Federal Research and Development Funding:
FY2012
John F. Sargent Jr., Coordinator
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
March 29, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41706
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Summary
President Obama has requested $147.911 billion for research and development (R&D) in
FY2012, a $772 million (0.5%) increase from the FY2010 actual R&D funding level of $147.139
billion. Congress will play a central role in defining the nation’s R&D priorities, especially with
respect to two overarching issues: the extent to which the federal R&D investment can grow in
the context of increased pressure on discretionary spending and how available funding will be
prioritized and allocated. Low or negative growth in the overall R&D investment may require
movement of resources across disciplines, programs, or agencies to address priorities. As year-
long funding for FY2011 appropriations has not yet been completed, this report compares the
President’s FY2012 request to FY2010 appropriations. Analysis of federal R&D funding is
complicated by several factors, including the Obama Administration’s omission of
congressionally directed spending from the FY2012 budget request. This report will be updated
as Congress acts on FY2012 appropriations bills.
Under the President’s request, six federal agencies would receive 94.8% of total federal R&D
spending: the Department of Defense (DOD, 51.8%), Department of Health and Human Services
(largely the National Institutes of Health, 21.9%), National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(6.6%), Department of Energy (DOE, 8.8%), National Science Foundation (NSF, 4.3%), and
Department of Agriculture (1.5%). The Department of Energy would receive the largest R&D
dollar increase for FY2012 of any agency, $2.153 billion (19.9%) above its FY2010 funding
level. The DOD would receive the largest reduction in R&D funding, $3.969 billion (-4.9%) less
than its FY2010 level.
President Obama’s request includes increases in the R&D budgets of the three agencies that were
targeted for doubling over 7 years by the America COMPETES Act, and over 10 years by the
America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 and by President Bush under his American
Competitiveness Initiative, as measured using FY2006 R&D funding as the baseline. Under
President Obama’s FY2012 budget, the DOE Office of Science would receive an increase of $512
million (10.4%) over its FY2010 funding level, the NSF budget would rise by $795 million
(11.4%), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s core research and facilities
construction funding would grow by $111.1 million (17.0%).
President Obama continues support for three multi-agency R&D initiatives. The President’s
FY2012 request includes $2.132 billion in funding for the National Nanotechnology Initiative,
$201 million (10.4%) above the FY2010 funding level. The Networking and Information
Technology Research and Development program would receive $3.868 billion in FY2012 funding
under the President’s request, an increase of $74 million (2.0%) from the FY2010 level. The
President’s request proposes $2.633 billion for the U.S. Global Change Research Program in
FY2012, $446 million (20.4%) above the FY2010 level.
For the past five years, federal R&D funding and execution has been affected by mechanisms
used to complete the annual appropriations process—multiple short-term continuing resolutions
for FY2011, the year-long continuing resolution for FY2007 (P.L. 110-5), and the combining of
multiple regular appropriations bills into the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 for FY2008
(P.L. 110-161), the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8), and the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117). Completion of appropriations after the beginning of
each fiscal year may cause agencies to delay or cancel some planned R&D and equipment
acquisition.
Congressional Research Service
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Contents
Overview .................................................................................................................................... 1
Federal R&D Funding Perspectives............................................................................................. 3
Agency Perspective............................................................................................................... 3
Character of Work, Facilities, and Equipment Perspective ..................................................... 4
Combined Perspective........................................................................................................... 5
Multiagency R&D Initiatives Perspective.............................................................................. 7
Multiagency R&D Initiatives ...................................................................................................... 9
National Nanotechnology Initiative ....................................................................................... 9
Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program ................... 10
U.S. Global Change Research Program ............................................................................... 10
FY2012 Appropriations Status................................................................................................... 10
Department of Defense ............................................................................................................. 11
Department of Homeland Security ............................................................................................ 14
National Institutes of Health...................................................................................................... 18
Department of Energy ............................................................................................................... 22
National Science Foundation..................................................................................................... 25
Department of Commerce ......................................................................................................... 29
National Institute of Standards and Technology ................................................................... 29
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.............................................................. 31
National Aeronautics and Space Administration ........................................................................ 33
Department of Agriculture......................................................................................................... 36
Department of the Interior ......................................................................................................... 39
Environmental Protection Agency ............................................................................................. 40
Department of Transportation.................................................................................................... 43
Figures
Figure 1. Doubling of Research Funding: Appropriations and Authorizations versus
Selected Rates.......................................................................................................................... 8
Tables
Table 1. Federal Research and Development Funding by Agency, FY2010-FY2012 .................... 4
Table 2. Federal Research and Development Funding by Character of Work, Facilities,
and Equipment, FY2010-FY2012............................................................................................. 5
Table 3. Top R&D Funding Agencies by Character of Work, Facilities and Equipment,
FY2010-FY2012...................................................................................................................... 6
Table 4. Funding for Agencies Targeted for Doubling by President Obama, the America
COMPETES Act, and the American Competitiveness Initiative ................................................ 9
Congressional Research Service
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 5. Alignment of Agency R&D Funding and Regular Appropriations Bills......................... 11
Table 6. Department of Defense RDT&E .................................................................................. 13
Table 7. Department of Homeland Security R&D and Related Programs ................................... 17
Table 8. National Institutes of Health Funding........................................................................... 21
Table 9. Department of Energy R&D and Related Programs ...................................................... 24
Table 10. National Science Foundation...................................................................................... 29
Table 11. NIST.......................................................................................................................... 31
Table 12. NOAA R&D .............................................................................................................. 33
Table 13. NASA R&D............................................................................................................... 35
Table 14. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D......................................................................... 38
Table 15. Department of the Interior R&D................................................................................. 40
Table 16. Environmental Protection Agency S&T Account ........................................................ 43
Table 17. Department of Transportation R&D ........................................................................... 44
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 45
Congressional Research Service
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Overview
The 112th Congress continues to take a strong interest in the health of the U.S. research and
development (R&D) enterprise and in providing support for federal R&D activities. However,
widespread concerns about the federal debt and recent and projected federal budget deficits are
driving difficult decisions involving prioritization of R&D within the context of the entire federal
budget and among competing priorities within the federal R&D portfolio. The U.S. government
supports a broad range of scientific and engineering research and development. Its purposes
include addressing specific concerns such as national defense, health, safety, the environment,
and energy security; advancing knowledge generally; developing the scientific and engineering
workforce; and strengthening U.S. innovation and competitiveness in the global economy. Most
of the R&D funded by the federal government is performed in support of the unique missions of
the funding agencies. The federal government has played an important role in supporting R&D
efforts that have led to scientific breakthroughs and new technologies, from jet aircraft and the
Internet to communications satellites and defenses against disease.
Status of FY2011 Appropriations and Its Effect on the Analysis in This Report
As of the time of the release of this report, the federal government is operating on a continuing resolution (P.L. 112-
6) set to expire on April 8, 2011. During the 111th Congress, 2 of the 12 regular appropriations bills passed the
House (the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2011, and
the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2011); none passed the
Senate. Since the beginning of FY2011, federal departments and agencies have been funded under a series of interim
continuing resolutions (CRs).1 On September 29, 2010, the Senate passed a continuing resolution (H.R. 3081,
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, as amended) providing funding for federal agencies through December 3, 2010,
including their R&D activities, “at a rate for operations as provided in the applicable appropriations Acts for fiscal year
2010 and under the authority and conditions as provided in such acts.” On September 30, 2010, the House passed
H.R. 3081 and President Obama signed it into law (P.L. 111-242). Five subsequent continuing resolutions have
extended funding through December 18, 2010 (P.L. 111-290), December 21, 2010 (P.L. 111-317), March 4, 2011 (P.L.
111-322), March 18, 2011 (P.L. 112-4), and April 8, 2011 (P.L. 112-6).2 Congress is currently considering options for
completing the FY2011 appropriations process. In the absence of ful -year FY2011 appropriations, this report
compares the President’s FY2012 budget request to FY2010 appropriations.
Congress will play a central role in defining the nation’s R&D priorities as it makes decisions
with respect to the size and distribution of aggregate, agency, and programmatic R&D funding.
Some Members of Congress have expressed concerns about the level of federal funding in light
of the current federal fiscal condition, deficit, and debt. Recent action by the House on H.R. 1, the
Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, would reduce funding for R&D at some agencies
in FY2011 and re-allocate these funds for non-R&D activities. As Congress acts to complete the
FY2012 appropriations process it faces two overarching issues: the extent to which the federal
R&D investment can grow in the context of increased pressure on discretionary spending and
how available funding will be prioritized and allocated. Low or negative growth in the overall
R&D investment may require movement of resources across disciplines, programs, or agencies to
address priorities.
1 For more detailed discussion of recent continuing resolutions as well as information on the history, nature, scope, and
duration of continuing resolutions, see CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief
Overview of Recent Practices, by Sandy Streeter.
2 For information on the history, nature, scope, and duration of continuing resolutions, see CRS Report RL30343,
Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief Overview of Recent Practices, by Sandy Streeter.
Congressional Research Service
1
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
President Obama’s proposed FY2012 budget, released on February 14, 2011, includes $147.911
billion for R&D in FY2012, a 0.5% increase over the actual FY2010 R&D funding level of
$147.139 billion.3 Adjusted for inflation, the President’s FY2012 R&D request represents a
decrease of 2.2% from the FY2010 level.4 This report provides government-wide, multi-agency,
and individual agency analyses of the President’s FY2012 request as it relates to R&D and related
activities.
Among its provisions, the President’s proposed FY2012 R&D funding maintains an emphasis on
increasing funding for the physical sciences and engineering, an effort consistent with the intent
of the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69) and the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act
of 2010 (P.L. 111-358). These acts seek to achieve this objective by authorizing increased funding
for three agencies with a strong R&D emphasis in these disciplines: the Department of Energy
Office of Science, the National Science Foundation, and the Department of Commerce National
Institute of Standards and Technology’s core laboratory research and R&D facilities construction
funding. Appropriations provided to these agencies has fallen short of the levels authorized in P.L.
110-69. (See “Multiagency R&D Initiatives” for detailed information.)
More broadly, in a 2009 speech before members of the National Academy of Sciences, President
Obama put forth a goal of increasing the national investment in R&D to more than 3% of the U.S.
gross domestic product (GDP). President Obama did not provide details on how this goal might
be achieved (e.g., how much would be funded through increases in direct federal R&D funding or
through indirect mechanisms such as the research and experimentation (R&E) tax credit5);
however, doing so likely would require a substantial increase in public and private investment. In
2008, total U.S. R&D expenditures were $397.629 billion,6 or approximately 2.77% of GDP.7
Based on 2008 figures, reaching President Obama’s 3% goal would require an 8.4% real increase
(above inflation) in national R&D funding. Increasing direct federal R&D funding by 8.4% in
FY2012 would have required an increase of $12.4 billion above President Obama’s request.
In addition, advocates for increased federal R&D funding—including President Obama’s science
advisor, John Holdren—have raised concerns about the potential harm of a “boom-bust” approach
to federal R&D funding (i.e., rapid growth in federal R&D funding followed by much slower
growth, flat funding, or even decline).8 The biomedical research community experienced a variety
of challenges resulting from such a circumstance following the five-year doubling of the NIH
3 Funding levels included in this document are in current dollars unless otherwise noted. Inflation diminishes the
purchasing power of federal R&D funds, so an increase that does not equal or exceed the inflation rate may reduce real
purchasing power.
4 As calculated by CRS using the GDP (chained) price index from Table 10.1, Gross Domestic Product and Deflators
Used In The Historical Tables: 1940–2016, from the President’s FY2012 budget. Available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/hist10z1.xls.
5 The research and experimentation tax credit is frequently referred to as the research and development tax credit or
R&D tax credit, through the credit does not apply to development expenditures. For additional information about the
R&E tax credit, see CRS Report RL31181, Research and Experimentation Tax Credit: Current Status and Selected
Issues for Congress, by Gary Guenther.
6 Preliminary estimate of 2009 U.S. R&D expenditures, National Science Foundation, National Patterns of R&D
Resources:2008, NSF 10-314, Arlington, VA, March 2010, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf10314/.
7 Based on 2009 U.S. GDP of $14,369.1 billion as reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic
Analysis, National Income and Product Accounts Table, Table 1.1.5, http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/
TableView.asp?SelectedTable=5&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2007&LastYear=2009.
8 Jennifer Couzin and Greg Miller, “NIH Budget: Boom and Bust,” Science, vol. 316, no. 5823 (April 2007), pp. 356-
361, at http://www.scienceonline.org/cgi/content/full/316/5823/356.
Congressional Research Service
2
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
budget that was completed in FY2003. With the NIH doubling came a rapid expansion of the
nation’s biomedical research infrastructure (e.g., buildings, laboratories, equipment), as well as
rapid growth in university faculty hiring, students pursuing biomedical degrees, and grant
applications to NIH. After the doubling, however, the agency’s budget fell each year in real terms
from FY2004 to FY2009. Critics assert there have been a variety of damages from this boom-bust
cycle, including interruptions and cancellations of promising research, declining share in the
number of NIH grant proposals funded, decreased student interest in pursuing graduate studies,
and reduced employment prospects for the large number of biomedical researchers with advanced
degrees. According to then-NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, the damages have been particularly
acute for early- and mid-career scientists seeking a first or second grant.9
Analysis of federal R&D funding is complicated by several factors, including the Obama
Administration’s omission of congressionally directed spending from the FY2012 budget request
and inconsistency among agencies in the reporting of R&D. As a result of this and other factors,
the R&D agency figures reported by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
and White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and shown in Table 1, may
differ somewhat from the agency budget analyses that appear later in this report.
Another factor complicating analysis of the President’s FY2012 budget request is the inclusion of
the Wireless Innovation (WIN) Fund, a part of the Administration’s Wireless Innovation and
Infrastructure Initiative. The WIN Fund would receive $3 billion over seven years (FY2012-
FY2018) from receipts generated through electromagnetic spectrum auctions. According to the
President’s request, the WIN funds would support research, test beds, and applications
development to support leading-edge wireless technologies and applications for public safety,
Smart Grid, telemedicine, distance learning, and other broadband capabilities and to facilitate
spectrum relocation. Under the President’s budget, if the WIN Fund is established, several
agencies would receive funding for these purposes, among them the Department of Defense, the
Department of Energy, the Department of Commerce, and the National Science Foundation.
