Federal Research and Development Funding:
FY2014
John F. Sargent Jr., Coordinator
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
August 7, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43086
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Summary
Congress has received President Obama’s budget request for FY2014, which includes $142.773
billion for research and development (R&D), a $1.861 billion (1.3%) increase from the FY2012
actual funding level of $140.912 billion. The request represents the President’s R&D priorities;
Congress may opt to agree with part or all of the request, or may express different priorities
through the appropriations process. In particular, Congress will play a central role in determining
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.
Funding for R&D is highly concentrated in a few departments. Under President Obama’s FY2014
budget request, seven federal agencies would receive 95.3% of total federal R&D funding, with
the Department of Defense (47.8%) and the Department of Health and Human Services (22.4%,
primarily for the National Institutes of Health) accounting for more than 70% of all federal R&D
funding.
Among the largest changes proposed in the President’s request, the R&D budget of the
Department of Defense would fall by $4.625 billion (6.3%), while R&D funding for the
Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) would
increase by $1.428 billion. The NIST growth is fueled by increases in funding for its core
research laboratories and by the establishment of the National Network for Manufacturing
Innovation with $1 billion in mandatory funding. The NNMI seeks to promote the development
of manufacturing technologies with broad applications.
President Obama has requested increases in the R&D budgets of NIST, the National Science
Foundation, and the Department of Energy’s Office of Science that were targeted for doubling
over 7 years, from their FY2006 levels, by the America COMPETES Act, and over 10 years by
the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. The FY2014 request breaks with
President Obama’s earlier budgets, which explicitly stated the goal of doubling funding for these
accounts over their FY2006 aggregate level. Instead the Office of Science and Technology Policy
asserts that the FY2014 request “maintains the President’s commitment to increase funding for
research at these three science agencies.” The President’s FY2014 request sets a pace that would
result in doubling of the FY2006 level over a period of more than 17 years, much longer than
authorized by either act.
The President’s FY2014 request continues support for three multi-agency R&D initiatives in
FY2014, proposing $1.704 billion for the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), a reduction
of $159 million (8.6%) over FY2012, due primarily to reductions in NNI funding at DOD and
NSF; $3.968 billion for the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development
(NITRD) program, an increase of $159 million (4.2%) over FY2012; and $2.652 billion for the
U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), an increase of $151 million (6.0%) over
FY2012.
In recent years, Congress has used a variety of mechanisms to complete the annual appropriations
process after the start of the fiscal year. This may affect agencies’ execution of their R&D
budgets, including delaying or canceling some planned R&D and equipment acquisition.
Congressional Research Service
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Contents
Overview .......................................................................................................................................... 1
Federal R&D Funding Perspectives ................................................................................................ 2
By Agency ................................................................................................................................. 3
By Character of Work, Facilities, and Equipment ..................................................................... 4
By Agency and Character of Work Combined .......................................................................... 5
Defense-Related and Nondefense-Related R&D....................................................................... 6
Multiagency R&D Initiatives ........................................................................................................... 7
Efforts to Double Certain R&D Accounts ................................................................................. 7
National Nanotechnology Initiative ........................................................................................... 9
Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program .................... 10
U.S. Global Change Research Program ................................................................................... 10
Materials Genome Initiative .................................................................................................... 10
Advanced Manufacturing Partnership ..................................................................................... 11
National Robotics Initiative .............................................................................................. 11
National Network for Manufacturing Innovation ............................................................. 12
Reorganization of STEM Education Programs ....................................................................... 12
Treatment of FY2013 Rescissions and Sequestration in this Report ............................................. 13
FY2014 Appropriations Status ....................................................................................................... 14
Department of Defense .................................................................................................................. 15
Department of Homeland Security ................................................................................................ 19
National Institutes of Health .......................................................................................................... 22
Department of Energy .................................................................................................................... 27
National Science Foundation ......................................................................................................... 31
National Aeronautics and Space Administration ........................................................................... 35
Department of Commerce .............................................................................................................. 38
National Institute of Standards and Technology ...................................................................... 38
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ................................................................ 40
Department of Agriculture ............................................................................................................. 42
Department of the Interior ............................................................................................................. 45
U.S. Geological Survey ........................................................................................................... 45
Other DOI Agencies ................................................................................................................ 45
Environmental Protection Agency ................................................................................................. 47
Department of Transportation ........................................................................................................ 51
Figures
Figure 1. Funding for Accounts Targeted for Doubling: Appropriations, Authorizations,
and Requests versus Selected Doubling Rates ............................................................................. 9
Congressional Research Service
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Tables
Table 1. Federal Research and Development Funding by Agency, FY2012-FY2014 ..................... 3
Table 2. Federal Research and Development Funding by Character of Work and Facilities
and Equipment, FY2012-FY2014 ................................................................................................ 4
Table 3. Top R&D Funding Agencies by Character of Work, Facilities,
and Equipment, FY2012-FY2014 ................................................................................................ 6
Table 4. Funding for Accounts Targeted for Doubling FY2006-FY2014 ........................................ 8
Table 5. Alignment of Agency R&D Funding and Regular Appropriations Bills ......................... 15
Table 6. Department of Defense RDT&E ...................................................................................... 18
Table 7. Department of Homeland Security R&D and Related Programs ..................................... 21
Table 8. National Institutes of Health Funding .............................................................................. 24
Table 9. Department of Energy R&D and Related Activities ........................................................ 30
Table 10. NSF Funding by Major Account .................................................................................... 34
Table 11. NASA R&D ................................................................................................................... 37
Table 12. NIST ............................................................................................................................... 40
Table 13. NOAA R&D ................................................................................................................... 41
Table 14. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D............................................................................ 44
Table 15. Department of the Interior R&D .................................................................................... 46
Table 16. Environmental Protection Agency S&T Account .......................................................... 50
Table 17. Department of Transportation R&D .............................................................................. 54
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 55
Congressional Research Service
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Overview
The 113th 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. 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. 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 R&D. Its purposes
include addressing specific concerns such as national defense, health, safety, the environment,
and energy security; advancing knowledge generally; developing the scientific and engineering
workforce; and strengthening U.S. innovation and competitiveness in the global economy. Most
of the R&D funded by the federal government is performed in support of the unique missions of
the funding agencies.
Congress will play a central role in defining the nation’s R&D priorities as it makes decisions
about the size and distribution of R&D funding—overall, within agencies, and for specific
programs. Some Members of Congress have expressed concerns about the level of federal
funding (for R&D as for other purposes) in light of the current federal fiscal condition, deficit,
and debt. As Congress acts to complete the FY2014 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.
President Obama released his proposed FY2014 budget on April 10, 2013. Since FY2013 final
appropriations figures (post-sequestration) were not yet available, the President’s budget
compared the FY2014 request generally to FY2012 funding rather than to FY2013 funding. This
report also uses FY2012 as the base comparison year; in some cases the analysis of growth rates
is also presented in terms of compound annual growth rates (CAGRs).1
This report provides government-wide, multi-agency, and individual agency analyses of the
President’s FY2014 request as it relates to R&D and related activities. The President’s budget
seeks $142.773 billion for R&D in FY2014, a 1.3% increase (0.7% CAGR) over the actual
FY2012 R&D funding level of $140.912 billion.2 Adjusted for inflation, the President’s FY2014
R&D request represents a decrease of 2.6% from the FY2012 level (1.3% CAGR).3
1 CAGR provides a measure of annual growth. CAGR is a calculated growth rate which, if applied year after year to a
beginning amount, reaches a specified final amount.
2 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 falls short of the inflation rate may reduce real purchasing
power.
3 As calculated by CRS using the GDP (chained) price index from Table 10.1, Gross Domestic Product and Deflators
Used in the Historical Tables: 1940–2018, from the President’s FY2014 budget, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/
default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/hist10z1.xls.
Congressional Research Service
1
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Among its provisions, the R&D funding in the President’s proposed FY2014 budget maintains an
emphasis on increasing support 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 accounts at 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 (collectively referred to as the “targeted
accounts”). Appropriations provided to these agencies have 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 (public and private) 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 credit).4 Doing so likely would require a substantial increase in government and/or
corporate R&D spending. When President Obama set forth the goal in 2009, total U.S. R&D
expenditures were $404 billion, or approximately 2.90% of GDP, so reaching the 3% goal would
have required an increase of 3.6% in national R&D spending per dollar of GDP. Since then,
however, GDP has grown faster than R&D. As a result, total estimated U.S. R&D expenditures of
$414 billion in 2011 accounted for a smaller fraction (2.7%) of GDP than in 2009. Therefore,
reaching the 3% goal in 2011 would have required an increase of 9.4% in national R&D spending
per dollar of GDP.5
Analysis of federal R&D funding is complicated by several factors, such as inconsistency among
agencies in the reporting of R&D and the inclusion of R&D in accounts with non-R&D activities.
As a result of these 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), including those shown in Table 1, may differ somewhat from the agency budget
analyses that appear later in this report.
Federal R&D Funding Perspectives
Federal R&D funding can be analyzed from a variety of perspectives that provide different
insights. The following sections examine the data viewed by agency, by the character of the work
supported, by a combination of these two perspectives, and by defense-related and nondefense-
related R&D.
4 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 Tax Credit: Current Law and Policy Issues for the 113th
Congress, by Gary Guenther.
5 GDP figures from Bureau of Economic Analysis, Survey of Current Business, 31 May 2012; R&D figures from
National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, National Patterns of R&D
Resources (annual series).
Congressional Research Service
2
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
By Agency
The authorization and appropriations process views federal R&D funding primarily from the
perspective of individual agencies and programs. Table 1 provides data on R&D by agency for
FY2012 (actual), FY2013 (estimate), and FY2014 (request) as reported by OMB. This table will
be updated as post-sequestration funding data become available.
Under President Obama’s FY2014 budget request, seven federal agencies would receive 95.3% of
total federal R&D funding: Department of Defense (DOD), 47.8%; Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) (primarily the National Institutes of Health), 22.4%; Department of
Energy (DOE), 8.9%; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 8.1%; National
Science Foundation (NSF), 4.3%; Department of Commerce (DOC), 1.9%; and Department of
Agriculture (USDA), 1.8%. This report provides an analysis of the R&D budget requests for
these agencies, as well as for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of the
Interior (DOI), Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). In total, these 11 agencies account for 98% of current and requested federal R&D funding.
The largest agency R&D increases in the President’s FY2014 request, compared with the FY2012
levels, are for DOE, $1.928 billion (17.8%); DOC, $1.428 billion (113.9%);6 DHS, $893 million
(185.7%); HHS, $669 million (2.1%); NSF, $512 million (9.1%); and NASA, $290 million
(2.6%). Under the President’s FY2014 budget request, DOD R&D funding would be reduced by
$4.625 billion (6.3%) and EPA R&D by $8 million (1.4%).
Table 1. Federal Research and Development Funding by Agency, FY2012-FY2014
(Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
Change,
2012-2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Department/Agency
Actual
Estimatea Request Dollar Percent CAGR
DOD $72,916
$68,291 $−4,625
−6.3%
−3.2%
HHS 31,377
32,046 669 2.1% 1.1%
DOE 10,811
12,739 1,928 17.8% 8.6%
NASA 11,315
11,605 290 2.6% 1.3%
NSF 5,636
6,148 512 9.1% 4.4%
DOC 1,254
2,682 1,428 113.9% 46.2%
USDA 2,331
2,523 192 8.2% 4.0%
DHS 481
1,374 893 185.7% 69.0%
6 The Department of Commerce total includes the mandatory funding proposal for the National Network for
Manufacturing Innovation at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. This program is discussed in the DOC
NIST section of this report. Mandatory spending is typically provided in permanent or multi-year appropriations
contained in the authorizing law, and therefore, the funding becomes available automatically each year, without
legislative action by Congress. For additional information on mandatory spending, see CRS Report RL33074,
Mandatory Spending Since 1962, by Mindy R. Levit and D. Andrew Austin.
Congressional Research Service
3
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Change,
2012-2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Department/Agency
Actual
Estimatea Request
Dollar Percent CAGR
Department of Veterans Affairs
1,160
1,172 12 1.0% 0.5%
DOI 820
963 143 17.4% 8.4%
DOT 921
942 21 2.3% 1.1%
EPA 568
560
−8
−1.4%
−0.7%
Other 1,322
1,728 406 30.7% 14.3%
Total 140,912
142,773 1,861
1.3% 0.7%
Source: Executive Office of the President, OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States
Government, Fiscal Year 2014, Table 21-1.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. FY2013 post-sequestration funding data will be added when available.
By Character of Work, Facilities, and Equipment
Federal R&D funding can also be examined by the character of work it supports—basic research,
applied research, or development—and by funding provided for construction of R&D facilities
and acquisition of major R&D equipment. (See Table 2.) President Obama’s FY2014 request
includes $33.162 billion for basic research, up $1.422 million (4.5%) from FY2012 (2.2%
CAGR); $34.963 billion for applied research, up $3.345 billion (10.6%) from FY2012 (5.2%
CAGR); $71.463 billion for development, down $3.781 billion (5.0%) from FY2012 (2.5%
CAGR); and $3.185 billion for facilities and equipment, up $875 million (37.9%) from FY2012
(17.4% CAGR).
