Order Code RL34448
Federal Research and Development
Funding: FY2009
Updated April 10, 2008
John F. Sargent (Coordinator),
Christine M. Matthews, John D. Moteff, Daniel Morgan,
Robert Esworthy, and Wendy H. Schacht
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Pamela W. Smith
Domestic Social Policy Division
Wayne A. Morrissey
Knowledge Services Group
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2009
Summary
President Bush has proposed total research and development (R&D) funding of
$147.0 billion in his FY2009 budget request to Congress, a $3.9 billion (2.7%)
increase over the estimated FY2008 level of $143.1 billion. Five federal agencies
would receive 92.8% of total federal R&D spending: the Department of Defense
(54.8%), Department of Health and Human Services (20.1%), National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (7.3%), Department of Energy (7.2%), and National
Science Foundation (3.5%). The President’s request includes $29.3 billion for basic
research, up $847 million (3.0%) from FY2008; $27.1 billion for applied research,
down $1.0 billion (-3.6%); $84.0 billion for development, up 1.6 billion (1.9%); and
$6.5 billion for R&D facilities and equipment, up $2.5 billion (61.7%). Congress is
to play a central role in defining the nation’s R&D priorities, especially with respect
to two overarching issues: the extent to which the Federal R&D investment can grow
in the context of increased pressure on discretionary spending and how available
funding will be prioritized and allocated. A low or negative growth rate in the
overall R&D investment may require movement of resources across disciplines,
programs, or agencies to address priorities.
The Administration has requested significantly larger percentage increases in
the R&D budgets of the three agencies that are part of its American Competitiveness
Initiative: the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, the National Science
Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. In 2007,
Congress authorized substantial R&D increases for these agencies under the America
COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69). The President’s budget would reduce R&D funding
for four agencies: the Department of Agriculture, down $357 million (-15.5%); the
Department of Veterans Affairs, down $76 million (-7.9%); the Department of the
Interior, down $59 million (-8.7%); and the Environmental Protection Agency, down
$7 million (-1.3%).
The FY2009 request includes increases for three multiagency R&D initiatives:
the National Nanotechnology Initiative, $1.53 billion, up $35 million (2.4%); the
Networking and Information Technology R&D program, $3.57 billion, up $194
million (5.8%); and the Climate Change Science Program, $2.01 billion, up $177
million (9.6%).
For the past two years, federal R&D funding and execution has been affected
by mechanisms used to complete the annual appropriations process — the year-long
continuing resolution for FY2007 (P.L. 110-5) and the combining of 11
appropriations bills into the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 for FY2008 (P.L.
110-161). For example, FY2008 R&D funding for some agencies and programs is
below the level requested by the President and passed by the House of
Representatives and the Senate. Completion of appropriations after the beginning of
each fiscal year has also resulted in delays or cancellation of planned R&D and
equipment acquisition.
The House and the Senate have passed concurrent budget resolutions
(H.Con.Res. 312 and S.Con.Res. 70, respectively). Differences remain to reconciled
and approved by both chambers.
Contents
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Federal R&D Funding Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Agency Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Character of Work, Facilities, and Equipment Perspective . . . . . . . . . . 3
Combined Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Multi-Agency Initiatives Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
FY2009 Federal R&D Appropriations Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Effect of FY2007-FY2008 Appropriations Process on R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Multiagency R&D Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Department of Defense (DOD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
National Institutes of Health (NIH) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Department of Energy (DOE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
National Science Foundation (NSF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Department of Commerce (DOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) . . . . . . . . . . 28
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Department of Agriculture (USDA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Department of the Interior (DOI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Department of Transportation (DOT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
List of Tables
Table 1. Federal Research and Development Funding by Agency,
FY2007-FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Table 2. Federal Research and Development Funding by Character
of Work, Facilities and Equipment, FY2007-FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 3. Top R&D Funding Agencies by Character of Work,
Facilities and Equipment, FY2007-FY2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Table 4. Department of Defense RDT&E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Table 5. Department of Defense RDT&E Associated with the Global
War on Terror Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Table 6. Department of Homeland Security R&D and Related Programs . . . . . 15
Table 7. National Institutes of Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Table 8. Department of Energy R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 9. National Science Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Table 10. NIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Table 11. NOAA R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Table 12. NASA R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 13. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Table 14. Department of the Interior R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Table 15. Environmental Protection Agency S&T Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Table 16. Department of Transportation R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Federal Research and Development
Funding: FY2009
Overview
Congress continues to take a strong interest in the health of the U.S. research
and development (R&D) enterprise and in providing sustained support for federal
R&D activities. The United States government supports a broad range of scientific
and engineering research and development (R&D). Its purposes include addressing
specific concerns such as national defense, health, safety, the environment, and
energy security; advancing knowledge generally; developing the scientific and
engineering workforce; and strengthening U.S. innovation and competitiveness in the
global economy. Most of the research funded by the federal government is in support
of specific activities of the federal government as reflected in the unique missions of
the funding agencies. The federal government has played an important role in
supporting R&D efforts that have led to scientific breakthroughs and new
technologies, from jet aircraft and the Internet to communications satellites and
defenses against disease.
CRS-2
President Bush has requested $147.0 billion for R&D in FY2009, a 2.7%
increase over FY2008 R&D funding which is estimated to be $143.1 billion.1
FY2008 funding is provided through the Defense Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L.
110-116), signed into law by President Bush on November 13, 2007, and the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161), signed into law on December
26, 2007. P.L. 110-161 provides funding for departments and agencies covered in
the eleven appropriations acts on which action had not been completed.
The President’s FY2009 proposed R&D increase over the FY2008 funding level
is due primarily to funding for the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) and
an advance appropriation to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for
acquisition under Project BioShield of medical countermeasures, such as vaccines,
against biological terror attacks.2 The Office of Management and Budget has
classified $2.175 billion of the DHS advance appropriation as R&D facilities
construction in FY2009. Some have questioned the appropriateness of classifying
these funds as R&D facilities and equipment since the funds appear to be intended
for product acquisition rather than research, development, or facilities construction.
This advance appropriation accounts for more than half of the net increase in R&D
funding in the President’s FY2009 budget request.
Analysis of federal R&D funding is complicated by several factors, including
the Administration’s omission of Congressionally directed spending from its current
year budget request, inconsistency among agencies in the reporting of R&D, and the
apparent mis-categorization of some funding in the President’s request. As a result
of these and other factors, the R&D agency figures reported by OMB (and shown in
Table 1) may differ somewhat from those agency budget analyses that appear later
in this report.
Federal R&D Funding Perspectives
Federal R&D funding can be analyzed from a variety of perspectives that
provide unique insights.
Agency Perspective. The authorization and appropriations process views
federal R&D funding primarily from agency and program perspectives. Table 1
provides data on R&D by agency for FY2007 (actual), FY2008 (estimate), and
FY2009 (request) as reported by OMB. Under the President’s FY2009 budget
1 Funding levels included in this document are in current dollars unless otherwise noted.
Inflation diminishes the purchasing power of federal R&D funds, so an increase that does
not equal or exceed the inflation rate may reduce real purchasing power. For example, if
inflation in 2008 exceeds 2.7 %, then the President’s R&D funding request for FY2009 may
represent a decline in real purchasing power. The Consumer Price Index, a key measure of
inflation, rose 2.8% in 2007 and is on a pace to exceed 4% in 2008.
2 The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2004 (P.L. 108-90), provided
funding under Title III, Preparedness and Recovery, in the amount of $5.593 billion to
remain available through FY2013. The act restricts DHS from spending more than $3.418
billion in fiscal years 2004 through 2008. The balance, $2.175 billion, will become
available for use by DHS in FY2009.
CRS-3
request, five federal agencies would receive 92.8% of total federal R&D funding: the
Department of Defense (DOD), 54.8%; the Department of Health and Human
Services (DHHS) (primarily the National Institutes of Health), 20.1%; the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 7.3%; the Department of Energy
(DOE), 7.2%; and the National Science Foundation (NSF), 3.5%. This report
provides an analysis of the R&D budget requests for these agencies, as well as for the
Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce (DOC), Homeland Security, Interior
(DOI), and Transportation (DOT), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
In total these departments and agencies account for more than 98% of current and
requested federal R&D funding.
The Administration has requested significantly larger percentage increases for
the three agencies that are part of its American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI):
DOE’s Office of Science (up 19% above the estimated FY2008 level), the National
Science Foundation (up 14%), and DOC’s National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) (up 5%). In 2007, Congress authorized substantial R&D
increases for these agencies under the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69).3 The
President’s budget would reduce R&D funding for four agencies: the Department of
Agriculture, down $357 million (-15.5%); the Department of Veterans Affairs, down
$76 million (-7.9%); the Department of the Interior, down $59 million (-8.7%); and
the Environmental Protection Agency, down $7 million (-1.3%).
Table 1. Federal Research and Development Funding by
Agency, FY2007-FY2009
(Budget authority, dollar amount in millions)
Dollar
Percent
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Change,
Change,
Department/Agency
Actual
Estimate
Request
2008 to
2008 to
2009
2009
Agriculture
2,275
2,309
1,952
-357
-15.5
Commerce
1,080
1,113
1,157
44
4.0
Defense
78,329
80,192
80,494
302
0.4
Energy
8,522
9,739
10,558
819
8.4
Environmental Protection
Agency
606
557
550
-7
-1.3
Health and Human
Services
29,201
29,475
29,480
5
0.0
Homeland Security
1,246
1,143
3,287
2,144
187.6
Interior
604
676
617
-59
-8.7
3 For additional information, see CRS Report RL34328, America COMPETES Act:
Programs, Funding, and Selected Issues, by Deborah D. Stine.
CRS-4
NASA
9,952
10,436
10,737
301
2.9
National Science
Foundation
4,479
4,500
5,201
701
15.6
Transportation
768
823
901
78
9.5
Veterans Affairs
892
960
884
-76
-7.9
Other
1,118
1,140
1,145
5
0.4
TOTAL
139,072
143,063
146,963
3,900
2.7
Source: Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009, Office
of Management and Budget, The White House, February 2008.
Character of Work, Facilities, and Equipment Perspective. Federal
R&D funding can also be examined by the character of work (basic research, applied
research, and development) it supports, and funding provided for facilities and
acquisition of R&D major equipment (see Table 2). The President’s FY2009 request
includes $29.3 billion for basic research, up $847 million (3.0%) from FY2008;
$27.1 billion for applied research, down $1.0 billion (-3.6%); $84.0 billion for
development, up $1.6 billion (1.9%); and $6.5 billion for facilities and equipment,
up $2.5 billion (61.7%).
Table 2. Federal Research and Development Funding by
Character of Work, Facilities and Equipment, FY2007-FY2009
(Budget authority, dollar amount in millions)
Dollar
Percent
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Change,
Change,
Actual
Estimate
Request
2008 to
2008 to
2009
2009
Basic research
27,688
28,472
29,319
847
3.0
Applied research
27,130
28,112
27,087
-1,025
-3.6
Development
80,606
82,432
84,013
1,581
1.9
Facilities and
equipment
3,648
4,047
6,544
2,497
61.7
TOTAL
139,072
143,063
146,963
3,900
2.7
Source: Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009, Office
of Management and Budget, The White House, February 2008.
Combined Perspective. Combining these perspectives, federal R&D
funding can be viewed in terms of each agency’s contribution to basic research,
applied research, development, and facilities and equipment (see Table 3). The
CRS-5
federal government is the largest supporter of basic research (funding an estimated
58.8% of U.S. basic research in 2006),4 primarily because the private sector asserts
it cannot capture an adequate return on long-term fundamental research investments.
The Department of Health and Human Services (primarily DHHS’s National
Institutes of Health (NIH)) accounts for more than half of all federal funding for basic
research.
