The National Nanotechnology Initiative:
Overview, Reauthorization, and
Appropriations Issues
John F. Sargent Jr.
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
May 6, 2009
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL34401
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Summary
Nanotechnology—a term encompassing the science, engineering, and applications of submicron
materials—involves the harnessing of unique physical, chemical, and biological properties of
nanoscale substances in fundamentally new and useful ways. The economic and societal promise
of nanotechnology has led to substantial and sustained investments by governments and
companies around the world. In 2000, the United States launched the world’s first national
nanotechnology program. Since then, the federal government has invested approximately $9.9
billion in nanoscale science, engineering, and technology through the U.S. National
Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). U.S. companies and state governments have invested billions
more. In FY2009 NNI funding is estimated to be approximately $1.5 billion. As a result of this
focus and these investments, the United States has, in the view of many experts, emerged as a
global leader in nanotechnology. However, the competition for global leadership in
nanotechnology is intensifying as countries and companies around the world increase their
investments.
Nanotechnology’s complexity and intricacies, early stage of development (with commercial pay-
off possibly years away for many potential applications), and broad scope of potential
applications engender a wide range of public policy issues. Maintaining U.S. technological and
commercial leadership in nanotechnology poses a variety of technical and policy challenges,
including development of technologies that will enable commercial scale manufacturing of
nanotechnology materials and products; environmental, health, and safety (EHS) concerns; and
maintenance of public confidence in its safety.
Congress established programs, assigned responsibilities, and initiated research and development
(R&D) related to these issues in the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act
of 2003 (P.L. 108-153). While many provisions of this act have no sunset provision, FY2008 was
the last year of agency authorizations included in the act. Legislation to amend and reauthorize
the act was introduced in the House (H.R. 5940, 110th Congress) and the Senate (S. 3274, 110th
Congress) in the 110th Congress. Both bills were titled the National Nanotechnology Initiative
Amendments Act of 2008. The House passed H.R. 5940 by a vote of 407-6; the Senate did not act
on S. 3274. In January 2009, H.R. 554, the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act
of 2009, was introduced in the 111th Congress. The act contains essentially the same provisions as
H.R. 5940 (110th Congress). In February 2009, the House passed the bill by voice vote under a
suspension of the rules. The Senate has not considered the legislation.
Proponents of the NNI assert that nanotechnology is one of the most important emerging and
enabling technologies and that U.S. competitiveness, technological leadership, national security,
and societal interests require an aggressive approach to the development and commercialization
of nanotechnology.
Critics of the NNI voice concerns that reflect disparate underlying beliefs. Some critics assert that
the government is not doing enough to move technology from the laboratory into the
marketplace. Others argue that the magnitude of the public investment may skew what should be
market-based decisions in research, development, and commercialization. Still other critics say
that the inherent risks of nanotechnology are not being addressed in a timely or effective manner.
Congressional Research Service
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Overview .................................................................................................................................... 2
National Nanotechnology Initiative ............................................................................................. 8
Vision and Goals................................................................................................................... 8
History.................................................................................................................................. 8
Legislative Approach ............................................................................................................ 9
Structure ............................................................................................................................. 11
Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee................................... 11
National Nanotechnology Coordination Office .............................................................. 13
Funding .............................................................................................................................. 15
Agency Funding............................................................................................................ 15
Program Component Area Funding ............................................................................... 16
Centers, Networks, and User Facilities ................................................................................ 20
Selected NNI Reports and Assessments ..................................................................................... 22
Selected NNI Reports.......................................................................................................... 22
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a
Revolution in Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2009
Budget ....................................................................................................................... 23
The National Nanotechnology Strategic Plan (2007)...................................................... 23
Strategy for Nanotechnology-related Environmental, Health, and Safety Research ........ 24
Prioritization of Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for
Engineered Nanoscale Materials: An Interim Document for Public Comment ............. 25
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Environmental, Health, and Safety
Research Needs for Engineered Nanoscale Materials.................................................. 25
Selected NNI Assessments .................................................................................................. 26
A Matter of Size: Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative............... 26
The National Nanotechnology Initiative at Five Years: Assessment and
Recommendations of the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel, President’s
Council of Advisors on Science and Technology ........................................................ 30
Nanotechnology Legislation in the 111th Congress..................................................................... 33
H.R. 554—National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2009 ........................... 33
S. 596—Nanotechnology Innovation and Prize Competition Act of 2009 ............................ 36
H.R. 820—Nanotechnology Advancement and New Opportunities Act ............................... 36
Concluding Observations .......................................................................................................... 37
Figures
Figure 1. Organizations With a Role in the National Nanotechnology Initiative and Their
Relationships ......................................................................................................................... 14
Tables
Table 1. NNI Funding, by Agency: FY2001-FY2008 and FY2009 Request................................ 16
Congressional Research Service
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Table 2. NNI Funding, by Program Component Area, FY2006-FY2009 .................................... 17
Appendixes
Appendix A. Selected Reports on the National Nanotechnology Initiative ................................. 39
Appendix B. List of NNI and Nanotechnology-Related Acronyms............................................. 41
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 42
Congressional Research Service
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Introduction
Nanotechnology has been an issue of interest to Congress for a number of years, coming into
focus in 2000 with the launch of the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) by President
Clinton in his FY2001 budget request to Congress. Since then, Congress has appropriated
approximately $9.9 billion for nanotechnology research and development (R&D). These efforts
have been directed at advancing understanding and control of matter at the nanoscale,1 where the
physical, chemical, and biological properties of materials differ in fundamental and useful ways
from the properties of individual atoms or bulk matter.2
The development and application of nanotechnology—more fully explained below—across a
wide array of products and industries holds the potential for significant economic and societal
benefits. To capture these benefits, the United States will have to effectively address a variety of
technical and policy challenges that stand as potential barriers to commercialization, including
environmental, health, and safety (EHS) concerns and their implications for workplace,
environmental, food, and drug regulations; development of standards, reference materials, and
consistent nomenclature; development of new measurement methods and tools; effective
technology transfer to the private sector; protection of intellectual property; availability,
affordability, and patience of investment capital; ethical, legal, and societal concerns; public
understanding, support, and acceptance; and development of a world-class scientific and technical
nanotechnology workforce.
In 2003, Congress passed the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (P.L.
108-153) providing a legislative foundation for some of the activities of the NNI, authorizing
agency funding levels through FY2008, and intended to address several of these challenges.
While many provisions of this act have no sunset provision, FY2008 was the last year of agency
authorizations included in the act. Legislation to amend and reauthorize the act was introduced in
the House (H.R. 5940, 110th Congress) and the Senate (S. 3274, 110th Congress) in the 110th
Congress. Both bills were titled the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2008.
The House passed H.R. 5940 by a vote of 407-6; the Senate did not act on S. 3274.
In January 2009, H.R. 554, the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2009, was
introduced in the 111th Congress. The act contains essentially the same provisions as H.R. 5940
(110th Congress). (For additional information, see bill highlights on page 33.) In February 2009,
the House passed the bill by voice vote under a suspension of the rules. The Senate has not
considered the legislation. A second bill, H.R. 820, the Nanotechnology Advancement and New
Opportunities Act, also would amend P.L. 108-153. The provisions of H.R. 820 cover a variety of
jurisdiction, thus the bill has been assigned to multiple House committees. (For additional
information, see bill highlights on page 36.)
Congress may use these bills to further address these issues and to establish authorization levels
for agency nanotechnology R&D. Alternatively, Congress may choose to address some or all of
1 In the context of the NNI and nanotechnology, the nanoscale refers to a dimension of 1 to 100 nanometers (see box
below).
2 While extensive R&D has been, and continues to be, conducted to understand and harness the properties of individual
atoms, this is not the domain of nanotechnology.
Congressional Research Service
1
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
these issues in separate legislation. Several bills have been introduced in the first session of the
111th Congress to address specific nanotechnology issues.
This report provides an overview of nanotechnology, the National Nanotechnology Initiative,
possible reauthorization of the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of
2003 (P.L. 108-153), and appropriations issues.
Overview
Nanotechnology: A Description
The economic and societal promise of
The term “nanotechnology” is often used as an al -
nanotechnology has led to involvement and
encompassing term for nanoscale science, engineering,
investments by governments and companies
and technology. Nanotechnology is the understanding
around the world. In 2000, the United States
and control of matter at dimensions of roughly 1 to 100
became the first nation to establish a formal,
nanometers, the size-scale between individual atoms and
national initiative to advance nanoscale
bulk materials, where unique phenomena enable novel
applications. A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter, or
science, engineering, and technology—the
about the width of 10 hydrogen atoms arranged side-by-
National Nanotechnology Initiative. Since
side in a line. Nanotechnology involves imaging,
then, Congress has appropriated
measuring, modeling, and manipulating matter at this
approximately $9.9 billion in nanoscale
size-scale.
science, engineering, and technology through
At the nanoscale, the physical, chemical, and biological
the NNI. U.S. companies and state
properties of materials can differ in fundamental and
governments have invested billions more.
useful ways from the properties of individual atoms and
molecules or bulk matter. Nanotechnology R&D is
directed toward understanding and creating improved
As a result of this focus and these investments,
materials, devices, and systems that exploit these new
the United States has emerged as a global
properties.
leader in nanotechnology. However, the
Physicist Richard Feynman’s remarks at the 1959 annual
competition for global leadership is
meeting of the American Physical Society are often cited
intensifying as foreign investments in
as the first articulation of and vision for nanotechnology.
nanoscale science, engineering, and
Though he did not use the term nanotechnology in this
technology increase. Other nations have
speech, he spoke of controlling matter at the nanoscale
and creating atomic-level machines, positing some of the
followed the U.S. lead and established their
applications that doing so might enable.
own national nanotechnology programs, each
Source: The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan,
with varying degrees of investment, foci, and
2004, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
support for industrial applications and
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The
commercialization. Today, almost every nation
White House, December 2004.
that supports R&D has a national-level
nanotechnology program.
Global public investments in nanotechnology in 2009 alone are estimated to be $9.8 billion, with
cumulative global public investments through 2009 reaching approximately $50 billion.3 In 2005,
an assessment of the NNI by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST) reported that the United States leads all other nations in public investments in
nanotechnology R&D, accounting for about a quarter of global annual public investments.4 An
3 Nanotechnology Takes a Deep Breath…and Prepares to Save the World, Cientifica, April 2009, available at
http://www.cientifica.eu/files/Whitepapers/Nanotechnology%20Takes%20a%20Deep%20Breath.pdf.
4 The National Nanotechnology Initiative at Five Years: Assessment and Recommendations of the National
Nanotechnology Advisory Panel, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, May 2005, available at
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
April 2009 report by Cientifica, a privately-held nanotechnology business analysis and consulting
firm, states that the U.S. share of global public nanotechnology funding has fallen to 19% in 2009
from 31% in 2004, calculated on a currency exchange rate basis, behind Russia (23%) and the
European Union (EU) States (collectively, 27%).5 The situation appears even less favorable when
the share of investment is calculated on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis (which takes into
account the price of goods and services in each nation). Using a PPP approach, Cientifica
concluded in its report that the U.S. share of global public nanotechnology investments is 16%,
less than Russia (25%), and the EU States (27%), and the same as China (16%).6
Global investments in nanotechnology already have begun to yield economic benefits as products
incorporating nanotechnology enter the marketplace. These products are estimated to have
produced $147 billion in revenues in 2007 (including $59 billion in the United States, $47 billion
in Europe, $31 billion in Asia/Pacific, and $9 billion in other nations).7 By tapping the unique
properties that emerge at the nanoscale, proponents maintain that nanotechnology holds the
potential for products that could transform existing industries and create new ones, clean and
protect the environment, extend and improve the quality of our lives, and strengthen national
security. Most nanotechnology products currently on the market—such as faster computer
processors, higher density memory devices, lighter-weight auto parts, stain-resistant clothing,
antibiotic bandages, cosmetics, and clear sunscreen—are evolutionary in nature, offering
incremental improvements in characteristics such as performance, aesthetics, cost, size, and
weight.
