at $674.5 million, an increase of 13% over FY2001.
Included in this was $321.1 million for the STRS account (3% above the previous fiscal
year). MEP was financed at $106.5 million and ATP received $184.5 million, a 27%
increase. Construction received $62.4 million. (The FY2002 Defense Appropriations Act
added $5 million into the STRS account for cybersecurity.)
The Bush Administration first proposed a significant cut in support for the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership in the FY2003 budget. The proposed 89% decline
in MEP funding was due to the President’s recommendation that centers in operation for
more than six years do so without federal financing. However, P.L. 108-7 provided NIST
with $707.5 million in FY2003 funds (after the mandated 0.65% across-the-board
rescission), an increase of almost 5% above the previous year. Included was $357.1
million for the STRS account (an 11% increase), $178.8 million for ATP, $105.9 million
for MEP, and $65.7 million for construction.
P.L. 108-199, the FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act, funded NIST at $610.7
million after a 0.59% across-the-board rescission included in the Act (but not including
the NIST portion of a rescission to Department of Commerce unobligated balances),
almost 14% below the FY2003 appropriation. The STRS account was funded at $337.2
million (a 5.5% decrease from FY2003). Manufacturing extension was financed at $38.7

---

CRS-3
million (a 63% reduction from the previous fiscal year) and ATP received $170.5 million,
4.6% below FY2003. Construction funding totaled $64.2 million.
The FY2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-447) provides NIST with
$695.3 million (after a mandated 0.8% across-the-board rescission and a 0.54% rescission
from Commerce, Justice, State discretionary accounts). This amount is 14% above
FY2004 funding. The STRS account is to receive $378.8 million, 12% over the previous
fiscal year. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership is funded at $107.5 million, an
increase of 178% that will bring support for the program up to pre-FY2004 levels. ATP
is financed at $136.5 million (20% below FY2004), and the construction budget totals
$72.5 million. The legislation also rescinds $3.9 million in unobligated balances from
prior year funds in the ATP account.
The President’s FY2006 budget requests $532 million in funding for NIST, a 23%
decrease from FY2005 due primarily to an absence of support for the Advanced
Technology Program (ATP) and a significant cut in financing for the Manufacturing
Extension Partnership (MEP). Included in the total figure is $426.3 million for the
Scientific and Technology Research and Services (STRS) account which covers primarily
the internal R&D activities of the laboratory. This amount is 12.5% above the current
fiscal year (and includes $5.7 million for the Baldrige National Quality Program). MEP
would be funded at $46.8 million, 56% below FY2005 support. The construction budget
would be $58.9 million.

Table 1. NIST Appropriations, FY2001-FY2004 Request
(millions of dollars)
FY2005
NIST Appropriation
FY2003
FY2004
FY2006
P.L. 108-
P.L.108-7*
P.L. 108-199**
Request
447†
STRS
357.1
337.2
378.8
426.3
ATP
178.8
170.5
136.5
0
Industrial
Technology
MEP
105.9
38.7
107.5
46.8
Services
Subtotal
284.7
209.2
244
46.8
Construction
65.7
64.2
72.5
58.9
Total
707.5
610.7
695.3
532
Figures may not add up because of rounding.
*Figures include the 0.65% across-the-board rescission mandated in the legislation.
** Figures reflect a mandated 0.59% across-the-board rescission (but not a rescission to unobligated
balances)
† Figures include the 0.83% across-the-board rescission and 0.54% rescission from the Commerce, Justice,
State discretionary accounts mandated in the legislation
Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS). The NIST in-
house R&D effort, involving approximately 3,300 scientists, engineers, technicians, and
support personnel (plus some 1,200 visiting scientists per year from industry, academia,
and other government agencies), is conducted at laboratories in Maryland and Colorado.
A major emphasis is cooperative research with industry to overcome technical barriers to
commercialization of emerging technologies. NIST participates with U.S. companies in