In contrast to basic research, industry is the primary funder of applied research
in the United States, accounting for an estimated 58.9% in 2006, while the federal
government accounted for an estimated 33.3%.5 Among federal agencies, DHHS is
the largest funder of applied research, accounting for nearly half of all federally
funded applied research.
Industry also provides the vast majority of funding for development, accounting
for an estimated 82.5% in 2006, while the federal government provided an estimated
16.2%.6 DOD is the primary federal agency development funder, accounting for
88.5% of total federal development funding in the FY2009 request.
Table 3. Top R&D Funding Agencies by Character of Work,
Facilities and Equipment, FY2007-FY2009
(Budget authority, dollar amount in millions)
Dollar
Percent
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Change, Change,
Actual
Estimate Request
2008 to
2008 to
2009
2009
Basic Research
-Health and Human Services
15,646
15,897
15,884
-13
0.0
-National Science Foundation
3,635
3,689
4,336
647
17.5
-Energy
3,123
3,232
3,556
324
10.0
Applied Research
-Health and Human Services
13,405
13,414
13,424
10
0
-Defense
5,103
5,058
4,245
-813
-16.1
-Energy
2,630
3,513
3,474
-39
-1.1
Development
-Defense
71,641
73,358
74,393
1,035
1.4
4 Science and Engineering Indicators 2008,Volume 2: Appendix Tables, National Science
Foundation, 2008.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
CRS-6
-NASA
5,576
5,436
5,731
295
5.1
-Energy
1,973
2,232
2,472
240
10.7
Facilities and equipment
-Homeland Security
131
147
2,250
2,102
1420.3
-NASA
1,643
1,922
2,175
253
13.2
-Energy
796
762
1,056
294
38.6
Source: Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009, Office
of Management and Budget, The White House, February 2008.
Note: Top funding agencies based on FY2009 request.
Multi-Agency Initiatives Perspective. Federal R&D funding can also be
viewed in terms of multi-agency efforts, such as the National Nanotechnology
Initiative (see “Multiagency R&D Initiatives” section), and other initiatives, such as
the Administration’s American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI).
The ACI was proposed by President Bush in February 2006 as a response to
growing concerns about America’s ability to compete in the global marketplace. The
$136 billion ACI proposal included $50 billion for additional research, science
education, and the modernization of research infrastructure from FY2007 through
FY2016. These funds were intended to double physical sciences and engineering
research in three agencies — NSF, DOE’s Office of Science, and NIST — over ten
years.7 Congress established authorization levels for FY2008-2010 that would put
funding for research at these agencies on track to double in approximately seven
years. However, FY2008 research funding provided in P.L. 110-161 for these
agencies falls below these doubling targets. Estimated FY2008 funding for ACI
research totals $10.61 billion, an increase of approximately $350 million (3.5%) over
the FY2007 ACI funding level.
In FY2009, President Bush has requested $12.21 billion in funding for ACI
research at NSF, DOE’s Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (including its core research program and facilities), an increase of
$1.6 billion (15.1%) above the estimated FY2008 level of $10.61 billion.8 The NSF
funding request for FY2009 is $6.85 billion, an increase of $821 million (13.6%)
7 The ACI proposes to double “innovation-enabling physical science and engineering
research” at the three agencies over ten years, and states that “individual agency allocations
remain to be determined.” (The American Competitiveness Initiative: Leading the World in
Innovation, Office of Science and Technology Policy/Domestic Policy Council, The White
House, February 2006.)
8 American Competitiveness Initiative Research fact sheet, FY2009 request, Office of
Science and Technology Policy, The White House, February 2008.
CRS-7
above the estimated FY2008 level of $6.03 billion.9 The FY2009 request for the
DOE Office of Science is $4.72 billion, $749 million (18.9%) more than the
estimated FY2008 level of $3.97 billion.10 FY2009 proposed funding for NIST’s
core research program and facilities totals $634 million, an increase of $33 million
(4.5%) above the estimated FY2008 level of $610 million.11
FY2009 Federal R&D Appropriations Status
As of March 2008, both the House and the Senate have passed concurrent
budget resolutions (H.Con.Res. 312 and S.Con.Res. 70, respectively). Differences
remain to be reconciled and approved by both chambers. These measures establish
broad spending ceilings to guide the work of House and Senate appropriators as they
set spending levels for FY2009. Funding for research and development is included
within these broad parameters but is not specifically identified. Section 601 of
H.Con.Res. 312, titled Sense of the House on the Innovation Agenda and the
America COMPETES Act, affirms that the budget resolution supports the efforts of
the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69) to provide increased funding for
physical sciences research and mathematics, science, and engineering education in
support of continued U.S. leadership in innovation, research, and technology.
Effect of FY2007-FY2008 Appropriations Process on R&D
For the past two years, federal R&D funding levels and execution have been
affected by mechanisms used to complete the annual appropriations process — the
year-long continuing resolution for FY2007 (P.L. 110-5) and the combining of 11
appropriations bills into the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 for FY2008 (P.L.
110-161). For example, FY2008 R&D funding for some agencies and programs is
below the level requested by the President, and originally passed by House and
Senate appropriations committees.12 The Department of Energy estimates that cuts
in its FY2008 R&D budget for its Office of Science will result in layoffs of 525
personnel at the Stanford Linear Accelerator, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory,
Argonne National Laboratory, and other laboratories and universities.13 Completion
of the appropriations process after the beginning of the fiscal year may also result in
delay, reduction, or cancellation of planned R&D, equipment acquisition, and
facilities construction, and may impede the ability of agencies to fully obligate funds
ultimately appropriated (see CRS Report RS22774, Federal Research and
9 Office of Management and Budget website. [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
fy2009/nsf.html]
10 Office of Management and Budget website. [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
fy2009/energy.html]
11 Office of Management and Budget website. [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
fy2009/commerce.html]
12 Letter from Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman to Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman,
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, February 4, 2008.
[http://energy.senate.gov/public/_files/SignedlettertoSenBingamanrequest0.pdf]
13 Ibid.
CRS-8
Development Funding: Possible Impacts of Operating Under a Continuing
Resolution, by Dana A. Shea and Daniel Morgan).
The following sections provide analyses of the President’s FY2009 R&D and
related funding requests for selected Federal agencies and multiagency R&D
initiatives. These sections will be updated periodically to include information on
appropriations actions taken by Congress.
Multiagency R&D Initiatives
The President’s FY2009 budget request provides increased funding for three
multiagency R&D initiatives. Funding for the National Nanotechnology Initiative
(NNI) is requested in the amount of $1.53 billion for FY2009, an increase of 2.4%
over the estimated FY2008 level of $1.50 billion (see CRS Report RL34401, The
National Nanotechnology Initiative: Overview, Reauthorization, and Appropriations
Issues, by John F. Sargent).14 Under the President’s FY2009 budget, the NNI would
increase its efforts in fundamental phenomena and processes by $19.2 million
(3.6%); instrument research, metrology, and standards by $21.1 million (34.9%);
environmental, health, and safety by $17.8 million (30.4%); and nanomanufacturing
by $11.9 million (23.7%). Smaller increases would support major research facilities
and instrumentation acquisition (up $6.9 million, 4.5%) and efforts in education and
societal dimensions (up $1.7 million, 4.4%). Funding would fall by $27.5 million
(-10.8%) for nanomaterials research and by $15.3 million (-4.5%) for nanoscale
devices and systems.
The President is requesting $3.57 billion in FY2009 funding for the Networking
and Information Technology R&D (NITRD) program, an increase of 5.8% above the
estimated FY2008 level of $3.37 billion. The NITRD increase is due primarily to
requested funding increases for NSF (up $159 million, 17.1%) and DOE (up $58
million, 13.3%).15, 16 For additional information, see CRS Report RL33586, The
Federal Networking and Information Technology Research and Development
Program: Funding Issues and Activities, by Patricia Moloney Figliola.
The administration has proposed $2.01 billion for the Climate Change Science
Program (CCSP), an increase of 9.6% over the estimated FY2008 level of $1.84
14 National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Funding in the
President’s FY2009 Budget, fact sheet, Office of Science and Technology Policy, The White
House, February 2008; National Nanotechnology Initiative website.
[http://www.nano.gov/html/about/funding.html]
15 Analytical Perspectives: Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009,
Office of Management and Budget, The White House, 2008.
16 The NITRD data in OMB’s Analytical Perspectives include the DOD Defense Information
Systems Agency (DISA). According to the NITRD National Coordination Office, DISA’s
contribution is not included in the FY2009 Networking and Information Technology
Research and Development: Supplement to the President’s Budget report.
CRS-9
billion.17 (See CRS Report RL33817, Climate Change: Federal Funding and Tax
Incentives, by Jane A. Leggett). Four agencies account for most of the FY2009
CCSP requested funding increase: NASA (up $126 million, 11.7%), the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (up $20 million, 8.3%), DOE (up
$18 million, 14.1%), and NSF (up $16 million, 7.8%).
Department of Defense (DOD)
Congress supports research and development in the Department of Defense
(DOD) through its Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E)
appropriation. The appropriation primarily supports the development of the nation’s
future military hardware and software and the technology base upon which those
products rely.
Nearly all of what DOD spends on RDT&E is appropriated in Title IV of the
defense appropriation bill (see Table 4). However, RDT&E funds are also requested
as part of the Defense Health Program and the Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction Program. The Defense Health Program supports the delivery of health
care to DOD personnel and their families. Program funds are requested through the
Operations and Maintenance appropriation. The program’s RDT&E funds support
Congressionally directed research in such areas as breast, prostate, and ovarian cancer
and other medical conditions. The Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction
Program supports activities to destroy the U.S. inventory of lethal chemical agents
and munitions to avoid future risks and costs associated with storage. Funds for this
program are requested through the Army Procurement appropriation. The Joint
Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund also contains additional RDT&E monies.
However, the fund does not contain an RDT&E line item as do the two programs
mentioned above. The Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Office, which now
administers the fund, tracks (but does not report) the amount of funding allocated to
RDT&E. Typically, Congress has funded all of these programs in Title VI (Other
Department of Defense Programs) of the defense appropriations bill.
More recently, RDT&E funds have also been requested and appropriated as part
of DOD’s separate funding to support what the Bush Administration terms the Global
War on Terror (GWOT). Congress has appropriated these funds in response to
emergency supplemental requests and under a separate GWOT request. GWOT-
related requests/appropriations often include funds for a number of transfer funds.
These include the Iraqi Freedom Fund (IFF), the Iraqi Security Forces Fund, the
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, and, more recently, the Mine Resistant and
Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund (MRAPVF). Congress typically makes a single
appropriation into each of these funds, and authorizes the Secretary to make transfers
to other baseline accounts, including RDT&E, at his discretion. A more detailed
breakdown of GWOT-related RDT&E funding is given in Table 5. Note that while
much of these GWOT-related appropriations are distributed to a baseline account,
they are accounted for separately.
17 Analytical Perspectives: Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009,
Office of Management and Budget, The White House, 2008.
CRS-10
For FY2009, the Bush Administration requested $79.6 billion for DOD’s
baseline Title IV RDT&E, roughly $2.5 billion more than Congress appropriated for
Title IV in FY2008. The FY2009 requests for RDT&E in the Defense Health
Program and the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction program were $194
million and $269 million, respectively. The Administration also submitted an
FY2008 Global War on Terror request (i.e., a supplemental request), which included
$2.9 billion for RDT&E. Congress only partially approved the Administration’s
FY2008 GWOT request made last year. The Administration hopes to make up the
balance of that request this year. The Administration has also suggested that a
FY2009 GWOT request may be coming later this year.
Since FY2001, funding for RDT&E in Title IV has increased from $42 billion
to $77 billion in FY2008. In constant FY2008 dollars, the increase is roughly 58%.