Evolutionary nanotechnology products, however, represent only a small fraction of what many
see as the substantial longer-term economic and societal promise of nanotechnology. One
estimate projects nanotechnology product revenues will reach $3.1 trillion by 2015,8 while
another estimate projects revenues will reach $2.95 billion by 2015, of which almost half will
come from semiconductors.9, 10
Many nanotechnology advocates—including business executives, scientists, engineers, medical
professionals, and venture capitalists—assert that in the longer term, nanotechnology, especially
in combination with information technology, biotechnology, and the cognitive sciences, may
deliver revolutionary advances, including:
• new prevention, detection, and treatment technologies that could reduce
substantially death and suffering from cancer and other deadly illnesses;11
(...continued)
http://www.nano.gov/html/res/FINAL_PCAST_NANO_REPORT.pdf.
5 Nanotechnology Takes a Deep Breath…and Prepares to Save the World, Cientifica, April 2009, available at
http://www.cientifica.eu/files/Whitepapers/Nanotechnology%20Takes%20a%20Deep%20Breath.pdf.
6 Ibid.
7 “Overhyped Technology Starts to Reach Potential,” press release, Lux Research, July 22, 2008.
http://www.luxresearchinc.com/press/RELEASE_Nano-SMR_7_22_08.pdf. Numbers do not add to total due to
rounding.
8 Ibid
9 Halfway to the Trillion Dollar Market: A Critical Review of the Diffusion of Nanotechnologies, Cientifica, 2007.
http://www.cientifica.eu/files/Whitepapers/A%20Reassessment%20of%20the%20Trillion%20WP.pdf
10 While views vary on how to calculate nanotechnology’s contribution to these products, the consensus is that
nanotechnology is likely to have a significant economic impact and transformative effect on many industries.
11 National Cancer Institute website. http://nano.cancer.gov/resource_center/tech_backgrounder.asp
Congressional Research Service
3
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
• new organs to replace damaged or diseased ones;12
• contact lenses, skin patches, and glucose-sensing tattoos that monitor diabetics’
blood sugar levels and warn when too high or low;13
• clothing that protects against toxins and pathogens;14
• clean, inexpensive, renewable power through energy creation, storage, and
transmission technologies;15
• inexpensive, portable water purification systems that provide universal access to
safe water;16
• energy efficient, low-emission “green” manufacturing systems;17
• high-density memory systems capable of storing the entire Library of Congress
collection on a device the size of a sugar cube;18
• agricultural technologies that increase crop yield and improve nutritional value,
reducing global hunger and malnutrition;19
• self-repairing materials;20
• powerful, small, inexpensive sensors that can warn of minute levels of toxins and
pathogens in air, soil, or water;21 and
• decontaminated industrial sites through environmental remediation.22
12 Ibid.
13 Aslan, Kadir; Lakowicz, Joseph R.; and Geddes, Chris D. “Nanogold plasmon resonance-based glucose sensing.
Wavelength-ratiometric resonance light scattering,” Analytical Chemistry, 2005, Vol. 77. Strategic Plan for Pediatric
Urology, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease, National Institutes of Health, Department of
Health and Human Services, February 2006.
14 Risbud, Aditi. “Fruit of the Nano Loom,” Technology Review, February 2006.
15 Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National
Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2004.
16 Risbud, Aditi. “Cheap Drinking Water from the Ocean,” Technology Review, June 2006.
17 Selko, Adrienne. “New Nanotechnology-Based Coatings Are Energy Efficient and Environmentally Sound,”
Industry Week, August 22, 2007. “Tomorrow’s Green Nanofactories,” Science Daily, July 11, 2007.
18 National Nanotechnology Initiative—Leading to the Next Industrial Revolution, Interagency Working Group on
Nanoscience, Engineering, and Technology, National Science and Technology Council, The White House.
http://www.ostp.gov/NSTC/html/iwgn/iwgn.fy01budsuppl/nni.pdf
19 21st Century Agriculture: A Critical Role for Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Agriculture, June 2003;
and Nanoscale Science and Engineering for Agriculture and Food Systems: Draft Report of the National Planning
Workshop to the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
July 2003.
20 Nanotechnology in Space Exploration, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National
Science and Technology Council, The White House, August 2004, available at http://www.nano.gov/
nni_space_exploration_rpt.pdf.
21 Nanotechnology and the Environment, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National
Science and Technology Council, The White House, May 2003, available at http://www.nano.gov/
NNI_Nanotechnology_and_the_Environment.pdf.
22 Proceedings of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Workshop on Nanotechnology for Site Remediation, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, October 2005.
Congressional Research Service
4
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Although some applications of nanotechnology have proven market-ready, much fundamental
research remains ahead, including efforts to advance understanding of nanoscale phenomena;
characterize nanoscale materials; understand how to control and manipulate nanoscale particles;
develop instrumentation and measurement methods; and understand how nanoscale particles
interact with humans, animals, plants, and the environment. In addition, several federal
agencies—such as the Departments of Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security—see the
potential for nanotechnology to help address mission requirements. Historically, the federal
government has played a central role in funding these types of research and development
activities.
Though federal nanoscale science, engineering, and technology R&D had been underway for over
a decade, the NNI was first initiated as a Presidential technology initiative in 2000.23 The original
participating agencies were the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Defense
(DOD), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Commerce’s (DOC) National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), and the Department of Health and Human Services’ National Institutes
of Health (NIH). In 2009, 25 agencies participated in the NNI, including 13 that received
appropriations to conduct and/or fund nanotechnology R&D.
Since its first year of funding in FY2001, the NNI’s annual appropriations have grown three-fold
to an estimated $1.5 billion in FY2009. From FY2001 through FY2009, Congress appropriated
an estimated $9.9 billion for NNI activities.
In 2003, Congress provided a statutory foundation for some of the activities of the NNI through
the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-153). The act
established a National Nanotechnology Program (NNP) and provided authorizations for a subset
of the NNI agencies, namely the NSF, DOE, NASA, NIST, and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).24 The act, however, did not address the participation of several agencies that fund
nanotechnology R&D under the NNI, including DOD, NIH, and the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). Nevertheless, coordination of nanotechnology R&D activities across all NNI
funding agencies continues under the National Science and Technology Council’s (NSTC’s)
Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology (NSET) subcommittee.25 According to the
NSET subcommittee’s 2004 NNI Strategic Plan, “For continuity and to capture this broader
participation, the coordinated federal activities as a whole will continue to be referred to as the
National Nanotechnology Initiative.” Accordingly, the functions and activities established under
the act are incorporated into the Executive Branch’s implementation of the NNI.
The thrust of the NNI has primarily been the development of fundamental scientific knowledge
through basic research. Investments at mission agencies, such as DOD, have supported
nanotechnology applications development for which they are a primary customer. Other
23 “National Nanotechnology Initiative: Leading to the Next Industrial Revolution,” press release, The White House,
January 21, 2000. http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000121_4.html; and “Steering the technology that will
redefine life as we know it,” Industrial Biotechnology, Vol. 1, No. 3, Fall 2005. http://www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/nano/
reports/mcr_ind_biotech_interview.pdf
24 While many provisions of this act have no sunset provision, FY2008 was the last year of agency authorizations
included in the act.
25 Prior to P.L. 108-153, the Bob Stump Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (P.L. 107-314) required DOD
to “provide for interagency cooperation and collaboration on nanoscale research and development.” The NSET
subcommittee is a subcommittee of the NSTC Committee on Technology.
Congressional Research Service
5
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
investments have supported infrastructural technologies. For example, NIST has contributed to
developing tools and standards that enable measurement and control of matter at the nanoscale,
thereby supporting the conduct of R&D and the ability to manufacture nanoscale materials and
products. As understanding of nanotechnology has matured, the NNI has worked with a variety of
industry organizations to facilitate the movement of research results from the laboratory bench to
the marketplace in fields as disparate as semiconductors, chemicals, energy, concrete, and forest
products.
The NNI agencies also have begun to address research needs and regulatory issues related to
environmental, health, and safety issues, as well as issues such as public understanding and
workforce education and training. The NNI agencies actively engage in a variety of international
fora, such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the
International Standards Organization (ISO), to cooperatively address nanotechnology issues
related to EHS, metrology26 and standards, nomenclature, and nanoscale materials
characterization.
Maintaining U.S. leadership poses a variety of technical, economic, and policy challenges,
including:
• safeguarding the environment and ensuring human health and safety;
• creating the standards, reference materials, nomenclature, methods, and tools for
metrology to enable the manufacturing of nanoscale materials and products;
• developing a world-class scientific and technical nanotechnology workforce;
• translating research results into products, including effective technology transfer
to the private sector;
• understanding public perceptions and attitudes and fostering public
understanding;
• addressing ethical, legal and societal implications;
• protecting intellectual property;
• securing investment capital for early-stage research, development, and
commercialization; and
• fostering and facilitating international cooperation and coordination.
Proponents of the NNI assert that nanotechnology is one of the most important emerging and
enabling technologies27 and that U.S. competitiveness, technological leadership, national security,
and societal interests require an aggressive approach to the development and commercialization
of nanotechnology. Critics of the NNI hold a variety of competing views, asserting that
government is not doing enough, is doing too much, or is moving too quickly.
Some in industry have criticized the NNI for being overly focused on basic research and not
being aggressive enough in moving NNI-funded R&D out of government and university
26 Metrology is the science of measurement, including the equipment and processes used to produce a measurement.
27 The Department of Commerce has characterized emerging and enabling technologies as those that “offer a wide
breadth of potential application and form an important technical basis for future commercial applications.” (ATP Rule,
15 C.F.R. Part 295).
Congressional Research Service
6
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
laboratories and into industry. Others in industry have criticized the federal government for not
providing mechanisms to help advance nanotechnology R&D to the point where it becomes
economically viable for venture capitalists, corporations, and other investors to create products
and bring them to market. Some refer to this gap as the “valley of death.”28 Still others in industry
have criticized the NNI for not adequately supporting the development of metrology, standards,
equipment, and processes necessary to manufacture nanotechnology materials, products, and
systems at a commercial scale.
Conversely, supporters of industry-driven market investments contend that extensive government
support for nanotechnology may supplant the judgment of the marketplace by picking “winners
and losers” in technological development. For example, the size and directions of the NNI
investments may encourage industry to follow the government’s lead rather than independently
selecting R&D directions itself or, alternatively, may result in the promotion of a less effective
technology path over a more effective one. These supporters also assert that federal government
funding of scientific research is often wasteful, driven by political considerations and not
scientific merit.29
Some non-governmental organizations (NGO) are critical of nanotechnology for its potential
adverse impacts on human health and safety and on the environment. They assert that the
government is pushing ahead too quickly in developing nanotechnology and encouraging its
commercialization and use without adequately investing in research focused on understanding
and mitigating negative EHS implications.30 They argue that the very characteristics that make
nanotechnology promising also present significant potential risks to human health and safety and
the environment. Some of these critics argue for application of the “precautionary principle,”
which holds that regulatory action may be required to control potentially hazardous substances
even before a causal link has been established by scientific evidence.31 At least one NGO has
called for a moratorium on nanotechnology R&D and new commercial products incorporating
synthetic nanoparticles.32
28 The term “valley of death” is used by business executives, economists, and venture capitalists to describe the
development gap that often exists between a laboratory discovery and the market’s willingness to invest to advance the
discovery to a final commercial product. This gap occurs due to a variety of issues, such as technical risk, market
uncertainty, and likelihood of obtaining an adequate return on investment.
29 Crews, Clyde Wayne, Jr., “Washington’s Big Little Pork Barrel: Nanotechnology,” Cato Institute website, May 29,
2003.
30 Testimony of Andrew Maynard, Chief Science Advisor, Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson
International Center for Scholars, “Research on Environmental and Safety Impacts of Nanotechnology: Current Status
of Planning and Implementation under the National Nanotechnology Initiative,” hearing, Subcommittee on Research
and Science Education, House Committee on Science and Technology, October 31, 2007.