Federal R&D Funding Perspectives
Federal R&D funding can be analyzed from a variety of perspectives that provide unique insights.
Agency Perspective
The authorization and appropriations process views federal R&D funding primarily from agency
and program perspectives. Table 1 provides data on R&D by agency for FY2010 (actual) and
FY2012 (request) as reported by OMB, and has a column for FY2011 that will be completed
when Congress completes action for the fiscal year.
Under President Obama’s FY2012 budget request, six federal agencies would receive 94.8% of
total federal R&D funding: Department of Defense (DOD), 51.8%; Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) (primarily the National Institutes of Health, NIH), 21.9%; Department of
Energy (DOE), 8.8%; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 6.6%; National
9 Ibid. For additional information on NIH R&D funding issues, see CRS Report R41705, The National Institutes of
Health (NIH): Organization, Funding, and Congressional Issues, by Judith A. Johnson and Pamela W. Smith.
Congressional Research Service
3
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Science Foundation (NSF), 4.3%; and Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1.5%. This report
provides an analysis of the R&D budget requests for these agencies, as well as for the
Departments of Commerce (DOC), Homeland Security (DHS), the Interior (DOI), and
Transportation (DOT), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In total, these agencies
account for more than 98% of current and requested federal R&D funding.
The largest agency R&D increases in the President’s FY2012 request are for DOE, $2.153 billion
(19.9%); HHS, $919 million (2.9%, due entirely to a $1.019 billion increase in R&D funding for
NIH); NSF, $875 million (16.1%); NASA, $559 million (6.0%); and DOC, $376 million (28.0%).
Under President Obama’s FY2012 budget request, DOD R&D funding would be reduced by
$3.969 billion (-4.9%), USDA R&D by $461 million (-17.7%), Department of Veterans Affairs
R&D by $144 million (-12.4%), and EPA R&D by $11 million (-1.9%).
Table 1. Federal Research and Development Funding by Agency, FY2010-FY2012
(Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
Dollar
Change,
Percent
FY2010
FY2012
2010 to
Change, 2010
Department/Agency
Actual
FY2011
Request
2012
to 2012
Agriculture 2,611
2,150
-461
-17.7
Commerce 1,344
1,720
376
28.0
Defense 80,602
76,633
-3,969
-4.9
Energy 10,836
12,989
2,153
19.9
Environmental Protection
Agency 590
579
-11
-1.9
Health and Human Services
31,424
32,343
919
2.9
Homeland Security
887
1,054
167
18.8
Interior 776
727
-49
-6.3
NASA 9,262
9,821
559
6.0
National Science Foundation
5,445
6,320
875
16.1
Transportation 1,069
1,215
146
13.7
Veterans Affairs
1,162
1,018
-144
-12.4
Other 1,131
1,342
211
18.7
Totala 147,139
147,911
772
0.5
Sources: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of
the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2012, Table 22-1.
a. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
Character of Work, Facilities, and Equipment Perspective
Federal R&D funding can also be examined by the character of work it supports—basic research,
applied research, and development—and funding provided for facilities and acquisition of major
R&D equipment. (See Table 2.) President Obama’s FY2012 request includes $32.895 billion for
basic research, up $3.498 billion (11.9%) from FY2010; $33.182 billion for applied research, up
Congressional Research Service
4
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
$3.383 billion (11.4%); $79.414 billion for development, down $3.891 billion (-4.7%); and
$2.420 billion for facilities and equipment, down $2.218 billion (-47.8%). It is important to note
that with the projected completion of construction of the International Space Station (ISS) in
FY2011, beginning in FY2012 NASA funding for operation of the facility is accounted for as
research; previously, NASA ISS funding was accounted for as “facilities and equipment.”
Table 2. Federal Research and Development Funding by Character of Work,
Facilities, and Equipment, FY2010-FY2012
(Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
Percent
Dollar
Change,
FY2012
Change,
2010 to
FY2010
Actual
FY2011
Request
2010 to 2012
2012
Basic research
29,937
32,895
3,498
11.9
Applied research
29,799
33,182
3,383
11.4
Development
83,305
79,414 -3,891 -4.7
Facilities and equipment
4,638
2,420
-2,218 -47.8
Totala 147,139
147,911
772
0.5
Source: Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Innovation, Education, and
Infrastructure, Table 1, February 14, 2011.
a. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
Combined Perspective
Combining these perspectives, federal R&D funding can be viewed in terms of each agency’s
contribution to basic research, applied research, development, and facilities and equipment. (See
Table 3.) The federal government is the nation’s largest supporter of basic research, funding
57.0% of U.S. basic research in 2008,10 primarily because the private sector asserts it cannot
capture an adequate return on long-term fundamental research investments. In contrast, industry
funded only 17.7% of U.S. basic research in 2008 (with state governments, universities, and other
non-profit organizations funding the remaining 25.3%). In the President’s FY2012 budget
request, the Department of Health and Human Services, primarily the National Institutes of
Health (NIH), accounts for more than half of all federal funding for basic research.11
In contrast to basic research, industry is the primary funder of applied research in the United
States, accounting for an estimated 60.8% in 2008, while the federal government accounted for an
estimated 32.4%.12 Among federal agencies, HHS is the largest funder of applied research,
10 National Science Foundation, New NSF Estimates Indicate that U.S. R&D Spending Continued to Grow in 2008,
NSF 10-312, January 2010, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf10312/#fn.http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf08318/.
11 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United
States Government, Fiscal Year 2012, Table 22-1, February 14, 2011.
12 National Science Foundation, National Patterns of R&D Resources: 2007 Data Update, NSF 08-318, 2008,
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf08318/.
Congressional Research Service
5
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
accounting for nearly half of all federally funded applied research in the President’s FY2012
budget request.13
Industry also provides the vast majority of funding for development. Industry accounted for an
estimated 84.1% in 2008, while the federal government provided an estimated 14.9%.14 DOD is
the primary federal agency funder of development, accounting for 87.7% of total federal
development funding in the President’s FY2012 budget request.15
Table 3. Top R&D Funding Agencies by Character of Work, Facilities and Equipment,
FY2010-FY2012
(Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
Dollar
Percent
FY2010
FY2012
Change,
Change,
Actual
Request
2010 to 2012 2010 to 2012
Basic Research
Health and Human Services
16,082
16,614
532
3.3
National Science Foundation
4,636
5,310
674
14.5
Energy 3,971
4,200
229
5.8
Applied Research
Health and Human Services
15,177
15,559
382
2.5
Energy 3,407
4,830
1,423
41.8
Defense 4,984
4,787
-197
-4.0
Development
Defense 73,734
69,664
-4,070
-5.5
NASA 5,461
5,135
-326
-6.0
Energy 2,520
2,859
339
13.5
Facilities and Equipment
Energy 938
1,100
162
17.3
National Science Foundation
482
443
-39
-8.1
Commerce 269
282
13
4.8
Source: Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2012, Office of Management and
Budget, The White House, February 14, 2011.
Note: Top funding agencies based on FY2012 request.
13 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Table 22-1, February
14, 2011, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/spec.pdf.
14 National Science Foundation, National Patterns of R&D Resources, 2008, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf08318/.
15 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Table 22-1, February
14, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
6
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Multiagency R&D Initiatives Perspective
Federal R&D funding can also be viewed in terms of multiagency efforts, such as the National
Nanotechnology Initiative (see “Multiagency R&D Initiatives”), and presidential initiatives.
In 2006, President Bush announced his American Competitiveness Initiative which, in part,
sought to double funding for basic research over 10 years (FY2006-2016) at three agencies—
NSF, DOE’s Office of Science, and NIST.
In 2007, Congress authorized substantial increases for these agencies under the America
COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69), setting a more aggressive seven-year doubling course.16
However, funding provided for these agencies in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L.
110-161), the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8), and the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117) fell below these targets. The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) also provided funding for each of the three ACI agencies
totaling approximately $5.202 billion in addition to the enacted levels in P.L. 110-329. (See Table
4 for individual and aggregate agency appropriations for FY2006-FY2010, and the request for
FY2012.) In 2010, Congress authorized appropriations levels for FY2011-FY2013 for these
agencies in the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-358).17 However the
agency authorization levels in this act represent increases of 5.8% to 7.1% per year, growth rates
that would result in doubling in about 10 to 12 years.
In his FY2010 Plan for Science and Innovation, President Obama stated that he, like President
Bush, would seek to double funding for basic research over 10 years (FY2006 to FY2016) at the
ACI agencies.18 In FY2011 supporting budget documents, President Obama extended the period
over which he would seek to double these agencies’ budgets to 11 years (FY2006 to FY2017).19
In his FY2012 budget request, President Obama reiterated his intention to double the federal
investment for these agencies from their FY2006 levels, though his budget request intentionally
does not specify the timeframe during which this is to take place.20 In addition, the Historical
Tables of the President’s FY2012 budget—which also provide outyear projections of agency
budget authority—show budget authority for the National Science Foundation initially dipping in
FY2013, then remaining essentially flat through FY2016.
The FY2012 budget requests for the three agencies are: DOE’s Office of Science (up 10.7%
above the estimated FY2010 level), NSF (up 13.0%), and DOC’s National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) core laboratory research21 and R&D facilities construction funds (up
16 For additional information, see CRS Report RL34328, America COMPETES Act: Programs, Funding, and Selected
Issues, by Deborah D. Stine.
17 For additional information, see CRS Report R41231, America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (H.R. 5116)
and the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69): Selected Policy Issues, coordinated by Heather B. Gonzalez.
18 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, The President’s Plan for Science and
Innovation: Doubling Funding for Key Basic Research Agencies in the 2010 Budget, May 7, 2009,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documents/ostp/budget/doubling.pdf.
19 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, The President’s Plan for Science and
Innovation: Doubling Funding for Key Basic Research Agencies in the 2011 Budget, February 1, 2010,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/doubling%2011%20final.pdf.
20 Telephone conversation with OSTP staff, May 23, 2011.
21 NIST core laboratory research is the scientific and technical research and services account.
Congressional Research Service
7
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
15.1%).22 Aggregate funding for these agencies in FY2012 would rise to $13.947 billion, an
increase $1.409 billion (11.2%) above the FY2010 actual aggregate funding level of $12.538
billion. Figure 1 shows funding of the agencies as a percentage of their FY2006 funding level,
and illustrates how actual (FY2006-FY2010) and authorized appropriations (FY2011 through
FY2013) compare to different doubling rates using FY2006 as the base year. The thick black line
labeled “DOUBLE” is the 200% line, indicating twice as much funding as received in FY2006.
The data used in Figure 1 is in current dollars, not constant dollars, therefore the effect of
inflation on the purchasing power of these funds is not taken into consideration.
Figure 1. Doubling of Research Funding:
Appropriations and Authorizations versus Selected Rates
NSF, DOE Office of Science, and NIST Core Research and Construction
Appropropriations and Authorizations as a Percentage of FY2006 Appropriations;
Illustrative 7-, 10-, 11-, and 15-year Doubling Paths
225%
NSF (regular approp. + ARRA)
D O U B L E
200%
7-year
10-year
doubling path
doubling path
11-year
doubling path
DOE/SC (regular approp. + ARRA)
175%
Total (regular approp. + ARRA)
NSF (regular approp. + ARRA)
150%
15-year
doubling path
NSF
125%
DOE/SC
NIST
100%
Total
America COMPETES Act
(Total)
75%
FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) using agency budget justifications for fiscal years
2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012; the President’s FY2012 budget request; and agency authorization levels from the
America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-358) for FY2011-FY2013.
Notes: Separate data points for each agency and total funding are included for FY2009 that represent the total level
of funding received under both regular appropriations and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.The
22 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Innovation, Education, and
Infrastructure, February 14, 2011, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/FY12-rd-fs.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
8
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
seven-year double pace assumes annual increases of 10.4%, the 10-year doubling pace assumes annual increases of
7.2%, the 11-year doubling pace assumes annual increases of 6.5%, and the 15-year doubling assumes annual increases
of 4.7%. Through compounding,, these rates achieve the doubling of funding in the specified time period. The lines
connecting annual agency/total appropriations is for illustration purposes only. Agency data for FY2006-FY2010 based
on appropriations (actual); America COMPETES Act figures based on levels authorized by the act. Agency and total
figures for FY2011-FY2013 (connected with dotted lines) are based on agency authorization levels in the America
COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. NIST data includes funding only for scientific and technical research and
services (STRS) and construction accounts. DOE/SC is the Department of Energy’s Office of Science; NSF is the
National Science Foundation; NIST is the National Institute of Standards and Technology; ARRA is the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5).
Table 4. Funding for Agencies Targeted for Doubling by President Obama, the
America COMPETES Act, and the American Competitiveness Initiative
(dollar amounts in millions)
FY2006 FY2007 FY2008
FY2009
FY2009
FY2010
FY2012
Agency
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
ARRA
Actual FY2011 Request
NSF
5,646 5,884 6,084
6,469
2,402
6,972
7,767
DOE/Office of
3,632 3,837 4,083
4,807
1,633
4,904
5,416
Science
NIST/core researcha 395 434 441
472
220
515
679
NIST/facilities 174
59 161
172
360
147
85
Totalb
9,846 10,214 10,768
11,920
4,615
12,538
13,947
Sources: National Institute of Standards and Technology, budget requests for fiscal years 2008, 2009, 2010,
2011, and 2012, available at http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/budget/index.cfm; Department of Energy, budget
requests for fiscal years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, available at http://www.cfo.doe.gov/crorgcf30.htm;
National Science Foundation, budget requests for fiscal years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 available at
http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/.
a. NIST core research is performed under its Scientific and Technical Research and Services account.
b. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
Multiagency R&D Initiatives
National Nanotechnology Initiative
President Obama’s FY2012 budget request provides funding for three multiagency R&D
initiatives. Funding for the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) is requested in the amount
of $2.130 billion for FY2012, $217 million (11.3%) above the FY2010 actual level of $1.931
billion. The overall increase in the FY2012 NNI funding request is due, in part, to funding for
what the administration refers to as “signature initiatives:” Nanoelectronics for 2020 and Beyond;
Sustainable Manufacturing: Creating the Industries of the Future; and Nanotechnology for Solar
Energy Collection and Conversion. Under the Administration’s FY2012 request, nanotechnology
funding would increase at the Department of Energy by $237 million (63.3%) over its FY2010
funding level, at the Department of Health and Human Services by $24 million (5.0%), at NASA
by $13 million (64.0%), and at the National Science Foundation by $11 million (2.5%). Funding
for FY2012 would fall for the Department of Defense by $71 million (-16.2%), the Department of
Congressional Research Service
9
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Homeland Security by $12 million (-53.4%), and the Department of Agriculture by $4 million
(-18.2%). Nanotechnology funding for other NNI agencies would remain flat in FY2012.23
Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development Program
President Obama has requested $3.868 billion in FY2012 funding for the Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) program, $74 million (2.0%)
above the FY2010 actual level. The NITRD request includes reductions of $261 million (-19.9%)
in DOD funding and $21 million (-3.1%) for HHS funding, and increases of $153 million
(13.8%) for NSF, $108 million (24.1%) for DOE, $53 million (49.3%) for DOC, $35 million
(69.7%) for DHS, and $9 million for NASA (11.0%).24
U.S. Global Change Research Program
President Obama has proposed $2.633 billion for the U.S. Global Change Research Program
(USGCRP) in FY2012, $446 million (20.4%) above the FY2010 actual level of $2.187 billion.