Historically, RDT&E funding has reached its highest levels in constant dollars,
dating back to 1948.18 Congress has appropriated more for RDT&E than has been
requested, every year, since FY1996.
RDT&E funding can be broken out in a couple of ways. Each of the military
services request and receive their own RDT&E funding. So, too, do various DOD
agencies (e.g., the Missile Defense Agency and the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency), collectively aggregated within the Defensewide account. RDT&E
funding also can be characterized by budget activity (i.e., the type of RDT&E
supported).Those budget activities designated as 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 (basic research,
applied research, and advanced development) constitute what is called DOD’s
Science and Technology Program (S&T) and represents the more research-oriented
part of the RDT&E program. Budget activities 6.4 and 6.5 focus on the development
of specific weapon systems or components (e.g., the Joint Strike Fighter or missile
defense systems), for which an operational need has been determined and an
acquisition program established. Budget activity 6.7 supports system improvements
in existing operational systems. Budget activity 6.6 provides management support,
including support for test and evaluation facilities.
S&T funding is of particular interest to Congress since these funds support the
development of new technologies and the underlying science. Assuring adequate
support for S&T activities is seen by some in the defense community as imperative
to maintaining U.S. military superiority. This was of particular concern at a time
when defense budgets and RDT&E funding were falling at the end of the Cold War.
As part of its 2001 Quadrennial Review, DOD established a goal of stabilizing its
base S&T funding (i.e., Title IV) at 3% of DOD’s overall funding. Congress has
embraced this goal. The FY2009 S&T funding request in Title IV is $11.5 billion,
about $1.3 billion less than what Congress appropriated for S&T in Title IV in
FY2008 (not counting S&T funding requested as part of the GWOT request or S&T’s
share of the general reduction made to Title IV). Furthermore, the S&T request for
18 This historical data can be found in DOD’s National Defense Budget Estimates for the
FY2008 Budget (also known as the “Green Book”). Office of the Under Secretary for
Defense (Comptroller).March 2007.pp 62-67. See [http://www.defenselink.mil/
comptroller/defbudget/fy2008/fy2008_greenbook.pdf]. Last viewed May 10, 2007.
CRS-11
Title IV is approximately 2.2% of the overall baseline DOD budget request (not
counting funds for the Global War on Terror), short of the 3% goal. The ability for
the Administration to meet its 3% goal has been strained in recent years as the overall
Defense budget continues to rise. In the FY2007 defense authorization bill (P.L.
109-364, Sec. 217), Congress reiterated its support for the 3% goal, extended it to
FY2012, and stipulated that, if the S&T budget request does not meet this goal, DOD
submit a prioritized list of S&T projects that were not funded solely due to
insufficient resources.
Within the S&T program, basic research (6.1) receives special attention,
particularly by the nation’s universities. DOD is not a large supporter of basic
research, when compared to the National Institutes of Health or the National Science
Foundation. However, 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 (such as electrical engineering and material science). The FY2009
request for basic research ($1.7 billion) is roughly $65 million more than what
Congress appropriated for Title IV basic research in FY2008. (CRS Contact: John
Moteff.)
Table 4. Department of Defense RDT&E
($ in millions )
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Enacted d
Enacted d
Request
Title IV - By Account
Army
11,055 12,127 10,524
Navy
18,674 17,919 19,337
Air Force
24,516
26,255
28,067
Defense Agencies
21,291
20,791
21,499
Dir. Test & Eval
185
180
189
Adjustments
-286 -367
g
improved economic assumptions
Total Title IV - By Account a
75,435 76,905 79,616
Title IV - By Budget Activity
6.1 Basic Research
1,552
1,634
1,699
6.2 Applied Research
5,282
5,096
4,245
6.3 Advanced Development
6,494
6,039
5,532
6.4 Advanced Component Development and
15,785
Prototypes
15,745 15,774
6.5 Systems Dev. and Demo
19,190
18,321
19,537
6.6 Management Support b
4,197 4,274 4,369
6.7 Op. Systems Dev c
23,221 26,163 28,461
Adjustments
improved economic assumptions
-286
-367
g
Total Title IV - by Budget Activity a
75,435
76,905 79,617
CRS-12
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Enacted d
Enacted d
Request
Tanker Replacement Transfer Fund
150
Title VI - Other Defense Programs
Defense Health Program
348 e 536 194
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction
231
313
269
Title IX
Additional Appropriations - Global War
On Terror (GWOT)
408
GWOT FY2007 Emergency Supplemental
(P.L. 110-28)
1,431 f
Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-92) and
Consolidated Appropriations Act 2008
(P.L. 110-161)
926 g
Grand Total
77,853
78,830
80,080
Sources: FY2007 and FY2008 figures were taken mainly from the defense appropriations act
conference reports (H.Rept. 109-676 and H.Rept. 110-434, respectively). The FY2007 Defense
Health Program figure was taken from the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution 2007 (P.L.
110-5, Chpt. 2. Sec. 20203). The GWOT FY2007 Emergency Supplemental figure was taken from
the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations
Act 2007 (P.L. 110-28, Chpts. 1 and 3). The figure for the Continuing Resolution (P.L. 110-92) and
the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2008 (P.L. 110-161) was taken from the Office of Secretary of
Defense, FY2008 Global War on Terror Pending Request, Exhibits for FY2008, Feb. 2008. Title IV
figures for the FY2009 request were taken from RDT&E Programs (R-1) Exhibits, Department of
Defense Budget FY2009. The FY2009 RDT&E request for the Defense Health Program was taken
from the Operations and Maintenance Exhibit (O-1), Department of Defense Budget FY2009. The
FY2009 RDT&E request for the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program was taken from
the Procurement Exhibit (P-1), Department of Defense Budget FY2009.
a. Total Budget Authority for Account and Budget Activity may not agree due to rounding.
b. Includes funds for Developmental and Operational Test and Evaluation.
c. Includes funding for classified programs.
d. Does not include subsequent rescissions or transfers, unless noted.
e. Funding for the Defense Health Program in FY2007 was provided in P.L. 110-5 (H.J.Res. 20).
f. This includes $1,098 million for GWOT-related baseline RDT&E and $332 million in additional
funding for RDT&E in the Defense Health Program. See Table 5, below.
g. Sec. 8104 of the FY2008 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-116) required a general reduction
to account for improved economic assumptions. RDT&E’s designated share was $367 million.
Sec. 8097 of this act also required a general reduction of $507 million to be taken
proportionately from Operations and Maintenance (Title II), Procurement (Title III), and
RDT&E (Title IV) to account for contractor efficiencies. The RDT&E’s share of this reduction
is not counted in this table.
h. Congress addressed some of the Administration’s FY2008 GWOT request in one of the continuing
resolutions (P.L. 110-92) which supported government operations in early FY2008 and in the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (P.L.110-161). The continuing resolution provided
additional funds for the MRAPVF. The Consolidated Appropriations Act provided funds to the
IFF, some of which were transferred to RDT&E.
CRS-13
Table 5. Department of Defense RDT&E Associated with the
Global War on Terror Funding
($ in millions )
FY2007
FY2007
Continuing
FY2008
Possible
Defense
GWOT
Resolution
GWOT
FY2009
Apprns.
Supple-
(P.L.110-92)
Pending
GWOT
Title IX
mental
and
(P.L.
(P.L.
Consolidated
109-289)
110-28)
Apprns. 2008
(P.L. 110-161)
Enacted
Enacted
Enacted
Request
Request
GWOT-Related Title IV
By Account
Army
100
20
163
Navy
231
299
149
611
Air Force
37
187
84
1,487
Defense Agencies
140
513
673
684
Dir. Test & Eval
Total Budget Auth.a
408
1,098
926
2,945
By Budget Activity
6.1 Basic Research
6.2 Applied Research
20
6
6.3 Advanced
Development
25
6.4 Advanced Component
Development and
Prototypes
17
228
6.5 Systems Dev. and
Demo
107
514
6.6 Management Supportb
2
200
54
6.7 Op. Systems Dev
973
707
2,121
Total Budget Auth.a
408
1,099
927
2,948
GWOT-Related Other Defense Programs
Defense Health Program
332
Grand Total
408
1,431
927
Sources: The FY2007 Title IX figure is taken from the FY2007 defense appropriations act’s
conference report (H.Rept. 109-676). The FY2007 GWOT Emergency Supplemental figure was
taken from the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability
Appropriations Act 2007 (P.L. 110-28, Chpts. 1 and 3). The figures for the Continuing Resolution
(P.L. 110-92) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2008 (P.L. 110-161) and the FY2008 GWOT
Pending Request were taken from the Office of Secretary of Defense, FY2008 Global War on Terror
Pending Request, Exhibits for FY2008, Feb. 2008.
a. Account vs. Budget Activity Total Obligational Authority numbers may not agree due to rounding.
b. Includes funds for Developmental and Operational Test and Evaluation.
CRS-14
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has requested $1.449 billion for
R&D and related programs in FY2009, an 8% increase from FY2008. This total
includes $869 million for the Directorate of Science and Technology (S&T), $564
million for the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), and $16 million for
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) in the U.S. Coast Guard
(see Table 6).
The Directorate of Science and Technology (S&T) is the primary DHS R&D
organization. Headed by the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, the
directorate performs R&D in several laboratories of its own and funds R&D
performed by the national laboratories, industry, universities, and other government
agencies. The FY2009 request for the S&T Directorate is 5% above the FY2008
appropriation. A proposed increase of $18 million for the Explosives program would
fund R&D on countering improvised explosive devices (IEDs), with an emphasis on
basic research to complement shorter-term R&D being conducted by other agencies.
A proposed increase of $43 million for the Laboratory Facilities program includes
$29 million for startup costs at the National Biodefense Analysis and
Countermeasures Center (NBACC) as well as $14 million for laboratory employee
salaries previously budgeted in the Management and Administration account. A
proposed $27 million reduction in the Infrastructure and Geophysical program is
largely the result of reducing funding for local and regional initiatives previously
established or funded at congressional direction.
Among the issues facing Congress are the S&T Directorate’s priorities and how
they are set, its relationships with other federal R&D organizations, its budgeting and
financial management, and the allocation of its R&D resources to national
laboratories, industry, and universities. The directorate announced five new
university centers of excellence in February 2008. Some existing centers are
expected to be terminated or merged over the next few years to align with the
directorate’s division structure. For more information, see CRS Report RL34356,
The DHS Directorate of Science and Technology: Key Issues for Congress.
The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) is the primary DHS
organization for combating the threat of nuclear attack. It is responsible for all DHS
nuclear detection research, development, testing, evaluation, acquisition, and
operational support. The FY2009 request for DNDO is a 16% increase from
FY2008. Most of the growth is in the Systems Acquisition account, where an
increase of $68 million for procurement of Advanced Spectroscopic Portals (ASPs)
is partly offset by a decrease of $10 million for the Securing the Cities initiative in
the New York City area.
Congressional attention has focused on the testing and analysis DNDO
conducted to support its decision to purchase and deploy ASPs, a type of next-
generation radiation portal monitor.19 The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008
19 See, for example, Government Accountability Office, Combating Nuclear Smuggling:
(continued...)
CRS-15
prohibits full-scale procurement of ASPs until the Secretary of Homeland Security
has certified their performance.20 DHS states that it expects the Secretary to make
that certification in late FY2008. The relative roles of DNDO and the S&T
Directorate in research, development, testing, and evaluation also remain an issue of
congressional interest. (CRS Contact: Daniel Morgan.)