31 “NGOs urge precautionary principle in use of nanomaterials,” EurActiv.com, June 14, 2007.
http://www.euractiv.com/en/environment/ngos-urge-precautionary-principle-use-nanomaterials/article-164619 Sass,
Jennifer. “Nanotechnology and the Precautionary Principle,” presentation, Natural Resources Defense Council, 2006.
http://docs.nrdc.org/health/hea_06121402a.pdf The precautionary principle has been used in other countries on some
issues. For example, the Biosafety Protocol to the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity incorporates provisions
applying the precautionary principle to the safe handling, transfer, and trade of genetically modified organisms. For
further information, see CRS Report RL30594, Biosafety Protocol for Genetically Modified Organisms: Overview, by
Alejandro E. Segarra and Susan R. Fletcher.
32 “No Small Matter II: The Case for a Global Moratorium—Size Matters!,” Occasional Paper Series, ETC Group,
April 2003. http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/pdf_file/165
Congressional Research Service
7
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
National Nanotechnology Initiative
The National Nanotechnology Initiative is an interagency program that coordinates federal
nanoscale science, engineering, and technology R&D activities and related efforts among
participating agencies.
Vision and Goals
The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) has stated the following vision for
the NNI:
A future in which the ability to understand and control matter on the nanoscale leads to a
revolution in technology and industry. The NNI will expedite the discovery, development,
and deployment of nanotechnology in order to achieve responsible and sustainable economic
benefits, to enhance the quality of life, and to promote national security.33
To achieve its vision, the NNI has established four goals: maintain a world-class R&D program
aimed at realizing the full potential of nanotechnology; facilitate transfer of new technologies into
products that provide economic growth, jobs, and other public benefits; develop educational
resources, a skilled workforce, and the supporting infrastructure and tools to advance
nanotechnology; and support responsible development of nanotechnology.34
History
Attempts to coordinate federal nanoscale R&D began in November 1996, as staff members from
several agencies met regularly to discuss their plans and programs in nanoscale science and
technology. This group continued informally until September 1998, when it was designated as the
Interagency Working Group on Nanotechnology (IWGN) under the NSTC. In August 1999,
IWGN completed its first draft of a plan for an initiative in nanoscale science and technology,
which was subsequently approved by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).35
In his 2001 budget submission to Congress, then-President Clinton raised nanotechnology-related
research to the level of a federal initiative, officially referring to it as the National
Nanotechnology Initiative.36
33 The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2004, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_Strategic_Plan_2004.pdf.
34 Ibid.
35 National Nanotechnology Initiative website. http://www.nano.gov/html/about/history.html
36 “National Nanotechnology Initiative: Leading to the Next Industrial Revolution,” press release, The White House,
January 21, 2000. http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000121_4.html; and National Nanotechnology Initiative
website. http://www.nano.gov/html/about/history.html
Congressional Research Service
8
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Legislative Approach
Congress has played a central role in the National Nanotechnology Initiative, providing
appropriations for the conduct of nanoscale science, engineering, and technology research;
establishing programs; and creating a legislative foundation for the activities of the NNI.
Congressional funding for the NNI is provided through appropriations to each of the NNI-
participating agencies. The NNI has no centralized funding. The overall NNI budget is calculated
by aggregating the nanotechnology budgets for each of the federal agencies that conduct or
provide funding for nanoscale science, engineering, and technology research.
In FY2001, the first year of NNI funding, Congress provided $464 million to eight agencies for
nanoscale science, engineering, and technology research.37 The NNI has continued to receive
support from both Congress and the White House. Both the number of agencies participating in
the NNI and the size of the federal investment have grown. Currently 25 agencies participate in
the NNI, 13 of which have received appropriated funds for nanotechnology R&D in FY2009.38
Total NNI funding in FY2009 is approximately $1.5 billion, more than three times the level of
funding provided in FY2001. The original six agencies identified at the launch of the NNI39 still
account for the vast majority of NNI funding (97.9% in FY2008; detailed agency funding levels
for FY2009 are not yet available).
Some of the NNI’s activities were codified and further defined in the 21st Century
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 which was passed by Congress in
November 2003. On December 3, 2003, the act was signed into law (P.L. 108-153) by President
Bush.40 The legislation received strong bipartisan support in both the House of Representatives,
which passed the bill on a recorded vote of 405-19, and in the Senate, which passed the bill by
unanimous consent.
Though this act is often referred to as the enabling legislation for the National Nanotechnology
Initiative, the act actually establishes a National Nanotechnology Program (NNP). The act
provides authorizations for five NNI agencies—the National Science Foundation, Department of
37 In its January 21, 2001 press release, “National Nanotechnology Initiative: Leading to the Next Industrial
Revolution,” announcing the establishment of the NNI, the White House identified only six participating agencies—
NSF, DOD, DOE, NIST, NASA, and NIH. Subsequently, EPA and DOJ reported nanotechnology R&D funding in
FY2001, bringing the total number of agencies funding nanotechnology R&D in FY2001 to eight.
38 NNI participants include agencies that either conduct or provide funding for nanotechnology R&D, as well as
agencies with missions that may affect the development, commercialization, and use of nanotechnology. For example,
in the latter case, the Food and Drug Administration may regulate (or not regulate) nanotechnology products, the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) treatment of nanotechnology-related patents may affect the value of the
underlying intellectual property, and the execution of the missions of the Departments of Education and Labor could
affect the preparedness of the U.S. workforce for emerging nanotechnology jobs. Some nanotechnology R&D agencies
may also have non-R&D missions related to nanotechnology. For example, EPA conducts and funds R&D but also has
a regulatory mission that could affect nanotechnology research, development, production, use, and/or disposal.
39 The original six agencies identified at the launch of the NNI were the Department of Defense, Department of Energy,
National Institute of Standards and Technology (Department of Commerce), National Science Foundation, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, and National Institutes of Health (DHHS). “National Nanotechnology
Initiative: Leading to the Next Industrial Revolution,” press release, The White House, January 21, 2000.
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000121_4.html; and National Nanotechnology Initiative website.
http://www.nano.gov/html/about/history.html
40 U.S. Congress. 2003. 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act. P.L. 108-153. 15 U.S.C. 7501.
108 Cong., December 3.
Congressional Research Service
9
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Energy, NASA, National Institute of Standards and Technology, and Environmental Protection
Agency—but not for the Department of Defense, National Institutes of Health, Department of
Homeland Security,41 or other NNI research agencies that collectively accounted for 46% of NNI
funding in FY2003.
The act created the NNP for the purposes of establishing the goals, priorities, and metrics for
evaluation of federal nanotechnology research, development, and other activities; investing in
federal R&D programs in nanotechnology and related sciences to achieve those goals; and
providing for interagency coordination of federal nanotechnology research, development, and
other activities undertaken pursuant to the NNP.
Key provisions of the act include:
• authorizing appropriations for the nanotechnology-related activities of the
National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, NASA, National Institute
of Standards and Technology, and Environmental Protection Agency for fiscal
years 2005 through 2008, totaling $3.679 billion for the four year period;
• establishing a National Nanotechnology Coordination Office, with a director and
full time staff to provide administrative support to the NSTC;
• establishing a National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel (NNAP) to advise the
President and the NSTC on matters relating to the NNP.
• establishing a triennial review of the NNP by the National Research Council of
the National Academies of Sciences;
• directing the NSTC to oversee the planning, management, and coordination of
the program, including the development of a triennial strategic plan;
• directing the Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and
Technology to establish a program to conduct basic research on issues related to
the development and manufacture of nanotechnology, and to use the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership program to ensure results reach small- and
medium-sized manufacturing companies;
• directing the Secretary of Commerce to use the National Technical Information
Service to establish a clearinghouse of information related to commercialization
of nanotechnology research;
• directing the Secretary of Energy to establish a program to support consortia to
conduct interdisciplinary nanotechnology R&D designed to integrate newly
developed nanotechnology and microfluidic tools with systems biology and
molecular imaging;
• directing the Secretary of Energy to carry out projects to develop, plan, construct,
acquire, operate, or support special equipment, instrumentation, or facilities for
investigators conducting nanotechnology R&D; and
41 FY2003 funding attributed to DHS for the purpose of this calculation is based on nanotechnology R&D
appropriations received by the Department of Transportation’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA). TSA
was transferred to DHS in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) which was enacted after the start of
FY2003.
Congressional Research Service
10
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
• directing the establishment of two centers, on a merit-reviewed and competitive
basis: (1) the American Nanotechnology Preparedness Center, to conduct,
coordinate, collect, and disseminate studies on the societal, ethical,
environmental, educational, legal, and workforce implications of
nanotechnology; and to identify anticipated issues related to the responsible
research, development, and application of nanotechnology, as well as provide
recommendations for preventing or addressing such issues, and (2) the Center for
Nanomaterials Manufacturing, to encourage, conduct, coordinate, commission,
collect, and disseminate research on new manufacturing technologies for
materials, devices, and systems with new combinations of characteristics, such
as, but not limited to, strength, toughness, density, conductivity, flame resistance,
and membrane separation characteristics; and to develop mechanisms to transfer
such manufacturing technologies to U.S. industries.
While the act establishes a National Nanotechnology Program, the Executive Branch continues its
broader effort under the NNI framework and name. According to the NNI’s 2004 Strategic Plan:
Many of the activities outlined in the Act were already in progress as part of the NNI.
Moreover, the ongoing management of the initiative involves considerable input from
Federal agencies that are not named specifically in the Act.... For continuity, and to capture
this broader participation, the coordinated Federal activities as a whole will continue to be
referred to as the National Nanotechnology Initiative.42
Structure
Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee
The NNI is coordinated within the White House through the NSTC, the Cabinet-level council by
which the President coordinates science, space, and technology policies across the federal
government. Operationally, NNI coordination is accomplished through the Nanoscale Science,
Engineering, and Technology (NSET) subcommittee of the NSTC’s Committee on Technology
(CT). The NSET subcommittee also has an informal reporting relationship to the NSTC’s
Committee on Science (CS). The NSET subcommittee is led by an agency co-chair, currently
from the Department of Energy (DOE), and an OSTP co-chair. The NSET subcommittee is
comprised of representatives from 25 federal entities, OSTP and the Office of Management
and Budget.43
42 The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2004, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_Strategic_Plan_2004.pdf.
43 The agencies that participate in the NSET subcommittee comprise the NNI. NSET subcommittee members include
Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce; Consumer Product Safety Commission; Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service, Department of Agriculture; Department of Defense; Department of
Education; Department of Energy; Department of Homeland Security; Department of Justice; Department of Labor;
Department of State; Department of Transportation; Department of the Treasury; Environmental Protection Agency;
Food and Drug Administration; Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; Intelligence Technology Innovation Center;
International Trade Commission; National Aeronautics and Space Administration; National Institutes of Health, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services; National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Center for Disease
Control, Department of Health and Human Services; National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of
Commerce; National Science Foundation; Nuclear Regulatory Commission; U.S. Geological Survey; and U.S. Patent
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
11
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
The NSET subcommittee has established several chartered and non-chartered working groups
that conduct work in key subject areas. The three chartered working groups are:44
National Environmental and Health Implications (NEHI)
The NEHI working group was chartered to provide for exchange of information among agencies
that support research and those responsible for regulations and guidelines related to
nanotechnology products; to facilitate identification, prioritization, and implementation of
research and other activities required for the responsible research, development, utilization, and
oversight of nanotechnology; and to promote communication of information related to research
on environmental and health implications of nanotechnology to other government agencies and
non-government parties. To this end, the NEHI working group seeks to identify and prioritize
environmental, health, and safety research needs related to nanotechnology. Twenty NNI agencies
participate in the NEHI working group, and 13 agencies fund safety-related nanotechnology
research and/or have regulatory authorities to guide the safe use of nanomaterials.45
National Innovation and Liaison with Industry (NILI)
The NILI working group was chartered to enhance collaboration and information sharing between
U.S. industry and government on nanotechnology-related activities. It also facilitates federal,
regional, state, and local nanotechnology R&D and commercialization activities. In addition, the
NILI working group is to create innovative methods for transferring federally funded technology
to industry. The NILI working group has facilitated collaborations between the NNI and the
semiconductor/electronics industry, chemical industry, forest products industry, and the Industrial
Research Institute.46
Global Issues in Nanotechnology (GIN)
The GIN working group was chartered to monitor foreign nanotechnology programs and
development; broaden international collaboration on nanotechnology R&D, including
safeguarding the environment and human health; and promote U.S. commercial and trade
interests in nanotechnology. The NEHI working group works with the GIN working group to
coordinate the U.S. position and participation in international activities related to environmental,
health, and safety implications of nanotechnology. The GIN working group facilitates
(...continued)
and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce’s Technology Administration was a
participating agency in the NNI until its elimination in August 2007 under the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69).