---

CRS-4
collaborative R&D programs in 130 research areas.1 Since 1988, NIST has participated
in over 960 formal Cooperative Research and Development Agreements with industry.
NIST is composed of seven internal research laboratories.2 Much of the research is
focused on measurements, evaluated data, standards, and test methods. NIST sees these
activities as supporting basic “infrastructural technologies” which enable the development
of advanced technologies, and which industry can use to characterize new materials,
monitor production processes, and ensure the quality of new product lines. Under the
President’s FY2003 budget request, funding for this in-house research and development
would increase 23% over the previous year (including the $5 million added for
cybersecurity activities by the FY2002 Defense Appropriations Act). The new budget
also included an additional $5 million to expand homeland security.
Industrial Technology Services (ITS). In response to what was perceived as
the necessity of maintaining a strong manufacturing base, Title V of the Omnibus Trade
and Competitiveness Act (P.L. 100-418) “... significantly expands the role of NIST as the
Government’s lead laboratory in support of U.S. industrial quality and competitiveness.”
To this end, NIST was given specific technology transfer functions, and several programs
were created including the Advanced Technology Program, Regional Centers for the
Transfer of Manufacturing Technology, and State Technology Extension. These efforts
were designed to facilitate industrial activities to utilize advanced process technology; to
promote cooperative ventures among industry, universities, and government laboratories;
and to encourage shared risks, accelerated development, and increased skills.
The Advanced Technology Program provides seed funding, matched by private
sector investment (generally of at least 50% of costs), to companies or consortia of
universities, businesses, and government laboratories for development of generic
technologies that have broad application across industries.3 Awards, based on technical
and business merit, are made for high-risk work past the basic research stage but not yet
ready for commercialization. The first awards were made in 1991; to date, 736 projects
have been funded. NIST restructured part of ATP to manage groups of projects in “well-
defined” programmatic areas designed for long-range support which were selected in
conjunction with industry. A general competition also continued. In FY1999, the focused
programs were dropped in favor of one competition for all technologies.
Initial funding for the Advanced Technology Program was $36 million in FY1991.
Appropriations increased to $48 million in FY1992, $67.9 million in FY1993, and $199.5
million in FY1994. In FY1995 funding expanded significantly to $431 million; however,
P.L. 104-6 rescinded $90 million from this total. Support declined to $221 million in
FY1996 and P.L. 105-18 rescinded $7 million of unobligated balances from the FY1997
ATP account of $225 million. Funding for FY1998 again declined to $192.5 million, but
increased 3% to $197.5 million for FY1999. This figure reflected a $6 million rescission
1 Available at the National Institute of Standards and Technology website: [http://www.nist.gov/].
2 These are: Electronics and Electrical Engineering, Manufacturing Engineering, Physics,
Chemical Science and Technology, Materials Science and Engineering, Building and Fire
Research, and Information Technology.
3 For more information on the ATP, see CRS Report 95-36, The Advanced Technology Program,
by Wendy H. Schacht.