Table 2. Federal Research and Development Funding by Character of Work and
Facilities and Equipment, FY2012-FY2014
(Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
Change,
2012-2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Actual
Estimatea Request Dollar Percent CAGR
Basic research
31,740
33,162 $1,422
4.5%
2.2%
Applied research
31,618
34,963 3,345 10.6% 5.2%
Development 75,244
71,463
−3,781
−5.0%
−2.5%
Facilities and Equipment 2,310
3,185 875 37.9% 17.4%
Total 140,912
142,773 1,861
1.3% 0.7%
Source: Executive Office of the President, OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government,
Fiscal Year 2014, Table 21-1.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. FY2013 post-sequestration funding data will be added when available.
Congressional Research Service
4
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
By Agency and Character of Work Combined
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 overall federal R&D budget reflects a wide range of national priorities, from
supporting advances in spaceflight to developing new and affordable sources of energy. These
priorities and the mission of each agency contribute, in part, to the composition of that agency’s
R&D spending (i.e., the allocation between basic research, applied research, development, and
facilities and equipment). In the President’s FY2014 budget request, the Department of Health
and Human Services, primarily the National Institutes of Health (NIH), accounts for nearly half
of all federal funding for basic research.7 HHS is also the largest funder of applied research,
accounting for about 45% of all federally funded applied research in the President’s FY2014
budget request.8 DOD is the primary federal agency funder of development, accounting for 86.1%
of total federal development funding in the President’s FY2014 budget request.9
The federal government is the nation’s largest supporter of basic research, funding 53.3% of U.S.
basic research in 2011, primarily because the private sector asserts it cannot capture an adequate
return on long-term fundamental research investments. In contrast, industry funded 22.5% of U.S.
basic research in 2011 (with state governments, universities, and other non-profit organizations
funding the remaining 24.2%).10 In contrast to basic research, industry is the primary funder of
applied research in the United States, accounting for an estimated 51.2% in 2011, while the
federal government accounted for an estimated 38.8%.11 Industry also provides the vast majority
of funding for development. Industry accounted for an estimated 74.6% in 2011, while the federal
government provided an estimated 23.7%.12
7 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United
States Government, Fiscal Year 2014, Table 21-1.
8Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United
States Government, Fiscal Year 2014, Table 21-1.
9 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United
States Government, Fiscal Year 2014, Table 21-1.
10 National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2013, National Patterns of
R&D Resources: 2010–11 Data Update, NSF 13-318, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13318/.
11 National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2013, National Patterns of
R&D Resources: 2010–11 Data Update, NSF 13-318, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13318/.
12National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2013, National Patterns of
R&D Resources: 2010–11 Data Update, NSF 13-318, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13318/.
Congressional Research Service
5
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Table 3. Top R&D Funding Agencies by Character of Work, Facilities,
and Equipment, FY2012-FY2014
(Budget authority, dollar amounts in millions)
Change,
2012 to 2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Actual
Estimatea
Request
Dollar Percent CAGR
Basic Research
Health and Human Services
16,195
16,182
−13
−0.1%
0.0%
National Science Foundation
4,584
5,120
536
11.7%
5.7%
Energy 3,912
4,129
217
5.5%
2.7%
Applied Research
Health and Human Services
14,933
15,660
727
4.9%
2.4%
Defense 4,728
4,602
−126
−2.7%
−1.3%
Energy 3,584
4,405
821
22.9%
10.9%
Development
Defense 66,069
61,499
−4,570
−6.9%
−3.5%
NASA 5,344
5,135
−209
−3.9%
−2.0%
Energy 2,446
3,338
892
36.5%
16.8%
Facilities and Equipment
Energy 869
867
−2
−0.2%
−0.1%
Homeland Security
97
778
681
702.1%
183.2%
National Science Foundation
535
548
13
2.4%
1.2%
Source: Executive Office of the President, OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United States Government,
Fiscal Year 2014, April 10, 2013.
Note: Top three funding agencies in each category based on FY2014 request.
a. FY2013 post-sequestration funding data will be added when available.
Defense-Related and Nondefense-Related R&D
Federal R&D funding is also characterized as defense-related or nondefense-related. Defense-
related R&D is provided for primarily by the Department of Defense, but includes some funding
at the Department of Energy and the Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Defense-related R&D has generally provided for more than half of total federal R&D funding for
the past two decades, fluctuating between 50% and 70%. Defense related R&D grew from 52.7%
of total federal R&D funding in FY2001 to 60.5% in FY2008 and has since declined. The
President’s request for FY2014 includes $73.2 billion in defense-related R&D funding, or about
51.2% of the total R&D request.
Congressional Research Service
6
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Multiagency R&D Initiatives
Although this report focuses primarily on the R&D activities of individual agencies, President
Obama’s FY2014 budget request supports several multiagency R&D initiatives. The following
sections discuss several of these.
Efforts to Double Certain R&D Accounts
In 2006, President Bush announced the American Competitiveness Initiative which, in part,
sought to increase federal funding for physical sciences and engineering research by doubling
funding over 10 years (FY2006-FY2016) for targeted accounts at three agencies: NSF, DOE
Office of Science, and the scientific and technical research and services (STRS) and construction
of research facilities (CRF) accounts at the DOC National Institute of Standards and Technology.
In 2007, Congress authorized substantial increases for these targeted accounts under the America
COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69), which set the combined authorization levels for these accounts
for FY2008-FY2010 at a seven-year doubling pace.13 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.14 (See Table 4 for individual and aggregate appropriations for the
targeted accounts.)
In 2010, Congress passed the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-358)
which, among other things, authorized appropriations levels for the targeted accounts for
FY2011-FY2013.15 The aggregate authorization levels in this act for the targeted accounts are
consistent with an 11-year doubling path, slower than the America COMPETES Act’s 7-year
doubling path. Moreover, aggregate FY2012 funding for the targeted accounts was approximately
$12.529 billion, $1.631 billion less than authorized in the act, setting a pace to double over 17
years from the FY2006 level—more than twice the length of time originally envisioned in the
2007 America COMPETES Act and more than half longer than the doubling period established
by the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010.16
In his FY2014 budget, President Obama is requesting $13.532 billion in aggregate funding for the
targeted accounts, an increase of $1.003 billion (8.0%) above the enacted FY2012 aggregate
funding level of $12.529 billion.
13 CRS Report R41951, An Analysis of Efforts to Double Federal Funding for Physical Sciences and Engineering
Research, by John F. Sargent Jr.
14 In 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) provided supplemental funding for
several of the targeted accounts (approximately $5.202 billion). This raised funding for the accounts above the target
levels in that year.
15 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.
16 All doubling path calculations in this report use FY2006 as the baseline. For additional information on the doubling
effort, see CRS Report R41951, An Analysis of Efforts to Double Federal Funding for Physical Sciences and
Engineering Research, by John F. Sargent Jr.
Congressional Research Service
7
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
In light of budget constraints, the future of the doubling path appears to be in question. 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.17 In his FY2011 budget documents, President Obama extended the period over which
he intended to double these agencies’ budgets to 11 years (FY2006 to FY2017).18 The FY2013
budget request, like the FY2012 budget request, reiterated President Obama’s intention to double
funding for the targeted accounts from their FY2006 levels but did not specify the length of time
over which the doubling is to take place. President Obama’s 2014 budget expresses a
commitment to increasing funding for the targeted accounts, but does not commit to doubling,
remaining silent on this goal and timeframe. In addition, the Office of Management and Budget’s
Public Budget Database, published as part of the President’s FY2014 request, includes projections
of budget authority for the targeted accounts through FY2018; projected FY2018 funding for the
targeted accounts sets a doubling pace of approximately 19 years.
Table 4. Funding for Accounts Targeted for Doubling
FY2006-FY2014
(budget authority, in millions of current dollars)
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Agency
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
ARRA
Actual
Actual
Actual
Est.a
Req.
NSF 5,646
5,884
6,084
6,469
2,402
6,972
6,913b 7,033
7,626
DOE/Office of
3,632 3,837 4,083 4,807
1,633
4,964
4,843 4,874
5,153
Science
NIST/core researchc 395 434
441 472
220
515
497 567
694
NIST/facilities 174
59
161
172
360
147
70
55
60
Total 9,846
10,214
10,768
11,920
4,615
12,598 12,323
12,529
13,533
Source: NIST, budget requests for FY2008-FY2014, available at http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/budget/
index.cfm; DOE, budget requests for FY2008-FY2014, available at http://www.cfo.doe.gov/crorgcf30.htm; NSF,
budget requests for FY2008-FY2014 available at http://www.nsf.gov/about/budget.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. FY2013 post-sequestration funding data will be added when available.
b. Includes $54 million transferred to the U.S. Coast Guard for icebreaking services (per P.L. 112-10).
c. NIST core research is performed under its scientific and technical research and services (STRS) account.
Figure 1 shows total funding for the targeted accounts as a percentage of their FY2006 funding
level, and illustrates how actual (FY2006-FY2012), requested (FY2007-FY2014), projected
(FY2015-FY2018), and authorized appropriations (FY2008-FY2013) compare to different
doubling rates using FY2006 as the base year. The thick black line at the top of the chart is at
200%, the doubling level. The data used in Figure 1 are in current dollars, not constant dollars,
thus the effect of inflation on the purchasing power of these funds is not taken into consideration.
17 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.
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 2011 Budget, February 1, 2010,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/doubling%2011%20final.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
8
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Figure 1. Funding for Accounts Targeted for Doubling:
Appropriations, Authorizations, and Requests versus Selected Doubling Rates
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) using agency budget justifications for FY2008-
FY2014; the President’s FY2014 budget request; and agency authorization levels from the America COMPETES
Act (P.L. 110-69) and the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-358).
Notes: The 7-year doubling pace represents annual increases of 10.4%, the 10-year doubling pace represents
annual increases of 7.2%, the 11-year doubling pace represents annual increases of 6.5%, the 15-year doubling
represents annual increases of 4.7%, and the 20-year doubling represents annual increases of 3.3%. Through
compounding, these rates achieve the doubling of funding in the specified time period. The lines connecting
aggregate appropriations for the targeted accounts are for illustration purposes only. Funding provided under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) is excluded from the FY2009 “Actual
Appropriations” amount.
National Nanotechnology Initiative
Launched by President Clinton in his FY2001 budget request, the National Nanotechnology
Initiative (NNI) is a multiagency R&D initiative advancing understanding and control of matter at
the nanoscale, where the physical, chemical, and biological properties of materials differ in
fundamental and useful ways from the properties of individual atoms or bulk matter.19
The President is requesting $1.704 billion for the NNI in FY2014, a reduction of $159 million
(8.6%) from the FY2012 actual level of $1.863 billion. Among the most substantial changes in
nanotechnology funding under the Administration’s FY2014 request: reductions for DOD ($209
million, 49.1%) and NSF ($35 million, 7.6%), and increases for DOE ($56 million, 17.8%), DHS
19 In the context of the NNI and nanotechnology, the nanoscale refers to a dimension of 1 to 100 nanometers.
Congressional Research Service
9
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
($16 million, 86.5%), HHS ($8 million, 1.7%), and DOC ($7 million, 7.0%). Nanotechnology
funding for other NNI agencies would remain essentially flat in FY2014.20
Networking and Information Technology Research and
Development Program
Established by the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194), the Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) program is the primary mechanism
by which the federal government coordinates its unclassified networking and information
technology (NIT) R&D investments in areas such as supercomputing, high-speed networking,
cybersecurity, software engineering, and information management.
President Obama has requested $3.968 billion in FY2014 for the Networking and Information
Technology Research and Development (NITRD) program. This is $159 million (4.2%) above the
FY2012 funding level. The most substantial agency increases in NITRD funding under the
Administration’s FY2014 request are for the DOC (up $51 million, 42.6%), DOE (up $44
million, 8.8%), DOD (up $38 million, 3.0%), DHS (up $22 million, 40.6%), and NSF (up $11
million, 0.9%). The President’s budget would reduce HHS NITRD funding by $6 million (down
1.0%) and NASA by $2 million (down 1.9%).21
U.S. Global Change Research Program
The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) coordinates and integrates federal
research and applications to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and
natural processes of global change.
President Obama has proposed $2.652 billion for the U.S. Global Change Research Program
(USGCRP) in FY2014, $151 million (6.0%) above the FY2012 estimated level of $2.501 billion.
The most substantial agency increases in USGCRP funding under the Administration’s FY2014
request are for NASA (up $71 million, 5.0%), DOC (up $45 million, 13.8%), DOI U.S.
Geological Survey (up $13 million, 22.2%), and USDA (up $11 million, 9.8%).22
Materials Genome Initiative
Announced in June 2011 by President Obama, the Materials Genome Initiative is a multi-agency
initiative
20 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, The 2014 Budget: A World-Leading
Commitment to Science and Research—Science, Technology, Innovation, and STEM Education in the 2014 Budget,
Table 2, April 10, 2013. For additional information on the NNI, see CRS Report RL34401, The National
Nanotechnology Initiative: Overview, Reauthorization, and Appropriations Issues, by John F. Sargent Jr.
21 Ibid. For additional information on the NITRD program, see CRS Report RL33586, The Federal Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development Program: Background, Funding, and Activities, by Patricia
Moloney Figliola.
22 Ibid. 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: FY2014
to create new knowledge, tools, and infrastructure with a goal of enabling U.S. industries to
discover, manufacture, and deploy advanced materials twice as fast than is possible today.