44 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in Technology and
Industry-Supplement to the President’s FY2008 Budget, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, July 2007, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_08Budget.pdf.
45 Testimony of E. Clayton Teague, Director, National Nanotechnology Coordinating Office, Research on
Environmental and Safety Impacts of Nanotechnology: Current Status of Planning and Implementation under the
National Nanotechnology Initiative, hearing, Subcommittee on Research and Science Education, House Committee on
Science and Technology, October 31, 2007.
46 The Industrial Research Institute is an association of companies and federally funded laboratories with the mission of
improving R&D capabilities through the development and dissemination of best practices.
Congressional Research Service
12
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
international collaboration on pre-competitive and non-competitive aspects of nanotechnology,
and international engagement on trade, commercialization and regulatory issues.
In addition to the chartered working groups, the NSET subcommittee has two non-chartered
working groups: the Nanomanufacturing working group and the Nanotechnology Public
Engagement and Communications (NPEC) working group.
National Nanotechnology Coordination Office
The National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO) provides administrative and
technical support to the NSET subcommittee. Initially established in 2001 through a
memorandum of understanding among the NNI participating agencies,47 the NNCO was
authorized by the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 (P.L.
108-153). The NNCO was charged under the act with providing technical and administrative
support to the NSTC and NNAP; serving as the point of contact for information on Federal
nanotechnology activities for the exchange of technical and programmatic information among
stakeholders; conducting public outreach; and promoting access to and early application of NNP
technologies, innovation, and expertise.
The act authorizes the work of the NNCO to be funded by contributions from NSET
subcommittee member agencies. According to the NNCO, funding is provided through a
memorandum of understanding signed by eight NNI agencies.48 In principle, each agency
contributes to the NNCO budget in proportion to its share of the President’s total nanotechnology
budget request for the signatory agencies. However, two of the signatories, EPA and DOT, had
sufficiently small enough nanotechnology budgets in the early years of the NNI that they were
not expected to contribute. EPA now contributes to funding the NNCO. Total NNCO funding
from the agencies in FY2008 was $2.1 million.
47 National Nanotechnology Initiative website, http://www.nano.gov.
48 The eight agencies that are signatories to the memorandum of understanding are NSF, DOD, DOE, NIH, NIST,
NASA, EPA, and DOT.
Congressional Research Service
13
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Figure 1. Organizations With a Role in the National Nanotechnology Initiative
and Their Relationships
Source: The National Nanotechnology Strategic Plan, Nanoscale, Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2007.
(Nanomanufacturing working group added to chart in cited source.)
Congressional Research Service
14
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Funding
The NNI supports fundamental and applied research on nanotechnology by funding research,
creating multidisciplinary centers of excellence, and developing key research infrastructure. It
also supports activities aimed at addressing the societal implications of nanotechnology, including
ethical, legal, human and environmental health, and workforce issues.
This section provides information on NNI funding from two perspectives: organizationally by
agency and functionally by program component area.
Agency Funding
The NNI budget is an aggregation of the nanotechnology components of the individual budgets of
NNI-participating agencies. The NNI budget is not a single, centralized source of funds that is
allocated to individual agencies. In fact, agency nanotechnology budgets are developed internally
as part of each agency’s overall budget development process. These budgets are subjected to
review, revision, and approval by the Office of Management and Budget and become part of the
President’s annual budget submission to Congress. The NNI budget is then calculated by
aggregating the nanotechnology components of the appropriations provided by Congress to each
federal agency.
For FY2008, the NNI budget totaled an estimated $1.491 billion, a 4.8% increase over FY2007
funding and more than triple the $464 million federal investment in nanotechnology research in
2001. This growth in nanotechnology R&D investments reflects expectations in Congress and in
the executive branch that the NNI will expand fundamental knowledge and make important
contributions to national priorities. Although Congress has appropriated FY2009 funds, the NNI
has released no details on FY2009 nanotechnology funding for each agency. NNI estimated
funding for FY2009 is approximately $1.5 billion. The chronology of NNI funding is detailed in
Table 1.
President Bush’s proposed FY2009 NNI budget supported a broad range of programs among
13 agencies. Agencies with the largest budgets are:
• NSF, which supports fundamental nanotechnology research across science and
engineering disciplines;
• DOD, whose investments in nanotechnology are aimed at addressing the
department’s national security mission;
• DOE, which supports nanotechnology research providing a basis for new and
improved energy efficiency, production, storage, and transmission technologies;
• NIH, which emphasizes nanotechnology-based biomedical advances occurring at
the intersection of biology and the physical sciences; and
• NIST, which focuses on research in instrumentation, measurement, standards,
characterization, and nanomanufacturing.
Other agencies investing in mission-related nanotechnology R&D are NASA, EPA, the
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and Forest Service at
the Department of Agriculture (USDA), National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
Congressional Research Service
15
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
(NIOSH), DHS, Department of Justice (DOJ), and Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
Table 1. NNI Funding, by Agency: FY2001-FY2008 and FY2009 Request
(in millions of current dollars)
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Agency
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
NSF
150 204 221 256 335 360 389 389 397
DODa, b
125 224 220 291 352 424 450 487 431
DOE
88 89 134 202 208 231 236 251 311
NIH
(DHHS)
40 59 78 106 165 192 215 226 226
NIST
(DOC)
33 77 64 77 79 78 88 89 110
NASA
22 35 36 47 45 50 20 18 19
EPA
5 6 5 5 7 5 8 10 15
DOJ
1 1 1 2 2 <1 2 2 2
DHS
2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1
CSREES
(USDA)
1 2 3 4 4 6 3
NIOSH
3
4
7
6
6
Forest
Service
(USDA)
2
3
5
5
FHWA
(DOT)
1
1
1
1
TOTALc
464 697 760 989
1,200
1,351
1,425 1,491 1,527
Sources: The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in Technology and
Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2008 Budget, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, July 2007. The National
Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National
Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2004. National Nanotechnology Initiative: FY2009
Budget & Highlights, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, February 2008.
a. According to NSTC, the Department of Defense budgets shown above for FY2006 and FY2007 include
Congressionally directed funding of approximately $76 million and $63 million, respectively. According to
NSTC, the 2008 DOD estimate “includes many earmarks that are outside the NNI plan.”
b. Revised down from $322 million.
c. Totals may not add due to rounding of agency budget figures.
Program Component Area Funding
The 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003 called for the NSET subcommittee to
develop categories of investment called Program Component Areas (PCA) to provide a means by
which Congress and the executive branch can be informed of and direct the relative investments
in these areas. The PCAs are categories of investments that cut across the needs and interests of
Congressional Research Service
16
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
individual agencies and contribute to the achievement of one or more of the NNI’s goals. The
2004 NNI strategic plan identified seven PCAs. The 2007 NNI strategic plan splits the seventh
PCA, Societal Dimensions, into two PCAs: Environment, Health, and Safety; and Education and
Societal Dimensions. A description of the seven initial PCAs and their current funding are
provided below,49 as well as a description of the two derivative PCAs.50 The chronology of NNI
funding by PCA is detailed in Table 2.
Table 2. NNI Funding, by Program Component Area, FY2006-FY2009
(in millions of current dollars)
PCA
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
Fundamental Phenomena and Processes
455.9
480.6
531.6
550.8
Nanomaterials 265.1
258.3
254.7
227.2
Nanoscale Devices and Systems
319.6
344.7
342.3
327.0
Instrumentation Research, Metrology, and Standards
51.0
52.5
60.4
81.5
Nanomanufacturing 33.8
48.1
50.2
62.1
Major Research Facilities and Instrumentation Acquisition 152.4
152.4
154.4 161.3
Societal Dimensions
73.5
- Environment, Health, and Safety
48.3
58.6
76.4
- Education and Societal Dimensions
39.2
39.0
40.7
TOTAL 1,351.2
1,424.1
1,491.2
1,527.0
Source: The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in Technology and
Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2008 Budget, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, July 2007.
Fundamental Phenomena and Processes
Fundamental Phenomena and Processes includes investments in the discovery and development
of fundamental knowledge pertaining to the new phenomena in the physical, biological, and
engineering sciences that occur at the nanoscale, as well as in understanding and articulation of
scientific and engineering principles related to nanoscale structures, processes, and mechanisms.
FY2008 funding for Fundamental Phenomena and Processes rose to $531.6 million, up $51.0
million (10.6%) over the FY2007 level due to increases in DOD (up $48.6 million, 23.1%) and
NIH (up $9.9 million, 21.7%) funding in this PCA. The increases in FY2008 funding for DOD
and NIH in this PCA were partially offset by decreases in other agencies’ budgets. President
49 The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2004, http://www.nano.gov/
NNI_Strategic_Plan_2004.pdf.
50 The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2007, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_Strategic_Plan_2007.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
17
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Bush’s FY2009 budget proposed $550.8 million in funding for this PCA, up $19.2 million (3.6%)
above the FY2008 level.51
Nanomaterials
Nanomaterials includes research investments to discover novel nanoscale and nanostructured
materials. This PCA also attempts to understand the properties of nanomaterials, and supports
R&D to enable the design and synthesis, in a controlled manner, of nanoscale materials with
targeted properties.
FY2008 funding for Nanomaterials fell to $254.7 million, down $3.6 million (1.4%) from the
FY2007 level, led by a decrease in DOD funding in this PCA (down $17.1 million, 19.9%). The
decline in FY2008 spending in this PCA resulting from the DOD reduction was partially offset by
increases in other agencies’ budgets, including a $9.0 million (13.1%) increase in DOE funding
and a $3.7 million (6.3%) increase in NSF funding. President Bush’s FY2009 budget proposed
$227.2 million for this PCA, a decrease of $27.5 million (10.8%) from the FY2008 level.52
Nanoscale Devices and Systems
Nanoscale Devices and Systems include R&D investments that apply nanoscale science and
engineering principles to create novel devices and systems or to improve existing ones. It also
includes the use of nanoscale or nanostructured materials to achieve improved performance or
new functionality. To meet this definition, the enabling science and technology must be at the
nanoscale, but the systems and devices are not restricted to that size.
Funding for Nanoscale Devices and Systems fell to $342.3 million in FY2008, down $2.4 million
(0.7%) from the FY2007 level. President Bush’s FY2009 budget proposed $327.0 million in
funding for this PCA, a decrease of $15.3 million (4.5%) from the FY2008 level, largely due to
reductions in DOD (down $12.1 million, 10.1%) and DOE (down $4.9 million, 37.7%) funding in
this PCA. The decrease in DOD and DOE funding for this PCA is somewhat offset by increases
in other agencies’ budgets.53
Instrumentation Research, Metrology, and Standards
The Instrumentation Research, Metrology, and Standards PCA includes R&D investments for
development of tools needed to advance nanotechnology research and commercialization.
Instrumentation for characterization, measurement, synthesis, and design of nanotechnology
materials, structures, devices, and systems is funded through this PCA. R&D and other activities
related to development of standards, including standards for nomenclature, materials,
characterization, testing, and manufacture are also in this PCA.
51 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: FY2009 Budget & Highlights, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and
Technology Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, February 2008, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_FY09_budget_summary.pdf.
52 Ibid.
53 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
18
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
FY2008 funding for Instrumentation Research, Metrology, and Standards increased to $60.4
million, up $7.9 million (15.0%) over the FY2007 level, led by a $3.7 million (86.0%) increase in
DOD funding. President Bush’s FY2009 budget proposed $81.5 million in funding for this PCA,
an increase of $21.1 million (34.9%) above the FY2008 level, with DOE and NIST accounting
for the largest increases.54
Nanomanufacturing
Nanomanufacturing R&D supports the development of scalable, reliable, cost-effective
manufacturing of nanoscale materials, structures, devices, and systems. It also includes R&D and
integration of ultra-miniaturized top-down processes and complex bottom-up processes.55
FY2008 funding for Nanomanufacturing rose to $50.2 million, up $2.1 million (4.4%) over the
FY2007 level due to increases in the budgets of NIST and DOE. President Bush’s FY2009 budget
proposed $62.1 million for this PCA, an increase in funding of $11.9 million (23.7%) above the
FY2008 level, due to increases in DOD, DOE, and NIST funding for this PCA.56
Major Research Facilities and Instrumentation Acquisition
This PCA includes investments in the establishment and ongoing operations of user facilities and
networks, the acquisition of major instrumentation, and other activities related to infrastructure
for the conduct of nanoscale science, engineering, and technology R&D.