Table 6. Department of Homeland Security
R&D and Related Programs
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Actual
Enacted
Request
Directorate of Science and Technology a
1,024
830
869
Management and Administration b
135
139
132
R&D, Acquisition, and Operations a
889
692
737
Border and Maritime
49
25
35
Chemical and Biological
348
208
200
Command, Control, and Interoperability
75
57
62
Explosives
122
78
96
Human Factors
7
14
12
Infrastructure and Geophysical
92
64
38
Innovation
22
33
45
Laboratory Facilities b
72
104
147
Test and Evaluation, Standards
25
29
25
Transition c
30
25
32
Homeland Security Institute c
—
5
—
University Programs
48
49
44
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
398
485
564
Management and Administration
30
32
39
Research, Development, and Operations
255
324
334
Systems Engineering and Architecture
30
22
25
Systems Development
97
118
108
Transformational Research and Development
57
96
113
Assessments
29
38
32
19 (...continued)
Additional Actions Needed to Ensure Adequate Testing of Next Generation Radiation
Detection Equipment, GAO-07-1247T, testimony before the House Committee on Energy
and Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, September 18, 2007.
20 P.L. 110-161, Division E, Title IV, under the heading “Systems Acquisition.”
CRS-16
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Actual
Enacted
Request
Operations Support
32
34
38
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center
10
15
18
Systems Acquisition
114
130
191
Radiation Portal Monitoring Program
107
90
158
Securing the Cities
<1
30
20
Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems
6
10
13
U.S. Coast Guard RDT&E
18
25
16
TOTAL a
1,440
1,340
1,449
Source: DHS FY2009 congressional budget justification.
Notes: Totals may not add because of rounding.
a. The FY2007 total does not include a rescission of $125 million in prior-year funds enacted by the
FY2007 appropriations act (P.L. 109-90).
b. Funding for the salaries of DHS laboratory employees ($14 million in FY2008) is transferred from
Management and Administration to Laboratory Facilities in the FY2009 request.
c. Congress appropriated $5 million for the Homeland Security Institute as a separate line item in
FY2008. The FY2009 budget justification incorporates this amount into Transition. The
FY2009 request for Transition includes $5 million for the Homeland Security Institute.
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
The President has requested a relatively flat budget of $29.165 billion at the
program level for NIH for FY2009 (see Table 7). The FY2008 level, derived from
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161), totaled $29.171 billion.
The FY2009 request represents a decrease of $5 million (-0.02%) below the FY2008
program level. The FY2008 appropriation was $133 million (0.5%) more than the
FY2007 program level of $29.038 billion.
NIH’s budget primarily comes from the Departments of Labor, Health and
Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies (Labor/HHS) appropriations
bill and the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
(Interior/Environment) appropriations bill. Those two bills provide NIH’s
discretionary budget authority. In addition, NIH receives $150 million annually that
was pre-appropriated in separate funding for diabetes research, and $8.2 million from
an “evaluation transfer” within the Public Health Service (PHS). Conversely, NIH
loses part of its appropriation to a transfer to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria. For several years, about $100 million of the annual NIH
appropriation was transferred to the Global Fund. For FY2008, the amount was
increased to $300 million in the President’s request, and the final amount of the
transfer from the NIH appropriation was $295 million. The FY2009 budget again
proposes a transfer of $300 million to the Global Fund. In Table 7, the total funding
available for NIH activities, taking account of add-ons and transfers, is called the
CRS-17
program level. Note, however, that the “NIH program level” cited in the
Administration’s budget documents does not reflect the Global Fund transfer.
Congress provided NIH with $27.1 billion in FY2003, completing a five year
doubling of its budget. Since then, the growth rate of NIH funding has fallen. In
FY2008, NIH funding was increased by 0.5% above FY2007. The President
requested no increase for NIH for FY2009, while the advocates in the research
community recommended a 6.5% increase. The projected increase in the inflation
index is 3.5% for both FY2008 and FY2009. In inflation-adjusted terms, the FY2008
funding level represents an estimated 11% decrease from FY2003, while the FY2009
request level would be 14% below FY2003.
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, particularly in
areas of research that involve multiple institutes. The individual institutes and centers
(ICs), each having a focus on particular diseases, areas of human 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 7,
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.)
Within the FY2009 request, most of the institutes and centers would be
approximately level-funded from their FY2008 amounts, receiving increases of 0.1%
or 0.2%. Only the National Center for Research Resources (1.0%) and the National
Library of Medicine (0.8%) would receive increases greater than 0.5%. The two
biggest changes in the request are a 5.6% increase in the Buildings and Facilities
account, and a 4.7% drop in funding for the Office of the Director. Many of the
laboratories, animal facilities, and office buildings on the NIH campus are aging, and
are in need of upgrading to stay compliant with health and safety guidelines and to
provide the proper infrastructure for the Intramural Research program. The budget
requests $126 million for Buildings and Facilities, an increase of $7 million.
The net $52 million drop in the OD account, from $1,109 million in FY2008 to
$1,057 million in the request, represents the proposed cancellation of a study
combined with increases for several other OD activities. The National Children’s
Study was funded at $111 million in FY2008. It is a long-term (25+ year), multi-
agency environmental health study that was mandated by the Children’s Health Act
of 2000 (P.L. 106-310). The overall projected cost for the whole study is about $2.7
billion. Starting with the FY2007 request, when the study moved from the planning
phase to the more costly implementation phase, the Administration has proposed
each year to end its funding. Congress has continued to support the study.
Proposed increases within the OD account total $59 million, including a $38
million increase (7.7%) for the NIH Roadmap initiatives funded through the
Common Fund. The NIH Roadmap for Medical Research is a set of trans-NIH
research activities designed to support high-risk/high-impact research in emerging
areas of science or public health priorities. For FY2009, planned funding for the
CRS-18
Roadmap/Common Fund totals $534 million, up from $496 million in FY2008. The
other major increase requested for OD is an additional $19 million (19.9%) for
research on medical countermeasures against nuclear, radiological, and chemical
threats, increasing that program to $113 million from $94 million in FY2008. That
is the only significant increase for NIH’s biodefense portfolio, which totals $1,748
million in the President’s FY2009 request (up 1.2%).
The NIH’s two major concerns in the face of tight budgets are maintaining
support of investigator-initiated research through research project grants (RPGs), and
continuing to nourish the pipeline of new investigators. Total funding for RPGs, at
$15.5 billion, represents about 53% of NIH’s budget. The FY2009 request would
support an estimated 38,257 awards, about the same as in FY2008, but with $19
million less in funding. Within that total, 9,757 would be competing RPGs, 14 fewer
than in FY2008. No inflationary increases are proposed for noncompeting
(continuation) RPGs, and the average annual cost of competing RPGs would remain
at the FY2008 level, about $361,000. The expected “success rate” of applications
receiving funding would decline to about 18% from the estimated rate of 19% for
FY2008. Estimated success rates for the various ICs would range from 8% to 26%.
Several efforts are focused on supporting new investigators to encourage young
scientists to undertake careers in research and to help them speed their transition
from training to independent research. The Pathway to Independence program would
support approximately 500 awardees, including 170 new awards, for a total of $71
million. Regular training mechanisms such as the National Research Service Awards
are proposed for an increase of $5 million (0.6%) to $786 million, including stipend
increases of 1% for both pre- and post-doctoral fellows. Clinical research training,
including the Clinical and Translational Science Awards, would be funded at a total
of $475 million. The request would support about 25 New Innovator Awards for a
total of $56 million in the Common Fund. The NIH Director’s Bridge Award is a
program that can give short-term funding to established, meritorious investigators
who have just missed the funding cutoff for a renewal application and who have little
other support, giving them time to resubmit without disrupting the operation of their
laboratory. The request includes $91 million for 244 awards, an increase of $1.6
million.
Changes proposed in the request for other funding mechanisms within the NIH
budget include increased support for research centers, up $20 million to $2,963
million; a $33 million increase to $3,275 million for R&D contracts, including $5
million additional for the Global HIV/AIDS Fund; $50 million more for the NIH
intramural research program, for a total of $3,119 million; an increase of $20 million
to a total of $1,361 million for research management and support; and a decrease of
$23 million for other research grants totaling $1,786 million.
NIH and three of the other Public Health Service agencies within HHS are
subject to a budget “tap” called the PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside (Section 241
of the PHS Act), which has the effect of redistributing appropriated funds among
PHS and other HHS agencies. The FY2008 appropriation kept the tap at 2.4%, the
same as in FY2007. NIH, with the largest budget among the PHS agencies, becomes
the largest “donor” of program evaluation funds, and is a relatively minor recipient.
CRS-19
By convention, budget tables such as Table 7 do not subtract the amount of the
evaluation tap, or of other taps within HHS, from the agencies’ appropriations.
At the end of the 109th Congress, the House and Senate agreed on the first NIH
reauthorization statute enacted since 1993, the NIH Reform Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-
482). The law made managerial and organizational changes in NIH, focusing on
enhancing the authority and tools for the NIH Director to do strategic planning,
especially to facilitate and fund cross-institute research initiatives. The measure
authorized, for the first time, overall funding levels for NIH, although not for the
individual ICs, and established a “common fund” for trans-NIH research. For further
information on NIH, see CRS Report RL33695, The National Institutes of Health:
Organization, Funding, and Congressional Issues, by Pamela W. Smith. (CRS
Contact: Pamela Smith.)
Table 7. National Institutes of Health
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Institutes and Centers (ICs)
actuala
enactedb
request
Cancer (NCI)
4,795.5
4,805.1
4,809.8
Heart/Lung/Blood (NHLBI)
2,919.2
2,922.1
2,924.9
Dental/Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
389.8
390.2
390.5
Diabetes/Digestive/Kidney (NIDDK)
1,706.0
1,706.7
1,708.5
Neurological Disorders/Stroke (NINDS)
1,534.9
1,543.9
1,545.4
Allergy/Infectious Diseases (NIAID)c,d
4,366.4
4,560.7
4,568.8
General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
1,935.6
1,935.8
1,937.7
Child Health/Human Development (NICHD)
1,254.1
1,254.7
1,255.9
Eye (NEI)
666.7
667.1
667.8
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
641.8
642.3
642.9
Aging (NIA)
1,046.5
1,047.3
1,048.3
Arthritis/Musculoskeletal/Skin (NIAMS)
508.1
508.6
509.1
Deafness/Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
393.5
394.1
395.0
Nursing Research (NINR)
137.3
137.5
137.6
Alcohol Abuse/Alcoholism (NIAAA)
436.1
436.3
436.7
Drug Abuse (NIDA)
1,000.0
1,000.7
1,001.7
Mental Health (NIMH)e
1,403.6
1,405.5
1,406.8
Human Genome Research (NHGRI)
486.4
486.8
487.9
Biomedical Imaging/Bioengineering (NIBIB)
298.4
298.6
300.3
Research Resources (NCRR)
1,143.8
1,149.4
1,160.5
Complementary/Alternative Med (NCCAM)
121.4
121.6
121.7
Minority Health/Health Disparities (NCMHD)
199.4
199.6
199.8
Fogarty International Center (FIC)
66.4
66.6
66.6
National Library of Medicine (NLM)
319.8
320.5
323.0
Office of Director (OD)d
1,047.5
1,109.1
1,056.8
Common Fund (non-add)
(483.0)
(495.6)
(533.9)
CRS-20
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Institutes and Centers (ICs)
actuala
enactedb
request
Buildings & Facilities (B&F)
81.1
119.0
125.6
Subtotal, Labor/HHS Appropriation
28,899.3
29,229.5
29,229.5
Superfund (Interior approp to NIEHS)f
79.1
77.5
77.5
Total, NIH discretionary budget authority
28,978.5
29,307.1
29,307.1
Pre-appropriated Type 1 diabetes fundsg
150.0
150.0
150.0
PHS Evaluation Tap fundingh
8.2
8.2
8.2
Global Fund transfer (AIDS/TB/Malaria)c
-99.0
-294.8
-300.0
Total, NIH program level
29,037.7
29,170.5
29,165.3
Source: Adapted by CRS from NIH, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, Fiscal
Year 2009, Tabular Data, p. TD-1, at [http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/UI/2008/tabular%20data.pdf].