Agencies are currently developing implementation strategies for the Materials Genome
Initiative with a focus on: (1) the creation of a materials innovation infrastructure, (2)
achieving national goals with advanced materials, and (3) equipping the next generation
materials workforce. Materials science funding opportunities announced in FY2012 and
requested in the FY2013 budget reflect these efforts.23
In congressional testimony, OSTP Director John Holdren stated that the purpose of the Materials
Genome Initiative is to “speed our understanding of the fundamentals of materials science,
providing a wealth of practical information that American entrepreneurs and innovators will be
able to use to develop new products and processes” in much the same way that the Human
Genome Project accelerated a range of biological sciences by identifying and deciphering the
human genetic code.24 The President’s FY2014 budget does not include a table of agency funding
for the MGI, but the initiative is referred to in the Analytical Perspectives supplement to the
President’s budget25 and multiple times in the National Science Foundation’s FY2014 Budget
Request to Congress.26 Among the agencies funding MGI R&D are DOE, DOD, NSF, and NIST.
Advanced Manufacturing Partnership
In June 2011, President Obama launched the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP), an
effort to bring together “industry, universities, and the Federal government to invest in emerging
technologies that will create high-quality manufacturing jobs and enhance our global
competitiveness.”27 Two R&D-focused components of the AMP are the National Robotics
Initiative (NRI) and the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI).
National Robotics Initiative
The National Robotics Initiative (NRI) seeks to “develop robots that work with or beside people
to extend or augment human capabilities.”28 Among the goals of the program are increasing labor
productivity in the manufacturing sector, assisting with dangerous and expensive missions in
space, accelerating the discovery of new drugs, and improving food safety by rapidly sensing
microbial contamination.29 In FY2012, four agencies—NSF, NIH, NASA, and USDA—issued a
joint solicitation to provide research funding for next-generation robotics. In addition, the
Department of Defense, through multiple component agencies, is supporting the NRI through the
23 E-mail correspondence between OSTP and CRS, March 14, 2012.
24 John P. Holdren, Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, testimony
before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Science and Space, hearing
on “Keeping America Competitive Through Investments in R&D,” March 6, 2012, http://commerce.senate.gov/public/
?a=Files.Serve&File_id=fed566eb-e2c8-49da-aec5-f84e4045890b.
25 Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United
States Government, Fiscal Year 2014, p. 371.
26 National Science Foundation, Fiscal Year 2014 Budget of the U.S. Government, April 10, 2013, http://www.nsf.gov/
about/budget/fy2014/pdf/EntireDocument_fy2014.pdf.
27 Ibid.
28 Ibid.
29 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, website, August 3, 2011,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/03/supporting-president-s-national-robotics-initiative.
Congressional Research Service
11
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Defense University Research Instrumentation Program. DOD is supporting the purchase of
equipment to assist in robotics research to advance defense technologies and applications,
including unmanned ground, air, sea, and undersea vehicles and autonomous systems.30 The
President’s FY2014 budget does not include a table of agency funding for the NRI, but is referred
to in the Analytical Perspectives supplement to the President’s budget.31 Also, a brief reference to
NSF’s participation in the NRI appears in the President’s budget for FY2014 as well as multiple
references in NSF’s FY2014 budget request.32
National Network for Manufacturing Innovation
The President’s FY2014 budget once again proposes the establishment of a National Network for
Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) to promote the development of manufacturing technologies
with broad applications. First proposed in President Obama’s FY2013 budget request, this
initiative would be carried out through a collaboration among NIST, DOD, DOE, and NSF.33
According to NIST, the NNMI would consist of
a network of institutes where researchers, companies, and entrepreneurs can come together to
develop new manufacturing technologies with broad applications. Each institute would have
a unique technology focus. These institutes will help support an ecosystem of manufacturing
activity in local areas. The Manufacturing Innovation Institutes would support manufacturing
technology commercialization by helping to bridge the gap from the laboratory to the market
and address core gaps in scaling manufacturing process technologies.34
The President’s budget requests a mandatory appropriation to NIST of $1 billion over nine years
(FY2014-FY2022) in support of up to 15 NNMI manufacturing innovation institutes. Funding for
the program would be front-loaded with NIST anticipating obligating $147.6 million in FY2014,
and $672 million in spending projected for FY2014-FY2018.35
Reorganization of STEM Education Programs
The Administration’s FY2014 budget proposes a broad reorganization and consolidation of
federal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs—
including programs with a potential nexus to federal R&D, such as research fellowships at
mission agencies. Under the plan, the National Science Foundation, Department of Education,
and Smithsonian Institution would become lead federal agencies for graduate/undergraduate
30 Ibid.
31 Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President, Analytical Perspectives, Budget of the United
States Government, Fiscal Year 2014, p. 371.
32 National Science Foundation, Fiscal Year 2014 Budget of the U.S. Government, April 10, 2013, http://www.nsf.gov/
about/budget/fy2014/pdf/EntireDocument_fy2014.pdf.
33 Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, The 2014 Budget: A World-Leading
Commitment to Science and Research—Science, Technology, Innovation, and STEM Education in the 2014 Budget,
April 10, 2013.
34 U.S. Department of Commerce, FY2014 Budget in Brief, February 2012, p. 123, http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/
budget/FY13BIB/fy2013bib_final.pdf.
35 Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President, Fiscal Year 2014 Budget of the U.S.
Government, Supplemental Tables, Table S-9, April 10, 2013, p. 203.
Congressional Research Service
12
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
STEM education, kindergarten-through-grade 12 STEM education, and informal science
education, respectively.
The President proposes that certain STEM education programs at other federal agencies be
reduced and their associated budget authority allocated to the three lead agencies. Other federal
STEM education programs, including those at the lead agencies, also would be consolidated
under the plan. About half of existing federal STEM education programs would be affected. It is
unclear how theses proposed changes might affect agency R&D funding levels. The widely
anticipated federal STEM education strategy, which Congress directed the Administration to
produce, may address some of these questions.36
Treatment of FY2013 Rescissions and Sequestration
in this Report
Rescissions specified in the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L.
113-6), coupled with sequestration requirements in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA, P.L.
112-25) and sequestration process modifications made in the American Taxpayer Relief Act of
2012 (ATRA, P.L. 112-240) have complicated analysis of the level of federal R&D funding
provided to federal agencies. The complication is particularly pronounced with respect to
accounts, programs, projects, and activities that include both R&D and non-R&D funding as
rescissions and sequestration reductions may be applied unequally to the R&D and non-R&D
functions. Accordingly, in those cases where the FY2013 R&D funding level cannot be
determined with certainty, no figures are provided. FY2013 figures will be added as agencies
provide additional information that allows for an accurate determination of R&D funding.
Appropriations accounts for some agencies contain only R&D; for most of those agencies, the
post-rescission/pre-sequestration funding levels are included. Similarly, for those accounts with
both R&D and non-R&D related activities that this report tracks in their entirety, post-
rescission/pre-sequestration funding levels are included. The remainder of this section provides
background on the acts that require sequestration and the processes to be used in arriving at the
amounts to be sequestered, as well as CRS resources that provide additional information.
FY2013 discretionary appropriations were considered in the context of the BCA, which
established discretionary spending limits for FY2012-FY2021. The BCA also tasked a Joint
Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to develop a federal deficit reduction plan for Congress
and the President to enact by January 15, 2012. Because deficit reduction legislation was not
enacted by that date, an automatic spending reduction process established by the BCA was
triggered; this process consists of a combination of sequestration and lower discretionary
spending caps, initially scheduled to begin on January 2, 2013. The “joint committee”
sequestration process for FY2013 requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to
implement across-the-board spending cuts at the account and program level to achieve equal
budget reductions from both defense and nondefense funding at a percentage to be determined,
under terms specified in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
(BBEDCA, Title II of P.L. 99-177, 2 U.S.C. 900-922), as amended by the BCA. For further
36 For more information on federal STEM education programs, see CRS Report R42642, Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Primer, by Heather B. Gonzalez and Jeffrey J. Kuenzi.
Congressional Research Service
13
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
information on the Budget Control Act, see CRS Report R41965, The Budget Control Act of 2011,
by Bill Heniff Jr., Elizabeth Rybicki, and Shannon M. Mahan.
The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA, P.L. 112-240), enacted on January 2, 2013,
made a number of significant changes to the procedures in the BCA that will take place during
FY2013. First, the date for the joint committee sequester to be implemented was delayed for two
months, until March 1, 2013. Second, the dollar amount of the joint committee sequester was
reduced by $24 billion. Third the statutory caps on discretionary spending for FY2013 (and
FY2014) were lowered. For further information on the changes to BCA procedures made by
ATRA, see CRS Report R42949, The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012: Modifications to the
Budget Enforcement Procedures in the Budget Control Act, by Bill Heniff Jr.
Pursuant to the BCA, as amended by ATRA, President Obama ordered that the joint committee
sequester be implemented on March 1, 2013. The accompanying OMB report indicated a dollar
amount of budget authority to be canceled to each account containing non-exempt funds. The
sequester will ultimately be applied at the program, project, and activity (PPA) level within each
account. Because the sequester was implemented at the time that a temporary continuing
resolution was in force, the reductions were calculated on an annualized basis and will be
apportioned throughout the remainder of the fiscal year. Although full year FY2013 funding has
been enacted, the effect of these reductions on the budgetary resources that will ultimately be
available to an agency at either the account or PPA level remain unclear until further guidance is
provided by OMB as to how these reductions should be applied.
Section 3004 of P.L. 113-6 is intended to eliminate any amount by which the new budget
authority provided in the act exceeds the FY2013 discretionary spending limits in Section
251(c)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, as amended by the Budget
Control Act of 2011 and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. As enacted, this section
provides two separate across-the-board rescissions—one for non-security budget authority and
one for security budget authority—of 0%, to be applied at the program, project, and activity level.
The section requires the percentages to be increased if OMB estimates that additional rescissions
are needed to avoid exceeding the limits. Subsequent to the enactment of P.L. 113-6, OMB
calculated that additional rescissions of 0.032% of security budget authority, and 0.2% of non-
security budget authority, would be required.
FY2014 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 eight of the 12 regular appropriations bills.
For each agency covered in this report, Table 5 shows the corresponding regular appropriations
bill that provides funding for the agency, including its R&D activities. As of August 5, 2013, three
of the eight regular appropriations bills that provide R&D funding for agencies covered in-depth
in this report had passed the House; none had passed the Senate. This report will be updated as
relevant appropriations bills are passed by the House or the Senate.
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 bill is available on the CRS webpage, Status Table of
Congressional Research Service
14
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Appropriations, available at http://crs.gov/Pages/AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx?source=
QuickLinks.
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, FY2014 Status Table of Appropriations, available at http://crs.gov/Pages/
AppropriationsStatusTable.aspx?source=QuickLinks.
Department of Defense37
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 appropriations
request. The program’s RDT&E funds support congressionally directed research in such areas as
37 This section was written by John Moteff, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
15
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
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. The Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction Program supports activities to destroy the
U.S. inventory of lethal chemical agents and munitions to avoid future risks and costs associated
with storage. Funds for this program are requested through the Defensewide Procurement
appropriations request. 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
Operations and Maintenance appropriation request. 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 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 has asked 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 have included in the past the Iraqi Freedom Fund (IFF), the Iraqi Security
Forces Fund, the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, and the Pakistan Counterinsurgency
Capability Fund. Another transfer fund is the Mine Resistant and Ambush Protected Vehicle Fund
(MRAPVF). Congress typically makes a single appropriation into each of these funds, and
authorizes the Secretary to make transfers to other accounts, including RDT&E, at his discretion.
For FY2014, the Obama Administration requested $67.520 billion for DOD’s baseline Title IV
RDT&E. This is $5.449 billion less than what was available in FY2012 for both baseline and
OCO RDT&E. It is $2.339 billion less than what was provided for baseline FY2013 RDT&E
funding in the Consolidated and Continuing Appropriations Act (H.R. 933). However, this does
not consider the subsequent sequestration. According to the Department’s FY2014 Budget
Briefing Documents, sequestration reduced the FY2013 RDT&E funding to $63.400 billion.
Therefore, the FY2014 request would be $4.120 billion above the FY2013 sequestered balance.
The Administration also requested $117 million in OCO RDT&E, approximately half of what
was appropriated for OCO RDT&E in FY2013. The FY2014 OCO RDT&E request was directed
almost exclusively toward classified programs.
In addition to the baseline Title IV RDT&E request, the Administration requested $684 million in
RDT&E through the Defense Health Program, $613 million in RDT&E through the Chemical
Congressional Research Service
16
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Agents and Munitions Destruction program, and $56 million in RDT&E through the National
Defense Sealift Fund for FY2014.
The House approved its version of the DOD appropriations bill on July 24. The House provided
$66.399 billion for Title IV RDT&E, $1.121 billion less than what was requested. Reductions
were often associated with program delays or program increases which the House considered to
be unjustified. Two relatively large increases were $250 million for the Office of the Secretary to
help administer the Rapid Innovation Fund and $173 million for missile defense programs within
the Israeli Cooperative Programs line item. The House also approved $56 million in RDT&E for
the National Defense Sealift Fund (as requested) and $604 million in RDT&E for the Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction Program ($9 million below the request). The House approved
$1.356 billion in RDT&E for the Defense Health Program (nearly doubling the request), which
includes an additional $20.5 million added on the floor of the House.
RDT&E funding can be analyzed 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.
Many congressional policymakers are particularly interested in S&T funding since these funds
support the development of new technologies and the underlying science. Some in the defense
community see ensuring adequate support for S&T activities as imperative to maintaining U.S.
military superiority. The knowledge generated at this stage of development can also contribute to
advances in commercial technologies.