FY2008 funding for Major Research Facilities and Instrumentation Acquisition rose to $154.4
million, an increase of $2.0 million (1.3%) over the FY2007 level. President Bush’s FY2009
budget proposed $161.3 million for this PCA, an increase of $6.9 million (4.5%) above the
FY2008 level, led by a $9.2 million (10.0%) increase in DOE funding and partially offset by
decreases in other agencies’ budgets.57
Societal Dimensions
The Societal Dimensions PCA includes investments in research and other activities that address
the broad implications of nanotechnology to society. This includes assessing benefits and risks
through research directed at environmental, health, and safety impacts of nanotechnology
development; risk assessment of such impacts; education-related activities, such as development
of materials for schools, undergraduate programs, technical training, and public outreach; and
research directed at identifying and quantifying the broad implications of nanotechnology for
society, including social, economic, workforce, educational, ethical, and legal implications.
54 Ibid.
55 Top-down processes are those that achieve design features by removing material from a larger block of material;
bottom-up processes begin with smaller building blocks (atoms or molecules) and achieve design features by putting
them together, possibly using self-assembly.
56 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: FY2009 Budget & Highlights, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and
Technology Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, February 2008,
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_FY09_budget_summary.pdf.
57 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
19
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Under the 2007 NNI Strategic Plan, the Societal Dimensions PCA was divided into two separate
PCAs: Environment, Health, and Safety, and Education and Societal Dimensions. Future PCA
reporting will use the new eight PCA taxonomy. NSTC has retroactively reported FY2007
Societal Dimensions PCA spending in the new PCAs.58 The NSET subcommittee characterizes
the new PCAs as follows:59
Environment, Health, and Safety
This PCA addresses research primarily directed at understanding the environmental, health, and
safety impacts of nanotechnology development and corresponding risk assessment, risk
management, and methods for risk mitigation.
FY2008 funding for Environment, Health, and Safety rose to $58.6 million, up $10.3 million
(21.3%) above the FY2007 level. A total of nine agencies funded work in this PCA in FY2008,
including three agencies that did not have funding in this PCA in FY2008.60 President Bush’s
FY2009 budget proposed $76.4 million in funding for this PCA, an increase of $17.8 million
(30.4%) above the FY2008 level, led by increases at NIST (up $12 million) and EPA (up $4.7
million).61
Education and Societal Dimensions
This PCA addresses education-related activities such as development of materials for schools,
undergraduate programs, technical training, and public communication, including outreach and
engagement. Such activities include research directed at identifying and quantifying the broad
implications of nanotechnology society, including social, economic, workforce, educational,
ethical, and legal implications.
FY2008 funding for Education and Societal Dimensions fell slightly to $39 million, down $0.2
million (less than 1%) from the FY2007 level. President Bush’s FY2009 budget proposed $40.7
million in funding for this PCA, an increase of $1.7 million (4.4%) above the FY2008 level,
accounted for entirely by an increase in NSF funding.
Centers, Networks, and User Facilities
A key facet of the National Nanotechnology Initiative has been the development of an extensive
infrastructure of interdisciplinary research and education centers, networks, and user facilities.
58 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: FY2009 Budget & Highlights, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and
Technology Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, February 2008, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_FY09_budget_summary.pdf.
59 The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2004, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_Strategic_Plan_2004.pdf.
60 The three agencies reporting FY2008 funding in the Environment, Health, and Safety PCA that reported no funding
for this PCA in FY2007 are DOD, DOE, and NASA.
61 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: FY2009 Budget & Highlights, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and
Technology Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, February 2008, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_FY09_budget_summary.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
20
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
The centers and user facilities are located at universities and federal laboratories across the
country.
Centers and networks provide opportunities and support for multidisciplinary research among
investigators from a variety of disciplines and research sectors, including academia, industry, and
government laboratories. Such multidisciplinary research not only can lead to advances in
knowledge, but also may foster relationships that further the development of basic research
results into devices and other applications.
Many agencies support such centers. Examples of federal and federally supported centers include:
• The National Science Foundation has established university-based centers
focused exclusively on nanotechnology, including 15 Nanoscale Science and
Engineering Centers (NSEC), one Engineering Research Center, one Science and
Technology Center, four Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers,
two Nanoscale Science and Engineering Education Centers, and five Nanoscale
Science and Engineering Networks.62
• The NIH has established more than 20 centers, including eight university-based
Nanomedicine Development Centers; a Nanotechnology Characterization
Laboratory, established by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), in partnership
with NIST and the Food and Drug Administration; eight university-based Centers
of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence, established under the NCI’s Alliance for
Nanotechnology in Cancer initiative; and four university-based centers,
established by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute under its Program of
Excellence in Nanotechnology.
• The Department of Defense supports two university-based nanotechnology
research centers, as well as the Institute for Nanoscience at the Naval Research
Laboratory.
• NASA has established three centers under its University Research, Engineering,
and Technology Institute program.
• The Department of Energy has established five Nanoscale Science Research
Centers (NSRCs) co-located with its national labs.
• NIST has established a Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST).
• NIOSH has established a Nanotechnology Research Center to conduct research
into the application of nanoparticles and nanomaterials in occupational safety and
health and the implications of nanoparticles and nanomaterials for work-related
injury and illness.
Many of the centers are designated as user facilities and are available to researchers not located at
the center. User facilities are designed to allow outside researchers to take advantage of facilities,
equipment, tools, and expertise. These shared resources provide researchers the opportunity to
conduct research, characterize materials, and test products using equipment and facilities that
their individual companies, universities, or organizations could not afford to acquire, support, or
62 In addition, 18 other Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers conduct nanotechnology-related research
as part of their overall efforts.
Congressional Research Service
21
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
maintain. Conditions for user access vary by facility and agency. In general, users are not charged
for pre-competitive, non-proprietary work leading to publication, and are charged on a cost-
recovery basis for proprietary work. In some cases, the user facilities are located at federal
government laboratories (e.g. the Department of Energy’s five NSRCs, and the NIST CNST);
other user facilities are located at universities and supported with federal funds (e.g. NSF’s 13
university-based centers in the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN)).
As mentioned earlier, the 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003 directed the
establishment of two centers, the American Nanotechnology Preparedness Center and the Center
for Nanomaterials Manufacturing. According to the NSET subcommittee, the requirement to
establish the American Nanotechnology Preparedness Center was met by NSF’s establishment of
the Network for Nanotechnology in Society, comprised of centers at the University of California,
Santa Barbara (with the participation of Harvard University and the University of South Carolina)
and the University of Arizona.63 These centers were funded under NSF’s Nanoscale Science and
Engineering Center (NSEC) program and did not include participation by any other NSET
subcommittee agency.64 The NSET subcommittee states that the requirement for establishing the
Center for Nanomaterials Manufacturing was met by NSF’s establishment of a National
Nanomanufacturing Network (NNN) comprised of four NSECs. The Center for Integrated
Hierarchical Manufacturing at the University of Massachusetts Amherst is the main node of the
NNN.65 The NNN NSECs were established by NSF in collaboration with DOD and NIST, but
exclusively with NSF funds.66
Selected NNI Reports and Assessments
This section presents summaries of recent reports from the NSTC’s Nanoscale Science,
Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee and assessments conducted by the National Research
Council and the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
Selected NNI Reports
The NNI’s coordinating body, the NSTC’s Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, produces a variety of reports that serve to inform Congress and other key
stakeholders on the initiatives’ current activities, investments, and priorities.
63 Private telephone communication between CRS and NSTC staff, January 31, 2008.
64 Private e-mail communication between CRS and NSF staff, January 31, 2008.
65 Private telephone communication between CRS and NSTC staff, January 31, 2008.
66 Private e-mail communication between CRS and NSF staff, January 31, 2008.
Congressional Research Service
22
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading
to a Revolution in Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s
FY2009 Budget67
Each year the NSET subcommittee publishes a supplement to the President’s annual budget
request. The FY2009 NNI budget supplement provides a more detailed look at each agency’s
nanotechnology R&D budget request and a break-out of the prior, current, and requested year
budgets for each PCA. In addition, the report provides data on agency funding for Small Business
Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer Research (STTR). The
report describes proposed changes in agency R&D budgets, as well as in the balance of
investments by PCA. Of particular note:
• President Bush’s FY2009 budget proposed a $36 million (2.4%) increase in the
overall NNI budget.
• Estimated funding for EHS R&D in FY2008 rose to $58.6 million, a 21.3%
increase over FY2007. President Bush requested $76.4 million for EHS R&D in
FY2009, a 30.4% increase over estimated FY2008 funding.
• President Bush’s FY2009 budget request reflected a decline in spending in
several areas compared to FY2008 estimated funding levels, including
nanomaterials, down $27.2 million (10.8%) and nanoscale devices and systems,
down $15.3 million (4.7%).
The National Nanotechnology Strategic Plan (2007)68
The 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-153) requires the NSTC to develop
an NNI strategic plan every three years. This plan is to guide the program’s activities to meet the
goals, priorities, and anticipated outcomes of the participating agencies. In addition, the act
requires the triennial report to address how the program intends to move results out of the
laboratory and into application for the benefit of society, its plan for long-term funding for
interdisciplinary R&D, and the allocation of funding for interagency projects. The 2007 strategic
plan is the first to follow external assessments by the National Academies and PCAST (operating
as the NNAP) and seeks to incorporate the findings of these reviews. Of particular note:
• The 2007 strategic plan includes a new chapter on “High-Impact Application
Opportunities and Critical Research Needs” possibly indicating an effort on the
part of the Administration to move the NNI toward more directed research with
commercial and societal benefits. Much of the early NNI work has been focused
on basic research and mechanisms by which such research may produce
economic and societal dividends. Seven years into the NNI, the program is under
increasing scrutiny to deliver the promised benefits. While the plan does not
67 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in Technology and
Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2009 Budget, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, September 2008, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_09Budget.pdf.
68 The National Nanotechnology Strategic Plan, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee,
National Science and Technology Council, The White House, December 2007, available at http://www.nano.gov/
NNI_Strategic_Plan_2007.pdf..
Congressional Research Service
23
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
establish R&D or application targets per se, this chapter illustrates tangible
benefits that may be achieved by research supported under the NNI. In addition,
the plan provides a matrix that identifies which agencies have a central or
supporting role in each key application area. The plan also provides a series of
nanotechnology application-specific vignettes on topics such as early detection of
life-threatening disease, smarter computers, more energy-efficient transportation,
and energy security.
• The 2007 strategic plan split the Societal Dimensions PCA into two separate
PCAs: Environmental, Health, and Safety, and Education and Societal
Dimensions. This change responds to increased Congressional and public
attention to EHS needs. Some critics of the NNI had raised concerns that the
inclusion of investments in education and other societal dimensions in the
broader category obscured and artificially inflated the perception of investments
in EHS R&D.
• The 2007 strategic plan also identifies four areas of common interest across
agencies that is to be the focus of future workshops: sensors and nanoelectronics,
energy, fate and transport of nanomaterials, and medical and health applications.
Strategy for Nanotechnology-related Environmental, Health, and Safety
Research69
Strategy for Nanotechnology-related Environmental, Health, and Safety Research outlines the
NNI’s strategy for addressing nanotechnology EHS concerns. The report outlines the process for
developing a research strategy, including identification of priority needs, assessment of existing
research, and analysis of strengths and weaknesses of the current portfolio of EHS-focused
research. The report provides a summary and analysis of FY2006 EHS research projects using the
five priority categories identified in the earlier report, The National Nanotechnology Initiative:
Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for Engineered Nanoscale Materials70
(discussed below). The report concludes with a framework for addressing EHS research needs,
including a summary and prioritization of research needs, an implementation strategy, and a
discussion of interagency coordination efforts.