Details may not add to totals due to rounding.
a. FY2007 reflects transfer of $99.0 million from NIH to Office of the Secretary, per P.L. 110-28 (see
note d). FY2007 also reflects comparative transfers to HHS ($0.542m) and among NIH ICs.
b. The FY2008 program level is an increase of $132.8 million (0.5%) over FY2007. FY2008 includes
comparative IC transfers from NHLBI to NIDDK ($0.816 million) and from NLM to NIDCR
($0.455 million).
c. NIAID totals include funds for transfer to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria.
d. For FY2007, the emergency supplemental appropriations act (P.L. 110-28) transferred funding for
the Advanced Development of Medical Countermeasures to Office of the Secretary ($49.5m
each from NIAID and OD).
e. FY2008 NIMH has $0.983m from Office of the Secretary to administer Interagency Autism
Coordinating Committee.
f. Separate account in the Interior/Environment appropriation for NIEHS research activities related
to Superfund.
g. Funds available to NIDDK for diabetes research under PHS Act § 330B (authorized by P.L. 106-
554, P.L. 107-360, and P.L. 110-173).
h. Additional funds for NLM from PHS Evaluation Set-Aside (§ 241 of PHS Act).
Department of Energy (DOE)
The Department of Energy (DOE) has requested $10.535 billion for R&D in
FY2009, including activities in three major categories: science, national security, and
energy (see Table 8). This request is 6% above the FY2008 appropriation.
The request for the DOE Office of Science is $4.722 billion, a 19% increase
from FY2008. This unusually large increase reflects the American Competitiveness
Initiative (ACI), which President Bush announced in the 2006 state of the union
address. Over 10 years, the ACI would double R&D funding for the Office of
Science and two other agencies.21 Congress set even faster growth targets in the
America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69), establishing authorization levels that would
double R&D funding for these agencies in seven years. The percentage increase in
the President’s FY2009 request for the Office of Science is higher than what would
21 The February 2006 White House document, American Competitiveness Initiative: Leading
the World in Innovation, states that “ACI doubles total research fund; individual agency
allocations remain to be determined.” One or more of the ACI agencies may receive more
or less than the amount required to double their FY2006 R&D level.
CRS-21
be required on an annual basis to reach the ACI doubling target. This was also the
case in FY2007 and FY2008, but although the House and Senate bills for those years
would have provided increases even relative to the request, the final appropriations
were lower than the ACI amount.
Within the Office of Science, the request for basic energy sciences includes
increases of $153 million for a new program of Energy Frontier Research Centers,
$66 million for construction of the National Synchrotron Light Source II, and $73
million to increase operating time at existing facilities. The requested 17% increase
for high energy physics would go mostly to programs cut in the final FY2008
appropriation that had been funded in the House and Senate bills for that year. The
requested 72% increase for fusion energy sciences would fund the U.S. contribution
to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), which was
eliminated in the final FY2008 appropriation, again despite support in the House and
Senate bills for that year. In December 2007, DOE announced new estimates of the
cost and schedule for ITER: between $1.45 and $2.2 billion (previously $1.122
billion) with a completion date between FY2014 and FY2017 (previously FY2014).
The requested funding for DOE national security R&D is $3.132 billion, a 2%
decrease. Increases would include $53 million for the naval reactors program, mostly
to support processing and storage of spent nuclear fuel, and $10 million for the
reliable replacement warhead program, which Congress zeroed in the FY2008
appropriation. The major decrease would be $79 million for proliferation detection
R&D, a program that Congress increased in FY2008.
The request for DOE energy R&D is $2.681 billion, down 2% from FY2008.
Within this total, R&D on nuclear energy and coal would increase, while hydrogen
R&D would decrease and gas and oil technology programs would be terminated (as
also proposed, unsuccessfully, in other recent years). Most of the requested 17%
decrease for energy efficiency and renewable energy results from the omission of
$186 million in FY2008 congressionally directed projects. The requested 44%
increase for nuclear energy R&D would be mostly for the Advanced Fuel Cycle
Initiative. (CRS Contact: Daniel Morgan.)
Table 8. Department of Energy R&D
($ in millions)
FY2009
FY2007
FY2008
Request
Science
$3,837
$3,973
$4,722
Basic Energy Sciences
1,222
1,270
1,568
High Energy Physics
732
689
805
Biological and Environmental Research
480
544
569
Nuclear Physics
412
433
510
Fusion Energy Sciences
312
287
493
Advanced Scientific Computing Research
276
351
369
Other
403
399
408
National Security
3,222
3,199
3,132
Weapons Activitiesa
2,154
2,016
1,996
CRS-22
FY2009
FY2007
FY2008
Request
Naval Reactors
782
775
828
Nonproliferation and Verification R&D
265
387
275
Defense Environmental Cleanup TD&D
21
21
32
Energy
2,153
2,730
2,681
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energyb
1,176
1,440
1,197
Fossil Energy R&D
581
743
754
Nuclear Energy R&Dc
300
438
630
Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability R&D
97
110
100
Total
9,212
9,903
10,535
Source: DOE FY2009 congressional budget justification.
a. Includes Stockpile Services R&D Support, Stockpile Services R&D Certification and Safety,
Reliable Replacement Warhead, Science Campaigns, Engineering Campaigns except Enhanced
Surety and Enhanced Surveillance, 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. Excludes Weatherization and Intergovernmental Activities.
c. Includes Nuclear Power 2010, Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative, Nuclear Hydrogen
Initiative, and Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI). Note that AFCI funding appears in the
Fuel Cycle Research and Facilities line item in FY2008, but in the Research and Development
line item in FY2007 and FY2009.
National Science Foundation (NSF)
The FY2009 request for the National Science Foundation (NSF) is $6.854
billion, a 13.6% increase ($822.1 million) over the FY2008 estimate of $6.032 billion
(see Table 9). President Bush has proposed doubling the NSF budget over 10 years,
from FY2007 to FY2016, as part of his American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI).
The FY2009 request represents another installment toward that doubling effort. In
August 2008, Congress passed the America COMPETES Act which authorizes
funding for NSF for FY2008 through FY2010 at a pace that would more than double
the agency’s funding in seven years. NSF has identified several strategies in the
FY2009 budget request: to maintain a portfolio with “powerful momentum” across
all disciplines; to build a world-class science and engineering workforce; to perform
effectively with the highest standards of accountability; and to support potentially
transformative research. The NSF Director describes transformative research as “a
range of endeavors, which promise extraordinary outcomes; such as, revolutionizing
entire disciplines, creating entirely new fields, or disrupting accepted theories and
perspective.”22 Several reports have recommended that funds be allocated
22 Bement, Jr., Arden L., Director, National Science Foundation, “Transformative Research:
The Artistry and Alchemy of the 21st Century,” remarks, Texas Academy of Medicine,
Engineering and Science Fourth Annual Conference, Austin, Texas, January 4, 2007.
[http://www.nsf.gov/news/speeches/bement/07/alb070104_texas.jsp]
(continued...)
CRS-23
specifically for this type of research. NSF contends that in the global environment
of science and engineering, support for transformative, high-risk, high-reward
research is critical to U.S. competitiveness. These strategies parallel some of the
goals contained in the President’s ACI, and are designed to promote research that
will drive innovation and support the design and development of world-class
facilities, instrumentation, and infrastructure.
Included in the FY2009 request is $5.594 billion for Research and Related
Activities (R&RA), a 16.0% increase ($772.5 million) above the FY2008 estimate
of $4.822 billion. R&RA funds research projects, research facilities, and education
and training activities.
The scientific and academic communities have voiced concerns about the
imbalance between support for the life sciences and the physical sciences. Research
is multidisciplinary and transformational in nature, and very often, discoveries in the
physical sciences lead to advances in other disciplines. The America COMPETES
ACT authorizes increased federal research support in the physical sciences,
mathematics, and engineering. The FY2009 request provides a 20.2% increase for
the Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) directorate. The MPS portfolio
supports investments in fundamental research, facilities, and instruments, and
provides approximately 44.0% of the federal funding for basic research in
mathematics and physical sciences conducted at colleges and universities. R&RA
includes Integrative Activities (IA), a cross-disciplinary research and education
program, and is a source of funding for the acquisition and development of research
instrumentation at institutions. The FY2009 request provides $276.0 million for IA.
The IA also funds Partnerships for Innovation, disaster research teams, and the
Science and Technology Policy Institute. In FY2008, support for the Experimental
Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) was transferred from the
Education and Human Resources Directorate (EHR) to IA. NSF’s FY2009 request
for EPSCoR is $113.5 million, which is a part of the total IA funding request. The
FY2009 request would support a portfolio of three complementary strategies —
research infrastructure, co-funding, and outreach — for the 27 EPSCoR jurisdictions.
Approximately 67.0% of the funding for EPSCoR would be used for a combination
of new awards and research infrastructure improvement grants. The balance of
funding would support co-funding (31.7%) and outreach activities (1.7%).
The 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. The Administration has requested $47.4 million for
the Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE). The OISE manages
NSF’s offices in Beijing, Paris, and Tokyo that report on and analyze in-country and
regional science and technology policies and developments. The OISE serves as a
liaison with research institutes and foreign agencies, and facilitates coordination and
implementation of NSF research and education efforts.
22 (...continued)
CRS-24
The Office of Polar Programs (OPP) is funded in the R&RA. The FY2009
request for addressing the challenges in polar research is $491.0 million. NSF
continues in its leadership role in planning U.S. participation in observance of the
International Polar Year, 2007-2009.23 The NSF also serves in a leadership capacity
for several international research partnerships in the Arctic and Antarctic. Increases
in OPP in FY2009 are directed at research programs for arctic and antarctic sciences
— glacial and sea ice, terrestrial and marine ecosystems, the ocean and the
atmosphere, and biology of life in the cold and dark. In FY2006, responsibility for
funding the operational costs of three icebreakers that support scientific research in
the polar regions was transferred from the U.S. Coast Guard to the NSF. NSF is
responsible for the operation, maintenance, and staffing of the vessels. Beginning in
FY2009, one of the icebreakers is to be in drydock. To meet the need for back-up
icebreaking services, the FY2009 request includes an additional $9.0 million for
contracting of other vessels.
NSF supports several interagency R&D priorities in the FY2009 request. It is
a lead agency in the U.S. nanotechnology research effort, accounting for $396.8
million of the National Nanotechnology Initiative’s $1.53 billion FY2009 request.
Funding would support research in emerging areas of nanoscale science and
technology such as new drug delivery systems, advanced materials, more powerful
computer chips. Support would be directed also at research and education in the
environmental, health, and safety impacts of nanotechnology. NSF’s other
interagency priorities include funding for the Climate Change Science Program
($220.6 million), Homeland Security ($379.2 million), Networking and Information
Technology R&D ($1,090.3 million), and Climate Change Technology Program
($23.5 million).
The NSF supports a variety of individual centers and center programs. The
FY2009 request provides $76.0 million for Science and Technology Centers, $53.6
million for Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers, $53.6 million for
Engineering Research Centers, $44.6 million for Nanoscale Science and Engineering
Centers, $15.0 million for Science of Learning Centers, $20.0 million for Centers for
Chemical Innovation, and $18.4 million for Centers for Analysis and Synthesis.