The FY2014 Title IV baseline S&T funding request was $11.984 billion, $0.074 billion below
what was available for S&T in FY2012. According to its FY2014 Budget Request Overview, the
FY2014 S&T budget request emphasizes activities aligned with the Department’s recent shift in
strategic focus from Iraq and Afghanistan to the Asia-Pacific region. This is reflected in funding
for technologies aimed at defeating anti-access/area denial capabilities of potential adversaries,
counter weapons of mass destruction, efficient operations in cyberspace and space, electronic
warfare, and high-speed kinetic strike capability.
The House approved $12.317 billion in Title IV baseline S&T funding, $333 million more than
what was requested. Each of the three S&T-related budget activities in all the accounts was
increased above the requested level.
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
Congressional Research Service
17
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
engineering and material science). The Administration requested $2.165 billion for basic research
for FY2014.
The House approved $2.170 billion in basic research, roughly what was requested. The increase
of $5 million went to the Historically Black Colleges and Universities line item in the
Defensewide account.
Table 6. Department of Defense RDT&E
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2014
Actual
Enacteda
Request
House
Base +
Budget Account
OCO Base OCO Base OCO Base OCO
Army 8,705
8,668
30
7,989
7
7,961
7
Navy 17,723
16,946
53
15,975
34
15,368
34
Air Force
26,631
25,407
53
25,703
9
24,947
9
Defensewide 19,722
18,613
112
17,667
66
17,876a 66
Dir. Test & Eval.
188
224
186
247
Total Title IV—By
Accountc
72,970
69,859
248
67,520
117
66,399
117
Budget Activity
6.1 Basic Research
2,010
2,128
2,165
2,170
6.2 Applied Research
4,730
4,720
4,627
4,679
6.3 Advanced Dev.
5,318
5,623
5,192
5,467
6.4 Advanced Component
Dev. and Prototypes
13,579
12,635
19
12,057
11,775
6.5 Systems Dev. And
Demo 13,573
13,990
17
13,699
7
13,046 7
6.6 Management Supportd 5,694
4,515
5
4,325
4,166
6.7 Op. Systems Dev.e
28,065
26,247
206
25,456
110
25,106
110
Total Title IV—by
Budget Activityc
72,970
69,859
247
67,520
117
6,410a 117
Title V—Revolving and
Management Funds
National Defense Sealift
Fund 51
37
56
56
Title VI—Other Defense
Programs
Office of Inspector General
0
0
Defense Health Program
1,274
1,307
684
1,356g
Chemical Agents and
Munitions Destruction
411
647
613
604
Grand Totalh 74,706
71,850
247
68,873
68,415a 117
Congressional Research Service
18
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Source: CRS, adapted from the Department of Defense Budget, Fiscal Year 2014 RDT&E Programs (R-1), April
2013, relevant FY2014 Budget Justification (R-2) documents, H.R. 933, H.R. 2397, and H.Rept. 113-113.
a. Includes rescission of 0.1% pursuant to Sec. 3001, Div. G of H.R. 933, but not sequester.
b. Includes $10 million reduction made on the House floor to offset a $10 million increase in prostate cancer
research in the Defense Health Program.
c. Total may differ from sum of components due to rounding.
d. Includes funding for the Director of Test and Evaluation.
e. Includes funding for classified programs.
f.
Does not include the $10 million reduction to Defensewide RDT&E made on the House floor.
g. Includes $20.5 million added on the House floor for prostate cancer, breast cancer, and post-traumatic
stress research.
h. The “Grand Total” figure uses the “Total Title IV—by Account” figure.
i.
Does include the $10 million reduction made to the Defensewide RDT&E account on the House floor.
Department of Homeland Security38
The President has requested $1.838 billion for R&D and related programs in the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) in FY2014. This is a 64% increase from $1.123 billion in FY2013.39
The total includes $1.527 billion for the Directorate of Science and Technology (S&T), $291
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. The House-passed bill
would provide $1.225 billion for S&T, $291 million for DNDO, and $10 million for Coast Guard
RDT&E. The Senate-reported bill would provide $1.218 billion for S&T, $289 million for
DNDO, and $20 million for Coast Guard RST&E. (See Table 7.)
The S&T Directorate is the primary DHS R&D organization.40 Led by the Under Secretary for
Science and Technology, the S&T Directorate 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 $1.527 billion for the S&T Directorate for FY2014. This is
91% more than the FY2013 operating plan level of $801 million. The increase results largely
from the request for $714 million in Laboratory Facilities for construction of the National Bio and
Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF). The NBAF is a planned replacement for the current Plum Island
Animal Disease Center. According to DHS, the FY2014 request (together with anticipated gift
funds from the state of Kansas) would be sufficient to fully fund NBAF construction, which DHS
expects to complete in FY2020. The total estimated cost of the NBAF project, including the
Kansas contribution and federal funds already appropriated, is $1.230 billion. The previous
estimate in the FY2012 budget was $725 million.41 In University Programs, the requested $31
38 This section was written by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
39 FY2013 amounts in this section are from Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Chief Financial Officer,
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2013 Post-Sequestration Operating Plan, April 26, 2013. They do
not include funding appropriated by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-2). That act appropriated
approximately $3 million for the S&T Directorate and approximately $4 million for DNDO.
40 For more information, see CRS Report R43064, The DHS S&T Directorate: Selected Issues for Congress, by Dana
A. Shea.
41 Department of Homeland Security, Congressional Budget Justification: FY2012, “Science and Technology
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
19
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
million in FY2014 is a decrease of 19% from $38 million in the FY2013 operating plan. This
decrease reflects a reduction in funding for university centers of excellence and the elimination of
funding for scholarships and fellowships. The latter is part of a government-wide consolidation of
STEM education activities, discussed earlier in the “Reorganization of STEM Education
Programs” section of this report. According to DHS, it will work with the National Science
Foundation to ensure that consolidated STEM education activities align with DHS needs.
The House bill would provide $1.225 billion for S&T. This total includes $404 million for NBAF
construction, the amount needed to “fully leverage funding contributions by the State of Kansas”
(i.e., to provide the 2-to-1 federal matching funds required for $202 million in state bonds). The
House provision of $40 million for University Programs would increase funding for university
centers of excellence; the House report did not address the proposed elimination of scholarship
and fellowship funding in University Programs.
The Senate bill would provide $1.218 billion for S&T. Like the House bill, it includes $404
million for NBAF, sufficient to “fully leverage” state contributions. The Senate recommendation
of $33 million for University Programs “recognizes the requested reduction ... resulting from the
consolidation of the Scholars and Fellows program within the National Science Foundation.”
The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office is the DHS organization responsible for nuclear detection
research, development, testing, evaluation, acquisition, and operational support. The
Administration has requested $291 million for DNDO for FY2014, a decrease of 4% from $303
million in the FY2013 operating plan. In the Research, Development, and Operations account,
funding for Systems Architecture and Systems Development would decrease relative to FY2013,
while funding for Transformational R&D and Assessments would increase. These shifts appear to
reflect DNDO’s ongoing transition from large-scale, government-sponsored technology
development initiatives to a commercial-first approach to technology acquisition. In the Systems
Acquisition account, the request of $14 million for Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems
(HPRDS) is a 50% decrease from $27 million in FY2013. The DHS budget justification for
HPRDS, however, describes the request as an increase relative to the $8 million the program
received under the FY2013 continuing resolution. It is unclear how the higher amount the
program received in the FY2013 operating plan will affect the program’s plans for FY2014. The
House bill would provide the requested amount for DNDO. The Senate bill would provide $289
million, with small reductions in the Management and Administration account and each of the six
elements of the Research, Development, and Operations account.
In September 2012, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that although the
S&T Directorate, DNDO, and the Coast Guard are the only DHS components that report R&D
activities to the Office of Management and Budget, several other DHS components also fund
R&D and activities related to R&D.42 The GAO report found that DHS lacks department-wide
policies to define R&D and guide reporting of R&D activities, and as a result, DHS does not
know the total amount its components invest in R&D. The report recommended that DHS
(...continued)
Directorate: Research, Development, Acquisitions, and Operations,” p. 134. The FY2013 budget did not present a cost
estimate for NBAF. At the time the FY2013 budget was released, DHS was reassessing whether to go forward with the
NBAF project.
42 Government Accountability Office, Department of Homeland Security: Oversight and Coordination of Research and
Development Should Be Strengthened, GAO-12-837, Sep 12, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
20
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
develop policies and guidance for defining, reporting, and coordinating R&D activities across the
department, and that DHS establish a mechanism to track R&D projects. In March 2013, the
explanatory statement for the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013
(P.L. 113-6) directed the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the Under Secretary for
Science and Technology, to establish a review process for all R&D and related work within
DHS.43 In April 2013, citing its September 2012 report, GAO listed DHS R&D as an area of
concern in its annual report on fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative federal programs.44 The
House bill would direct DHS to submit a report on reforms to its R&D programs, including a
formal process for setting R&D priorities, a formal process for DHS-wide involvement in R&D
decision-making and review, metrics for R&D program status and return on investment, and the
implementation of GAO’s recommendations. The Senate bill language includes no provision on
this topic, but report language directs DHS to implement policies and guidance for defining and
overseeing R&D, in accordance with the GAO recommendations. The Senate report also directs
DHS to “expeditiously continue” the implementation of R&D portfolio reviews in additional
DHS components “to improve the coordinated approach to R&D and related activities within
DHS.”
Table 7. Department of Homeland Security R&D and Related Programs
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2014
FY2014
Actual
Op. Plan Request
House
Sen. Cte.
Directorate of Science and Technology
$673
$801
$1,527
$1,225
$1,218
Management
and
Administration
135 127 130 129 129
R&D, Acquisition, and Operations
538
674
1,397
1,096
1,089
Research, Development, and Innovation
266
432
467
467
467
Laboratory
Facilities
182 158 858 548 548
Acquisition and Operations Support
54
46
42
42
42
University
Programs
37 38 31 40 33
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
290
303
291
291
289
Management
and
Administration
38 38 38 37 37
Research, Development, and Operations
215
216
211
211
209
Systems
Architecture
30 29 21 21 21
Systems
Development
51 27 21 21 21
Transformational
R&D
40 71 75 75 75
Assessments
38 31 40 40 39
Operations
Support
33 34 31 31 30
National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center
23
24
23
23
23
Systems
Acquisition
37 50 43 43 43
43 Congressional Record, March 11, 2013, p. S1547.
44 Government Accountability Office, 2013 Annual Report: Actions Needed to Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap, and
Duplication and Achieve Other Financial Benefits, GAO-13-279SP, April 2013.
Congressional Research Service
21
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2014
FY2014
Actual
Op. Plan Request
House
Sen. Cte.
Radiation Portal Monitors Program
2
1
7
7
7
Securing
the
Cities
22 21 22 22 22
Human Portable Radiation Detection Systems
14
27
14
14
14
U.S. Coast Guard RDT&E
28
20
20
10
20
TOTAL
991 1,123 1,838 1,527 1,527
Sources: FY2012 actual and FY2014 request from DHS FY2014 congressional budget justification,
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/budget/dhs-budget.shtm. FY2013 operating plan from Department of Homeland
Security, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2013 Post-
Sequestration Operating Plan, April 26, 2013. FY2014 House from H.R. 2217 as passed by the House and H.Rept.
113-91. FY2014 Senate Committee from H.R. 2217 as reported in the Senate and S.Rept. 113-77.
Notes: FY2013 operating plan amounts do not include approximately $7 million appropriated by the Disaster
Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-2). Totals may differ from sum of components due to rounding.
National Institutes of Health45
The FY2014 President’s Budget requests a program level total of $31.331 billion for NIH, $471
million (1.5%) more than the comparable FY2012 amount of $30.860 billion (see Table 8). While
most of the institutes and centers would receive small increases, a few specific activities are
proposed for larger increases that account for most of the additional funding.
All comparisons in this section of the report are between the FY2014 request and FY2012 actual
funding. (See “Treatment of FY2013 Rescissions and Sequestration in this Report” for
explanation of difficulties in assessing FY2013 funding.) NIH has posted an operating plan table
showing FY2012 actual funding and FY2013 totals for each account and some subaccounts,
based on funding provided by the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013
(P.L. 113-6) and incorporating the effects of sequestration and additional administrative transfers.
The FY2013 figures from this operating plan are included in Table 8.
NIH Organization and Sources of Funding. NIH supports and conducts a wide range of basic
and clinical research, research training, and health information dissemination across all fields of
biomedical and behavioral sciences. About 83% of NIH’s budget goes out to the extramural
research community in the form of grants, contracts, and other awards. The funding supports
research performed by more than 300,000 non-federal scientists and technical personnel who
work at more than 2,500 universities, hospitals, medical schools, and other research institutions
around the country and abroad.46 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.
45 This section was written by Pamela W. Smith, Analyst in Biomedical Policy, CRS Domestic Social Policy Division.
For background information on NIH, see CRS Report R41705, The National Institutes of Health (NIH): Organization,
Funding, and Congressional Issues, by Judith A. Johnson and Pamela W. Smith.
46 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FY2014 Budget in Brief, April 10, 2013, p. 34, http://www.hhs.gov/
budget/fy2014/fy-2014-budget-in-brief.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
22
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
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 an intramural Buildings and Facilities account. (The other three centers, not included
in the table, are funded through the NIH Management Fund.)