69 Strategy for Nanotechnology-related Environmental, Health, and Safety Research, Science, Engineering, and
Technology Subcommittee, National Science and Technology Council, The White House, February 2008, available at
http://www.nano.gov/NNI_EHS_Research_Strategy.pdf.
70 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for Engineered
Nanoscale Materials, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National Science and
Technology Council, The White House, September 2006, available at http://www.nano.gov/
NNI_EHS_research_needs.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
24
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Prioritization of Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for
Engineered Nanoscale Materials: An Interim Document for Public Comment71
This document is a follow-on to the Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for
Engineered Nanoscale Materials report (discussed below), incorporating public comments,
refinements of the prioritization principles, and continued assessment of research needs. This
report further identifies and defines five priorities within each of the five general categories of
research needs established in the earlier document and presents the revised principles and the
process used for this prioritization. The NEHI working group of the NSET subcommittee expects
to use this report to evaluate the NNI’s current EHS research portfolio, perform a gap analysis,
and identify opportunities for interagency collaboration. The report stresses that the NSET
subcommittee is “pursuing a dynamic, open, and transparent process in developing an NNI EHS
research strategy” and invites continuing public input.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Environmental, Health, and Safety
Research Needs for Engineered Nanoscale Materials72
This report documents the efforts of the NSET subcommittee’s Nanotechnology Environmental
and Health Implications (NEHI) working group to identify, prioritize, and implement research
and other activities required for the responsible research and development of nanotechnology. The
report is designed to help inform the research, risk assessment, and risk management activities of
federal agencies and the private sector.
The report identifies priority research within five general research areas: instrumentation,
metrology, and analytical methods; nanomaterials and human health; nanomaterials and the
environment; health and environmental surveillance; and risk management methods.
The report identifies several next steps:
• prioritize research needs among those identified in the report;
• evaluate in greater detail the current NNI EHS research portfolio;
• perform a “gap analysis” of the NNI EHS research compared to the prioritized
needs;
• coordinate and facilitate among the NNI agencies’ research programs to address
priorities; and
• establish a process for periodic review of progress and for updating research
needs and priorities.
71 Prioritization of Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for Engineered Nanoscale Materials: An Interim
Document for Public Comment, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National Science and
Technology Council, The White House, August 2007, available at http://www.nano.gov/
Prioritization_EHS_Research_Needs_Engineered_Nanoscale_Materials.pdf.
72 The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for Engineered
Nanoscale Materials, Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology Subcommittee, National Science and
Technology Council, The White House, September 2006, available at http://www.nano.gov/
NNI_EHS_research_needs.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
25
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
The report concludes that conducting EHS research in parallel with the development of
nanomaterials and their applications will help to ensure the full, safe, and responsible realization
of the promise of nanotechnology, and that coordination of research activities among NNI-
participating agencies, as well as with industry and other governments, is necessary to expedite
progress. In contrast, some NGOs have asserted the need for EHS research to precede the
development of nanomaterials and nanotechnology applications.
Selected NNI Assessments
The 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-153) requires periodic external
reviews of the National Nanotechnology Program (NNP) by the National Research Council, an
arm of the National Academies,73 and the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel.74 In their
first reviews, both institutions reviewed the NNI in its entirety, including the activities of those
agencies that are not part of the NNP.
In general, these reviews concluded that the NNI has been successful so far and that its efforts are
important to future U.S. technological leadership and commercial competitiveness. Both reports
emphasize that much nanotechnology research is still in its very early stages and caution against
expecting too much in the near term from this nascent technology. The reports also laud the
cooperative efforts between the NNI and stakeholders in academia and industry and encourage
increased interactions with industry, state and local economic developers, and, where appropriate,
international partners.
A Matter of Size: Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative75
This 2006 report presents the findings of the National Research Council’s (NRC) first triennial
review mandated by the 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003.
The NRC study concluded that the NNI has been successful in coordinating nanoscale efforts and
interests across the federal government, in catalyzing cooperative R&D across a variety of
scientific and engineering disciplines, and in opening a host of new scientific opportunities
through its infrastructure and R&D investments. The NRC attributed much of this success to
effective communication and coordination by the NSET subcommittee and the NNCO.
Recommendations
Here are the recommendations made by the NRC followed by a discussion of each.
NRC recommendation:
73 The National Research Council, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the
Institute of Medicine are part of a private, non-profit institution established under a congressional charter. They are
collectively referred to as the National Academies.
74 P.L. 108-153 directs the President to “establish or designate a National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel.” In July
2004, President Bush designated the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology to serve as the NNAP
by issuing Executive Order 13349, Amending Executive Order 13226 To Designate the President’s Council of Advisors
on Science and Technology To Serve as the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel.
75 A Matter of Size: Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, National Research Council, 2006,
available at http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11752.
Congressional Research Service
26
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
the federal government [should] sustain investments in a manner that balances the pursuit of
shorter-term goals with support for longer-term R&D and that ensures a robust supporting
infrastructure, broadly defined. Supporting long-term research effectively will require
making new funds available that do not come at the expense of much-needed ongoing
investment in U.S. physical sciences and engineering research.
President Bush has expressed support for increasing federal R&D funding for the physical
sciences and engineering, most notably in his American Competitiveness Initiative which
includes nanotechnology investments. Yet, as Federal non-discretionary spending growth
increases pressure on federal discretionary spending, finding new funds to support long-term
nanotechnology research may need to come from other scientific disciplines.
NRC recommendation:
the federal government [should] establish an independent advisory panel with specific
operational expertise in nanoscale science and engineering; management of research centers,
facilities, and partnerships; and interdisciplinary collaboration to facilitate cutting-edge
research on and effective and responsible development of nanotechnology.
In July 2004, President George W. Bush implemented the provision of the 21st Century
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act to “establish or designate a National
Nanotechnology Advisory Panel” by issuing Executive Order 13349, which amends Executive
Order 13226, designating the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology to serve
as the NNAP.
The NRC’s recommendation suggests that the President’s designation of PCAST to serve as the
legislatively mandated National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel is not fully adequate. Critics of
the use of PCAST to serve as the NNAP maintain that the scope and depth of expertise needed to
provide effective guidance on the NNI requires an independent panel of people with
nanotechnology- and interdisciplinary-specific expertise and an undivided focus. Supporters of
the use of PCAST for this function assert that a single advisory panel provides an integrated
perspective, reduces unnecessary cost and management burdens, and that expertise can be added
to the panel or accessed through non-member technical advisory groups.
NRC recommendation:
federal agencies participating in the NNI, in consultation with the NNCO and the Office of
Management and Budget, should continue to develop and enhance means for consistent
tracking and reporting of funds requested, authorized, and expended annually. The current
set of PCAs provides an appropriate initial template for such tracking.
It is difficult to assess and track funding for specific purposes within the NNI because the
initiative is not centrally funded and operated. The NNI budget is an aggregation of the
nanotechnology-related activities of the participating federal agencies. Congress funds the NNI-
related R&D on an agency-by-agency basis, with responsibilities crossing many authorizing
committees and appropriations subcommittees. Thus, while it is relatively straightforward to
quantify an agency’s nanotechnology budget, tracking all NNI investments related to a particular
activity—EHS-related research, for example—is much more difficult. The PCAs serve to provide
such a tracking mechanism. In addition, according to the 2007 National Nanotechnology
Initiative Strategic Plan, the division of the Societal Dimensions PCA into two PCAs—
Environmental, Health, and Safety; and Educational and Societal Dimensions—is intended to
better understand and manage the NNI investment. Such a change indicates a level of flexibility
Congressional Research Service
27
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
that may enable the executive branch and Congress to more effectively manage and balance
investments in discrete areas of the NNI.
NRC recommendation:
the NSET Subcommittee [should] carry out or commission a study on the feasibility of
developing metrics to quantify the return to the U.S. economy from the federal investment in
nanotechnology R&D. The study should draw on the Department of Commerce’s expertise
in economic analysis and its existing ability to poll U.S. industry. Among the activities for
which metrics should be developed and relevant data collected are technology transfer and
commercial development of nanotechnology.
Few efforts have been made within the federal government to understand the economic impacts
of the nation’s investments in the NNI. Identification and tracking of data that could serve as an
indicator of success in commercializing nanotechnology research or the effects on U.S. job
creation or retention has not been formalized. To the extent that federal assessments of the
economic contribution of and/or potential for nanotechnology products have occurred, they have
not been performed with analytical rigor. Although the Commerce Department retains its
economic analysis expertise, resident primarily in the Economics and Statistics Administration’s
Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Department’s Technology Administration, which led
Commerce’s NNI activities and had government-wide responsibilities for technology transfer
activities, was eliminated in August 2007.76 Prior to its elimination, the Technology
Administration contracted for two studies that could contribute to addressing this NRC
recommendation: an analysis of barriers to nanotechnology commercialization performed by the
University of Illinois at Springfield, and an analysis of innovation metrics conducted by the
Alliance for Science and Technology Research in America (ASTRA). These reports are publicly
available at Commerce Department websites.77
NRC recommendation:
research on the environmental, health, and safety effects of nanotechnology [should] be
expanded. Assessing the effects of engineered nanomaterials on public health and the
environment requires that the research conducted be well-defined and reproducible, and that
effective methods be developed and applied to (1) estimate the exposure of humans, wildlife,
and other ecological receptors to source material; (2) assess effects on human health and
ecosystems of both occupational and environmental exposure; and (3) characterize, assess,
and manage the risks associated with exposure.
While the NRC asserts the need for additional EHS research, it does not quantify how much more
is needed. Clayton Teague, director of the NNCO, has testified that the current level of
investment in EHS research is adequate.78 Many critics from academia, industry, and non-profit
76 The Technology Administration was eliminated in the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69).
77 Barriers to Nanotechnology Commercialization, College of Business Management, University of Illinois at
Springfield, September 2007, available at http://www.osec.doc.gov/Report-
Barriers%20to%20Nanotechnology%20Commercialization.pdf Innovation Vital Signs Project, Alliance for Science
and Technology Research in America, July 2007. http://www.ntis.gov/ta_reports/Report-InnovationVitalSigns.pdf.
78 Testimony of Clayton Teague, director of the NNCO, hearing, “Environmental and Safety Impacts of
Nanotechnology: What Research is Needed?” House Committee on Science, November 17, 2005.
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy24464.000/hsy24464_0.HTM
Congressional Research Service
28
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
organizations have argued strongly that the NNI needs a greater level of investment in EHS
research.79 These critics argue from a variety of perspectives, including the need to:
• protect workers, human health, and the environment;
• create public faith and confidence in the safety of nanotechnology products;
• prevent a problem with one specific nanotechnology product from resulting in a
loss of public support for all nanotechnology R&D; and
• create a predictable and stable regulatory environment.
This last factor is deemed by some as critical to fostering future nanotechnology investments.
NRC recommendation:
the NSET Subcommittee [should] create a working group on education and the workforce
that engages the Department of Education and Department of Labor as active participants.
The NSET subcommittee has sought, with limited success, greater involvement of the
Departments of Education and Labor in the subcommittee’s activities. An NSET subcommittee
working group on education and the workforce has not yet been established.
With advocates promising the creation of many new jobs—some assert millions—as a result of
global nanotechnology investments, some have expressed concern that the country must prepare
students for nanotechnology research, engineering, and production jobs.80 Assessing which
industries are likely to create such jobs, which skills will be needed, and in what timeframe are
key challenges. If workers with nanotechnology-specific skills are needed and no workers are
available domestically (U.S. citizens, resident aliens, or those in the United States on work visas),
potential employers may opt to establish or move operations outside the United States to tap
workers with those skills abroad. Conversely, if students are trained for jobs that do not emerge or
do not emerge in the same timeframe as students are entering the job market, this investment is
lost. In addition, potential students may be discouraged from pursuing future nanotechnology-
related studies. Close coordination among the Departments of Commerce, Education, and Labor
might help to align federal education and training efforts better with the labor market for
nanotechnology workers.
The 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act also directed the NRC to address two other issues in
its first triennial report: Is molecular self assembly feasible for manufacturing of materials and
devices at the nanoscale? And, what are the needs for standards, guidelines, or strategies for
ensuring the responsible development of nanotechnology?