---

CRS-5
included in the FY1999 appropriations to account for funds originally obligated for
projects that were terminated early and thus available for use in other ATP competitions.
For FY2000, ATP received $142.6 million. In FY2001, ATP funding was $145.7 million
and in FY2002 the program was financed at $184.5 million.
As required by law, NIST created Regional Centers for the Transfer of
Manufacturing Technology.4 Expanded in 1994 to include the State Technology
Extension Program, and known as the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), this
activity is designed to transfer expertise and technologies developed under NIST
programs to small and mid-sized U.S.-based manufacturing firms. Funded through
cooperative agreements with non-profit or state and local organizations, competitive
awards were originally made for up to six years (now extended as discussed below). Non-
federal sources are required to provide 50% or more of each Center’s capital and costs
during this time period. P.L. 105-309 permits the federal government to support centers
after the six years if a positive, independent evaluation is made every two years. Federal
funding is limited to one-third of the capital and annual operating and maintenance costs
of the center. Centers offer expertise, needs evaluation, application demonstrations for
new production technologies, training, and information dissemination.
Centers are located in all 50 states and Puerto Rico with approximately 400 regional
offices. NIST also assumed support of the 36 centers originally funded by the Department
of Defense through its Technology Reinvestment Project when funding for this program
was terminated in FY1994. Appropriations for FY1988 and FY1989 totaled $12.5
million. Further funding included $11.9 million in FY1991; $15.1 million in FY1992;
and $16.9 million in FY1993. In FY1994, when the original program was expanded,
appropriations for MEP increased to $30.3 million. The $90.6 million funding for
FY1995 included support for a new program, LINKS, to tie together federal, state, and
local agencies, the private sector, and the manufacturing outreach institutions through
communications and data systems. P.L. 104-19 rescinded $16.3 million from the FY1995
appropriation for the MEP. Funding for FY1996 was $80 million and $95 million in
FY1997. FY1998 support was $113.5 million. P.L. 105-277 appropriated $106.8 million
for FY1999, a decrease that reflected statutory requirements reducing the federal financial
commitment as centers reach six years of operation. FY2000 funding totaled $104.2
million. In FY2001, MEP received $105.1 million and in FY2002 the program was
financed at $106.5 million.
Construction of Research Facilities. Concerns have been raised whether
NIST laboratories are technologically obsolete, preventing state-of-the-art research. In
1993, a $540 million, 10-year plan to upgrade the lab was endorsed and by FY1995
approximately $220 million had been appropriated for construction. Recommending a
reassessment of NIST’s plans, the 104th Congress rescinded $61 million of unobligated
building funds. In FY1998, $95 million was provided for construction. Part of the $56.7
million made available in FY1999 and the $106.9 million in FY2000 was used to build
the Advanced Measurement Laboratory. Support for construction totaled $34.9 million
in FY2001 and $62.4 million in FY2002.
4 For more information on the MEP, see CRS Report 97-104, Manufacturing Extension
Partnership Program: An Overview, by Wendy H. Schacht.

---

CRS-6
Issues for Congress
Beginning with the 104th Congress, many Members expressed skepticism over a
“technology policy” based on providing federal funds to industry for development of pre-
competitive generic technologies. This philosophical shift from previous Congresses,
coupled with pressures to balance the federal budget, led to significant reductions in
funding for NIST. The Advanced Technology Program and the Manufacturing Extension
Partnership, which were key players in the former Clinton Administration’s civilian
technology development strategy, and which accounted for over 50% of the FY1995 NIST
budget, were proposed for elimination. However, strong support by the former
Administration and the Senate led to their continued financing. Yet funding for ATP
remains controversial. Since FY2000, the original appropriations bills as passed by the
House did not contain any financial support for ATP, although the final legislation funded
the program. Many of the budget requests submitted by President Bush also proposed
abolishing ATP. In the FY2003 budget, the Administration also recommended
suspension of federal support for those manufacturing extension centers in operation for
more than six years. The following year, P.L. 108-199, the FY2004 Consolidated
Appropriation Act, significantly cut funding for manufacturing extension. However, the
FY2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act brought support for MEP back up to the level
necessary to fully fund the existing centers. The legislation also financed the Advanced
Technology Program, although this financing is below that of previous fiscal years.
While much of the legislative debate has focused on the Advanced Technology
Program and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, increases in spending for the
NIST laboratories that perform the research essential to the mission responsibilities of the
agency have tended to remain small: a 3.7% increase between FY1995 and FY1996, a
3.5% increase in FY1997, no increase for FY1998, and 3.1% for FY1999. During
FY2000, there was less than a 1% increase in support. However, FY2001 appropriations
were 11% above the previous year while the figure for FY2002 included a 2.7% increase
in funding. In FY2003, support for in-house R&D was 12% more than the previous fiscal
year; although the FY2004 figure decreased by 5.5%, funding for FY2005 included a 12%
increase. It remains to be seen how support for this effort will evolve and how this might
affect financing of extramural efforts such as ATP and MEP. As the new Congress
debates the budget beyond the current fiscal year, the resulting dispensation of funding
for NIST programs may affect the ways by which the federal government supports
technology development for commercial application.5
5 See CRS Report 95-50, The Federal Role in Technology Development, by Wendy H. Schacht.

---