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 type 1 diabetes research, and also receives $8.2 million annually for the National
Library of Medicine from a transfer within PHS. The total funding available for NIH activities,
taking account of add-ons and transfers, is the program level.
Except for the mandatory diabetes funding, Congress does not usually specify amounts for
particular diseases or research areas. Similarly, NIH does not expressly budget by disease
category.47 Some bills may propose authorizations for designated research purposes, but funding
would generally remain subject to the discretionary appropriations process.
NIH and other HHS agencies and programs that are authorized under the PHS Act 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. Congress sets the
percentage level of the tap in the annual Labor/HHS appropriations acts, and also directs specific
amounts of funding from the tap to a number of HHS programs. The set-aside has the effect of
redistributing appropriated funds for specific purposes among PHS and other HHS agencies. NIH,
with the largest budget among the PHS agencies, becomes the largest “donor” of program
evaluation funds, and is a relatively minor recipient. Section 205 of the FY2012 Labor/HHS
appropriations act capped the set-aside at 2.5%, which drew over $700 million from the NIH
budget. The FY2014 President’s Budget proposes to increase the cap on the set-aside to 3.0%.48
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.49
FY2014 President’s Budget Request. Most of the institutes and centers would receive increases
of about 1% in the request compared to FY2012, with selected exceptions reflecting program
priorities. NIH describes its areas of emphasis for FY2014 under four broad themes that build on
its current activities, provide for some new initiatives, and continue the implementation of an
organizational restructuring for translational medicine that started in FY2012.
Theme 1: Investing in Basic Research. About 53% of the proposed FY2014 budget would be
spent on basic research to understand the causes of disease onset and progression. In
47 See NIH website, “Estimates of Funding for Various Research, Condition, and Disease Categories (RCDC),”
http://report.nih.gov/categorical_spending.aspx.
48 Last year, in reporting its FY2013 Labor/HHS bill (S. 3295, S.Rept. 112-176), the Senate Appropriations Committee
rejected a proposed increase to 3.2% and maintained the tap at 2.5%. The final FY2013 continuing appropriations act
also continued the 2.5% level from FY2012.
49 For further information on the PHS Evaluation Set-Aside, see CRS Report R41737, Public Health Service (PHS)
Agencies: Overview and Funding, FY2010-FY2012, coordinated by Charles S. Redhead and Pamela W. Smith.
Congressional Research Service
23
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
neurosciences, about $40 million is requested for the recently-announced BRAIN initiative (Brain
Research through Application of Innovative Neurotechnologies) to develop new tools for study of
complex brain functions. To improve the handling, sharing, and analysis of large digital datasets
of information, the request provides $41 million for a new program called Big Data to Knowledge
(BD2K) through the NIH Common Fund.
Theme 2: Advancing Translational Sciences. Translational medicine focuses on converting basic
research discoveries into clinical applications that benefit patients. All of the ICs support
translational research in their own fields to develop, test, and disseminate new interventions. In
the FY2012 appropriations act, Congress approved an NIH reorganization that consolidated
relevant but scattered resource programs into a new National Center for Advancing Translational
Sciences (NCATS). NCATS explores improved methods to test possible new products for human
use and encourage commercialization and dissemination of new therapies. The FY2014 budget
request for NCATS is $666 million, an increase of $91 million (16%) over its FY2012 first-year
budget. Over $40 million of the increase would go to expanding the Cures Acceleration Network
(CAN) from $10 million to $50 million.
Theme 3: Recruiting and Retaining Diverse Scientific Talent and Creativity for the Research
Workforce. NIH has analyzed the current status of the biomedical workforce and future training
needs, with a special focus on promoting diversity in the workforce and understanding barriers to
career advancement. NIH is implementing new measures to assist trainees and track their career
progress, including a requested increase for the Director’s Early Independence Award Program
from $9 million in FY2012 to $17 million. The request includes $32 million for a new Workforce
Diversity Initiative being piloted through the NIH Common Fund. It will support a consortium of
under-resourced institutions and create a National Research Mentoring Network. NIH requests
$776 million for its major research training program, the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research
Service Awards, $14 million (2%) above the FY2012 level, with stipend increases for trainees.
Theme 4: Restoring American Competitiveness. The NIH budget summary offers economic
arguments for support of health research.50 It cites studies of the impact of health research on, for
example, reductions in death rates and increased life expectancy, as well as studies linking NIH
funding to direct and indirect support of U.S. jobs and to growth of private investment in life
sciences research. The summary discusses global competition in the sciences, especially Asian
and European R&D efforts, and warns of erosion in the U.S. leadership position.
Table 8. National Institutes of Health Funding
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Component
Actuala
Enactedb
Request
Cancer (NCI)
5,063
4,779
5,126
Heart/Lung/Blood (NHLBI)
3,073
2,901
3,099
Dental/Craniofacial Research (NIDCR)
410
387
412
Diabetes/Digestive/Kidney (NIDDK)c 1,794
1,693
1,812
50 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, FY2014 Justification of Estimates for
Appropriations Committees, Vol. I - Overview/Executive Summary, April 10, 2013, pp. ES-24-28,
http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/pdfs/FY14/Tab%201%20-%20Executive%20Summary_final.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
24
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Component
Actuala
Enactedb
Request
Neurological Disorders/Stroke (NINDS)
1,623
1,532
1,643
Allergy/Infectious Diseases (NIAID)d 4,482
4,231
4,579
General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)
2,426
2,291
2,401
Child Health/Human Development (NICHD)
1,319
1,245
1,339
Eye (NEI)
701
662
699
Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
684
646
691
Aging (NIA)
1,120
1,040
1,193
Arthritis/Musculoskeletal/Skin (NIAMS)
535
505
541
Deafness/Communication Disorders (NIDCD)
416
392
423
Nursing Research (NINR)
145
136
146
Alcohol Abuse/Alcoholism (NIAAA)
459
433
464
Drug Abuse (NIDA)
1,051
993
1,072
Mental Health (NIMH)d 1,478
1,395
1,466
Human Genome Research (NHGRI)
512
483
517
Biomedical Imaging/Bioengineering (NIBIB)
338
319
339
Complementary/Alternative Medicine (NCCAM)
128
121
129
Minority Health/Health Disparities (NIMHD)
276
260
283
Fogarty International Center (FIC)
69
66
73
Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS)
574
542
666
National Library of Medicine (NLM)
365
318
382
Office of Director (OD)
1,457
1,436
1,473
Buildings & Facilities (B&F)
125
118
126
Subtotal, Labor/HHS Appropriation
30,623
28,926
31,094
Superfund (Interior appropriation to NIEHS)e 79
75
79
Total, NIH discretionary budget authority
30,702
29,001
31,173
Pre-appropriated type 1 diabetes fundsf 150
142
150
PHS Evaluation Tap fundingg 8
8
8
Total, NIH program level
30,860
29,151
31,331
Sources: FY2012 actual and FY2014 request are adapted by CRS from National Institutes of Health, Justification
of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, FY2014, Vol. I - Overview/Supplementary Tables, April 10, 2013, p. ST-
2, http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/pdfs/FY14/FY%202014_Supplementary%20Tables.pdf. FY2013 enacted is from
NIH Office of Budget, “Operating Plan—Allocation by IC,” http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/cy.html.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. NIH FY2012 appropriations were provided in Division F (Labor/HHS/ Education) and Division E
(Interior/Environment). Amounts shown reflect across-the-board rescissions of 0.189% (Division F) and
0.16% (Division E) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74). FY2012 reflects Secretary’s
transfer of $8.727 million to Health Resources and Services Administration for Ryan White AIDS and
Secretary’s net transfer of $18.273 million for Alzheimer’s disease research to NIA from other ICs. FY2012
figures are shown on a comparable basis to FY2014, reflecting transfers from ICs to NLM.
Congressional Research Service
25
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
b. FY2013 final funding levels under the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L.
113-6), including the effects of the March 1, 2013, sequestration order and April 2013 administrative
transfers. FY2013 IC and NLM amounts are not comparable to FY2012 and FY2014 as the FY2013 figures
do not reflect transfers from ICs to NLM.
c. NIDDK amounts do not include Type 1 diabetes funding (see note f).
d. The FY2014 request shifts a $27 mil ion program on HIV/AIDS behavioral health research from NIMH to
NIAID.
e. This is a separate account in the Interior/Environment appropriations for NIEHS research activities related
to Superfund.
f.
Mandatory funds available to NIDDK for type 1 diabetes research under PHS Act §330B (provided by P.L.
111-309 and P.L. 112-240). Funds have been appropriated through FY2014.
g. Additional funds for NLM from PHS Evaluation Set-Aside (§241 of PHS Act).
Selected Other Program Changes in NIH Accounts. Alzheimer’s disease research: To continue
implementing the research components of the National Plan to Address Alzheimer’s Disease
(AD), NIH estimates it will spend $562 million on AD research in FY2014, up $59 million (12%)
from FY2012. The request for the National Institute on Aging is $73 million (7%) above FY2012,
including an increase of $80 million (24%) for research on AD therapies.
Institutional Development Awards (IDeA): The IDeA program, housed in the National Institute of
General Medical Sciences, supports research capacity and infrastructure grants at institutions in
states that have historically received less NIH research support. For FY2014, NIH requests $225
million for IDeA, reversing a $50 million increase Congress gave the program in FY2012.
National Children’s Study: In the budget request for the Office of the Director (OD), funding for
the National Children’s Study (NCS) would drop by $28 million, from $193 million in FY2012 to
$165 million. Language in P.L. 113-6 prohibited NIH from awarding contracts for the NCS Main
Study until after a National Academy of Sciences review of its proposed methodologies.
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education: The Administration has
proposed a government-wide reorganization of STEM education (for more, see “Reorganization
of STEM Education Programs”). While details of the overall reorganization and specific
programs affected are not yet clear, NIH budget documents report that nine NIH STEM programs
totaling $26 million are proposed for elimination or consolidation, the largest of which is a $15.4
million reduction in the Science Education Partnership Awards program in OD.
Office of the Director/Common Fund: The FY2014 President’s Budget requests a net increase of
$16 million for OD to $1.473 billion. This figure includes decreases in the National Children’s
Study and STEM education programs, as well as new funding for strategic initiatives—$31
million is requested for a new Biomedical Innovation Opportunities-Fund (BIO-F) to facilitate a
rapid response to new ideas and unexpected scientific opportunities—and the Common Fund. The
Common Fund supports research in emerging areas of scientific opportunity, public health
challenges, or knowledge gaps that might benefit from collaboration between two or more
institutes or centers. The request for the Common Fund is $573 million, $28 million (5%) higher
than the FY2012 level, including funding for the new BD2K program.
Research Project Grants. The main funding mechanism for supporting extramural research is
research project grants (RPGs), which are competitive, peer-reviewed, and largely investigator-
initiated. The FY2014 budget requests total funding for RPGs of $16.9 billion, representing about
54% of NIH’s proposed budget. The amount is an increase of $382 million (2%) over the FY2012
Congressional Research Service
26
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
level. The request would support an estimated 36,610 RPG awards, 351 more grants than in
FY2012. Within that total, 10,269 would be competing RPGs, 1,283 (14%) more than in FY2012.
(“Competing” awards means new grants plus competing renewals of existing grants.) The
average cost of a competing RPG in FY2014 is estimated to be about $456,000, up from about
$421,000 in FY2012. The increase is mainly due to the cycling of high-cost HIV/AIDS Clinical
Trials Networks grants into competing status in FY2014. After adjusting for those large grants,
the average cost of competing RPGs is estimated to be about $420,000, or approximately the
same as in FY2012. To maximize the number of new and competing grants in FY2014, NIH
proposes to continue the FY2012 grant awards policy of eliminating inflation increases for future
year commitments for all competing and non-competing awards.51 Adjustments for special needs,
however, such as equipment and added personnel, would continue to be accommodated.
Other Funding Mechanisms. Support for research centers would decrease by $195 million (6.4%)
to $2.846 billion (includes IDeA centers). The catch-all R&D contracts mechanism would
increase by $119 million (4.1%) to $3.030 billion (includes the proposed increase in the PHS
evaluation tap). The NIH intramural research program would gain $66 million (1.9%) for a total
of $3.503 billion. Research management and support would increase by $20 million (1.3%) under
the request to $1.550 billion. The request for the Buildings and Facilities appropriation is $126
million, $1 million more than in FY2012.
Department of Energy52
The Administration has requested $12.618 billion in FY2014 for Department of Energy (DOE)
R&D and related activities, including programs in three major categories: science, national
security, and energy. This request is 13.1% more than the FY2012 appropriation of $11.159
billion. The House committee recommended $9.893 billion. The Senate committee recommended
$12.219 billion. (See Table 9 for details.)
The request for the DOE Office of Science is $5.153 billion, an increase of 4.4% from the
FY2012 appropriation of $4.935 billion. There is no authorized funding level for the Office of
Science in FY2014: the most recent authorization act (the America COMPETES Reauthorization
Act of 2010, P.L. 111-358) authorized appropriations through FY2013. The House committee
recommended $4.653 billion; according to the Administration, this level of funding for the Office
of Science “would eliminate all funding for new grants and likely lead to terminations of ongoing
awards ... operations at all major scientific user facilities would be reduced or would cease.”53
The Senate committee recommended the requested amount.