Four agencies would receive the bulk of the FY2010 USGCRP funding increase: NASA (up $215
million, 19.1%); NSF (up $106 million, 33.0%); DOC, including the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and NIST (up $56 million, 15.4%); and DOE (up $54 million,
31.5%).25
FY2012 Appropriations Status
The remainder of this report provides a more in-depth analysis of R&D in 12 federal departments
and agencies that, in aggregate, receive more than 98% of federal R&D funding. Annual
appropriations for these agencies are provided through 8 of the 12 regular appropriations bills.
For each agency covered below, Table 5 shows the corresponding regular appropriations bill that
provides funding for the agency, including its R&D activities.
In addition to this report, CRS produces individual reports on each of the appropriations bills.
These reports can be accessed via the CRS website at http://crs.gov/Pages/clis.aspx?cliid=73.
Also, the status of each appropriations bills is or will be available on the CRS webpage, FY2012
Status Table of Appropriations, available at http://www.crs.gov/Pages/appover.aspx. This report
will be updated as relevant appropriations bills are passed by the House or the Senate.
23National Science and Technology Council, The White House, The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and
Development Leading to a Revolution in Technology and Industry, Supplement to the President’s FY2012 Budget,
February 2011. For additional information on the NNI, see CRS Report RL34401, The National Nanotechnology
Initiative: Overview, Reauthorization, and Appropriations Issues, by John F. Sargent Jr.
24 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Innovation, Education, and
Infrastructure, Table 2, February 14, 2011.
25 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Innovation, Education, and
Infrastructure, Table 2, February 14, 2011. For additional information on the USGCRP, see CRS Report RL33817,
Climate Change: Federal Program Funding and Tax Incentives, by Jane A. Leggett.
Congressional Research Service
10
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 5. Alignment of Agency R&D Funding and Regular Appropriations Bills
Department/Agency
Regular Appropriations Bill
Department of Defense
Department of Defense Appropriations Act
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act
National Institutes of Health
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act
Department of Energy
Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act
National Science Foundation
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act
Department of Commerce
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Appropriations Act
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act
Department of Agriculture
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act
Department of the Interior
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act
Department of Transportation
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act
Source: CRS website, FY2011 Status Table of Appropriations, available at http://www.crs.gov/Pages/
appover.aspx.
Department of Defense26
Congress supports research and development in the Department of Defense (DOD) primarily
through its Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) appropriation. The
appropriation supports the development of the nation’s future military hardware and software and
the technology base upon which those products rely.
Nearly all of what DOD spends on RDT&E is appropriated in Title IV of the defense
appropriation bill. (See Table 6.) However, RDT&E funds are also appropriated in other parts of
the bill. For example, RDT&E funds are appropriated as part of the Defense Health Program, the
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program, and the National Defense Sealift Fund.
The Defense Health Program supports the delivery of health care to DOD personnel and their
families. Program funds are requested through the Operations and Maintenance appropriation.
The program’s RDT&E funds support congressionally directed research in such areas as breast,
prostate, and ovarian cancer and other medical conditions. Congress appropriates funds for this
program in Title VI (Other Department of Defense Programs) of the defense appropriations bill.
26 This section was written by John Moteff, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
11
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
The Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program supports activities to destroy the U.S.
inventory of lethal chemical agents and munitions to avoid future risks and costs associated with
storage. Funds for this program have been requested through the Procurement appropriation.
Congress appropriates funds for this program also in Title VI. The National Defense Sealift Fund
supports the procurement, operation and maintenance, and research and development of the
nation’s naval reserve fleet and supports a U.S. flagged merchant fleet that can serve in time of
need. Requests for this fund are made as part of the Navy’s Procurement appropriation. Congress
appropriates funds for this program in Title V (Revolving and Management Funds) of the defense
appropriations bill.
The Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund (JIEDDF) also contains RDT&E monies.
However, the fund does not contain an RDT&E line item as do the three programs mentioned
above. The Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Office, which now administers the fund,
tracks (but does not report) the amount of funding allocated to RDT&E. The JIEDDF funding is
not included in the table below.
RDT&E funds also have been requested and appropriated as part of DOD’s separate funding to
support efforts in what the Bush Administration had termed the Global War on Terror (GWOT),
and what the Obama Administration refers to as Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO).
Typically, the RDT&E funds appropriated for GWOT/OCO activities go to specified Program
Elements (PEs) in Title IV. However, they are requested and accounted for separately. The Bush
Administration requested these funds in separate GWOT emergency supplemental requests. The
Obama Administration, while continuing to identify these funds uniquely as OCO requests, has
included these funds as part of the regular budget, not in emergency supplementals. However, the
Obama Administration will ask for additional OCO funds in supplemental requests, if the initial
OCO funding is not enough to get through the fiscal year.
In addition, GWOT/OCO-related requests/appropriations often include money for a number of
transfer funds. These include the Iraqi Freedom Fund (IFF), the Iraqi Security Forces Fund, the
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, the Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund
(MRAPVF), and, beginning in FY2010, the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund.
Congress typically makes a single appropriation into each of these funds, and authorizes the
Secretary to make transfers to other accounts, including RDT&E, at his discretion.
For FY2012, the Obama Administration requested $75.325 billion for DOD’s baseline Title IV
RDT&E. The FY2012 request is $5.330 billion (nearly 7%) below the actual total obligational
authority available in FY2010. In addition to the $75.325 billion baseline request, the
Administration requested $100 million as DOD’s share of the Wireless Innovation Fund. This
fund (approximately $3 billion distributed through various departments) is part of the President’s
initiative to expand coverage and usage of the nation’s wireless networks and to encourage
innovation in wireless devices. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) will
manage the $100 million for DOD.
For FY2012, the Administration requested an additional $664 million in RDT&E through the
Defense Health Program, $407 million in RDT&E through the Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction program, and $48 million in RDT&E through the National Defense Sealift Fund. To
support overseas contingencies, the Administration requested $397 million in OCO-related
RDT&E. The Administration also requested $2 million in RDT&E for DOD’s Office of the
Inspector General.
Congressional Research Service
12
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
RDT&E funding can be broken out in different ways. Each of the military departments request
and receive their own RDT&E funding. So, too, do various DOD agencies (e.g., the Missile
Defense Agency and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), collectively aggregated
within the Defensewide account. RDT&E funding also can be characterized by budget activity
(i.e., the type of RDT&E supported). Those budget activities designated as 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 (basic
research, applied research, and advanced technology development, respectively) constitute what
is called DOD’s Science and Technology Program (S&T) and represent the more research-
oriented part of the RDT&E program. Budget activities 6.4 and 6.5 focus on the development of
specific weapon systems or components (e.g., the Joint Strike Fighter or missile defense systems),
for which an operational need has been determined and an acquisition program established.
Budget activity 6.6 provides management support, including support for test and evaluation
facilities. Budget activity 6.7 supports system improvements in existing operational systems.
Congressional policymakers are particularly interested in S&T funding since these funds support
the development of new technologies and the underlying science. Ensuring adequate support for
S&T activities is seen by some in the defense community as imperative to maintaining U.S.
military superiority. This was of particular concern at a time when defense budgets and RDT&E
funding were falling at the end of the Cold War.
The FY2012 baseline S&T funding request in Title IV is $12.246 billion (not including the $100
million for the Wireless Innovation Fund), about $1.060 billion (8%) less than the total
obligational authority available for baseline S&T in Title IV in FY2010.
Within the S&T program, basic research (6.1) receives special attention, particularly by the
nation’s universities. DOD is not a large supporter of basic research, when compared to NIH or
NSF. However, over half of DOD’s basic research budget is spent at universities and represents
the major contribution of funds in some areas of science and technology (such as electrical
engineering and material science). The FY2012 request for basic research ($2.078 billion) is
roughly $263 million (14%) more than what was available for Title IV basic research in FY2010.
The table below does not yet include funding levels for FY2011, given the uncertainty regarding
the outcome of ongoing budget negotiations. However, policymakers may note that the
Administration requested less funding for RDT&E in FY2011 than was appropriated in FY2010.
Therefore, while many agencies are unlikely to see their FY2011 requests met, DOD may end up
with more money for RDT&E in FY2011 than was requested.
Table 6. Department of Defense RDT&E
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2010
FY2011
Request
Base +
Base +
OCO
OCO
Budget Account
Actual
Enacted Base OCO
Army 11,711
9,684
9
Navy 19,948
17,956
54
Air Force
27,917
27,738
142
Defensewide 20,890
19,856a 192
Congressional Research Service
13
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Dir. Test & Eval.
188
191
Total Title IV - By Accountb 80,655
75,425
397
Budget
Activity
6.1 Basic Research
1,815
2,078
6.2 Applied Research
4,984
4,687
6.3 Advanced Dev.
6,507
5,581a
6.4 Advanced Component Dev. and
Prototypes 14,469
13,727
2
6.5 Systems Dev. and Demo
16,779
15,664
11
6.6 Management Supportc 6,098
4,175
18
6.7 Op. Systems Dev.d 30,003
29,512
366
Classified programs
17,671
17,605
Total Title IV—by Budget Activityb 80,655
75,425
397
Title V—Revolving and
Management
Funds
National Defense Sealift Fund
73
48
Title VI—Other Defense Programs
Office of Inspector General
2
Defense Health Program
1,444
664
Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction 351
407
Grand Totalb 82,523
76,546
397
Source: CRS, adapted from the Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2012, RDT&E Programs (R-1),
February 2011.
a. For FY2012, this figure includes the $100 million for DARPA’s Wireless Innovation Fund.
b. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
c. Includes funding for the Director of Test and Evaluation.
d. Includes funding for classified programs. Figure for classified programs noted in italics below.
Department of Homeland Security27
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has requested $1.528 billion for R&D and related
programs in FY2012, a 9.2% increase from FY2010. This total includes $1.176 billion for the
Directorate of Science and Technology (S&T), $332 million for the Domestic Nuclear Detection
Office (DNDO), and $20 million for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) in
the U.S. Coast Guard. (See Table 7.)
27 This section was written by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
14
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
The S&T Directorate is the primary DHS R&D organization.28 Headed by the Under Secretary
for Science and Technology, it performs R&D in several laboratories of its own and funds R&D
performed by the DOE national laboratories, industry, universities, and others. The
Administration has requested $1.176 billion for the S&T Directorate for FY2012. This is 17.6%
more than the FY2010 appropriation of $1.000 billion. An increase of $126 million for
Laboratory Facilities would support the beginning of construction at the National Bio and Agro-
Defense Facility (NBAF). Funding for University Programs would decrease $12 million, in part
through the elimination of the National Transportation Security Center of Excellence. In the new
Research, Development, and Innovation budget line, about $109 million of the request would
fund radiological and nuclear R&D activities currently conducted in DNDO. Also in Research,
Development, and Innovation, the request includes an increase of $18 million for cybersecurity
R&D.
In late 2010, the S&T Directorate announced a reorganization and released a new strategic plan.
The reorganization reduced the number of direct reports to the Under Secretary and was
accompanied by a change in budget structure, with most of the previous budget lines combined
into two new categories: Acquisition and Operations Support and Research, Development, and
Innovation. (The FY2010 budget presented in the new categories is shown as “FY2010
Comparable” in Table 7.) According to DHS, the new strategy and organization will result in
more robust partnerships with other DHS components, a smaller number of larger projects, and
more emphasis on transitioning technology into the field rather than long-term research.
The construction of NBAF will likely result in increased congressional oversight over the next
several years. For construction of NBAF and decommissioning of the Plum Island Animal
Disease Center (PIADC), which NBAF is intended to replace, DHS expects to need further
appropriations of $541 million between FY2013 and FY2017, in addition to the $150 million
requested for FY2012. In the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L.
110-329, Div. D, §540) and the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L.
111-83, §540), Congress authorized DHS to use receipts from the sale of Plum Island, subject to
appropriation, to offset NBAF construction and PIADC decommissioning costs. According to
DHS, the likely value of those receipts “has been found to be considerably overestimated.”29
The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office is the primary DHS organization for combating the threat
of nuclear attack. It is responsible for all DHS nuclear detection development, testing, evaluation,
acquisition, and operational support. Under the Administration’s FY2012 budget, however, much
of DNDO’s research role would be transferred to the S&T Directorate. The Administration has
requested a total of $332 million for DNDO for FY2012. This is an 11.5% decrease from the
FY2010 appropriation of $375 million.30 Systems Acquisition would receive $84 million in
FY2012 versus $20 million in FY2010. Systems Development would be reduced by $30 million.
Congressional attention has focused in recent years on the testing and analysis DNDO has
conducted to support its planned purchase and deployment of Advanced Spectroscopic Portals
28 For more information, see CRS Report RL34356, The DHS Directorate of Science and Technology: Key Issues for
Congress, by Dana A. Shea and Daniel Morgan.
29 DHS FY2012 budget justification, p. S&T RDA&O 24. For more information on NBAF, see CRS Report RL34160,
The National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility: Issues for Congress, by Dana A. Shea, Jim Monke, and Frank Gottron.
30 The decrease is more than accounted for, however, by the proposed transfer of the Transformational and Applied
Research program to the S&T Directorate. If the $109 million appropriated for that program in FY2010 is excluded, the
FY2012 request for the remaining DNDO activities represents an increase of 25%.