The FY2009 request for the EHR Directorate is $790.4 million, $64.8 million
(8.9%) above the FY2008 estimate. The EHR portfolio is focused on, among other
things, increasing the technological literacy of all citizens; preparing the next
generation of science, engineering, and mathematics professionals; and closing the
achievement gap of underrepresented groups in all scientific fields. Support at the
various educational levels in the FY2009 request is as follows: research on learning
in formal and informal settings (including precollege), $226.5 million;
undergraduate, $219.8 million; and graduate, $190.7 million.
Priorities at the precollege level include research and evaluation on education
in science and engineering ($42.0 million), informal science education ($66.0
million), and Discovery Research K-12 ($108.5 million). Discovery Research is
23 International Polar Year runs from March 2007 through March 2009. Sponsors say that
a two-year period was selected to provide equal coverage of both the Arctic and Antarctic.
CRS-25
structured to combine the strengths of three existing programs and encourage
innovative thinking in K-12 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
education.
According to NSF, programs at the undergraduate level are designed to “create
leverage for institutional change.” Priorities at the undergraduate level include the
Robert Noyce Scholarship Program ($11.6 million); Course, Curriculum, and
Laboratory Improvement ($39.2 million); STEM Talent Expansion Program ($29.7
million); Advanced Technological Education ($51.6 million); and Scholarship for
Service ($15.0 million). The Math and Science Partnership Program (MSP), an
interagency program, is proposed at $51.0 million in the FY2009 request. The MSP
in NSF coordinates activities with the Department of Education and its state-funded
MSP sites. At the graduate level, NSF’s priorities are Integrative Graduate Education
and Research Traineeship ($25.0 million), Graduate Research Fellowships ($116.7
million), and the Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Education ($49.0 million).
Additional priorities in the EHR would support a portfolio of programs directed
at strengthening and expanding the participation of underrepresented groups and
diverse institutions in the scientific and engineering enterprise. Among these targeted
programs in the FY2009 request are the Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Undergraduate Program ($31.0 million), Tribal Colleges and Universities Program
($13.4 million), Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation ($42.5 million),
and Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology ($30.5 million).
Improving the success rate of grant applicants has been a long-term priority for
NSF. The funding rate (the number of grants awarded as a share of total grant
applications) declined from 30% in FY2000 to an estimated 21% in FY2008. NSF
anticipates increasing the funding rate to 23.0% in FY2009 by supporting an
additional 1,370 research grants.
The Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) account
is funded at $147.5 million in the FY2009 request, a decrease of 33.2% from the
FY2008 estimate. The MREFC supports the acquisition and construction of major
research facilities and equipment that extend the boundaries of science, engineering,
and technology. According to NSF, it is the primary federal agency providing
support for “forefront instrumentation and facilities for the academic research and
education communities.” NSF’s first priority for funding is for ongoing projects.
Second priority is given to projects that have been approved by the National Science
Board for new starts. To qualify for support, NSF required MREFC projects to have
“the potential to shift the paradigm in scientific understanding and/or infrastructure
technology.” The FY2009 request is indicative of NSF’s tighter standards and
requirements for receiving funding in this account. Three projects that appeared in
the FY2008 request (Alaskan Regional Research Vessel, Ocean Observatories
Initiative, and the National Ecological Observatory Network) have to undergo a final
design review and a risk management plan to meet NSF’s policy of not allowing cost
overruns on major facilities projects. These projects are still supported by NSF, and
will be considered for inclusion in the budget cycle following submission of their
revised baseline budgets and contingencies. The FY2009 request supports three
ongoing projects: Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory
($51.4 million), Atacama Large Millimeter Array ($82.3 million), and the IceCube
CRS-26
Neutrino Observatory ($11.3 million). The request also provides $2.5 million to
support design activities for a new start, the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope.
(CRS Contact: Christine M. Matthews.)
Table 9. National Science Foundation
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Actual
Estimate
Request
Research & Related Activities
Biological Sciences
$608.5
$612.0
$675.1
Computer & Inform. Sci. & Eng.
526.7
534.5
638.8
Engineering
630.0
636.9
759.3
Geosciences
745.9
752.7
848.7
Math and Physical Sciences
1,150.7
1,167.3
1,402.7
Social, Behav., & Econ. Sciences
214.5
215.1
233.5
Office of Cyberinfrastructure
182.4
185.3
220.1
Office of International Sci. & Eng.
40.4
41.3
47.4
U.S. Polar Programs
438.4
442.5
491.0
Integrative Activities a
219.5
232.3
276.0
U.S. Arctic Research Commission
1.5
1.5
1.5
Subtotal Res. & Rel. Act
4,758.4
4,821.5
5,594.0
Ed. & Hum. Resr.
695.7
725.6
790.4
Major Res. Equip. & Facil. Constr.
166.2
220.7
147.5
Agency Operations & Award Management.
248.5
281.8
305.1
National Science Board
3.7
4.0
4.0
Office of Inspector General
11.92
11.4
13.1
Rescission required under P.L. 110-161
—
-33.0
—
Total NSF March 20, 2008 b
5,884.4
6,032.0
6,854.1
a. Beginning in the FY2008 request, EPSCoR was transferred from the EHR Directorate to IA.
b. The totals do not include carry overs or retirement accruals. Totals may not add due to rounding.
Department of Commerce (DOC)
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a laboratory of
the Department of Commerce with a mandate to increase the competitiveness of U.S.
companies through appropriate support for industrial development of precompetitive,
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
CRS-27
underpin U.S. commerce, technological progress, improved product reliability,
manufacturing processes, and public safety.
For FY2009, the Administration’s budget request would provide NIST with
$638.0 million, 15.6% below the current fiscal year due primarily to the absence of
funding for the Technology Innovation Program (TIP) and a significant reduction in
support for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program. Internal
research and development under the Scientific and Technology Research and
Services (STRS) account is to increase 21.5% to $535.0 million (including $8.5
million for the Baldrige National Quality Program). The MEP program is to receive
$4 million to close out the federally funded portion of the activity such that “...MEP
centers will become independent, as intended in the program’s original
authorization.” This figure is over 95% less than the FY2008 appropriation.
Construction funding would decrease 38.3% to $99.0 million. (See Table 10.)
The FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 110-161, finances NIST at
$755.8 million, an increase of 11.7% over FY2007. Support for the STRS account
increased 1.4% to $440.5 million (including $7.9 million for the Baldrige Quality
Program). The Technology Innovation Program (formerly the Advanced Technology
Program (ATP)) was appropriated $65.2 million (with an additional $5 million from
FY2007 unobligated balances under ATP), 17.6% below the previous fiscal year.
Funding for MEP decreased 14.4% to $89.6 million. Support for construction almost
tripled to $160.5 million.
The President’s FY2008 budget proposal requested $640.7 million for NIST,
5.3% below the FY2007 appropriation. The STRS account would have increased
15.2% to $500.5 million (including the Baldrige Quality Program). There was no
funding for ATP and financing for MEP would have been reduced 55.8% to $46.3
million. Construction expenses were to increase 60% to $93.9 million.
No final FY2007 appropriations legislation for NIST was enacted during the
109th Congress. A series of continuing resolutions funded the program at FY2006
levels through February 15, 2007. However, P.L. 110-5, passed in the 110th Congress,
provided $676.9 million in FY2007 support for NIST. Funding for the STRS
account increased 10% over the previous fiscal year to $434.4 million while the
construction budget decreased 66% to $58.7 million. Financing for ATP at $79.1
million and support for MEP at $104.7 million reflected similar funding in FY2006.
As part of the American Competitiveness Initiative, the Administration stated
its intention to double over 10 years funding for “innovation-enabling research”
performed at NIST through its “core” programs (defined as internal research in the
STRS account and the construction budget). To this end, the President’s FY2007
budget requested an increase of 18.3% for intramural R&D at NIST; FY2007
appropriations for these in-house programs increased 9.6%. For FY2008, the
omnibus appropriations legislation provided for a small increase in the STRS
account. This is in contrast to the Administration’s FY2008 budget which included
a 15.2% increase in funding, as did the original appropriations bill, H.R. 3093, as
passed by the House, while the Senate-passed version contained a 15.6% increase.
The President’s FY2009 budget request proposes a 21.5% increase in support for the
STRS account.
CRS-28
Continued support for the Advanced Technology Program was a major funding
issue, particularly because opponents objected to large companies receiving research
grants. Although Congress maintained (often decreasing) funding for ATP, the initial
appropriation bills passed by the House since FY2002 failed to include financing for
the program. In FY2006, support for the program was cut 41% and in FY2007, P.L.
110-69 replaced ATP with the Technology Innovation Program which focuses on
small and medium sized firms. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008,
provides funding for this new initiative. The Administration’s FY2009 budget
request does not include financing for TIP. The budget for the Manufacturing
Extension Partnership, another extramural program administered by NIST, has also
been debated for several years. The President’s FY2009 budget proposal
recommends curtailing the federally funded portion of the MEP and provides $4.0
million to accomplish this objective.
For additional information, see CRS Report 95-30, The National Institute of
Standards and Technology: An Appropriations Overview; CRS Report RS22815, The
Technology Innovation Program; and CRS Report 97-104, The Manufacturing
Extension Partnership Program: An Overview, all by Wendy H. Schacht. (CRS
Contact: Wendy H. Schacht.)
Table 10. NIST
($ in millions)
FY2008
FY2009
NIST Program
FY2007
FY2008
Request
Request
STRSa
$434.4
$500.5
440.5
535.0
ATP/TIP
79.1
0
65.2c
0
MEP
104.7
46.3
89.6
4.0
Construction 58.7
93.9
160.5
99.0
NIST Total
676.9
640.7
755.8
638.0
Note: Figures may not add up because of rounding.
a. Includes funding for the Baldrige National Quality Program
b. Does not include the $30.8 million directed away from the ATP appropriation for use by other non-
NIST programs
c. Funding is for the new Technology Innovation Program (TIP) that replaces ATP.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
President Bush has proposed $576 million in NOAA R&D funding for FY2009
(see Table 11), or about 14% of the agency’s total discretionary budget request of
$4.109 billion. The Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), released a NOAA FY2009 Budget Summary, on February
4, 2008, detailing the NOAA request. As reported, the R&D request would consist
of 93% research funding and 7% development funding. About 70% of the R&D
request would account for intramural programs, while 30% would be for extramural
ones.
CRS-29
NOAA’s Budget Office reported the R&D funding request for the Office of
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) to be $294 million, or 51% of total R&D
funding requested for FY2009. NOAA R&D request figures indicate that there
would be an increase of 38% for the National Ocean Service (NOS) and one of 24%
for the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). These line offices in general
sustained overall budget cuts affecting R&D for FY2008. The National
Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service (NESDIS) R&D budget
request is a slight increase of $2 million as compared with the FY2008 enacted
appropriation. National Weather Service (NWS) R&D is essentially flat funded at
$23 million. The President’s budget for FY2009 indicated that $260 million of
NOAA’s budget request would be for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program
(CCSP). Also, it indicated that $378 million requested for OAR represents NOAA’s
portion of the President’s “Federal Science and Technology Budget” for FY2009.
(CRS Contact: Wayne Morrissey.)
Table 11. NOAA R&D
($ in millions)
R&D By NOAA Line Office and Program
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Support
Actual a
Enacted b
Request
National Ocean Service (NOS)
62
57
55
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
47
45
50
Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR)
299
323
293
National Weather Service (NWS)
23
23
23
National Environmental Satellite Data and
30
26
29
Information Service (NESDIS)
Office of Marine and Aviation Services (OMAO) —
97
107
126
Program Support
Total Conduct of R&D
$557
$581
$576
Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA,
“FY2007-FY2009, Research and Development,” personal communication, March 13, 2008.
a. P.L. 110-5 (Reported as H.J.Res. 20)
b. P.L. 110-161 (Reported as Amendment to the Senate Amendment to H.R. 2764, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2008, Div. B, Title I, Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies
c. OMAO R&D includes marine research data acquisition and services.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA)
President Bush has requested $12.9 billion for NASA R&D in FY2009 (see
Table 12). This request is a 5% increase over FY2008, in a total NASA budget that
would increase by 2%.