The Obama Administration’s previous goal of doubling the combined funding of the Office of
Science and two other agencies is now “a commitment to increase funding” for those agencies.54
51 National Institutes of Health, NIH Fiscal Policy for Grant Awards - FY2012, Notice NOT-OD-12-036, January 20,
2012, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-12-036.html. See also the NIH Extramural Financial
Operations website at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/financial/index.htm for yearly plans and resources.
52 This section was written by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
53 Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy on H.R.
2609, July 8, 2013.
54 Executive Office of the President, “The President’s Plan for Science and Innovation: Increasing Funding for Key
Science Agencies in the 2014 Budget,” http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/2014_R&
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
27
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
For further discussion of the doubling goal and how it has evolved through successive
Administrations and congressional action, see the section “Efforts to Double Certain R&D
Accounts” above. The original target announced by the Bush Administration was to achieve the
doubling in the decade from FY2006 to FY2016. The FY2014 request for the Office of Science is
42% more than its FY2006 baseline. The House and Senate committee recommendations are
respectively 28% and 42% above the baseline.
The Office of Science includes six major research programs. The request of $1.862 billion for the
largest program, basic energy sciences (BES), is an increase of $218 million relative to $1.645
billion in FY2012. The House and Senate committees recommended $1.583 billion and $1.805
billion, respectively. Within BES, DOE plans to issue a solicitation in FY2014 for new Energy
Frontier Research Centers (EFRCs) and renewals of existing centers. The request includes an
increase of $69 million for EFRCs, to a total of $169 million, to allow DOE to forward-fund
some of the new and renewed centers. The House committee recommended $60 million for
EFRCs. The Senate committee recommended $100 million. Also in BES, the request includes an
increase of $151 million for scientific user facilities; this would mostly fund increased operations
at existing DOE synchrotron light sources. Requested construction funding for the BES-funded
National Synchrotron Light Source II would decrease $125 million in FY2014 as the project
nears completion. Meanwhile, requested funding for the Linac Coherent Light Source II (LCLS-
II) would increase $65 million as project construction begins. The House committee
recommended $47.5 million less than the request for LCLS-II. In the BES Materials Sciences and
Engineering program, the request includes $8.5 million for the Experimental Program to
Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR). The House committee recommended no funding for
EPSCoR, while the Senate committee recommended $20 million.
In the Office of Science fusion energy sciences program, the request would increase the U.S.
contribution to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) from $105 million
in FY2012 to $225 million in FY2014. In 2008, the cost for the U.S. share of ITER, a multi-year
international construction project, was estimated to be between $1.45 billion and $2.2 billion.
Schedule delays, design and scope changes, and other factors have likely increased ITER costs
and delayed formal approval of a revised cost estimate. Pending a new official estimate, DOE
believes that funding of $225 million per year will allow it to meet its international obligations,
up to the achievement of ITER’s intermediate “first plasma” milestone, for a total cost of $2.4
billion. The requested increase for U.S. ITER funding in FY2014 would be partly offset by a
decrease in funding for domestic fusion activities. In particular, no FY2014 funding is requested
for research or operations at the Alcator C-Mod tokamak, a fusion reactor that is scheduled to be
shut down in FY2013. The House committee recommended $7.5 million less than the request for
the U.S. contribution to ITER, but $55 million more than the request for domestic fusion
activities, including $22 million for FY2014 operations and research at Alcator C-Mod. The
Senate committee recommended $183.5 million for the U.S. contribution to ITER, contingent on
submission of a baseline cost, schedule, and scope estimate. The Senate committee’s
recommended total for fusion energy sciences was the requested amount and included no funding
for Alcator C-Mod.
(...continued)
Dbudget_agencies.pdf. Compare Executive Office of the President, “The President’s Plan for Science and Innovation:
Doubling Funding for Key Science Agencies in the 2013 Budget,” http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
microsites/ostp/fy2013rd_doubling.pdf, and similar documents in previous years.
Congressional Research Service
28
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
The request for biological and environmental research in the Office of Science is $625 million, up
5.6% from $592 million in FY2012. This total is divided approximately evenly between two
programs: biological systems science and climate and environmental sciences. The House
committee recommended $494 million for biological and environmental research. The House
committee report stated that “the Committee continues to support the Biological Systems Science
program”; it did not mention the climate and environmental sciences program. The Senate
committee recommended the requested amount for both programs.
The request for DOE national security R&D is $3.283 billion, a 5.8% increase from $3.103
billion in FY2012. The House committee recommended $3.209 billion, while the Senate
committee recommended $3.398 billion. Most of the requested increase is in the Naval Reactors
program. An increase of $97 million for Naval Reactors operations and infrastructure would fund
recapitalization of facilities, infrastructure, and capital equipment. Naval Reactors construction
funding would increase by $30 million and is projected to increase further in future years as
construction begins on the Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization project. The House
recommendation included $93 million less than the request for Naval Reactors operations and
infrastructure and did not include funding for the Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization project.
The Senate committee recommended $66 million more than the request for Naval Reactors, with
increases spread across several activities. In the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation account, a
requested increase of $41 million for R&D results largely from the assumption of certain costs for
nuclear detection satellites that were previously paid by the Department of Defense. The House
committee recommended the requested amount for nuclear nonproliferation R&D, while the
Senate committee recommended an increase of $20 million for the development of advanced
nuclear detection technologies. In the Weapons Activities account, the Administration request
would increase funding for nuclear weapons science and reduce funding for research on inertial
confinement fusion and advanced simulation and computing. The House and Senate committee
recommendations would increase funding for inertial confinement fusion, rather than decreasing
it. Other Weapons Activities reductions in the Senate bill are largely a result of accounting
changes.
The request for DOE energy R&D is $4.182 billion, up 34.0% from $3.121 billion in FY2012.
The House and Senate committees recommended $2.031 billion and $3.668 billion, respectively.
The request would increase funding for R&D in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EERE) by 53%, from $1.653 billion in FY2012 to $2.528 billion in FY2014, with
increases requested for most EERE programs. The House committee recommended $811 million
and rescinded $157 million in unobligated balances from prior years, while the Senate committee
recommended $2.034 billion. Within EERE, Advanced Manufacturing (formerly Industrial
Technologies) would receive $365 million under the request, more than triple its FY2012 level.
The Advanced Manufacturing request includes $177 million to create Clean Energy
Manufacturing Innovation Institutes (consistent with the previously discussed “National Network
for Manufacturing Innovation”). Other focus areas for requested funding increases in EERE
include batteries and energy storage, concentrating solar power, a demonstration of commercial-
scale biofuels production under the Defense Production Act,55 and grid integration for energy
efficient buildings. Under the House committee recommendation, nearly every EERE program
would decrease relative to FY2012, with Advanced Manufacturing ($120 million, up about 6%
from FY2012) being a rare exception. The Senate committee recommended $126 million for
Advanced Manufacturing. Also in EERE, the Senate committee directed DOE to terminate the
55 See CRS Report R42568, The Navy Biofuel Initiative Under the Defense Production Act, by Anthony Andrews et al.
Congressional Research Service
29
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Energy Efficient Buildings Hub, which it said has shown “no measurable benefit.” The
Administration’s proposed increase in funding for fossil energy R&D reflects the rescission of
unobligated prior-year balances in FY2012. Excluding this rescission, the FY2014 request for
fossil energy R&D is a decrease of $95 million, mostly from the coal program. The House
recommendation for fossil energy R&D was $39 million more than the request, but included $43
million less than requested for carbon capture. The request for the Advanced Research Projects
Agency–Energy (ARPA-E) is $379 million, an increase of $104 million or 38%. The House
committee recommended $50 million for ARPA-E, while stating that it “remains supportive of
ARPA-E’s efforts.” The Senate committee recommended the requested amount for ARPA-E.
Table 9. Department of Energy R&D and Related Activities
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2014
FY2014
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
House
Senate
Actual
Enacted Request
Committee
Committee
Science
$4,935 $4,866 $5,153 $4,653
$5,153
Basic Energy Sciences
1,645
—
1,862
1,583
1,805
High Energy Physics
771
—
777
773
807
Biological and Environmental Research
592
—
625
494
625
Nuclear
Physics
535
—
570
552
570
Advanced Scientific Computing Research
428
—
466
432
494
Fusion Energy Sciences
393
—
458
506
458
Other
571
—
395
313
394
National
Security
3,103 3,245 3,283 3,209
3,398
Weapons
Activitiesa
1,665 1,688 1,624 1,697
1,653
Naval
Reactors
1,080 1,080 1,246 1,109
1,312
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation R&D
348
466
389
389
409
Defense Environmental Cleanup Tech. Dev.
10
11
24
14
24
Energy
3,121 3,315 4,182 2,031
3,668
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energyb 1,653
1,661c
2,528 811d 2,034
Fossil Energy R&D
337
533
421
450
421
Nuclear
Energy
760 757 735 656
735
Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability R&D
96
99
119
64
99
Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy
275
264
379
50
379
Total 11,159
11,426
12,618
9,893
12,219
Source: FY2012 actual and FY2014 request from DOE’s FY2014 congressional budget justification,
http://energy.gov/cfo/downloads/fy-2014-budget-justification. FY2013 enacted from P.L. 113-6 and explanatory
statement, Congressional Record, March 11, 2013, pp. S1308-S1310. FY2014 House from H.R. 2609 as reported
and H.Rept. 113-135. FY2014 Senate from S. 1245 as reported and S.Rept. 113-47.
Notes: FY2013 enacted amounts are adjusted for the rescission in P.L. 113-6, Section 3004 (0.032% for security
programs, 0.2% for nonsecurity programs, as determined by the Office of Management and Budget) but not for
subsequent sequestration or reprogramming. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to
rounding.
Congressional Research Service
30
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
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, and National Security Applications. 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. Estimated by CRS because an amount for Weatherization and Intergovernmental Activities was not
specified in P.L. 113-6 or its explanatory statement.
d. Not adjusted for the rescission of $157 million in unobligated prior-year balances.
National Science Foundation56
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.”57 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.
For FY2014 the Administration seeks $7.626 billion in funding for the NSF. This amount is
$521.1 million (7.3%) more than the FY2012 actual level of $7.105 billion. Congress has not
enacted specific FY2014 appropriations authorizations for NSF.58 NSF indicates that its
overarching priorities for FY2014 include the following six programs.
• Cyber-enabled Materials, Manufacturing, and Smart Systems (CEMMSS)—The
FY2014 request is $300.4 million, which is $156.1 million (108.2%) more than
the FY2012 actual amount of $144.3 million.
• Cyberinfrastructure Framework for 21st Century Science, Engineering, and
Education (CIF21)—The FY2014 request is $155.5 million, which is $64.2
million (70.4%) more than the FY2012 actual amount of $91.2 million.
• NSF Innovation Corps (I-Corps)—The FY2014 request is $24.9 million, which is
$18.1 million (267.1%) more than the FY2012 actual amount of $6.8 million.
• Integrated NSF Support Promoting Interdisciplinary Research and Education
(INSPIRE)—The FY2014 request is $63.0 million, which is $33.9 million
(116.5%) more than the FY2012 actual amount of $29.1 million.
• Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (SEES)—The FY2014
request is $222.8 million, which is $65.3 million (41.4%) more than the FY2012
actual amount of $157.6 million.
56 This section was written by Heather B. Gonzalez, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division. Numbers are rounded. Data available upon request.
57 The National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (P.L. 81-507).
58 NSF relies on its organic act for budget authority in FY2014.
Congressional Research Service
31
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
• Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC)—The FY2014 request is $110.3
million, which is $3.1 million (2.8%) less than the FY2012 actual amount of
$113.4 million.
Since FY2006, overall increases in the NSF budget have been at least partially driven by the so-
called “doubling path policy.” Congress and successive Administrations have sought to double
funding for the NSF, Department of Energy’s Office of Science, and National Institute of
Standards and Technology’s core laboratory and construction accounts (collectively “the targeted
accounts”). However, actual funding for the targeted accounts has not typically reached
authorized levels during the authorization period, which ends in FY2013.59 It is unclear if
policymakers will seek to continue the doubling path policy in FY2014. In FY2013 some
legislators expressed concern about pursuing the doubling effort given the nation’s fiscal
challenges, including one who urged observers “to be realistic about the notion of doubling the
NSF budget.”60 Other analysts have asserted that without the doubling path policy in place,
funding levels for targeted accounts might have fallen over the past half-decade.61
Congress typically appropriates to NSF at the major account level. NSF’s major accounts are
Research and Related Activities (R&RA); Education and Human Resources (E&HR); Major
Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC); Agency Operations and Awards
Management (AOAM); National Science Board (NSB); and the Office of Inspector General
(IG).62 (See Table 10.)
R&RA is the largest NSF account and the primary source of research funding at the NSF.63 The
Administration seeks $6.212 billion in funding for R&RA in FY2014; noting “strong support for
cross-cutting research priorities such as advanced manufacturing, clean energy and sustainability,
break-through materials, robotics, cyberinfrastructure, and cybersecurity.” The FY2014 request
for R&RA is $454.0 million (7.9%) more than the FY2012 actual funding level of $5.758 billion.
NSF consolidated certain R&RA sub-accounts in FY2013, moving from 11 directorates and
offices to 8.64 Compared to FY2012 enacted levels, the FY2014 request for R&RA includes
increases for all but one major sub-account.65 As was the case in FY2013, the largest increase—
by both amount ($138.0 million) and percentage (34.6% more than the FY2012 level of $398.6
million)—is in the International and Integrative Activities account (IIA), for which the
Administration seeks $536.6 million in FY2014. Also as with FY2013, over half of the growth in
59 The most recent authorization levels for the targeted accounts, specified in the America COMPETES Reauthorization
Act (P.L. 111-358), were for FY2011, FY2012, and FY2013.