79 Ibid.
80 Phillip J. Bond, Under Secretary for Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce, remarks, “Nanotechnology:
Economic Opportunities, Societal and Ethical Challenges,” NanoCommerce 2003, December 9, 2003.
http://www.technology.gov/Speeches/PJB_031209.htm Sizing Nanotechnology’s Value Chain, Lux Research, October
2004.
Congressional Research Service
29
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Molecular Self-Assembly
Self-assembly is the process by which components (atoms, molecules, or more complex
structures) form, without external control or direction, an organized structure. For example, water
molecules dispersed in air in cold temperatures can self-assemble to form snowflakes. Our bodies
act as self-assemblers, producing a variety of cells as needed (e.g. to repair a damage to the skin
or produce new blood cells from added nutrients).
To what extent can molecular self-assembly be used as a tool for nanomanufacturing? On this
issue, the NRC concluded that molecular self-assembly is feasible for the manufacture of simple
materials and devices. However, for the manufacture of more sophisticated materials and devices,
including complex objects produced in large quantities, the NRC found it unlikely that simple
self-assembly processes will yield the desired results. One major barrier cited is the probability of
error during assembly as a result of the systems’ complexity.
Standards, Guidelines, and Strategies for Ensuring Responsible Development
of Nanotechnology
The NRC concluded that it is not possible yet to make a rigorous assessment of the level of
environmental and health risks posed by engineered nanomaterials and called for further
development of risk assessment protocols. The NRC report also stated that the need for more
EHS data requires an expanded research effort to complement dialog on these issues. In addition,
until reproducible and well-characterized EHS data are available to inform the development of
rigorous risk-based guidelines and best practices, the NRC found it prudent to recommend use of
precautionary measures to protect the health and safety of workers, the public, and the
environment. The NRC report also stressed that addressing the ethical and societal impacts of
nanotechnology will require an integrated approach among scientists, engineers, social scientists,
toxicologists, policymakers, and the public.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative at Five Years: Assessment and
Recommendations of the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel,
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology81
This report presents the findings of the first biennial review of the NNI by the President’s Council
of Advisors on Science and Technology’s, acting as the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel,
as mandated by the 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003. PCAST submitted its first
report to the President on May 16, 2005, titled The National Nanotechnology Initiative at Five
Years: Assessment and Recommendations of the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel. The
second report was due in 2007 but has yet to be completed.
The PCAST report finds that the United States is the acknowledged leader in nanotechnology
R&D, but the U.S. leadership position is under increasing competitive pressure from growing
public and private investments around the world. The report states that the federal investment in
the NNI has been well-spent, the United States is well-positioned to maintain global leadership
81 The National Nanotechnology Initiative at Five Years: Assessment and Recommendations of the National
Nanotechnology Advisory Panel, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, May 2005, available at
http://www.nano.gov/html/res/FINAL_PCAST_NANO_REPORT.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
30
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
going forward, and continued robust funding is important for long-term U.S. economic well-
being and national security. This assessment of the U.S. leadership position is founded not on
sales, growth, or market share of commercial products—common measures of global
competitiveness for established products—but rather on metrics that may serve as early indicators
of potential innovation, such as the U.S. share of scientific publications and patents. The use of
such metrics may not be universally accepted as predictive of leadership position. Technological
leadership—or even leadership in innovation—does not ensure that the economic benefits from
such leadership will accrue to the United States. Companies may choose to manufacture products
or conduct other value-added activities outside the United States. If the assessment of national
competitiveness is expanded to include the value-added activities and jobs generated or retained
within the United States, then the metrics for assessing leadership might change.
The PCAST report acknowledges that there are potential environmental and health risks
associated with nanotechnology, but finds that the NNI is directing appropriate attention and
adequate resources to the research that will ensure the protection of the public and the
environment. Nanotechnology products should not be immune from regulation, according to the
report, but such regulation must be rational and based on science, not on perceived fears. The
PCAST report states that strong communication exists among the NNI agencies responsible for
research and regulation. The PCAST report contains four recommendations for the NNI:
PCAST recommendation:
To further facilitate technology transfer from the lab to the marketplace, the NNI should
expand its interaction with industry, increase federal-state coordination, and improve
knowledge management of and access to NNI assets, such as user facilities and
instrumentation.
The NSET subcommittee’s National Innovation and Liaison with Industry (NILI) working group
was established to facilitate NNI interactions with industry, and with state and local
nanotechnology initiatives. The NILI working group’s limited resources and agency participation
have hindered its ability to conduct more extensive and sustained outreach.82 Due to the structure
and resource allocation of the NNI, the initiative’s engagements with industry and with state and
local initiatives are largely limited to single agency or laboratory interactions and to public
engagement activities, such as speeches and information on the NNI website.83
PCAST recommendation:
The NNI should continue its efforts to understand the possible toxicological effects of
nanotechnology and where harmful human or environmental effects are proven, pertinent
federal agencies should apply appropriate regulatory mechanisms. There should be strong
interagency and international collaboration on this issue to eliminate unnecessary duplication
of research efforts and to ensure wide dissemination of information. Since exposure to
nanomaterials is most likely to occur during the manufacturing process, research on potential
hazards associated with workplace exposure must be given the highest priority.
82 Private telephone and e-mail communication with Sean Murdock, executive director of the NanoBusiness Alliance,
February 4, 2008.
83 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
31
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
With respect to collaboration on EHS issues, the NSET subcommittee’s National Environmental
and Health Implications (NEHI) working group is the primary EHS coordination mechanism for
participating NNI agencies. The Global Issues in Nanotechnology (GIN) working group works
with the NEHI working group on international collaboration on EHS issues. The NIOSH has
published several documents addressing concerns about workplace exposure to nanoparticles.
Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology: An Information Exchange With NIOSH was intended to
provide the best currently available knowledge on nanoparticle toxicity and control and to solicit
input from the stakeholder community.84 Progress Toward Safe Nanotechnology in the Workplace
details the work of NIOSH’s Nanotechnology Research Center from 2004 through 2006.85 In
December 2007, NIOSH released interim guidance concerning the medical screening of workers
potentially exposed to engineered nanoparticles during the manufacture and industrial use of
nanomaterials. The NIOSH says that the document is intended to “generate discussion, fill the
current knowledge gap, and provide interim recommendations until further scientific information
becomes available.”86 The NIOSH is currently seeking public comment on this guidance.
With respect to regulatory issues associated with nanotechnology, see CRS Report RL34332,
Engineered Nanoscale Materials and Derivative Products: Regulatory Challenges, by Linda-Jo
Schierow.
PCAST recommendation:
The NNI should establish relationships with the Department of Education and Department of
Labor to develop education and training systems to support the Nation’s technical
proficiency in areas related to nanotechnology.
The PCAST report’s recommendation is similar to the recommendation made by the NRC and is
discussed earlier in this paper.
PCAST recommendation:
The NNI must support research aimed at understanding the societal implications of
nanotechnology—including ethical, economic and legal implications—and must actively
work to inform the public about nanotechnology. The NNI should continue to confront
societal issues in an open, straightforward, and science-based manner.
Some critics of the NNI hold deep reservations about the ethical, economic, and legal
implications of nanotechnology. Some of these concerns are common to many technologies, such
as the allocation of risk and benefit during manufacturing. For example, a neighborhood located
near a production facility may bear risks associated with exposure to the byproducts (or products)
of manufacturing, while gaining few of the benefits. Concerns about possible adverse effects of
nanoscale particles on human health and the environment resulting from their small particle size
and unique characteristics may result in increased attention to such costs and benefits with respect
84 Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology: An Information Exchange with NIOSH, National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health, July 2006.
85 Progress Toward Safe Nanotechnology in the Workplace, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, June
2007.
86 NIOSH Update: NIOSH Draft Offers Interim Guidance on Medical Screening of Workers Potentially Exposed to
Engineered Nanoparticles, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, December 13, 2007.
Congressional Research Service
32
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
to nanoscale material production. Currently, nanotechnology EHS risks are unknown and may be
acute or pose no more risk than other manufacturing processes.
Privacy rights are another issue associated with the products of nanotechnology. Nanotechnology
may enable the production of highly sensitive, inexpensive sensors that could be deployed
ubiquitously in commercial and public settings. While these sensors may allow check-out-free
purchases from stores, or monitor the environment for toxic substances, critics argue that they
could also impinge on the privacy rights of individuals if, for example, the sensors could detect
chemicals related to the use of tobacco, alcohol, or illegal substances without the permission of
the individual. Such information might be later applied in law enforcement, life insurance, health
insurance, or employment decisions.87 Others express concern that the economically
disadvantaged and less educated—both individuals and nations—might be unable to take part in
the benefits that nanotechnology products could offer.88
On the legal front, innovations in nanotechnology are already presenting unique challenges to the
U.S. Patent and Trademark (USPTO). For example, U.S. case law generally prohibits patenting
where the sole element of novelty is a change in size, the characteristic most obviously associated
with nanotechnology.89 In addition, many nanotechnology innovations involve multiple
disciplines. Since the USPTO structure for examining patents is discipline-based, an examiner
may not have all of the requisite expertise for the examination, affecting both their ability to
conduct the examination, and the speed at which it can be done. USPTO also has acknowledged
the need to accelerate the speed of nanotechnology-related patent applications. According to John
Doll, Commissioner of Patents, the agency is hampered in its ability to recruit and retain patent
examiners with the requisite skills to handle nanotechnology patents given the “more generous
offers [patent examiners get] from the private sector.”90 Doll said that efforts have been made to
improve hiring and retention at USPTO, and that a new processes has been established allowing
an accelerated examination of applications.91
Nanotechnology Legislation in the 111th Congress
H.R. 554—National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of
2009
H.R. 554, the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2009, was introduced on
January 15, 2009, and passed by the House of Representatives on February 11, 2009. The bill was
referred to the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee on February 12, 2009.
The purpose of the bill is to authorize activities for support of nanotechnology research and
87 Moore, Fiona M., “Implications of Nanotechnology Applications: Using Genetics as a Lesson,” Health Law Review,
Vol. 10, No. 3, 2002. http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/hli/pdfs/hlr/v10_3/10.3moorefrm.pdf
88 Smith, Richard H.,”Social, Ethical, and Legal Implications of Nanotechnology,” Societal Implications of
Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001).
89 Nanotechnology Patents: Issues for Nanotechnology Inventions, Dorsey and Whitney, LLP, May 9, 2005.
90 Doll, John, Commissioner of Patents, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Letter to the Editor, Small Times, April 23,
2007. http://www.smalltimes.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?ARTICLE_ID=290818&p=109
91 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
33
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
development and for other purposes. Among its provisions, the bill would amend the 21st Century
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 to:
• require the NSTC triennial strategic plan to include near-term and long-term
objectives, the anticipated timeframe for achieving near-term objectives, and
metrics for assessing progress; cooperative and collaborative activities in R&D
and technology transition supported by the states; and proposed research in areas
of national priority;
• require the NSTC annual nanotechnology report supplementing the President’s
budget request to include a breakout of spending for the development and
acquisition of research facilities and instrumentation for each program
component area, and a breakout of spending on all activities related to ethical,
legal, environmental, and societal implications;
• direct NNP agencies to support the activities of committees involved in the
development of standards for nanotechnology and allow agencies to reimburse
the travel costs of scientists and engineers who participate in activities of such
committees;
• direct the agencies to fund the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office,
and to do so in proportion to each agency’s share of the previous year’s NNP
budget;
• require the NNCO to develop and maintain a publicly accessible database of
projects funded under the Environmental, Health, and Safety, the Education and
Societal Dimensions, and the Nanomanufacturing program component areas;
• require the NNCO to develop, maintain, and publicize information on
nanotechnology facilities supported by the NNP, including at a minimum the
terms and conditions for the use of each facility, a description of the capabilities
of the instruments and equipment available for use at the facility, and a
description of the technical support available to assist users of the facility;
• require the establishment of a National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel (NNAP)
“as a distinct entity.” Currently, under the provisions of presidential Executive
Order 13349, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
serves as the NNAP;92
• direct the NNCO to enter into an arrangement with the National Research
Council to conduct a triennial review of the NNP, and authorizes funds for
FY2010, FY2011, and FY2012; and
• define nanotechnology as “the science and technology that will enable one to
understand, measure, manipulate, and manufacture at the nanoscale, aimed at
creating materials, devices, and systems with fundamentally new properties or
functions,” and define nanoscale as “one or more dimensions of between
approximately 1 and 100 nanometers.”