Budget priorities throughout NASA are being driven by the Vision for Space
Exploration. Announced by President Bush in January 2004 and endorsed by
CRS-30
Congress in the NASA Authorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-155), the Vision
includes returning the space shuttle to regular flight status following the 2003
Columbia disaster, but then retiring it by 2010; completing the International Space
Station, but discontinuing its use by the United States by 2017; returning humans to
the Moon by 2020; and then sending humans to Mars and “worlds beyond.” To
replace the space shuttle and carry astronauts to the Moon, NASA is developing a
new spacecraft and a new launch vehicle, known as Orion and Ares I. Their first
crewed flight is expected in March 2015.
In general, the FY2009 request includes increases for programs related to the
Vision and decreases for other programs. The request for Constellation Systems, the
program responsible for developing Orion and Ares I, is an increase of $576 million
or 23% relative to FY2008. The request for the International Space Station is an
increase of $247 million or 14%. Among programs not focused on human space
exploration, the request for Science is a decrease of $15 million or 0.3%,24 and the
request for Aeronautics is a decrease of $65 million or 13%.
Within the nearly flat request for Science, increases for Earth Science and
Planetary Science would be offset by a decrease for Astrophysics. The request for
Earth Science would fund two new missions recommended by the National Research
Council,25 while the request for Planetary Science would initiate a new program in
lunar robotic science. In Astrophysics, two programs have been of particular
congressional interest: the NASA/DOE Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM) and the
Space Interferometer Mission (SIM). The request includes funds for JDEM, as
directed by Congress in the FY2008 explanatory statement,26 but not for SIM. NASA
explains that a new exoplanet exploration initiative could include a smaller,
medium-class version of SIM, as recommended by the FY2008 Senate report.27
(CRS Contact: Daniel Morgan.)
24 After adjusting for transfers. See notes to Table 12.
25 National Research Council, Earth Science and Applications from Space: National
Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond, 2007.
26 Congressional Record, December 17, 2007, pp. H15820 and H15923.
27 S.Rept. 110-124, p. 110.
CRS-31
Table 12. NASA R&D
($ in millions)
FY2007 a
FY2008 a
FY2009
Request
Science b
$4,363
$4,456
$4,442
Earth Science
1,198
1,280
1,368
Planetary Science
1,216
1,248
1,334
Astrophysics
1,365
1,338
1,162
Heliophysics b
584
591
577
Aeronautics
594
512
446
Exploration
2,870
3,143
3,500
Constellation Systems
2,115
2,472
3,048
Advanced Capabilities
755
671
452
International Space Station
1,469
1,813
2,060
Subtotal R&D
9,295
9,924
10,449
Other NASA Programs c
4,040
4,142
3,866
Cross-Agency Support d
2,950
3,243
3,300
Associated with R&D
2,056
2,288
2,409
Associated with Other Programs
894
955
891
Total R&D
11,352
12,212
12,857
Total NASA
16,285
17,309
17,614
Source: NASA FY2009 budget justification ([http://www.nasa.gov/news/budget/]).
a.
Adjusted for accounting changes to be comparable with the FY2009 request.
b.
Reduced by $247 million in FY2007 and $250 million in FY2008 to adjust for the transfer of
Near Earth Networks and Deep Space Mission Systems from Heliophysics to Space and Flight
Support in FY2009.
c.
Space Shuttle, Space and Flight Support (increased as in note b), Education, and Inspector
General.
d.
Allocation between R&D and non-R&D estimated by CRS in proportion to the underlying
program amounts in order to allow calculation of a total for R&D. The Cross-Agency Support
account consists mostly of indirect costs for other programs assessed in proportion to their direct
costs.
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
The FY2009 R&D request for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is
$2.333 billion, a 13.0% decrease ($347.8 million) from the FY2008 estimate of
$2.680 billion (see Table 13) . The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is USDA’s
in-house basic and applied research agency, and operates approximately 100
laboratories nationwide. The ARS laboratories focus on efficient food and fiber
production, development of new products and uses for agricultural commodities,
development of effective biocontrols for pest management, and support of USDA
CRS-32
regulatory and technical assistance programs. Included in the total support for USDA
in FY2009 is $1.067 billion for ARS, $117.2 million below the FY2008 estimate.
In the ARS, the Administration proposes the reduction of $41.0 million in funding
add-ons designated by Congress for research at specific locations. Also, there is the
proposed discontinuation and redirection of $105.0 million in lower priority
programs. The amounts are to be redirected to critical research priorities of the
Administration that include livestock production, food safety, crop protection, and
human nutrition. Included in the FY2009 request for ARS is $13.2 million for
buildings and facilities.
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, education, and outreach. Included in these
partnerships is funding for research at 1862 land-grant 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 FY2009 request provides $1.010 billion for CSREES, a decrease
of $189.1 million from the FY2008 estimate. The CSREES FY2009 budget includes
the proposed elimination of $144.0 million in Congressional add-ons and the
reduction of $88.0 million in lower priority programs. Funding for formula
distribution in FY2009 to the state Agricultural Experiment Stations is $273.2
million, approximately $1.5 million below the FY2008 estimate. Support for the
1890 formula programs is $38.3 million, $2.8 million below the FY2008 level. One
of the primary goals of the FY2009 CSREES budget is to expand competitive, peer-
reviewed allocation of research programs. The FY2009 budget request has proposed,
as in previous years, to modify the Hatch formula program.28 It would expand the
multistate research programs share of Hatch funds from 25.0% to approximately
70.0%. The request would redirect 42.0% of Hatch funds to nationally, competitively
awarded, multi-state/multi-institutional projects in the first year, with the balance of
funds distributed over a four year period. In addition, the FY2009 request proposes
allocating 67.0% of McIntire-Stennis funds for the creation of a competitively
awarded multi-state research program. The extension programs are also proposed to
be strengthened through competitively awarded grants. The programs are designed
to be more responsive to critical national issues such as agricultural security, local
and regional emergencies, zoonotic diseases, and pest risk management.
The FY2009 request proposes $256.5 million for the National Research
Initiative (NRI) Competitive Grants Program, an increase of $65.6 million over the
FY2008 estimate. In addition to supporting fundamental and applied science in
agriculture, USDA maintains that the NRI makes a significant contribution to
developing the next generation of agricultural scientists by providing graduate
students with opportunities to work on research projects. A focus of these efforts is
28 Hatch Act Formula grants are provided for agricultural research to state agricultural
experiment stations (SAES) in accordance with the act approved July 2, 1862 (7 U.S.C. 301
et seq.) — as amended through P.L. 107-293. SAESs are directed to support research
projects that have relevance to the special needs of the respective states. SAESs are
required to provide 100% in matching funds.
CRS-33
providing increased opportunities for minority and under-served communities in
agricultural science. NRI funding also will support projects directed at developing
alternate methods of biological and chemical conversion of biomass, and research
determining the impact of a renewable fuels industry on the economic and social
dynamics of rural communities. The Administration has proposed support for
initiatives in agricultural genomics, emerging issues in food and agricultural security,
the ecology and economics of biological invasions, and plant biotechnology.
Research is proposed that moves beyond water quality issues to extend to water
availability, reuse, and conservation.
The FY2009 request for USDA provides $82.1 million for the Economic
Research Service (ERS), $4.2 million above the FY2008 estimated level; and $153.5
million for the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), approximately $9.9
million below the FY2008 level. The budget includes support to improve research
efforts in analyzing the impacts of bioenergy production, and to examine those
concerns pertaining to feedstock storage, transportation networks, and the vagaries
in commodity production. Funding for NASS will allow for the creation of a data
series on key elements of bioenergy production. Research areas to explore include
production and utilization of biomass materials; stocks and prices of distillers’ grains;
and current and proposed ethanol plants. Funding is provided in the NASS FY2009
request to fully fund the last year of the 2007 Census of Agriculture. Funding will
be available also for data collection to measure energy use and production on farms.
(CRS Contact: Christine M. Matthews.)
Table 13. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Actual a
Estimate
Request a
Agricultural Research Service (ARS)
Product Quality/Value Added
$105.4
$105.1
$97.6
Livestock Production
85.1
84.8
70.1
Crop Production
201.2
200.6
191.0
Food Safety
104.7
104.5
105.8
Livestock Protection
86.8
82.4
68.8
Crop Protection
197.0
196.0
188.7
Human Nutrition
85.7
85.3
79.5
Environmental Stewardship
223.2
222.5
199.6
National Agricultural Library
23.7
21.8
18.4
Repair and Maintenance
17.6
17.5
17.5
Subtotal
1,147.2 b
1,120.6
1,037.0
Buildings and Facilities
0.0
46.8
13.2
Trust Funds
16.0
17.0
17.0
Total, ARS
1,163.2 c
1,184.4
1,067.2
Cooperative State Research, Education, & Extension (CSREES) Research and Education
Hatch Act Formula
322.6
195.8
139.2
Cooperative Forestry Research
30.0
24.8
19.5
Evans-Allen Formula (Payments to 1890
40.7
41.1
38.3
Special Research Grants
14.7
107.1
18.1
CRS-34
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Actual a
Estimate
Request a
NRI Competitive Grants
190.2
190.9
256.5
Animal Health and Disease Res.
5.0
5.0
0.0
Federal Administration
10.3
42.2
10.7
Higher Education d
52.2
53.9
54.6
Integrated Activities
55.2
55.9
20.1
Outreach for Disadvantaged Farmers
5.9
6.4
6.9
Other Programs
21.0
22.6
14.0
Total, Cooperative Research. & Education e
747.8
745.7
577.9
Extension Activities
Smith-Lever Sections 3b&c
285.6
274.7
273.2
Smith-Lever Sections 3d
94.5
97.5
91.5
Renewable Resources Extension
4.0
4.0
4.1
1890 Colleges, Tuskegee, & West Virginia State
16.8
17.3
16.6
Other Extension Prog. & Admin.
49.4
59.7
46.4
Total, Extension Activities
450.3
453.2
431.8
Total, CSREES e
1,198.2
1,198.8
1,009.7
Economic Research Service
75.2
77.9
82.1
National Agricultural Statistics Service
147.3
163.4
153.5
Total, Research, Education, and Economics
2,639.1
2,680.4
2,332.6
Note: Research activities carried out in support of Homeland Security are reflected under the Food
Safety, Livestock Protection, and Crop Protection program areas — FY2007,$35.7 million; FY2008,
$35.5 million; and FY2009, $64.3 million.
a. Funding levels are contained in U.S. Department of Agriculture FY2009 Budget Summary and
other documents internal to the agency.
b. Includes funds for the Collaborative Research Program ($3.0 million), Miscellaneous Fees ($8.7
million), and an unobligated balance ($5.2 million)
c. Includes an unobligated balance of $5.2 million.
d
c. Higher education includes payments to 1994 institutions and 1890 Capacity Building Grants
program, the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund, the Alaska Native and Native
Hawaiian-Serving Institutions Education Grants, and others.
e. Program totals may or may not include set-asides (non-add) or contingencies. The CSREES total
includes support for Community Food Projects and the Organic Agriculture Research and
Education Initiative.
Department of the Interior (DOI)
President Bush has requested $617 million for Department of the Interior (DOI)
R&D in FY2009, an estimated decrease of 8.7% from FY2008 funding of $676
million (see Table 14). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is the primary
supporter of R&D within DOI, accounting for nearly 90% of the department’s total
R&D appropriations. President Bush has proposed $546 million for USGS R&D in
FY2009, a reduction of $40.6 million (-6.9%) from the estimated FY2008 level.