60 Opening Statement of Ranking Member Dan Lipinksi, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, Subcommittee on Research and Science Education, “The National Science Foundation’s FY2013 Budget
Request,” hearings, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., February 28, 2012.
61 Testimony of Dr. Jeffrey L. Furman, in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, “Five Years of the America COMPETES Act: Progress, Challenges, and Next Steps,” hearings, 112th
Cong., 2nd sess., September 19, 2012.
62 Funds from major NSF accounts may be merged at the program level and in many cases NSF’s education, facilities,
and research activities are deeply integrated as a matter of practice.
63 For more information on historical funding trends at NSF, see CRS Report R42470, An Analysis of STEM Education
Funding at the NSF: Trends and Policy Discussion, by Heather B. Gonzalez.
64 The FY2014 NSF budget request adjusts funding levels for all reported years to account for this change.
65 The FY2014 NSF budget request decreases funding for the U.S. Artic Research Commission by about -3.4%, from
$1.45 million in FY2012 to $1.40 million in FY2014.
Congressional Research Service
32
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
IIA is attributable to requested increases in funding for the Graduate Research Fellowship
(GRF).66 The second-largest increase—by amount ($86.6 million) and percentage (10.5% over
the FY2012 level of $824.6 million)—goes to the Engineering (ENG) directorate. The
Administration seeks $911.1 million for ENG in FY2014. About a third of the growth in the ENG
account stems from requested increases for small business research programs in ENG’s Division
of Industrial Innovation and Partnerships (IIP).67
Other widely tracked sub-accounts in the R&RA account include Experimental Program to
Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), the Division of Astronomical Sciences (AST), and
the Directorate on Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE). The FY2014 request for
EPSCoR is $163.6 million; or $12.7 million (8.4%) more than the FY2012 actual level of $150.9
million. The FY2014 request for AST is $243.6 million, or $8.9 million (3.8%) more than the
FY2012 actual level of $234.7 million. The FY2014 request for SBE is $272.4 million. This
amount is $18.2 million, or 7.1%, more than the FY2012 actual funding level of $254.2 million.
The Administration seeks $880.3 million in funding for E&HR in FY2014. This amount is $49.8
million (6.0%) more than the FY2012 actual level of $830.5 million. E&HR is the primary source
of funding for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education at the NSF.
Approximately 44.0% of the FY2014 request for E&HR (or $387.0 million) would support
research and development activities. In FY2012, FY2011, and FY2010 (all actual) the percentage
of E&HR funding that supported R&D was 30.3%, 25.9%, and 13.7%, respectively.
As mentioned earlier in “Reorganization of STEM Education Programs,” for FY2014 the
Administration proposes a reorganization and consolidation of many federal STEM education
programs.68 Under the Administration’s plan, NSF would play a leadership role in the federal
undergraduate and graduate STEM education efforts. The Department of Education and
Smithsonian Institution would focus on K-12 education and informal STEM education,
respectively. Although the NSF FY2014 budget proposal provides certain details about planned
E&HR program changes, it is unclear what the Administration’s STEM education program
reorganization means for STEM education at the NSF overall. Questions about the proposal may
be addressed (at least in part) by publication of the federal STEM education strategic plan.69
The foundation’s FY2014 budget request highlights several NSF changes associated with the
Administration’s plan for reorganization of the federal STEM education effort. These include
establishment of the Catalyzing Advances in Undergraduate STEM Education (CAUSE)
66 The FY2014 NSF budget request seeks $162.6 million for the R&RA contribution to the GRF. This amount is $74.1
million (83.7%) more than the FY2012 actual R&RA funding level of $88.5 million. E&HR also contributes to the
GRF.
67 The FY2014 request for IIP is $225.5. This amount is $37.7 million (20.1%) more that the FY2012 actual level of
$187.8 million. About 80% of this increase would support growth in the NSF Small Business Innovation Research
(SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. For more information on these programs, see CRS
Report 96-402, Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program, by Wendy H. Schacht.
68 Although the details of the plan appear to be in flux, the Administration proposes reducing the number of federal
STEM education programs by about 50% and shifting approximately $180.0 million in budget authority from various
federal agencies to the NSF, Department of Education, and Smithsonian Institution. Some programs within the three
receiving agencies would also be consolidated, as would STEM education programs at other federal agencies.
69 Congressional appropriators directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy to produce this plan within 45
days of the enactment of P.L. 113-6. See Senator Barbara Mikulski, “Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act,” Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 159, part 34 (March 11, 2013), pp. S1287-S1587
Congressional Research Service
33
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
program;70 expansion of the GRF such that it would become a primary source for all federal
research fellowships; and the creation of the NSF Research Traineeship (NRT), which would
replace the Integrative Graduate Education Research Traineeship (IGERT). It is unclear how the
expansion of the GRF—which would become the National Graduate Research Fellowship
(NGRF)—would affect the availability of fellowships for mission-driven research at other federal
science agencies. The Administration seeks $123.1 million in funding for CAUSE, $325.1 million
for the NGRF, and $55.1 million for the NRT in FY2014.
Other accounts that fund R&D at the NSF include the Major Research Equipment and Facilities
Construction (MREFC) account. The FY2014 request for the MREFC account is $210.1 million.
This amount is $12.0 million (6.1%) more than the FY2012 actual funding level of $198.1
million.71 NSF indicates that FY2014 funding would provide a final year of support for the
Advanced Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (AdvLIGO) and Ocean Observatories
Initiative (OOI), as well as the first year of funding for the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Funding for the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope and National Ecological
Observatory Network (NEON) would continue.
The Administration seeks $304.3 million, $4.5 million, and $14.3 million, respectively, for
AOAM, NSB, and OIG in FY2014. These amounts are between 1.6% and 1.7% more than the
FY2012 actual funding levels for these accounts.
The FY2014 NSF budget request also includes funding for three multi-agency initiatives:
National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI, $430.9 million), Networking and Information
Technology Research and Development (NITRD, $1.227 billion), and U.S. Global Change
Research Program (USGCRP, $326.4 million). The request for NNI is $35.4 million (7.6%) less
than the FY2012 actual amount of $466.3 million; the NITRD request is $11.2 million (0.9%)
more than the FY2012 funding level of $1.216 billion; and the request for USGCRP is $7.0
million (12.1%) below the FY2012 actual level of $333.4 million.
Table 10. NSF Funding by Major Account
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2013
FY2012
(Post-Rescissions,
FY2014
Account
Actual
Pre-Sequestration)
Request
Biological Sciences
$712.3
n/a
$760.6
Computer and Information Science and
937.2 n/a 950.3
Engineeringa
Engineering 824.55
n/a
911.1
Geosciencesa 1,321.4
n/a
1393.9
Mathematical and Physical Sciences
1,308.7
n/a
1386.1
Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences
254.2
n/a
272.4
International and Integrative Activitiesa 398.6
n/a 536.6
70 The CAUSE program would consolidate three E&HR programs, three R&RA programs, and one NSF-wide program.
71 As authorized by P.L. 112-55, NSF transferred $30.0 million from the R&RA account to MREFC in FY2012. This
amount is reflected in the FY2013 request, which is $30.0 million more than the level Congress specified in FY2012.
Congressional Research Service
34
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
FY2013
FY2012
(Post-Rescissions,
FY2014
Account
Actual
Pre-Sequestration)
Request
U.S. Arctic Research Commission
1.45
n/a
1.4
Research and Related Activities,
$5,758.3 $5,859.2 $6,212.3
Total
Education and Human Resources
830.5
877.0
880.3
Major Research Equipment and
198.1 192.1 210.1
Facilities Construction
Agency Operations and Award
299.3 293.2 304.3
Management
National Science Board
4.4
4.3
4.5
Office of the Inspector General
14.1
13.9
14.3
NSF, Total
$7,104.7
$7,239.8
$7,625.8
Source: Numbers in the “FY2012 Actual” and “FY2014 Request” columns are from the FY2014 NSF Budget
Request to Congress. Numbers in the “FY2013 (Post-Rescissions, Pre-Sequestration)” column are from
Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6).
Notes: n/a = not available. CRS was unable to identify a defined amount of funding for this account. Numbers
are rounded. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. On September 7, 2012, NSF announced that it was realigning the Research and Related Activities account.
Under the new account structure, the Office of Cyberinfrastructure became a division within the
Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering and the Office of Polar Programs
became a division within the Geosciences directorate. The offices of International Science and Engineering
and Integrative Activities have merged to become the Office of International and Integrative Activities.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration72
The Administration has requested $16.516 billion for NASA R&D in FY2014. This amount is
4.4% more than the $15.819 billion enacted for FY2012. The House committee recommended
$15.297 billion. The Senate committee recommended $16.794 billion. For a breakdown of these
amounts, see Table 11. There is no authorized level for NASA funding in FY2014; the most
recent authorization act (the NASA Authorization Act of 2010, P.L. 111-267) authorized
appropriations through FY2013. Bills that would authorize FY2014 appropriations for NASA
include H.R. 2687, H.R. 2616, and S. 1317.
The FY2014 request for Science is $5.018 billion, a 1.1% decrease from FY2012. The House and
Senate committees recommended $4.781 billion and $5.154 billion respectively. In Planetary
Science, the request includes $40.5 million for observation of near-Earth objects and $50 million
for management of a Department of Energy (DOE) program to produce plutonium-238, which
some spacecraft use for power generation. In the past, congressional policymakers have disagreed
about whether NASA or DOE should fund DOE production of plutonium-238 for NASA. The
72 This section was written by Daniel Morgan, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
35
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
House and Senate committee recommendations for Planetary Science were respectively $1.315
billion and $1.318 billion. Among other differences relative to the request, the House committee
recommended increases for exploration of Mars and the outer planets and no funding for
plutonium-238 production. The Senate committee’s recommended increase was entirely for Mars
exploration. In Earth Science, the request includes $30 million to begin development of future
land imaging capabilities to replace the current Landsat satellites, operated by the U.S. Geological
Survey, as well as funds to assume responsibility for certain Earth-observing satellite instruments
previously held by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The
House committee recommended $1.659 billion for Earth Science, and its report stated that no
funds should be spent on the proposed Landsat and NOAA-related activities. The Senate
committee recommended approximately the requested amount for Earth Science, including the
requested funds for land imaging, but its report expressed concern about the Administration’s
approach and directed NASA to submit a plan for implementing future Landsat satellites at
substantially lower cost. The request for the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is $658.2
million. NASA expects FY2014 to be the peak funding year for JWST and states that the budget
and schedule for the JWST program remain consistent with the 2011 revised plan. In the FY2012
appropriations conference report, Congress capped the formulation and development cost of
JWST and mandated annual reports on the program by the Government Accountability Office.
The House committee recommended $584.0 million for JWST in FY2014, while the Senate
committee recommended the requested amount.
The request for Aeronautics is $565.7 million, a 0.7% decrease from FY2012. The request for
Integrated Systems Research includes a new program on advanced composite materials and
structures. In the Fundamental Aeronautics program, NASA plans to explore options for the
future of its rotorcraft research; this planning will be coordinated with other government agencies
and industry partners. The House committee recommended $566.0 million for Aeronautics, while
the Senate committee recommended $558.7 million.
For Space Technology, the Administration has requested $742.6 million, a 29.4% increase from
FY2012. The requested increase is largely explained by existing projects that are moving from the
planning and design phase to the more expensive tasks of hardware manufacture and
demonstration. The request also includes funds to accelerate the development of high-power solar
electric propulsion technology for future spacecraft. The House and Senate committee
recommendations were respectively $576.0 million and $670.1 million.
The Administration’s request for Exploration in FY2014 is $3.916 billion, an increase of 5.6%
from FY2012. This account funds development of the Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV)
and the Space Launch System (SLS) heavy-lift rocket, which were mandated by the 2010
authorization act for human exploration beyond Earth orbit. The account also funds development
of a commercial crew transportation capability for future U.S. astronaut access to the
International Space Station. Relative to FY2012, the request of $821.4 million for commercial
crew is an increase of 102.3%, while the request of $2.730 billion for Orion, the SLS, and related
ground systems (known collectively and Exploration Systems Development) is a decrease of
9.0%. In the past, this apparent difference in human spaceflight priorities between Congress and
the Administration has been controversial. According to NASA, the amounts requested are
consistent with the planned schedules for both Orion/SLS and commercial crew. NASA officials
state that the request for commercial crew is necessary to make commercial crew transportation
services available in 2017, while the request for Orion and SLS is sufficient for an uncrewed
flight of the SLS in 2017 and a crewed flight in 2021. The House committee recommended
$3.612 billion, including $500 million for commercial crew and $2.825 billion for Exploration
Congressional Research Service
36
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Systems Development. The Senate committee recommended $4.209 billion, including $775 for
commercial crew and $3.118 billion for Exploration Systems Development.
The request for the International Space Station (ISS) is $3.049 billion, an increase of 9.3% from
FY2012. The ISS account includes the cost of commercial cargo flights for ISS resupply. The first
such flight was in May 2012. A second provider is expected to attempt its first cargo resupply
flight in 2013. The House committee recommended $2.860 billion. The Senate committee
recommended the requested amount.