Congressional Research Service
15
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
(ASPs), a type of next-generation radiation portal monitor.31 Congress included a requirement for
secretarial certification before full-scale ASP procurement in each homeland security
appropriations act from FY2007 through FY2010. The expected date for certification has been
postponed several times. In February 2010, DHS decided that it would no longer pursue the use
of ASPs for primary screening, although it will continue to develop and test them for use in
secondary screening.32 The FY2012 request includes funds to purchase and deploy 44 ASPs for
secondary screening.
The global nuclear detection architecture overseen by DNDO remains an issue of congressional
interest.33 The Systems Engineering and Architecture activity includes a GNDA development
program as well as programs to develop and assess GNDA activities in various mission areas.
For the first time, the Administration’s FY2012 request includes funds for the Securing the Cities
program, which was previously funded at congressional direction. According to DHS, this
program aligns with a new DNDO emphasis on developing surge capabilities and working with
state and local law enforcement agencies. The program was previously limited to the New York
area; it is to be expanded to an additional city in FY2012.
The mission of DNDO, as established by Congress in the SAFE Port Act (P.L. 109-347, Title V),
includes serving as the primary federal entity “to further develop, acquire, and support the
deployment of an enhanced domestic system” for detection of nuclear and radiological devices
and material (6 U.S.C. 592). The same act eliminated any explicit mention of radiological and
nuclear countermeasures from the statutory duties and responsibilities of the Under Secretary for
S&T.
Congress may consider whether the proposed transfer of DNDO’s research activities to the S&T
Directorate is consistent with its intent in the SAFE Port Act. Congress may also choose to
consider the acquisition portion of DNDO’s mission. Most of DNDO’s funding for Systems
Acquisition was eliminated in FY2010, and that year’s budget stated that “funding requests for
radiation detection equipment will now be sought by the end users that will operate them.”34 In
contrast, the FY2012 request for Systems Acquisition includes funding for ASPs that would be
operated by Customs and Border Protection, as well as human-portable radiation detectors for the
Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, and the Transportation Security Administration.
The reasons for this apparent reversal of policy are not explained in either the FY2011 or the
FY2012 DNDO budget justification.
31 For more information, see CRS Report RL34750, The Advanced Spectroscopic Portal Program: Background and
Issues for Congress, by Dana A. Shea, John D. Moteff, and Daniel Morgan.
32 Letter from Dr. William K. Hagan, Acting Director, DNDO, to Senator Lieberman, February 24, 2010,
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=11f7d1f0-c4fe-4105-94e6-
bb4a0213f048.
33 For more information, see CRS Report RL34574, The Global Nuclear Detection Architecture: Issues for Congress,
by Dana A. Shea.
34 Executive Office of the President, FY2010 Budget, Appendix, p. 560.
Congressional Research Service
16
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 7. Department of Homeland Security R&D and Related Programs
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
Enacted
Comparable
Enacted
Request
Directorate of Science and Technology
$1,000
$1,000
$1,176
Management and Administration
143
143
149
R&D, Acquisition, and Operations
856
856
1,027
Acquisition and Operations Support
—
86
54
Laboratory Facilities 150
150
276
Research, Development, and Innovation
—
577
660
University Programs
49
49
37
Border and Maritime
44
—
—
Chemical and Biological
207
—
—
Command, Control, and Interoperability
82
—
—
Explosives 121
—
—
Human Factors / Behavioral Sciences
16
—
—
Infrastructure and Geophysical
75
—
—
Innovation 44
—
—
Test and Evaluation, Standards
29
—
—
Transition 46
—
—
Rescission of Prior-Year Unobligated Balances
(7)
(7)
—
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
375
375
332
Management and Administration
38
38
41
Research, Development, and Operations
317
317
206
Systems Engineering and Architecture
25
25
32
Systems Development
100
100
70
Transformational R&D
109
109
—
Assessments 32
32
43
Operations 38
38
37
Forensics 20
20
25
Rescission of Prior-Year Unobligated Balances
(8)
(8)
—
Systems Acquisition
20
20
84
Radiation Portal Monitors Program
0
0
37
Securing the Cities
20
20
27
Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems
0
0
20
U.S. Coast Guard RDT&E
25
25
20
TOTAL 1,399
1,399
1,528
Source: FY2010 enacted from P.L. 111-83 and H.Rept. 111-298. FY2012 request from DHS FY2012 budget
justification, online at http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/budget/. FY2010 comparable amounts for S&T Acquisition and
Congressional Research Service
17
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Operations Support and S&T Research, Development, and Innovation from U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation, An Overview of
Science and Technology Research and Development Programs and Priorities at the Department of Homeland Security,
hearing charter, March 15, 2011, p. 2.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
National Institutes of Health35
For FY2012 the Obama Administration has requested $32.0 billion for NIH, an increase of $745
million (2.4%) over FY2010. The agency will focus on implementing a new translational
medicine program in FY2012 as well as emphasize three other broad scientific areas including
advanced technologies, comparative effectiveness research, and support for young investigators.36
For the new program, NIH is proposing to establish a new center, the National Center for
Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) to catalyze the development of new diagnostics and
therapeutics. To do so, NIH proposes to abolish the existing National Center for Research
Resources (NCRR) and transfer its Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) program to
NCATS.37 The FY2012 request proposes $485 million for CTSA, a program which funds a
national consortium of medical research institutions that work together to accelerate treatment
development, engage communities in clinical research efforts, and train clinical and translational
researchers. Another component of NCATS will be the Therapeutics for Rare and Neglected
Diseases (TRND) program; the request would double support for TRND in FY2012 to $50
million. TRND is currently funded on an NIH-wide basis.
NCATS may also incorporate the new Cures Acceleration Network (CAN), which was authorized
but not funded, in the new health reform law (P.L. 111-148). The purpose of CAN is to support
the development of high need cures and facilitate their FDA review. P.L. 111-148 authorized $500
million for FY2010 and such sums as may be necessary for subsequent fiscal years for CAN. The
law also specified that other funds appropriated under the Public Health Service Act may not be
allocated to CAN. The NIH request proposes $100 million for CAN in FY2012. If CAN receives
funding, NIH would determine which medical products are “high need cures,” and then make
awards to research entities or companies in order to accelerate the development of such high need
cures.
In addition to the new program, NIH will emphasize three scientific areas in FY2012:
1. Technologies to Accelerate Discovery. NIH will support further development and
application of advanced technologies (such as DNA sequencing, microarray
technology, nanotechnology, new imaging modalities, and computational
biology) to further understanding of complex diseases, such as cancer and
Alzheimer’s disease, to enable development of more effective therapies.
35 This section was written by Judith A. Johnson, Specialist in Biomedical Policy, CRS Domestic Social Policy
Division.
36 Translational medicine focuses on converting basic research discoveries into clinical applications that benefit
patients.
37 NIH, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, FY2012, Vol. I, Overview, p. ES-12.
Congressional Research Service
18
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
2. Enhancing the Evidence Base for Health Care Decisions. NIH plans to use
comparative effectiveness research methodologies to assist in developing
individually-tailored treatments (personalized medicine) by testing candidate
therapies in a group of Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) caring for
more than 13 million patients.
3. New Investigators, New Ideas. NIH will emphasize two of its programs that
support young scientists. The NIH Director’s New Innovator Award program
provides first-time independent awards to outstanding investigators; the
Administration requests $80 million to support these awards in FY2012. The
second program, announced in October 2010, called the Early Independence
Program, will support talented junior scientists, allowing them to by-pass the
traditional postdoctoral training period and move directly to an independent
research career. NIH requests $8.4 million for this program in FY2012.
Funding for NIH comes primarily from the annual appropriations bill for the Departments of
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies (Labor/HHS), with an
additional amount for Superfund-related activities from the appropriations bill for the Department
of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies (Interior/Environment). Those two bills
provide NIH’s discretionary budget authority. In addition, NIH receives mandatory funding of
$150 million annually that is provided in the Public Health Service (PHS) Act for a special
program on diabetes research, and also receives $8.2 million annually for the National Library of
Medicine from a transfer within PHS. Each year since FY2002, Congress has provided that a
portion of NIH’s Labor/HHS appropriation be transferred to the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria. The transfer, currently $300 million, is part of the U.S. contribution to
the Global Fund. The total funding available for NIH activities, taking account of add-ons and
transfers, is the program level. Because the “NIH program level” cited in the Administration’s
FY2012 budget documents does not reflect the Global Fund transfer, Table 8 shows the program
level both before and after the transfer. Discussions in this section refer to the program level after
the transfer.
The agency’s organization consists of the Office of the NIH Director and 27 institutes and
centers. The Office of the Director (OD) sets overall policy for NIH and coordinates the programs
and activities of all NIH components, particularly in areas of research that involve multiple
institutes. The institutes and centers (collectively called ICs) focus on particular diseases, areas of
human health and development, or aspects of research support. Each IC plans and manages its
own research programs in coordination with the Office of the Director. As shown in Table 8,
Congress provides a separate appropriation to 24 of the 27 ICs, to OD, and to a Buildings and
Facilities account. (The other three centers, not included in the table, are funded through the NIH
Management Fund.)
Research Project Grants. Of the funds appropriated to NIH each year, more than 80% go out to
the extramural research community in the form of grants, contracts, and other awards. The
funding supports research performed by more than 325,000 scientists and technical personnel
who work at more than 3,000 universities, hospitals, medical schools, and other research
institutions around the country and abroad. The primary funding mechanism for support of the
full range of investigator-initiated research is competitive, peer-reviewed research project grants
(RPGs).
In the FY2012 request, total funding for RPGs, at $16.9 billion, represents about 53% of NIH’s
budget. The request proposes to support an estimated 36,852 awards, 43 more grants than in
Congressional Research Service
19
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
FY2010 (excluding ARRA funds). Within that total, 9,158 would be competing RPGs, 228 fewer
than in FY2010. (“Competing” awards means new grants plus competing renewals of existing
grants.) For noncompeting (continuation) RPGs, the FY2012 budget provides an inflation-
adjustment increase of 1%.
Other Funding Mechanisms. The FY2012 request includes an increase of 4% for training
stipends for individuals supported by the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards
program.38 The budget request would raise funding for the program by $19 million to $794
million, a 2.5% increase, which would allow NIH to support 16,831 full-time training positions,
330 fewer than in FY2010.39 Changes proposed in the request for other funding mechanisms
within the NIH budget include a decrease in support for research centers, down $41 million (-
1.3%) to $3.036 billion; an increase of $25 million (1.4%) for other research grants for a total of
$1.820 billion; an $89 million (2.8 %) increase to $3.245 billion for R&D contracts (excluding
the funding to be transferred for the Global HIV/AIDS Fund); $50 million more (1.5%) for the
NIH intramural research program, for a total of $3.382 billion; an increase of $30 million (2.0%)
to a total of $1.538 billion for research management and support; and an increase of $109 million
(17.2%) for the Office of the Director, for a total of $742 million. Buildings and Facilities would
increase by almost $26 million (23.7%) to $134 million.
Also funded through the OD account is the NIH Common Fund, which supports emerging areas
of scientific opportunity, public health challenges, or knowledge gaps that deserve special
emphasis and might benefit from collaboration between two or more institutes or centers. For
FY2012, the President requests $556.9 million for the Common Fund, up $12.9 million from
FY2010.
NIH and three of the other Public Health Service agencies within HHS are subject to a budget tap
called the PHS Program Evaluation Set-Aside. Section 241 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. § 238j)
authorizes the Secretary to use a portion of eligible appropriations to assess the effectiveness of
federal health programs and to identify ways to improve them. The set-aside has the effect of
redistributing appropriated funds for specific purposes among PHS and other HHS agencies.
Section 205 of the FY2010 Labor/HHS appropriations act capped the set-aside at 2.5%, instead of
the 2.4% maximum that had been in place for several years. The FY2012 budget proposes to
increase the set-aside to 3.2%. NIH, with the largest budget among the PHS agencies, becomes
the largest “donor” of program evaluation funds, and is a relatively minor recipient. By
convention, budget tables such as Table 8 do not subtract the amount of the evaluation tap, or of
other taps within HHS, from the agencies’ appropriations.
38 NIH, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, FY2012, Vol. I, Overview, p. ES-18.
39 NIH, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, FY2012, Vol. I, Overview, p. ES-26.
Congressional Research Service
20
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 8. National Institutes of Health Funding
(dollars in millions)
FY 2010
FY 2012
Component
Actuala
FY 2011
Request
Cancer (NCI)
5,101
5,196
Heart/Lung/Blood (NHLBI)
3,095
3,148
Dental/Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
413
420
Diabetes/Digestive/Kidney (NIDDK)
1,807
1,838
Neurological Disorders/Stroke (NINDS)
1,635
1,664
Al ergy/Infectious Diseases (NIAID)b
4,816
4,916
General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
2,051
2,102
Child Health/Human Development (NICHD)
1,329
1,352
Eye (NEI)
707
719
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
689
701
Aging (NIA)
1,110
1,130
Arthritis/Musculoskeletal/Skin (NIAMS)
539
548
Deafness/Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
419
426
Mental Health (NIMH)
1,490
1,517
Drug Abuse (NIDA)
1,059
1,080
Alcohol Abuse/Alcoholism (NIAAA)
462
469
Nursing Research (NINR)
146
148
Human Genome Research (NHGRI)
516
525
Biomedical Imaging/Bioengineering (NIBIB)
316
322
Minority Health/Health Disparities (NIMHD)c
211
215
Research Resources (NCRR)
1,268
1,298
Complementary/Alternative Medicine (NCCAM)
129
131
Fogarty International Center (FIC)
70
71
National Library of Medicine (NLM)
351
387
Office of Director (OD)
1,177
1,298
Common Fund (non-add)
544
557
Buildings & Facilities (B&F)
100
126
Subtotal, Labor/HHS Appropriation
31,005
31,748
Superfund (Interior approp to NIEHS)d
79
81
Total, NIH discretionary budget authority
31,084
31,829
Pre-appropriated Type 1 diabetes fundse
150
150
PHS Evaluation Tap fundingf
8
8
Total, NIH program level
31,243
31,987
Total, NIH program level (less Global
30,943
31,687
Fund)
Congressional Research Service
21
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Source: Adapted by CRS from NIH, Justification of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, Fiscal Year 2012, ST-2,
at http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/pdfs/FY12/Tab%203%20-%20Supplementary%20Tables.pdf. Details may not add
to totals due to rounding.
a. FY2010 Actual reflects real transfer of $1 million from HHS/Office of the Secretary to NIMH, $4.6 million
transfer to Health Resources and Services Administration Ryan White Program, as well as comparable
adjustments for transfers of funds from ICs to NLM.
b. Includes funds for transfer to the Global Fund for HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria ($300 million in each
of FY2010, FY2011, and FY2012). Bioshield transfer of $304 million was not provided under the FY2011
CR.
c. Section 10334(c) of P.L. 111-148 redesignated the Center as an Institute.
d. Separate account in the Interior-Environment appropriations for NIEHS research activities related to
Superfund.
e. Funds available to NIDDK for diabetes research under PHS Act § 330B (provided by P.L. 110-275 and P.L.