FY2009 R&D funding would decline in three of the four USGS research divisions:
Geographic Research, Geological Resources, and Water Resources. FY2009 funding
for the Biological Research Division would remain flat. Funding for a new USGS
program, Global Change, was authorized by Congress in FY2008 and funded at $7.4
CRS-35
million. The President’s FY2009 budget proposes a 260.1% increase in funding for
this program to $26.6 million.
USGS Geographic Research efforts seek to describe and interpret America’s
landscape by mapping the nation’s terrain, monitoring changes over time, and
analyzing how and why these changes have occurred. The President’s FY2009
budget for Geographic Research R&D proposes a $5.6 million cut (-11.8%) to $41.9
million from its estimated FY2008 level of $47.5 million.
Funding for Geological Resources R&D in FY2009 would decrease by $33.4
million (-15.2 percent) to $185.5 million from its estimated FY2008 level of $218.8
million. The Geological Resources Program assesses the availability and quality of
the nation’s energy and mineral resources. The Geological Resources Program
researches, monitors, and assesses the landscape to understand geological processes
to help distinguish natural change from those resulting from human activity. Within
the earth sciences, the USGS plays a major role in important geological hazards
research, including research on earthquakes and volcanoes. Enterprise Information
conducts information science research to enhance the National Map and National
Spatial Data infrastructure.
USGS Water Resources R&D is focused on water availability, water quality and
flood hazards. The President’s FY2009 budget for Water Resources R&D proposes
a $21.4 million cut (-16.7%) to $106.7 million from its estimated FY2008 level of
$128.1 million.
USGS Biological Research efforts seek to generate and distribute scientific
information that can assist in the conservation and management of the nation’s
biological resources. The President’s FY2009 budget request for Biological Research
R&D proposes a small increase of $0.5 million (less than 1%) to $180.3 million. The
USGS Biological Research program serves as DOI’s biological research arm, using
the capabilities of 17 research centers and associated field stations, one technology
center, and 40 cooperative research units that support research on fish, wildlife, and
natural habitats. Major research initiatives are carried out by USGS scientists who
collect scientific information through research, inventory, and monitoring
investigations. These activities develop new methods and techniques to identify,
observe, and manage fish and wildlife, including invasive species and their habitats.
(CRS Contact: John Sargent.)
CRS-36
Table 14. Department of the Interior R&D
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
actual
estimate
request
Geographic Research
44
47
42
Geological Resources
218
219
185
Water Resources
126
128
107
Biological Research
181
180
180
Global Change
0
7
27
Enterprise Information
5
5
5
USGS total
574
586
546
Other agencies a
77
84
82
Total b
651
671
628
Source: R&D estimates are from the Department of the Interior’s FY2009 agency budget
justification, except for FY2007 funding data for the Bureau of Reclamation (incorporated in
“Other agencies”) which is from data in the Department of the Interior’s FY2008 budget
justification. [http://www.doi.gov/budget]
a.
Includes the Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of Land Management, the Minerals Management
Service, and the National Park Service.
b.
Totals may not add due to rounding.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the regulatory agency
responsible for carrying out a number of environmental pollution control laws, funds
a broad portfolio of R&D activities to provide the necessary scientific tools and
knowledge to support decisions relating to preventing, regulating, and abating
environmental pollution. Most of EPA’s scientific research activities are funded
within the agency’s Science and Technology (S&T) appropriations account. This
account is funded by a “base” appropriation and a transfer from the Hazardous
Substance Superfund (Superfund) account. These transferred funds are dedicated to
research on more effective methods to clean up contaminated sites. Including the
transfer from the Superfund account, the President’s FY2009 budget request includes
$789.9 million for the S&T account, a $4.1 million (less than 1%) increase above the
FY2008 appropriation of $785.8 million (see Table 15). The total amount requested
for the S&T account represents 11% of the $7.14 billion requested for EPA for
FY2009.
Without adjusting for inflation, requested FY2009 funding for certain research
activities would increase relative to FY2008 appropriated levels;, however, funding
for many of the program areas within the S&T account would remain relatively
constant or decline. For example, the request includes decreased funding for
CRS-37
“Climate Change Protection Program” and “Global Change Research,” but an
increase for “Air Toxics and Quality” programs. Overall funding for “Human Health
and Ecosystem Research,” including funding for the Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) program, would decrease based on the FY2009 request. However, within
this category, funding for human health “Computational Toxicology Research”
would increase. The largest requested increase for FY2009 within the S&T account
is for two EPA homeland security activities: Water Security Initiative, and
Decontamination Research.29 The combined $51.4 million requested for FY2009 is
$19.3 million above the FY2008 appropriation of $32.1 million for these two
activities; a 60% increase.
Although the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports30 historical and
projected budget authority amounts for R&D at EPA (and other federal agencies),
OMB documents do not describe how these amounts explicitly relate to the requested
and appropriated funding amounts for the many specific EPA program activities.
EPA’s annual appropriations are requested, considered, and enacted according to
eight line-item appropriations accounts, which were established by Congress.
The activities funded within the Science and Technology (S&T) account
include research conducted by universities, foundations, and other non-federal
entities with grants awarded by EPA, and research conducted by the agency at its
own laboratories and facilities. R&D at EPA headquarters and laboratories around
the country, as well as external R&D, is managed primarily by EPA’s Office of
Research and Development (ORD). A large portion of the S&T account
appropriations fund EPA’s R&D activities managed by ORD, including the agency’s
research laboratories and research grants. The account also provides funding for the
agency’s applied science and technology activities conducted through its program
offices (e.g., the Office of Water). Many of the programs implemented by other
offices within EPA have a research component, but the research is not necessarily the
primary focus of the program.
The operation and administration of the agency’s laboratories and facilities
necessitate significant expenditures for rent, utilities, and security. Prior to FY2007,
a significant portion of the funding for these expenses had been requested and
appropriated within EPA’s Environmental Programs and Management (EPM)
29 Under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, and Homeland Security Presidential Directives 7, 9
and 10, EPA is the lead federal agency for coordinating security of the Nation’s water
systems, and plays a role in developing early warning monitoring and decontamination
capabilities associated with potential attacks using biological contaminants.
30 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports R&D budget authority amounts
in its Analytical Perspectives accompanying the annual President’s budget, but amounts for
specific programs are not included. The R&D budget authority amounts reported by OMB
are typically significantly less than amounts appropriated/requested for the S&T account,
but the differences are not explicitly defined. For example, for EPA R&D OMB reported
actual budget authority of $606 million for FY2007, an estimated amount of $557 million
for FY2008, and $550 million proposed for FY2009. See OMB, Fiscal Year 2009 Budget
of the United States: Analytical Perspectives - Cross Cutting Programs.
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/]
appropriations account. In FY2007, and FY2008, increasing portions of funding for
these expenses were requested and appropriated within the S&T account. As Table
15 illustrates, this change affects comparisons of the S&T appropriations over time.
Funding for these latter expenses represents approximately 10% of the total S&T
account in the FY2009 request and the FY2008 appropriations, compared to less than
5% in FY2007.31
Some Members of Congress and an array of stakeholders have continually
raised concerns about the adequacy of funding for scientific research at EPA. The
adequacy of funding for EPA’s scientific research activities has been part of a
broader question about the adequacy of overall federal funding for a broad range of
scientific research activities administered by multiple federal agencies. Some
Members of Congress, scientists, and environmental organizations have expressed
concern about the downward trend in federal resources for scientific research over
time. The debate continues to center around the question of whether the regulatory
actions of federal agencies are based on “sound science,” and how scientific research
is applied in developing federal policy. (CRS Contact: Robert Esworthy).
Table 15. Environmental Protection Agency S&T Account
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Environmental Protection Agency
Enacted
Enacted
Requested
Science and Technology Appropriations Account
— Base Appropriations
$733.4
$760.1
$763.5
— Transfer in from Superfund Account
30.2
25.7
26.4
Science and Technology Total
763.6
785.8
789.9
— (Operations and Administration)
(33.0)
(72.7)
(74.9)
Net Science and Technology
730.6
713.1
715.0
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) using information provided by the
House Appropriations Committee. Enacted amounts for FY2008 in the above table reflect a 1.56 %
across-the-board rescission required in P.L. 110-161 for any discretionary appropriations in Division
F Titles I through IV of the law (Division F Title IV § 437 of P.L. 110-161). Numbers may not add
due to rounding.
Department of Transportation (DOT)
President Bush has requested $901 million for Department of Transportation
(DOT) R&D in FY2009, an increase of approximately $78 million (9.5%) from
FY2008 funding of $823 million (see Table 16). In addition to receiving R&D funds
through the regular appropriations process, DOT also receives R&D funding from
31 For example, for research alone (net after operations and administration expenses), the
FY2008 consolidated appropriations provided a $6.4 million increase above the FY2008
request for the S&T account, but $17.5 million less than the FY2007 appropriations
(includes transfers from the Superfund account).
CRS-39
the Transportation Trust Fund through authorization legislation.32 For example, P.L.
109-59, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act — A
Legacy for Users, which became law in August 2005, set DOT surface transportation
authorization levels for each fiscal year from FY2005 through FY2009, providing
increased DOT R&D funding during this period.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) together account for more than 80 percent of DOT’s R&D
funding request. FHWA, FAA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) account
for all increases in the DOT FY2009 R&D budget request.
The President has requested $392.8 million in FY2009 for FHWA R&D, an
increase of $20.1 million (5.4%) above the FY2008 funding level of $372.6 million.
FHWA’s research programs include the investigation of ways to improve safety,
reduce congestion, improve mobility, reduce lifecycle construction and maintenance
costs, improve the durability and longevity of highway pavements and structures,
enhance the cost-effectiveness of highway infrastructure investments, and minimize
negative impacts on the natural and human environment.
FHWA’s FY2009 budget would provide $166.9 million for R&D under the
Surface Transportation Research, Development, and Deployment Program, an
increase of $23 million (16%) above the FY2008 level of $143.9 million, and $51.3
million for R&D for the Intelligent Transportation Systems program, an increase of
$7.5 million (17%) above the FY2008 level of $43.8 million. These increases are
partially offset by decreases in R&D funds for State Planning and Research (down
$10.7 million, -6.4%) which would receive $156.2 million in FY2009.
The President has requested $335.0 million for Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) R&D, up $64.2 million (23.2%) from the FY2008 level of $270.7 million.
The request includes $171.0 million for Research, Engineering, and Development,
$161.5 million for the Air Traffic Organization (ATO), $2.3 million for Safety and
Operations, and $125,000 for Commercial Space Transportation. The request
includes an increase in R&D funding for FAA’s Next Generation Air Transportation
System (NextGen) which is focused on addressing air traffic growth by increasing
the nation’s airspace capacity and efficiency and reducing emissions and noise.
NextGen R&D funding under Research, Engineering, and Development increases
from $24.3 million in FY2008 to $56.5 million in FY2009, up $32.2 million
(132.5%). An additional $69.4 million is requested for NextGen R&D under ATO
focused on systems development, demonstrations and infrastructure development.
The President’s FY2009 budget proposes $16.8 million in R&D funding for
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), up $4.9 million over the FY2008 level of
$11.9 million. (CRS Contact: John Sargent.)
32 Appropriators may add to or direct funds identified in authorization legislation.
CRS-40
Table 16. Department of Transportation R&D
($ in millions)
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Department of Transportation
actual
estimated
request
Federal Highway Administration
371
373
393
Federal Aviation Administration
232
271
334
Other agencies a
165
179
174
Total
768
823
901
Source: R&D estimates are from unpublished OMB tables and DOT budget justifications.
a. “Other agencies” includes National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Railroad
Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Research and Innovative Technology
Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, and the Office of the Secretary.