In addition, the bill would:
92 Executive Order 13349 is available at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/janqtr/3CFR13349.htm.
Congressional Research Service
34
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
• require the designation of a White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy associate director to serve as the “Coordinator for Societal Dimensions of
Nanotechnology” and would charge the coordinator with convening and chairing
a panel of federal agency representatives and others to develop, maintain,
implement, and monitor an annual EHS research plan that includes, among other
things, standards related to nanotechnology nomenclature; standards for methods
and procedures for detecting, measuring, monitoring, sampling, and testing
engineered nanoscale materials for environmental, health, and safety impacts;
and standard reference materials for EHS testing;
• require the National Science Foundation to provide grants to establish
Nanotechnology Education Partnerships to recruit and help prepare secondary
school students to pursue postsecondary level courses of instruction in
nanotechnology;
• direct the NSTC to establish an Education Working Group under the NSET
Subcommittee to coordinate, prioritize, and plan NNP educational activities;
• direct certain NNP agencies to provide companies access to their supported
facilities to assist in the development of prototypes of nanoscale products,
devices, or processes for determining proof of concept;
• direct NNP agencies to encourage nanotechnology-related submissions to their
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology
Transfer (STTR) programs;
• direct NIST to encourage nanotechnology-related submissions to its Technology
Innovation Program (TIP), and directs the TIP advisory Board to provide advice
to NIST to accomplish this, and to provide an assessment of the adequacy of TIP
resources allocated to nanotechnology related projects;
• direct the NSTC to actively pursue industry liaison groups for all industries;
• direct the NNP to coordinate and leverage federal investments with
nanotechnology research, development, and technology transition initiatives
supported by the States;
• direct the NNP to support nanotechnology R&D activities directed toward
application areas that have the potential for significant contributions to national
economic competitiveness and for other significant societal benefits, such as
nano-electronics, energy efficiency, health care, and water remediation and
purification;
• direct the NNP to support research on the development of instrumentation and
tools required for the rapid characterization of nanoscale materials and for
monitoring of nanoscale manufacturing processes, and to support approaches and
techniques for scaling the synthesis of new nanoscale materials to achieve
industrial-level production rates; and
• direct certain NNP-supported interdisciplinary research centers to support
research on methods and approaches to environmentally benign nanoscale
products and nanoscale manufacturing processes, as well as related technology
transfer and education activities.
Congressional Research Service
35
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
S. 596—Nanotechnology Innovation and Prize Competition Act of
2009
S. 596, the Nanotechnology Innovation and Prize Competition Act of 2009, was introduced on
March 16, 2009, and referred to the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee.
The purpose of the bill is to establish an award program to honor achievements in
nanotechnology. Under the bill, the Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards
and Technology is directed to award prizes to individuals and companies for achievement in one
or more of the following areas: improvement of the environment, consistent with EPA’s Twelve
Principles of Green Chemistry; development of alternative energy that has the potential to lessen
the dependence of the United States on fossil fuels; and/or improvement of human health,
consistent with regulations promulgated by the FDA. The bill authorizes financial prizes for being
the first to achieve a specific criteria, as well as recognition prizes, made as part of the previously
established National Technology and Innovation Medal award program. The bill authorizes
$2,000,000 annually for the financial prizes as well as $750,000 annually for administration of
the prize competitions.
H.R. 820—Nanotechnology Advancement and New
Opportunities Act
H.R. 820, the Nanotechnology Advancement and New Opportunities Act, was introduced on
February 3, 2009. The purpose of the bill is to ensure the development and responsible
stewardship of nanotechnology. The bill would:
• establish a $100 million Nanomanufacturing Investment Partnership at the
Department of Commerce to work with private investors to advance the
commercialization of nanomanufacturing technologies and to increase the
commercial application of federally supported research results;
• establish a 15% tax credit, taken over five years, for the purchase of up to $10
million of stock in qualified nanotechnology companies; and
• establish a grant program within the DOC to support the establishment and
development of nanotechnology incubators by non-profit entities and degree-
granting institutions;
• require the Director of the NNCO to prepare a report to Congress on a
nanotechnology research strategy for government and industry that will ensure
the development and responsible stewardship of nanotechnology;
• provide a tax credit of 50% for nanotechnology education and training expenses
for businesses and individuals;
• authorize an annual appropriation of $15 million for FY2010 through FY2013 for
the NSF to conduct a grant program for the development of curriculum materials
for interdisciplinary nanotechnology courses at institutions of higher education;
• direct the NSF to establish, through its Advanced Technological Education
program, a program to encourage manufacturing companies to enter into
partnerships with occupational training centers for the development of training to
support nanomanufacturing; and
Congressional Research Service
36
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
• direct the Secretary of Energy to submit a report to Congress containing a
strategy for increasing interaction among scientists and engineers at DOE
national laboratories and the informal science education community to prepare
appropriate exhibits for school age children and the general public.
In addition the bill would amend the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development
Act of 2003 to:
• authorize $10 million for the NSF to establish a center for the development of
computer-aided design tools for nanotechnology applications;
• authorize an annual appropriation of $30 million for the DOE to conduct a grant
program for nanotechnology research to address the need for “clean, cheap,
renewable energy;”
• authorize an annual appropriation of $30 million for the EPA for a grant program
for nanotechnology research to address technologies for the remediation of
pollution and other environmental protection technologies;
• authorize an annual appropriation of $30 million for the DHS to conduct a grant
program for nanotechnology research to address the need for sensors and
materials related to homeland security needs; and
• authorize an annual appropriation of $30 million for the DHHS to conduct a
grant program for nanotechnology research to address health-related applications.
On February 3, 2009, H.R. 820 was referred to the House Science and Technology Committee;
the House Ways and Means Committee; the House Energy and Commerce Committee; and the
House Homeland Security Committee.
Concluding Observations
Many expect nanotechnology to bring significant economic and societal returns. The United
States was the first government to launch a national-level nanotechnology program and has
invested more than any other nation. As a result of this focus and these sustained investments,
many experts believe that the United States enjoys a technological leadership position in
nanotechnology. Other nations are investing heavily and some industrialized and emerging
economies have formidable capabilities in nanotechnology. Assessments of the National
Nanotechnology Initiative have concluded that the effort is well-managed and has been successful
in achieving its objectives so far. However, these assessments have recognized that the NNI faces
a variety of challenges in ensuring that the full promise of nanotechnology is realized and that the
United States remains the global leader in nanoscale science, engineering, and technology.
Congress may choose to address some or many of the issues addressed in the body of this report
in the course of deliberation on the reauthorization of the 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act
of 2003 or, alternatively, in separate legislation.
The 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act’s funding authorizations extend through FY2008.
Action is being considered in both the House and Senate on reauthorization of the program.
Possible topics for consideration in the reauthorization process include budget authorization
levels for the covered agencies; R&D funding levels, priorities, and balance across the program
Congressional Research Service
37
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
component areas; administration and management of the NNI; translation of research results and
early-stage technology into commercially viable applications; environmental, health, and safety
issues; ethical, legal, and societal implications; education and training for the nanotechnology
workforce; metrology, standards, and nomenclature; public understanding; and international
dimensions. Consideration may also be given to the establishment of an independent review panel
and to coordination of the timing for the NNAP assessment, the NRC assessment, and the NSET
subcommittee’s strategic plan for the NNI.
Congressional Research Service
38
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Appendix A. Selected Reports on the National
Nanotechnology Initiative
Reports of the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology
Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in
Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2009 Budget. September 2008.
National Nanotechnology Initiative Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Summary & Highlights. February
2008
Strategy for Nanotechnology-Related Environmental, Health, and Safety Research. February
2008
The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan. December 2007.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in
Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2008 Budget. July 2007.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Environmental, Health, and Safety Research Needs for
Engineered Nanoscale Materials. September 2006.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in
Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2007 Budget. July 2006.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Leading to a Revolution in
Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2006 Budget. March 2005.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative Strategic Plan. December 2004.
Nanotechnology in Space Exploration. August 2004.
Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs. Report from a workshop held in March 2004.
Instrumentation and Metrology for Nanotechnology. Report from a workshop held in January
2004.
Nanotechnology: Societal Implications-Maximizing Benefits for Humanity. Report from a
workshop held in December 2003.
Nanobiotechnology. Report from a workshop held in October 2003.
Regional, State, and Local Initiatives in Nanotechnology. Report from a workshop held in
September-October 2003.
National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and Development Supporting the Next Industrial
Revolution, Supplement to the President’s FY2004 Budget. August 2003.
Congressional Research Service
39
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Nanotechnology and the Environment. Report from a workshop held in May 2003.
National Nanotechnology Initiative: The Initiative and Its Implementation Plan, Detailed
Technical Report Associated with the Supplemental Report to the President’s FY2003
Budget. June 2002.
National Nanotechnology Initiative: The Initiative and Its Implementation Plan, Detailed
Technical Report Associated with the Supplemental Report to the President’s FY2001
Budget. July 2000.
Report of the Interagency Working Group on Nanoscience,
Technology, and Engineering (NSET Subcommittee Predecessor)
Nanotechnology: Shaping the World Atom by Atom. 1999.
Agency Reports
NIOSH Update: NIOSH Draft Offers Interim Guidance on Medical Screening of Workers
Potentially Exposed to Engineered Nanoparticles, National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health. December 2007.
Progress Toward Safe Nanotechnology in the Workplace, National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health. June 2007.
Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology in the Workplace, National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health. July 2006.
Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology in DOE’s Office of Basic Energy Sciences,
U.S. Department of Energy. February 2003.
External Reviews
A Matter of Size: Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, National Research
Council. 2006.
The National Nanotechnology Initiative at Five Years: Assessment and Recommendations of the
National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (acting as the National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel). May 2005.
Small Wonders, Endless Frontiers: A Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, National
Research Council. June 2002.
Congressional Research Service
40
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
Appendix B. List of NNI and
Nanotechnology-Related Acronyms
ASTRA
Alliance for Science and Technology Research in America
CNST
Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology
CS Committee
on
Science
CT Committee
on
Technology
CSREES
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
DHHS
Department of Health and Human Services
DHS
Department of Homeland Security
DOC Department
of
Commerce
DOD
Department of Defense
DOE Department
of
Energy
DOJ Department
of
Justice
DOT Department
of
Transportation
EHS
Environmental, health, and safety
ELSI
Ethical, legal, and societal implications
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
EOP
Executive Office of the President
EPSCoR
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
FHWA Federal
Highway
Administration
GIN
Global Issues in Nanotechnology working group
ISO
International Standards Organization
IWGN
Interagency Working Group on Nanotechnology
NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NCI National
Cancer
Institute
NEHI
National Environmental and Health Implications working group
NGO Non-governmental
organization
NIH
National Institutes of Health
NILI
National Innovation and Liaison with Industry working group
NIOSH
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
NIST
National Institute of Standards and Technology
NNAP
National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel
NNCO
National Nanotechnology Coordination Office
NNI
National Nanotechnology Initiative
NNIN
National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network
NNN National
Nanomanufacturing
Network
NNP National
Nanotechnology
Program
Congressional Research Service
41
The National Nanotechnology Initiative
NPEC
Nanotechnology Public Engagement and Communications working group
NRC
National Research Council
NSET
Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology subcommittee
NSF
National Science Foundation
NSEC
Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center
NSRC
Nanoscale Science Research Centers
NSTC
National Science and Technology Council
OECD
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
OMB
Office of Management and Budget
OSTP
Office of Science and Technology Policy
PCA Program
Component
Areas
PCAST
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
R&D
Research and development
SBIR
Smal Business Innovation Research
STTR
Smal Business Technology Transfer Research
TSA
Transportation Security Administration
USDA
U.S. Department of Agriculture
USPTO
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Author Contact Information
John F. Sargent Jr.
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
jsargent@crs.loc.gov, 7-9147
Congressional Research Service
42