111-309). Funds have been appropriated through FY2013.
f.
Additional funds for NLM from PHS Evaluation Set-Aside (§ 241 of PHS Act).
Department of Energy40
The Administration has requested $14.447 billion for Department of Energy (DOE) R&D and
related programs in FY2012, including activities in three major categories: science, national
security, and energy. This request is 21.0% more than the FY2010 appropriation of $11.941
billion. (See Table 9 for details.)
The request for the DOE Office of Science is $5.416 billion, an increase of 10.4% from the
FY2010 appropriation of $4.904 billion. The Administration has stated that it intends to double
the combined R&D funding of the Office of Science and two other agencies41 over the decade
from FY2006 to FY2016.42 This policy continues a goal first established by the Bush
Administration as part of its American Competitiveness Initiative. The 10.4% increase requested
for FY2012 relative to FY2010, however, is less than two years of the 7.2% annual growth rate
required to achieve a doubling in 10 years. The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of
2010 (P.L. 111-358) authorized $5.614 billion for the Office of Science in FY2012.
Four of the six research programs of the Office of Science would receive increases under the
Administration’s budget proposal. The largest increase would be for basic energy sciences.
Among other changes, this program would allocate $34 million for a new energy innovation hub
on materials for batteries and energy storage and $24 million for the existing hub on fuels from
sunlight (currently funded by the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy).43
40 This section was written by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
41 The National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s core laboratory research
and construction accounts.
42 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, The President’s Plan for Science and
Innovation: Doubling Funding for Key Science Agencies in the 2011 Budget, February 1, 2010,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/doubling%2011%20final.pdf.
43 The Administration proposed to initiate eight energy innovation hubs in FY2010, but Congress funded only three.
The FY2012 budget request would fund six hubs. The three new hubs would focus on batteries and energy storage,
critical materials, and Smart Grid technologies and systems. The aim of the hubs is “to address basic science and
technology hindering the nation’s secure and sustainable energy future” by assembling multidisciplinary teams of
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
22
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
The biological and environmental research program would receive a $69 million increase for
foundational genomics research. Funding for high energy physics would decline 2%, partly
because of the end of operations at the Tevatron facility in Illinois. In fusion energy sciences, the
U.S. contribution to International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) would drop from
$135 million to $105 million. The current estimate for ITER’s total project cost remains between
$1.45 billion and $2.2 billion.
The request for DOE national security R&D is $4.175 billion, a 19.9% increase from $3.481
billion in FY2010. A $209 million increase for the naval reactors program would accelerate the
continuing design of reactors for the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine, modernization of the
land-based prototype reactor, and recapitalization of program infrastructure. Funding for
nonproliferation and verification R&D would increase $100 million, including $56 million to
fund contractor pension payments resulting from the transition of management contracts at Los
Alamos and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Funding for nuclear weapons activities
includes a similar increase of $168 million for contractor pensions.
The request for DOE energy R&D is $4.856 billion, up 36.6% from $3.556 billion in FY2010. In
the energy efficiency and renewable energy program, funding for hydrogen and fuel cell
technologies would decrease $70 million, but most other activities would increase rapidly. R&D
on energy-efficient technologies for homes, vehicles, and industries would more than double, and
solar energy R&D would increase 88%. In fossil energy R&D, the coal program would be
reduced by $102 million, and “consistent with the Administration’s policy to phase out fossil fuel
subsidies,” no funds would be provided for natural gas technologies or unconventional fossil
energy technologies.44
The Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy (ARPA-E) would receive $650 million under
the Administration request. This agency received no appropriation for FY2010. The bulk of its
funding to date has been provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(ARRA, P.L. 111-5).45 In recommending no funds for ARPA-E in FY2010, the House Committee
on Appropriations explained that ARRA funds remained available and that “the decision not to
provide any additional funding ... [did] not in any way suggest a lack of commitment to this
program by the Committee.”46 The Administration request for ARPA-E in FY2012 includes $100
million in mandatory funding from a proposed Wireless Innovation Fund supported by the
proceeds of spectrum auctions.
(...continued)
researchers “spanning science, engineering, and other disciplines, but focused on a single critical national need
identified by the Department.” (DOE FY2011 budget justification, vol. 4, p. 86)
44 DOE FY2012 budget justification, vol. 3, pp. 513 and 517.
45 For more information on ARPA-E, see CRS Report RL34497, Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy
(ARPA-E): Background, Status, and Selected Issues for Congress, by Deborah D. Stine.
46 H.Rept. 111-203, p. 120.
Congressional Research Service
23
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 9. Department of Energy R&D and Related Programs
($ in millions)
FY2010
FY2012
Enacted
Request
Science $4,904
$5,416
Basic
Energy
Sciences
1,636
1,985
High
Energy
Physics
810
797
Biological and Environmental Research
604
718
Nuclear
Physics
535
605
Fusion Energy Sciences
426
400
Advanced Scientific Computing Research
394
466
Other
499
445
National Security
3,481
4,175
Weapons
Activitiesa 2,198
2,572
Naval
Reactors
945
1,154
Nonproliferation and Verification R&D
317
418
Defense Environmental Cleanup Technology Development
20
32
Energy 3,556
4,856
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energyb 1,973
2,806
Fossil Energy R&D
672
453
Nuclear
Energy
787
754
Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability R&D
125
193
Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy
0
650
Totalc 11,941
14,447
Source: FY2010 enacted from P.L. 111-85 and H.Rept. 111-278. FY2012 request from DOE FY2012 budget
justification, online at http://www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/12budget/index12.html.
Notes:
a. Including Stockpile Services R&D Support, Stockpile Services R&D Certification and Safety, Science,
Engineering except Enhanced Surety and Enhanced Surveillance, Inertial Confinement Fusion, Advanced
Simulation and Computing, National Security Applications, and a prorated share of Readiness in Technical
Base and Facilities. Additional R&D activities may take place in the subprograms of Directed Stockpile Work
that are devoted to specific weapon systems, but these funds are not included in the table because detailed
funding schedules for those subprograms are classified.
b. Excluding Weatherization and Intergovernmental Activities.
c. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
Congressional Research Service
24
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
National Science Foundation47
The National Science Foundation (NSF) supports basic research and education in the non-medical
sciences and engineering. Congress established the Foundation as an independent federal agency
in 1950 and directed it to “promote the progress of science; to advance the national health,
prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes.”48 The NSF is a
primary source of federal support for U.S. university research, especially in certain fields such as
mathematics and computer science. It is also responsible for significant shares of the federal
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education program portfolio and
federal STEM student aid and support.
The President’s FY2012 budget request for the NSF is $7,767.0 million, a $794.8 million increase
(11.4%) over the FY2010 actual level.49 Most of the requested increase would go to NSF’s
Research and Related Activities account. The remainder would go to other Foundation accounts,
including those that primarily support education, agency operations, and research facilities and
equipment. Overall, the distribution of the FY2012 requested increase is largely consistent with
the existing distribution of funds across the NSF.50 (See Table 10 for details.)
The President’s FY2012 request for increased funding at the NSF is part of a long-term effort to
double federal support for basic research in the physical sciences and engineering. To that end,
the effort seeks to double research funding at the NSF, Department of Energy’s Office of Science,
and National Institute of Standards and Technology laboratories. The Administration states that
these increases are “key to our nation’s prosperity and to preserving America’s place as the world
leader in science and technology.”51 Other advocates stress that increases are necessary to
rebalance the federal R&D portfolio, which has skewed toward health-related R&D for the past
several decades.52
Congress set statutory authorization levels consistent with the doubling effort in both the 2007
America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69) and its 2010 reauthorization (P.L. 111-358). However,
actual appropriations to NSF and other targeted research accounts have not been consistent with
statutory authorizations since the 2006 baseline.53 Further, some policymakers in the 112th
Congress have expressed concerns about NSF funding in light of the current federal fiscal
condition, deficit, and debt. Some analysts prefer alternative policy options, such as tax or
47 This section was written by Heather B. Gonzalez, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division. Numbers are rounded.
48 The National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (P.L. 81-507). For more information about how the NSF plans to
implement its mandate, see National Science Foundation, Empowering the Nation through Discovery and Innovation:
NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2001-2016, February 2011, http://www.nsf.gov/news/strategicplan/.
49 National Science Foundation, FY2012 Budget Request to Congress, February 14, 2011, http://www.nsf.gov/about/
budget/fy2012/pdf/00a_fy2012.pdf.
50 Based on CRS analysis. Data available upon request.
51 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, “The President’s Plan for Science and
Innovation: Doubling Funding for Key Basic Research Agencies in the 2010 Budget,” press release, May 7, 2009, p. 1,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documents/ostp/budget/doubling.pdf.
52 The National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Rising Above the
Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, National Academies Press,
2007, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html.
53 Based on CRS analysis. Data available upon request.
Congressional Research Service
25
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
regulatory reforms, to increased research appropriations. Others support increased appropriations
for research, but raise concerns about the practical effects of what some characterize as a “boom-
bust” cycle in R&D support.54 There have been some legislative efforts to reduce Foundation
funding in FY2011.55
Another issue raised in the general debate about funding for NSF focuses on the Foundation’s
ability to effectively manage its grants. This is relevant to R&D policy because much of the
Foundation’s R&D funding is distributed via the grant process. In a House hearing, NSF’s
Inspector General Allison C. Lerner testified that—among other issues—the Foundation faces
ongoing challenges in ensuring that grant recipients comply with grant terms and conditions.
According to Lerner’s testimony, the NSF attributes this problem, at least in part, to staffing
constraints. Lerner postulated that, “If the Foundation’s budget continues to grow, the resulting
increase in awards to monitor will compound this challenge.”56
Research and Related Activities (R&RA) is the largest account at the NSF. It is also the largest
source of R&D funding at the Foundation. The total Administration request for R&RA in FY2012
is $6.254 billion. Of this, $5.031 billion (80.4%) would fund basic research activities. Another
$539.7 million (8.6%) would fund applied research and $209.8 million (3.4%) would support
R&D facilities and major equipment. R&RA is divided into 11 subaccounts, which are organized
by broad discipline (e.g., Engineering) and activity (e.g., Integrative Activities).
The FY2012 Administration request for R&RA represents a $638.2 million increase (11.4%) over
the FY2010 actual level. All major R&RA sub-accounts would see increases over FY2010 actual
levels—ranging from 1.3% for the U.S. Arctic Research Commission to 22.3% for Integrative
Activities. Of the total proposed growth in the R&RA account, $242.1 million (37.9%) would go
to two directorates: Engineering (ENG) and Computer and Information Science and Engineering
(CISE).
R&RA funds are typically awarded through a merit-based competitive process to U.S. colleges
and universities. Some policymakers assert that this process favors certain institutions and states.
In response to these concerns, the NSF launched the Experimental Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research (EPSCoR) program in 1978. The EPSCoR program seeks to increase the
research competitiveness of states with historically low federal research funding rates.
Assessments of the effectiveness of EPSCoR vary. NSF’s FY2012 budget documents indicate that
the Foundation plans to have EPSCoR independently evaluated.57 Previously, concerns have
focused on the program’s “graduation rate” and review process, among other things.58 The
54 For more information see, CRS Report R41231, America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (H.R. 5116) and
the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69): Selected Policy Issues, coordinated by Heather B. Gonzalez.
55 H.R. 1, as passed by the House on February 18, 2011, would reduce funding for the R&RA, EHR, and MREFC
accounts.
56 Testimony of NSF Inspector General Allison C. Lerner, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations,
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Oversight of the National Science Foundation
(NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), hearings, 112th Cong., 1st sess., February 11,
2011, P. 3, http://appropriations.house.gov/_files/NSFIGAllisonCLerner.pdf.
57 National Science Foundation, “Integrative Activities,” FY2012 Budget Request to Congress, February 14, 2011, p.
IA-4, http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2012/pdf/00a_fy2012.pdf.IA-4
58 The term “graduation rate” in this context typically refers to states that transition out of EPSCoR after increasing
their shares of federal R&D funding. For more information about EPSCoR, see CRS Report RL30930, U.S. National
Science Foundation: Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), by Christine M. Matthews,
U.S. National Science Foundation: Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), by Christine
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
26
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Administration’s FY2012 request for EPSCoR is $160.5 million, a $13.4 million increase (9.1%)
over the FY2010 actual level of $147.1 million.
Other R&RA sub-accounts and programs seek to address certain long-term trends in R&D. These
include the Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE) and the newly created
Integrated NSF Support Promoting Interdisciplinary Research and Education (INSPIRE)
program. Observers of U.S. R&D activities have long noted (1) the increasing globalization of
research activities59 and (2) decreasing distinctions between historically disparate academic
fields.60 OISE seeks to support international collaborations and partnerships that help achieve
U.S. research objectives, including foreign policy objectives. INSPIRE will endeavor to support
interdisciplinary research by individuals or teams of researchers. The Administration proposes
$58 million for OISE in FY2012, an increase of $10.2 million (21.3%) over the FY2010 actual
level, and $12.4 million for INSPIRE.
Other accounts that support R&D at the National Science Foundation include the Major Research
Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) and the Education and Human Resources
(EHR) accounts. Although EHR primarily funds STEM education programs, the Foundation
indicates that it supports R&D in this account as well.
The FY2012 MREFC account request for $224.7 million is a $58.8 million increase (35.4%) over
the FY2010 actual level. It includes increases for the National Ecological Observatory Network
(NEON, $87.9 million) and Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI, $102.8 million) projects. Most
other MREFC projects would be reduced. The NSF requests no new MREFC funds for the Alaska
Region Research Vessel or IceCube Neutrino Observatory in FY2012, both of which are now
fully funded.
The President has asked for $911.2 million for EHR, a $38.4 million increase (4.4%) over the
FY2010 actual level. Under the FY2012 proposal all major EHR sub-accounts would receive an
increase over FY2010 actual levels. Of the increase, $21.5 million (55.9%) would go to the
Division of Human Development (HRD) for a new program to increase the participation of
underrepresented populations in undergraduate STEM education, and $10.3 million (26.8%)
would go to the Division of Graduate Education (DGE) to help fund 2,000 new Graduate
Research Fellowships. The Administration also proposes program changes in EHR.
The Administration requests $357.7 million for the Agency Operations & Award Management
account, a $57.9 million (19.3%) increase over the FY2010 actual level. Most of the requested
increase would fund a new NSF headquarters.61 The Administration also seeks increases of $1.0
(...continued)
M. Matthews.
59 National Science Board, Globalization of Science and Engineering Research: A Companion to Science and
Engineering Indicators 2010 (NSB-10-3), 2010, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsb1003/.
60 Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of
Engineering, Institute of Medicine, Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, National Academies Press, 2004,
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11153.
61 The current NSF Headquarters lease expires in 2013. According to the NSF, “In December 2010, GSA submitted a
prospectus to Congress requesting authorization to enter into a new 15-year operating lease for the Foundation. GSA
anticipates that the procurement of a new lease, the design, renovation and/or construction of a new headquarters, and
the relocation and occupancy of NSF’s employees will be completed by May 2015,” p. AOAM-9, http://www.nsf.gov/
about/budget/fy2012/pdf/30_fy2012.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
27
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
million and $.46 million, respectively, for NSF’s Office of the Inspector General and the National
Science Board.
The Administration’s FY2012 budget request proposes increases for certain NSF-wide
investments funding from more than one Foundation account, including the interagency
Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) and National
Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) efforts, and NSF’s Science, Engineering, and Education for
Sustainability (SEES) portfolio and Major Multi-User Research Facilities funding.
For FY2012 the Administration proposes a $152.1 million (12.1%) increase for NITRD and a
$27.3 million (6.0%) increase for the NNI. Total funds for these accounts in FY2012 under the
President’s plan would be $1.258 billion and $456.0 million, respectively. The NITRD program is
a collaborative effort in which 13 agencies coordinate and cooperate to help increase the overall
effectiveness and productivity of federal IT R&D.62 Similarly, the NNI is a multiagency effort to
advance nanoscale science, engineering, and technologies through the coordination of federal
R&D.63 NSF is a principle funding agency for both of these efforts.
The Administration has asked for approximately a $272.6 million (39.1%) increase for NSF’s
SEES portfolio64 and a $31.5 million (2.7%) increase for Major Multi-User Research Facilities
funding in FY2012. Total funds for these accounts in FY2012 under the President’s plan would be
$998.2 million and $1.185 billion, respectively. The SEES portfolio focuses on sustainability,
including fundamental climate and energy science research. Major Multi-User Research Facilities
supports R&D centers such as the National Radio Astronomy Observatory and the Large Hadron
Collider.
The Administration’s FY2012 request would also eliminate six NSF programs: Deep
Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory, Graduate STEM Fellow in K-12 Education,
National STEM Distributed Learning Program, Research Initiation Grants to Broaden
Participation in Biology, Science Learning Centers, and the Synchrotron Radiation Center. Funds
from these activities would be redirected to other Foundation accounts.
62 For more information, see CRS Report RL33586, The Federal Networking and Information Technology Research
and Development Program: Background, Funding, and Activities, by Patricia Moloney Figliola
63 For more information on the NNI, see CRS Report RL34401, The National Nanotechnology Initiative: Overview,
Reauthorization, and Appropriations Issues, by John F. Sargent Jr.
64 The FY2012 budget justification does not include FY2010 actual amounts for all accounts in the SEES portfolio.
Therefore, growth calculations for the portfolio were made without contributions from EHR or the Office of
International Science and Engineering. The FY2012 SEES portfolio request for these accounts is $12.0 million and
$17.0 million, respectively. Data available upon request.
Congressional Research Service
28
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 10. National Science Foundation
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY 2010 Actual
FY2011
Request
Biological Sciences
714.8
794.5
Computer & Information Sci. & Eng.
618.7
728.4
Engineering 775.9
908.3
Geosciences 891.9
979.2
Math and Physical Sciences
1,368.0
1,432.7
Social, Behavioral, & Economic Sciences
255.3
301.1
Office of Cyberinfrastructure
214.7
236.0
Office of International Sci. & Eng.
47.4
58.0
U.S. Polar Programs
451.7
477.4
Integrative Activities
274.9
336.3
U.S. Arctic Research Comm.
1.6
1.6
Subtotal Research & Related Activities
5,615.3
6,253.5
Education & Human Resources
872.8
911.2
Major Research Equipment & Facilities Construction 165.9
224.7
Agency Ops. & Award Mgmt.
299.9
357.7
National Science Board
4.4
4.8
Office of Inspector General
14.0
15.0
Total NSF
6,972.2
7,767.0
Source: National Science Foundation, FY2012 Budget Request to Congress, Arlington, VA, February 14, 2011.
Summary Tables.
Notes: The totals do not include carryovers or retirement accruals. Totals may differ from the sum of the
components due to rounding.
Department of Commerce
National Institute of Standards and Technology65
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a laboratory of the Department of
Commerce with a mandate to increase the competitiveness of U.S. companies through appropriate
support for industrial development of precompetitive, generic technologies and the diffusion of
government-developed technological advances to users in all segments of the American economy.
NIST research also provides the measurement, calibration, and quality assurance techniques that
underpin U.S. commerce, technological progress, improved product reliability, manufacturing
processes, and public safety.
65 This section was written by Wendy H. Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
29
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
The Administration’s FY2012 budget proposes $1.001 billion in funding for NIST, a 16.9%
increase over the FY2010 appropriation of $856.6 million. Support for research and development
under the Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) account would increase 34.3%
from $505.4 million to $678.9 million (excluding the Baldrige National Quality Program which
has been transferred out of STRS). Under the Industrial Technology Services (ITS) account, the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program would receive $142.6 million, 14.4% more
than the $124.7 million appropriated in FY2010, while funding for the Technology Innovation
Program (TIP) would increase to $75.0 million, 7.3% over the FY2010 figure of $69.9 million.
Now budgeted under ITS, support for the Baldrige National Quality Program would decrease
19.8% from $9.6 million to $7.7 million. A new program, the Advanced Manufacturing
Technology Consortia (AMTech) would be created and funded at $12.3 million. The construction
budget would decline 42.4% from $147.0 million in FY2010 to $84.6 million in FY2012. (See
Table 11.)
NIST’s extramural programs (currently the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and the
Technology Innovation Program), which are directed toward increased private sector
commercialization, have been a source of contention. The Administration’s FY2012 budget
would establish and provide support for an additional extramural program, AMTech. Some
members of Congress have expressed skepticism over a “technology policy” based on providing
federal funds to industry for the development of “pre-competitive generic” technologies. This
approach, coupled with pressures to balance the federal budget, has led to significant reductions
in appropriations for several of these NIST activities. The Advanced Technology Program (ATP)
and the MEP, which accounted for more than 50% of the FY1995 NIST budget, were proposed
for elimination. In 2007, ATP was terminated and replaced by the Technology Innovation
Program.66
Increases in spending for NIST laboratories that perform the research essential to the mission
responsibilities of the agency have tended to remain small. As part of the American
Competitiveness Initiative, announced by former President Bush in the 2006 State of the Union
address, the Administration stated its intention to double funding over 10 years for “innovation-
enabling research” done, in part, at NIST through its “core” programs (defined as the STRS
account and the construction budget). In April 2009, President Obama indicated his decision to
double the budget of key science agencies, including NIST, over the next 10 years. While
Congress has provided additional funding, it remains to be seen how support for internal R&D at
NIST will evolve and how this might affect financing of extramural programs such as TIP and
MEP.67
66 For additional information on the MEP and TIP programs, see CRS Report RS22815, The Technology Innovation
Program, and CRS Report 97-104, Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview, both by Wendy H.
Schacht.
67 For additional information on NIST, see CRS Report 95-30, The National Institute of Standards and Technology: An
Appropriations Overview.
Congressional Research Service
30
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 11. NIST
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2012
NIST Program
Enacted
FY2011
Request
STRSa 505.4
678.9
ITS
TIP
69.9
75.0
MEP
124.7
142.6
Baldrige Program
9.6
7.7
AMTech
12.3
Construction
147.0
84.6
NIST Totalb 856.6
1001.1
Sources: NIST website (available at http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/budget.htm), P.L. 111-117 and
Administration’s FY2012 Budget Request.
a. Excludes FY2010 funding for the Baldrige National Quality Program; funding for this program is included in
the FY2010 Enacted column under ITS for comparison purposes.
b. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration68
The Commerce Department’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
conducts scientific research in areas such as ecosystems, climate, global climate change, weather,
and oceans; supplies information on the oceans and atmosphere; and manages coastal and marine
organisms and environments. NOAA was created in 1970 by Reorganization Plan No. 4.69 The
reorganization was intended to unify certain of the nation’s environmental activities and to
provide a systematic approach for monitoring, analyzing, and protecting the environment.
NOAA’s R&D efforts focus on three areas: climate; weather and air quality; and ocean, coastal,
and Great Lakes resources. For FY2012, President Obama has requested $737.0 million in R&D
funding for NOAA, a 7.6% increase in funding from the FY2010 level of $684.7 million. R&D
accounts for 13.4% of NOAA’s total FY2012 discretionary budget request of $5.503 billion. The
R&D request consists of $490 million for research (66.5%), $85 million for development
(11.5%), and $162 million for R&D equipment (22.0%). Excluding equipment, about $412
million (71.6%) of the R&D request would fund intramural programs and $163 million (28.3%)
would fund extramural programs.70
68 This section was written by Harold F. Upton, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
69 “Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970,” 35 Fed. Reg. 15627-15630, October 6, 1970; also, see
http://www.lib.noaa.gov/noaainfo/heritage/ReorganizationPlan4.html.
70 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration FY 2012
Budget Summary, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, February 2011,
http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy12_bluebook/chapter7_Research_Development.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
31
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
NOAA’s administrative structure has evolved into five line offices that reflect its diverse mission,
including the National Ocean Service (NOS); National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS);
National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS); National Weather
Service (NWS); and Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). In addition to NOAA’s
five line offices, Program Support (PS), a cross-cutting budget activity, includes the Office of
Marine and Aviation Operations (OMAO). NOAA’s FY2012 budget request proposes a budget
neutral reorganization of its administrative structure by establishing a Climate Service (CS) line
office. The reorganization would bring together existing climate related capabilities from NWS,
NESDIS, and OAR. The main goal of establishing CS is to strengthen and expand NOAA’s
contributions to climate science by creating a more efficient and effective management structure.
NESDIS would be renamed as the National Environmental Satellite Service (NESS) while NOS
and NMFS would remain unchanged.
CS would receive $246.6 million for R&D, 33.5% of the total NOAA FY2012 R&D request and
71.2% of the total request for the CS line office. The OAR R&D funding level would decrease
relative to FY2010 by $230.4 million to $175.1 million because of the transfer of OAR R&D
climate related activities to CS. NWS R&D funding would decrease by $7.1 million (-17.2%) to
$34.1 million. The President’s budget would increase NOS R&D by $19.1 million (26.6%) to
$91.0 million and NMFS R&D funding by $29.4 million (53.8%) to $84.0 million. NESS R&D
funding would increase by $2.7 million (10.5%) to $28.4 million. OMAO R&D equipment would
be funded at $77.8 million, a decrease of $8.0 million (-9.3%) from FY2010 (see Table 12).71
The NOAA Research Council, an internal body composed of scientific personnel, developed the
current NOAA 5-Year Research Plan for 2008-2012. The plan identified the most pressing
research challenges as a set of six overarching questions. NOAA’s research and development
portfolio is structured around finding answers to these questions:72
What factors, human and otherwise, influence ecosystem processes and impact our ability to
manage marine ecosystems and forecast their future state?
What is the current state of biodiversity in the oceans, and what impacts will external forces
have on this diversity and how we use our oceans and coasts?
What are the causes and consequences of climate variability and change?
What improvements to observing systems, analysis approaches, and models will allow us to
better analyze and predict the atmosphere, ocean, and hydrological land processes?
How can the accuracy and warning times for severe weather and other high-impact
environmental events be increased significantly?
How are uncertainties in our analysis and predictions best estimated and communicated?
71 Emily Larkin, NOAA Budget Office, email, March 7, 2011.
72 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration FY 2012
Budget Summary, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, February 2011,
http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy12_bluebook/chapter7_Research_Development.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
32
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 12. NOAA R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2012
NOAA Line Office
Actual
FY2011
Request
NOS $71.9
$91.0
NMFS 54.6
84.0
OAR
405.5
175.1
CS N/A
246.6
NWS 41.2
34.1
NESS (formerly NESDIS)
25.7
28.4
OMAOa 85.8
77.8
Total R&Db 684.7
737.0
Sources: Emily Larkin, NOAA Budget Office, Email, March 7, 2011.
a. Al OMAO R&D funding is for equipment.
b. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration73
The Administration has requested $16.637 billion for NASA R&D in FY2012. This amount
would be an increase of 20.9% over FY2010, in a total NASA budget that would remain
unchanged at $18.724 billion. For a breakdown of these amounts, as well as the amounts
authorized for NASA in FY2012 by the NASA Authorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-267), see
Table 13.
The proposed increase in R&D funding, despite flat funding for the agency as a whole, is made
possible by the planned retirement of the space shuttle. The space shuttle program is classified as
an operational expense, not R&D. The last shuttle flight is scheduled to be completed during
FY2011. Funding for the shuttle program would decrease from $3.101 billion in FY2010 to $665
million in the FY2012 request. Most of the FY2012 request for this program would be used to
cover a funding shortfall in the defined benefit pension plan of the contractor that manages space
shuttle operations.
The Administration’s $5.017 billion request for NASA Science in FY2012 would be an 11.5%
increase from FY2010. The largest increase would be for Earth Science, which would continue
the global climate research initiative proposed in FY2011 and support the development and
launch of several missions recommended by the 2007 decadal survey of the National
Academies.74 An independent review of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in October
73 This section was written by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
74 National Research Council, Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade
and Beyond, 2007, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11820.html.
Congressional Research Service
33
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
2010 estimated that the project was 15 months behind schedule and $1.4 billion over budget.75
NASA is developing a revised JWST program with a new schedule and cost estimate.
The request for Aeronautics is $569 million, an increase of 14.6% from FY2010. Selected
research topics (e.g., the effects of high altitude ice crystals on aircraft) in categories identified by
the 2010 authorization act (P.L. 111-267, Sec. 902) would receive increases, while funding for
hypersonics would be reduced and focused on foundational research.
Space Technology would receive $1.024 billion under the request. About half of this total ($497
million) would be for Crosscutting Space Technology Development, a mostly new activity. The
request for this activity is comparable to the amount authorized for Space Technology by the 2010
authorization act ($486 million). Most of the remainder of the request for Space Technology
would be for two activities transferred from other accounts: Exploration Technology
Development from the Exploration account and Small Business Innovation Research from the
Cross-Agency Support account. The request would roughly double the funding for both these
transferred activities.
The Administration’s request for Exploration in FY2012 is $3.949 billion, an 8.9% increase over
FY2010 but about 25% less than the authorized amount. In FY2010, the bulk of this account
funded the Constellation program, including the Orion crew vehicle and the Ares I rocket for
carrying humans into low Earth orbit, as well as the heavy-lift Ares V cargo rocket and other
systems needed for a Moon mission. Under the FY2012 request, the account would instead fund
development of the Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and heavy-lift Space Launch System
(SLS) mandated by the 2010 authorization act. Although this would be a substantial change,
many elements of Orion and Ares would also be included in the MPCV and SLS. The request for
Exploration also includes $850 million to help companies develop commercial crew transport
services to low-Earth orbit; the FY2010 appropriation included $39 million for development of
commercial cargo capabilities, but none for commercial crew.
The request for the International Space Station (ISS) is $2.842 billion, a 22.9% increase over
FY2010. Although the request includes an additional $60 million for ISS research, most of the
requested increase would fund crew and cargo transportation to and from orbit. Because of the
end of the space shuttle program in FY2011, transportation services in FY2012 will be obtained
under contract with international partners and commercial providers.
75 Final report of the JWST Independent Comprehensive Review Panel, October 29, 2010, http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/
499224main_JWST-ICRP_Report-FINAL.pdf; and GAO, NASA: Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects, GAO-
11- 239SP, March 2011, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11239sp.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
34
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Table 13. NASA R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2012
As Enacted
Op. Plan
Enacted
Authorized
Request
Science $4,469.0
$4,497.6
$5,248.6
$5,016.8
Earth Science
1,450.3
1,439.3
1,944.5
1,797.4
Planetary Science
1,359.5
1,364.4
1,547.2
1,540.7
Astrophysics 1,119.8
647.3
1,109.3
682.7
James Webb Space Telescopea — 438.7
— 373.7
Heliophysics 636.6
608.0
647.6
622.3
Adjustments (97.2)
—
—
—
Aeronautics 501.0
497.0
584.7
569.4
Space Technology
—
275.2
486.0
1,024.2
Exploration 3,746.3
3,625.8
5,252.3
3,948.7
Human Exploration Capabilitiesb n/a 3,287.5
n/a 2,810.2
Commercial Spaceflightb n/a
39.1
n/a
850.0
Exploration R&Db n/a
299.2
n/a
288.5
International Space Station
2,317.0
2,312.7
2,952.2
2,841.5
Subtotal R&D
11,033.3
11,208.3
14,523.8
13,400.6
Other NASA Programsc 4,048.7
4,045.6
1,372.8
1,681.4
Cross-Agency Supportd 3,194.0
3,017.6
3,189.6
3,192.0
Associated with R&D
2,336.6
2,217.3
2,914.2
2,836.1
Associated with Other
857.4
800.3
275.4
355.9
Construction & Env. C&Rd 448.3
452.8
363.8
450.4
Associated with R&D
328.0
332.7
332.4
400.2
Associated with Other
120.3
120.1
31.4
50.2
Total R&D
13,697.8
13,758.3
17,770.3
16,636.9
Total NASA
18,724.3
18,724.3
19,450.0
18,724.3
Source: FY2010 as enacted from P.L. 111-117 and H.Rept. 111-366. FY2010 operating plan and FY2012 request
from NASA’s FY2012 congressional budget justification, http://www.nasa.gov/news/budget/. FY2012 authorized
from P.L. 111-267.
Notes: FY2010 operating plan amounts reflect NASA’s operating plan dated July 21, 2010; they differ from the
enacted amounts because of reprogramming, the creation of a separate line item for the James Webb Space
Telescope, and the transfer of certain activities from Exploration and Cross-Agency Support to Space
Technology. Totals and subtotals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. Included in Astrophysics in FY2010 enacted and FY2012 authorized amounts.
b. The items within the Exploration account are new in the FY2012 budget documents. The FY2010 enacted
and FY2012 authorized amounts for these items are not available.
c. Space Shuttle, Space and Flight Support, Education, and Inspector General.
d. Al ocation between R&D and non-R&D is estimated by CRS in proportion to the underlying program
amounts in order to al ow calculation of a total for R&D. The Cross-Agency Support and Construction and
Congressional Research Service
35
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Environmental Compliance and Remediation accounts consist mostly of indirect costs for other programs,
assessed in proportion to their direct costs.
Department of Agriculture76
The FY2012 request for research and education activities in the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) is $2.773 billion, a decrease of $222.0 million (approximately 7.4%) from the FY2010
level of $2.995 billion. (See Table 14.)
The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is USDA’s in-house basic and applied research agency,
and operates approximately 100 laboratories nationwide. The ARS also includes the National
Agricultural Library, the primary information resource on food, agriculture, and natural resource
sciences. The ARS laboratories focus on efficient food and fiber production, development of new
products and uses for agricultural commodities, development of effective biocontrols for pest
management, and support of USDA regulatory and technical assistance programs. The President
has requested $1.156 billion for ARS for FY2012, $109.0 million below the FY2010 enacted
level, including a $101.0 million reduction in funding for FY2010 add-ons designated by
Congress for research at specific locations.
The amounts from the discontinued projects are to be redirected to the Administration’s research
priorities including research on the conversion of agricultural products into biobased products and
biofuels; development of production systems that will provide a sustainable balance of crop
production, carbon soil sequestration, and net greenhouse gas emissions; development of new
measures to control bovine tuberculosis and bovine respiratory diseases; domestic and global
market opportunities; new varieties and hybrids of feedstocks; and new healthier foods with
decreased caloric density. The FY2012 budget request includes an increase of $6.0 million for
research at Regional Biofuels Feedstocks Research and Demonstration Centers and a $4.0 million
increase for research to develop integrated, sustainable management systems to improve food
production and security. Other proposed increases include $7.0 million for research on non-
traditional agents and their possible use in food and $1.3 million for epidemiological and ecologic
studies. The Administration does not propose any funding for buildings and facilities in FY2012
for ARS, but does propose $3.0 million for high priority needs of existing facilities.
The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), formerly the Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), was established in Title VII, §7511 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246, also known as the 2008 farm bill). In its
FY2012 request, NIFA would support larger and longer-term research efforts on issues related to
the viability of agriculture. NIFA is responsible for developing partnerships between the federal
and state components of agricultural research, extension, and institutions of higher education.
NIFA distributes funds to State Agricultural Experiment Stations, State Cooperative Extension
Systems, land-grant universities, and other institutions and organizations that conduct agricultural
research, education, and outreach. Included in these partnerships is funding for research at 1862
land-grant institutions, 1890 historically black colleges and universities, 1994 tribal land-grant
colleges, and Hispanic-serving institutions. Funding is distributed to the states through
competitive awards, statutory formula funding, and special grants. The FY2012 request proposes
76 This section was written by Christine M. Matthews, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
36
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
$1.366 billion for NIFA, a decrease of $120.0 million from the FY2010 level. The NIFA FY2012
budget proposes the elimination of $141.0 million in congressional add-ons and reductions in
ongoing program initiatives. Funding for formula distribution in the FY2012 request to the state
Agricultural Experiment Stations is $605.0 million, $31.0 million below the FY2010 enacted
level.
One of the stated primary goals of the President’s FY2012 NIFA request is to emphasize and
prioritize competitive, peer-reviewed allocation of research funding. Because of the increased
emphasis on competitive grants, the Administration has requested funding for the development of
new grant management tools. For FY2012, the Administration seeks funding for programs that
are more responsive to critical national issues such as agricultural security, local and regional
emergencies, zoonotic diseases, climate change, childhood obesity, pest risk management, and
development of biofuels that contribute to agricultural productivity and sustainability. Another
focus in the FY2012 request is on programs that support minority-serving institutions and their
recipients.
NIFA is also responsible for administering the agency’s primary competitive research grants
program, the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI). The FY2012 request proposes
$325.0 million for AFRI, a $63.0 million increase (24.0%) over the FY2010 level. In addition to
supporting fundamental and applied science in agriculture, USDA maintains that the AFRI makes
a significant contribution to developing the next generation of agricultural scientists by providing
graduate students with opportunities to work on research projects. A focus of these efforts is to
provide increased opportunities for minority and under-served communities in agricultural
science. AFRI funding would provide $8.2 million for alternative and renewable energy research
to develop cost-effective feedstocks for biofuel production; $4.7 million for global climate
change research to develop mitigation capabilities for agricultural production; $11.8 million for
international food security; $8.2 million for an integrated food safety research program that has
the potential for improving the understanding of disease-causing microorganisms; and $8.2
million in nutrition and obesity prevention research. The Administration also proposes support for
initiatives in agricultural genomics, emerging issues in food and agricultural security, the ecology
and economics of biological invasions, and plant biotechnology. The Administration has proposed
research efforts that would go beyond water quality to include water availability, reuse, and
conservation.
The FY2012 request for USDA provides $86.0 million for the Economic Research Service (ERS),
$4.0 million above the FY2010 enacted level. ERS supports both economic and social science
information analysis on agriculture, rural development, food, and the environment. ERS collects
and disseminates data concerning USDA programs and policies to various stakeholders. FY2012
funding for the ERS includes support for an administrative data pilot project. Funding for the
National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) is proposed at $165.0 million in the FY2012
request, $3.0 million above the FY2010 level. The FY2012 budget request includes
approximately $12.0 million in initiatives which have been offset by the termination of $8.3
million in low-priority programs. The FY2012 budget request includes a recommendation to
improve research efforts in analyzing the impacts of bioenergy production, and to examine
concerns pertaining to feedstock storage, transportation networks, and commodity production.
Additional research areas include production and utilization of biomass materials; stocks and
prices of distillers’ grains; and current and proposed ethanol production plants. Proposed FY2012
funding for NASS provides for restoration of the chemical use data series on major row crops;
post harvest chemical use; and alternating annual fruit, nuts, and vegetable chemical use. Also,
funding is provided to support the third year of the 2012 Census of Agriculture’s five year cycle.
Congressional Research Service
37
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Data from the Census of Agriculture is to be used to measure trends and new developments in the
agricultural community.
Table 14. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
Actuala
Estimate
Request
Agricultural Research Service
Product Quality/Value Added
$105.0
107.0
Livestock Production
81.0
75.0
Crop Production
234.0
236.0
Food Safety
108.0
114.0
Livestock Protection
79.0
80.0
Crop Protection
203.0
197.0
Human Nutrition
86.0
89.0
Environmental Stewardship
202.0
196.0
National Agricultural Library
22.0
23.0
Repair, Maintenance, Trust Funds, and Other
Programs 74.0
39.0
Subtotal 1,194.0
1,156.0
Buildings and Facilities
71.0
0.0
Total, ARS
1,265.0
1,156.0
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
(NIFA)a
Hatch Act Formula
215.0
204.0
Cooperative Forestry Research
29.0
27.0
Earmarked Projects and Grants
141.0
0.0
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative
262.0
325.0
Federal Administration
18.0
18.0
Higher Education Programsb
48.0 43.0
Other Programs
79.0
91.0
Subtotal, Research and Education
Activities 792.0
708.0
Extension Activities
Smith-Lever Sections 3b&c
298.0
283.0
Extension and Integrated Programs
49.0
10.0
1890 Colleges, Tuskegee, & West Virginia State
University Colleges
91.0
91.0
Other Extension Programs
57.0
83.0
Subtotal, Extension Activities
495.0
467.0
Congressional Research Service
38
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
Actuala
Estimate
Request
Integrated Activities
60.0
30.0
Mandatory and Other Programs
139.0
161.0
Total, NIFAc 1,486.0
1,366.0
Economic Research Service
82.0
86.0
National Agricultural Statistics Service
162.0
165.0
Total, Research, Education, and Economics
2,995.0
2,773.0
Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, FY2012 Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan.
Note: Totals and subtotals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. Funding levels are contained in the U.S. Department of Agriculture FY2012 Budget Summary and Annual
Performance Plan, February 2011. Formerly CSREES. NIFA was established in Title VII of the 2008 Farm Bill.
b. Higher Education includes capacity building grants, Hispanic-Serving Institution Education Grants Program,
Two-Year Postsecondary, and Agriculture in the K-12 Classroom, Higher Education Chal enge Grants,
Improve the Quality of Life in Rural America, and others.
c. Program totals may or may not include set-asides (non-add) or contingencies.
Department of the Interior77
President Obama has proposed $727 million in R&D funding for the Department of the Interior
(DOI), a decrease of $49 million (-6.3%) from the FY2010 actual funding of $776 million. (See
Table 15.) The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) would remain the primary supporter of R&D
within DOI, accounting for more than 83% of the department’s total FY2012 R&D request.78
President Obama has proposed $607.2 million for USGS R&D in FY2012, a decrease of $53.8
million (-8.1%) from the FY2010 actual level. USGS R&D is conducted under several
activity/program areas that have been realigned for FY2012. Seven of these areas constitute
DOI’s Surveys, Investigations, and Research (SIR) portfolio: Ecosystems; Climate and Land Use
Change; Energy, Minerals, and Environmental Health; Natural Hazards; Water Resources, Core
Science Systems; and Administration and Enterprise Information. In total, the SIR R&D funding
would fall by $58.8 million (-8.9%) in FY2012 over FY2010 actual, with the largest reductions
being made to the Water Resources (-$18.1 million, -15.5%), Core Science Systems (-$13.9
million, -24.1%), and Energy, Minerals, and Environmental Health (-$13.4 million, -13.2%)
accounts.
Under the President’s FY2012 budget request, an eighth account, National Land Imaging, is
recommended for funding existing and future Landsat missions. Landsat provides sensing data
for space policy and land use and climate change research. This account would be funded at $5.0
million in FY2012.
77 This section was written by John F. Sargent, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
78 Data on the Department of the Interior’s R&D funding for FY2012 was provided by the Office of Management and
Budget and the DOI’s Office of Budget in private communications with CRS.
Congressional Research Service
39
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
The National Park Service would receive $38 million in R&D funding for FY2012, $4 million
(11.8%) above its FY2010 R&D funding level. DOI’s other agencies would see flat R&D funding
for FY2012.
Table 15. Department of the Interior R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010 Enacted
FY2011
FY2012 Request
U.S. Geological Survey
661
607
Bureau of Land Management
12
12
Bureau of Reclamation
13
12
National Park Service
34
38
Fish and Wildlife Service
11
11
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation,
and Enforcement
45
47
Total, DOI R&Da 776
727
Source: CRS analysis of unpublished data provided to CRS by the Office of Management and Budget, The White
House, and agency budget justifications for FY2012.
a. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
Environmental Protection Agency79
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the regulatory agency responsible for carrying
out a number of environmental pollution control laws, funds a broad portfolio of R&D activities
to provide the necessary scientific tools and knowledge to support decisions relating to
preventing, regulating, and abating environmental pollution. Beginning in FY2006, EPA has been
funded through the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill. Most of
EPA’s scientific research activities are funded within the agency’s Science and Technology (S&T)
appropriations account. This account is funded by a “base” appropriation and a transfer from the
Hazardous Substance Superfund (Superfund) account. These transferred funds are dedicated to
research on more effective methods to clean up contaminated sites.
As indicated earlier in this report, action has not been completed on any of the 12 regular
appropriations bills for FY2011, including the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
appropriations bill that provides funding for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Since
the beginning of FY2011, EPA and other federal departments and agencies have been funded
under a series of interim continuing resolutions (CRs).80 Most recently, the Additional Continuing
Appropriations Amendments, 2011 (P.L. 112-6), extended funding generally at FY2010 levels
79 This section was written by Robert Esworthy, Specialist in Environmental Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
80 For more detailed discussion of recent continuing resolutions as well as information on the history, nature, scope, and
duration of continuing resolutions, see CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief
Overview of Recent Practices, by Sandy Streeter.
Congressional Research Service
40
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
through April 8, 2011, for most federal departments and agencies. Congress is considering
additional full-year options for FY2011 appropriations, therefore the following discussion
presents the President’s FY2012 budget request as compared to the FY2010 enacted
appropriations.
The President’s FY2012 budget request of $848.6 million for the EPA S&T account, including
transfers from the Superfund account, is $26.3 million (3.0%) below the $874.9 million included
in the FY2010 regular and supplemental appropriations (P.L. 111-88 and P.L. 111-212).81 The
amount included in the FY2012 budget request for the EPA’s S&T account (including transfers)
represents 9.1% of the agency’s total $8.97 billion request for FY2012. As indicated in Table 16
below, the base requested funding for the S&T account is a decrease below the FY2010 enacted
level. The $23.0 million proposed transfer from the Superfund account for FY2012 is $3.8
million less than the $26.8 million transferred in FY2010. As indicated in EPA’s FY2012 budget
justification,82 the requested base amount for the S&T account includes both increases and
decreases of varying levels for the individual EPA research program and activity line items
identified within the account when compared with the enacted FY2010 appropriations. For some
activities, the amount of the request for FY2012 remained relatively flat compared to the prior
year appropriation.
The President’s FY2012 budget includes reductions in some programmatic areas within EPA’s
S&T appropriations account, including $16.3 million for the Climate Protection Program, $3.5
million (-17.4%) less than FY2010; $108.0 million for Air, Climate, and Energy research, $3.4
million (-3.1%) less than FY2010; and $171.0 million for Sustainable Communities (human
health and ecosystem) Research, $17.1 million (9.1%) less than FY2010. The largest requested
dollar decrease for FY2012 within the S&T account was for EPA’s Homeland Security research
activities.83 The $42.0 million requested for FY2010 is nearly $24.3 million (-36.7%) below the
FY2010 appropriation of $66.3 million.
The largest quantitative increase for FY2012 above FY2010 levels within the S&T account was
$138.1 million for Chemical Safety and Sustainability research activities, including funding for
human health risk assessments, endocrine disruptors, and computations toxicology. The requested
amount is $17.3 million (14.3%) more than the $120.7 million appropriated in FY2010. The
FY2012 request also included $118.8 million for Safe and Sustainable Water Research, a $7.7
million (6.9%) increase above FY2010. FY2012 requested funding for other areas, such as
Pesticide Licensing, Drinking Water Programs, Indoor Air and Radiation, and Clean Air Quality
81 Title II of P.L. 111-88, the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations for FY2010 included $872.9
million for EPA’s S&T account. Title II of P.L. 111-212 provided additional supplemental FY2010 appropriations for
oil spill response and recovery efforts in the Gulf of Mexico associated with the Deepwater Horizon incident. Of these
funds in Title II, $2.0 million was provided for EPA within the S&T account for research of the potential long-term
human and environmental risks and impacts from the releases of crude oil, and the application of chemical dispersants
and other measures to mitigate these releases. For information on FY2010 funding for all EPA appropriations accounts
see CRS Report R40685, Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2010 Appropriations; for discussion of the
FY2010 EPA S&T supplemental funding see CRS Report R41098, Federal Research and Development Funding:
FY2011, coordinated by John F. Sargent Jr.
82 U.S. EPA, Fiscal year FY2012 Justification of Appropriation estimates for the Committee on Appropriations:
Science and Technology, http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/FY_2012_CJ_VV_rev.pdf, PDF pp. 74-248..
83 Under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, and Homeland Security Presidential Directives 7, 9, and 10, EPA is the lead
federal agency for coordinating security of the Nation’s water systems, and plays a role in developing early warning
monitoring and decontamination capabilities associated with potential attacks using biological contaminants.
Congressional Research Service
41
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
research activities reflected both increases and decreases when compared to FY2010
appropriations.
The activities funded within the S&T account include research conducted by universities,
foundations, and other non-federal entities with EPA grants, and research conducted by the
agency at its own laboratories and facilities. R&D at EPA headquarters and laboratories around
the country, as well as external R&D, is managed primarily by EPA’s Office of Research and
Development (ORD). A large portion of the S&T account funds EPA’s R&D activities managed
by ORD, including the agency’s research laboratories and research grants. The account also
provides funding for the agency’s applied science and technology activities conducted through its
program offices (e.g., the Office of Water). Many of the programs implemented by other offices
within EPA have a research component, but the research is not necessarily the primary focus of
the program.
The EPA S&T account incorporates elements of the former EPA Research and Development
(R&D) account, as well as a portion of the former Salaries and Expenses, and Program
Operations accounts, which had been in place until FY1996.84 Because of the differences in the
scope of the activities included in these accounts, apt comparisons before and after FY1996 are
difficult. Although the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports85 historical and
projected budget authority (BA) amounts for R&D at EPA (and other federal agencies), OMB
documents do not describe how these amounts explicitly relate to the requested and appropriated
funding amounts for the many specific EPA program activities. The R&D BA amounts reported
by OMB are typically significantly less than amounts appropriated/requested for the S&T
account. (BA as reported by OMB is included in Table 16 below for purpose of comparison.)
This is an indication that not all of the EPA S&T account funding is allocated to R&D.
Some Members of Congress and other stakeholders have consistently raised concerns about the
adequacy of funding for scientific research at EPA. The adequacy of funding for EPA’s scientific
research activities has been part of a broader question about the adequacy of overall federal
funding for a broad range of scientific research activities administered by multiple federal
agencies. Some congressional policymakers, scientists, and environmental organizations have
expressed concern about the downward trend in federal resources for scientific research over
time. The debate continues to center around the question of whether the regulatory actions of
federal agencies are based on “sound science,” and how scientific research is applied in
developing federal policy. Additionally, several recent and pending EPA regulatory actions have
been the focus of considerable debate during first session of the 112th Congress,86 including EPA
scientific research in support of these actions. Actions under the Clean Air Act, in particular EPA
84 In recent years, EPA’s annual appropriations have been requested, considered, and enacted according to eight
statutory appropriations accounts established by Congress during the FY1996 appropriations process.
85 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports R&D budget authority (BA) amounts in its Analytical
Perspectives accompanying the annual President’s budget, but amounts for specific programs are not included. For
example, for EPA R&D, OMB reported actual BA of $590 million for FY2010, $651 million proposed for FY2011,
and $579 proposed for FY2012. The R&D budget authority amounts reported by OMB are typically significantly less
than amounts appropriated/requested for the S&T account. This is an indication that not all of the EPA S&T account
funding is allocated to R&D. See OMB, Fiscal Year 2011 Budget of the United States: Analytical Perspectives –
Special Topics/Research and Development pgs. 339-344,and Fiscal Year 2012 Budget of the United States: Analytical
Perspectives – Special Topics/Research and Development pgs. 366-368 http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/
browse.html.
86 For a discussion of EPA regulatory actions see CRS Report R41561, EPA Regulations: Too Much, Too Little, or On
Track?, by James E. McCarthy and Claudia Copeland.
Congressional Research Service
42
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
controls on emissions of greenhouse gases, as well as efforts to address conventional pollutants
from a number of industries, have received much of the attention. Several actions under the Clean
Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), have
also received some attention. Congressional concern regarding these issues are likely to be
prominent areas of debate during oversight and deliberation of EPA’s S&T funding levels.
Table 16. Environmental Protection Agency S&T Account
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2010
Enacted
Supplemental
FY2012
Environmental Protection Agency
(P.L. 111-88)
(P.L. 111-212)
FY2011
Request
Science and Technology
Appropriations Account
—Base Appropriations
$848.1
$2.0
$825.6
—Transfer in from Superfund Account
26.8
N/A
23.0
Total Science and Technology
$874.9
$2.0
$848.6
R&D Budget Authority Report by
OMB
$590.0. N/A
$579.0
est.
Source: Prepared by CRS. FY2010 appropriation amounts are from the Conference Report (H.Rept. 111-316),
accompanying the FY2010 Interior, Environment and related Agencies appropriations (P.L. 111-88); the FY2010
base amount includes $2.0 million in supplemental appropriations for research of the potential long-term human
and environmental risks and impacts from the releases of crude oil, and the application of chemical dispersants
and other mitigation measures under P.L. 111-212, Title II. FY2012 requested amounts are from EPA’s FY 2012
Justification of Appropriation Estimates for Committee on Appropriations, http://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/
annualplan/fy2012.html; OMB amounts are as reported in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Fiscal Year
2012 Budget of the United States: Analytical Perspectives – Special Topics/Research and Development pgs. 366-368
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/browse.html. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to
rounding.
Department of Transportation87
President Obama has requested $1.215 billion for Department of Transportation (DOT) R&D in
FY2012, an increase of $146 million (13.7%) from the FY2010 enacted level. (See Table 17.)
Two DOT agencies—the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA)—account for most of the department’s R&D funding (79.4% in the
FY2012 request).
The President has requested $417 million for FAA R&D and R&D facilities, an increase of $5
million (1.2%) from the FY2010 enacted level. The $190 million requested for Research,
Engineering, and Development (RE&D) is essentially unchanged from the FY 2010 enacted
level. Of these funds, $77 million ($5 million above the FY2010 level) is for the RE&D NextGen
R&D portfolio which is focused on the use of alternative and renewable fuels for general aviation
aircraft to reduce aviation’s effects on the environment. The Environmental and Energy program,
including some NextGen research, would be funded at $35.8 million, with R&D focused on
87 This section was written by John F. Sargent, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
43
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
applications such as modeling environmental impacts of aviation and further advancing
technologies that reduce aircraft noise and emissions. 88
The FHWA would receive $548 million in R&D funding in FY2012 under the President’s request,
an increase of $94.8 million (20.9%). Highway Research and Development funding would
increase to $200.0 million, up $33.7 million (20.3%) from FY2010 funding of $166.3 million.
Funding for Intelligent Transportation Systems R&D would increase to $96.1 million in FY2012,
up $14.8 (18.1%) from its FY2010 funding level. The ITS Multi-modal Research Program and
the Competitive University Transportation Center (UTC) Consortia would each receive $20
million in FY2012. In addition, R&D funding for the State Planning and Research program would
grow to $206.4 million in FY2012, up $23.4 million (12.8%) over FY2010.
Table 17. Department of Transportation R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2010
FY2012
Actual
FY2011
Request
Federal Highway Administration
453
548
Federal Aviation Administration
412
417
Other agencies
204
250
Total, DOT R&D
1,069
1,215
Source: DOT FY2011 agency budget justifications; unpublished tables provided by OMB to CRS in February
2010; private communications between OMB and CRS.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
88 Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Budget Estimates Fiscal Year2012, February
2011.
Congressional Research Service
44
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2012
Author Contact Information
John F. Sargent Jr., Coordinator
John D. Moteff
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
jsargent@crs.loc.gov, 7-9147
jmoteff@crs.loc.gov, 7-1435
Robert Esworthy
Wendy H. Schacht
Specialist in Environmental Policy
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
resworthy@crs.loc.gov, 7-7236
wschacht@crs.loc.gov, 7-7066
Heather B. Gonzalez
Pamela W. Smith
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Analyst in Biomedical Policy
hgonzalez@crs.loc.gov, 7-1895
psmith@crs.loc.gov, 7-7048
Christine M. Matthews
Harold F. Upton
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
cmatthews@crs.loc.gov, 7-7055
hupton@crs.loc.gov, 7-2264
Daniel Morgan
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
dmorgan@crs.loc.gov, 7-5849
Congressional Research Service
45