NASA has proposed a mission to capture a small asteroid robotically, redirect it into orbit around
the Moon, and explore it with astronauts as one of the first destinations for Orion and the SLS.
The FY2014 budget request includes initial funding for this mission in three different accounts:
$20 million in Science for identification and characterization of a suitable asteroid, $45 million in
Exploration for mission definition and planning and development of capture mechanisms, and
$40 million in Space Technology for development of the solar electric propulsion technology that
would be used to redirect the asteroid’s orbit. The House report called the proposed asteroid
mission “premature” and stated that the House committee’s recommendation “does not include
any of the requested increases associated with the asteroid retrieval proposal.”
Table 11. NASA R&D
(budget authority in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
FY2014
FY2014
Actual
Enacted
Request
House Cte. Senate Cte.
Science
$5,073.7 $5,037.4 $5,017.8 $4,781.0 $5,154.2
Earth Science
1,760.5
1,748.0
1,846.1
1,659.0 1,846.2
Planetary Science
1,501.4
1,385.7
1,217.5
1,315.0 1,317.6
Astrophysics 648.4
655.1
642.3
622.0
678.4
James Webb Space Telescope
518.6
615.0
658.2
584.0
658.2
Heliophysics 644.8
633.6
653.7
601.0
653.8
Aeronautics 569.4
558.2
565.7
566.0
558.7
Space Technology
573.7
628.7
742.6
576.0
670.1
Exploration 3,707.3
3,806.4
3,915.5
3,612.0
4,209.3
Exploration Systems Development 3,001.6
2,990.7
2,730.0
2,825.0 3,118.2
Commercial Spaceflight 406.0
514.1
821.4
500.0
775.0
Exploration R&D
299.7
301.6
364.2
287.0
316.1
International Space Station
2,789.9
2,896.7
3,049.1
2,860.0
3,049.1
Subtotal R&D
12,714.0
12,927.3
13,290.7
12,395.0
13,641.4
Non-R&D Programsa 1,568.5
1,134.0
965.0
967.3
988.4
Cross-Agency Support
2,993.9
2,764.5
2,850.3
2,711.0
2,793.6
Associated with R&Db 2,665.1
2,541.5
2,657.4
2,514.8
2,604.9
Construction & Environmental C&R
494.5
665.9
609.4
525.0
586.9
Associated with R&Db 440.2
612.2
568.1
487.0
547.2
Total R&D
15,819.3
16,081.0
16,516.2
15,396.7
16,793.5
Total NASA
17,770.0
17,491.7
17,715.4
16,598.3
18,010.3
Congressional Research Service
37
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Sources: FY2012 actual and FY2014 request from NASA’s FY2014 congressional budget justification,
http://www.nasa.gov/news/budget/. FY2013 enacted from P.L. 113-6 and explanatory statement, Congressional
Record, March 11, 2013, pp. S1308-S1310. FY2013 House Committee from H.R. 2787 as reported and H.Rept.
113-171. FY2014 Senate Committee from S. 1329 as reported and S.Rept. 113-78.
Notes: FY2013 enacted amounts are adjusted for the rescissions in P.L. 113-6, Section 3001 (1.877%) and
Section 3004 (0.2% as determined by the Office of Management and Budget), but not for subsequent
sequestration or reprogramming. Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
a. Space Shuttle, Space and Flight Support, Education, and Inspector General.
b. 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
Environmental Compliance and Remediation accounts consist mostly of indirect costs for other programs,
assessed in proportion to their direct costs.
Department of Commerce
National Institute of Standards and Technology73
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.
The President’s FY2014 budget requests $928.2 million for NIST, an increase of 23.6% ($177.4
million) over the FY2012 appropriation. Included in this figure is $693.7 million for research and
development in the Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) account, 22.3%
($126.7 million) above FY2012 funding. Under the Industrial Technology Services (ITS) account,
the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program is to receive $153.1 million, a 19.2%
($24.7 million) increase over FY2012. Also included in ITS is $21.4 million for the Advanced
Manufacturing Technology Consortia (AMTech), which was not funded when it was included in
the FY2012 budget. The $60.0 million for construction is 8.3% ($4.6 million) more than that
provided in FY2012.
The House Committee on Appropriations report to accompany H.R. 2787 recommends funding
NIST at $784.0 million, 15.5% below the budget request. The $609.0 million provided for the
STRS account is 12.2% less than the Administration’s proposal, while the $120.0 million for
MEP is 21.6% below the President’s figure. There is no funding provided for AMTech. The $55.0
million for construction is 8.3% less than the budget request.
The Senate Committee on Appropriations report to accompany S. 1329 includes $947.5 million
for NIST, 2.1% more than proposed by the President. Funding for the STRS account would
amount to $703.0 million, 1.3% higher than the budget request. Support for MEP would total
$153.1 million, the same as the Administration’s proposal; however, the $31.4 million for
73 This section was written by Wendy H. Schacht, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources,
Science, and Industry Division.
Congressional Research Service
38
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
AMTech represents a 46.7% increase over the President’s recommendation. The $60.0 million for
construction is identical to the budget request.
In addition to the appropriations included in the budget proposal that are to be addressed through
the annual appropriations process, the Administration includes two new programs that are to be
funded through mandatory appropriations (spending that is typically “provided in permanent or
multi-year appropriations contained in the authorizing law, and therefore, the funding becomes
available automatically each year, without legislative action by Congress”).74 According to the
budget request, NIST would receive $100 million generated by the proceeds of the spectrum
auction to “conduct public safety R&D” as part of the Wireless Innovation (WIN) Fund (under
provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012). The President also
proposes $1.000 billion in support for the establishment of a National Network for Manufacturing
Innovation.75
NIST’s extramural programs (currently the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and AMTech),
which are directed toward increased private sector commercialization, have been a source of
contention. 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
proposals for the elimination of these activities. In 2007, the Advanced Technology Program was
terminated and replaced by the Technology Innovation Program which operated until support was
withdrawn in the final FY2012 appropriation.76
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. In President
Obama’s FY2011 budget the timeframe for doubling slipped to 11 years; his FY2012 budget was
intentionally silent on a timeframe for doubling. There is no mention of doubling or a timeframe
in the FY2014 budget request.
74 See CRS Report RL33074, Mandatory Spending Since 1962, by Mindy R. Levit and D. Andrew Austin.
75 For additional information on the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, see CRS Report R42625, The
Obama Administration’s Proposal to Establish a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, by John F. Sargent
Jr.
76 For additional information on the MEP and TIP programs, see CRS Report RS22815, The Technology Innovation
Program, by Wendy H. Schacht.
Congressional Research Service
39
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Table 12. NIST
(in millions of dollars)
FY2013
Enacted
FY2012
P.L. 113-6
Enacted
(post-rescission,
FY2014
FY2014
(P.L. 112-
pre-
FY2014
House
Senate
NIST Program
55)
sequestration)
Request
Committee
Committee
Scientific and Technical
567.0 599.5
693.7
609.0
703.0
Research and Services
Industrial Technology Services
Technology Innovation
0 0 0
0 0
Program
Manufacturing Extension
128.4 125.8
153.1
120.0
153.1
Partnership
Baldrige Program
0
0
0
0
0
AMTech 0
14.2
21.4
0
31.4
Construction
55.4 58.8
60.0
55.0
60.0
NIST Total
750.8
807.1
928.2
784.0
947.5
Mandatory Appropriations
National Network for
0 1,000.0
0
0
Manufacturing Innovation
Sources: NIST website (available at http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/budget/index.cfm), P.L. 112-55,
Administration’s FY2014 Budget Request, House Rept. 113-171, and Senate Rept. 113-78.
Note: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration77
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. 4.78 The
reorganization was intended to unify elements 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. NOAA’s R&D efforts support the four long-term goals of NOAA’s
Next Generation Strategic Plan: (1) climate adaptation and mitigation, (2) weather-ready nation,79
(3) healthy oceans, and (4) resilient coastal communities and economies.80
77 This section was written by Harold F. Upton, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
78 “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.
79 According to NOAA a weather-ready nation is envisioned as a society that is prepared for and responds to weather-
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
40
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
For FY2014, President Obama requests $733.0 million in R&D funding for NOAA, a 27.8%
increase in funding from the FY2012 level of $573.4 million. R&D accounts for 13.5% of
NOAA’s total FY2014 discretionary budget request of $5.442 billion. The R&D request consists
of $503.9 million for research (68.7%), $65.7 million for development (9.0%), and $163.4 million
for R&D equipment (22.3%). Excluding equipment, about $393 million (68.9%) of the R&D
request would fund intramural programs and $177 million (31.1%) would fund extramural
programs.81
NOAA’s administrative structure has five line offices that reflect its diverse mission: 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). The President’s request would provide OAR with 59.9% of NOAA’s R&D
funding total, approximately $438.7 million. Table 13 provides R&D funding levels by line
office for FY2012 and the FY2014 request.82
Table 13. NOAA R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Line Offices
Enacted
Enacted
Request
National Ocean Service
62.4
n/a
83.9
National Marine Fisheries Service
53.6
n/a
51.3
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
338.6
n/a
438.7
National Weather Service
22.5
n/a
40.2
National Environmental Satellite, Data, and
26.7 n/a
27.0
Information Service
Office of Marine and Aviation Operationsa 69.6 n/a
91.9
Total R&D
573.4
n/a 733.0
NOAA Total
4,893.7
n/a 5,441.7
Sources: Jackie Rolleri, NOAA Budget Office, e-mail, April 30, 2013.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding. n/a = not available.
a. All OMAO R&D funding is for equipment.
(...continued)
related events.
80 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration FY2014
Budget Summary, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, April 2013,
http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy14_bluebook/FINALnoaaBlueBook_2014_Web_Full.pdf.
81 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration FY2014
Budget Summary, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC, April 2013.
http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/nbo/fy14_bluebook/FINALnoaaBlueBook_2014_Web_Full.pdf.
82 Jackie Rolleri, NOAA Budget Communications Office, e-mail, April 30, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
41
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Department of Agriculture83
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) research and education activities are administered in
four of its agencies: Agricultural Research Service (ARS), National Institute of Food and
Agriculture (NIFA),84 Economic Research Service (ERS), and National Agricultural Statistics
Service (NASS). The Administration’s FY2014 budget request for activities under USDA’s
Research, Education, and Economics (REE) mission area is $2.81 billion, an increase of 11%
from the FY2012 enacted level of $2.54 billion. (See Table 14.) The House and Senate
committees recommended $2.52 billion and $2.65 billion, respectively. When referring to the
Administration’s request, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack stated that
[A]gricultural research is a proven investment. It is important to increase our investment in
research and education, which has proven to be a powerful strategy to boost farm
productivity, and has contributed to creation of jobs and enhancing rural economies. As
farmers and ranchers face challenges from more frequent and more intense extreme weather
conditions, we are focused on providing best practices and workable strategies to adapt to the
changes and mitigate the impact.85
The Agricultural Research Service is USDA’s in-house basic and applied research agency, and
operates approximately 90 laboratories nationwide. ARS also includes the National Agricultural
Library, a primary information resource on food, agriculture, and natural resource sciences. ARS
laboratories focus on efficient food and fiber production, development of new products and uses
for agricultural commodities, development of effective controls for pest management, and support
of USDA regulatory and technical assistance programs.
The President requested $1.28 billion for ARS in FY2014, $184 million above the FY2012
enacted level. The House and Senate committees recommended $1.07 billion and $1.12 billion,
respectively. The FY2014 request proposes $155 million to replace the agency’s Southeast
Poultry Disease Research Laboratory in Athens, GA. The request fully funds only this single
facility rather than making smaller upgrades across multiple facilities. The President also
requested funding for additional research to increase the economic value of biorefinery co-
products, for example, while proposing to eliminate lower priority extramural projects
(particularly for research carried out by other institutions) and to close six selected laboratories.
Funding from proposed discontinued ARS projects would be redirected to agency research
priorities such as enhanced floral and nursery research, improved feed efficiency and reduced
antimicrobial resistance in livestock, and food safety.
The National Institute of Food and Agriculture was established in Title VII, Section 7511 of the
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246, also known as the 2008 farm bill).
NIFA is responsible for developing partnerships between the federal and state components of
83 This section was written by Dennis A. Shields, Specialist in Agricultural Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division.
84 NIFA was formerly the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES).
85 U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Statement by Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture, Before the
Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, Committee
on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives,” April 16, 2013, http://appropriations.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hhrg-
113-ap01-wstate-vilsackt-20130416.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
42
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
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.86 Funding is distributed to the states through competitive awards,
statutory formula funding, and special grants. The FY2014 request would provide $1.29 billion
for NIFA, $86 million above the FY2012 enacted level. The House and Senate committees
recommended $1.22 billion and $1.29 billion, respectively.
The Administration’s FY2014 request for NIFA emphasizes competitive, peer-reviewed allocation
of research funding for what USDA perceives are the most critical needs of agriculture. For
FY2014, the President requested $383 million for NIFA’s flagship competitive grant program, the
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), 45% higher than FY2012 enacted funding of
$264 million. AFRI’s programs focus on plant and animal health and production, agricultural
systems and technologies, bioenergy and natural resources, food safety, human nutrition, and
health. Proposed major initiatives in FY2014 include (1) support of schools and colleges in the
development of food and agriculture-related workforce; (2) water research to develop solutions
for resource management; (3) REE efforts for food security; (4) nutrition and obesity prevention
research; (5) food safety research with a focus on minimizing antibiotic resistance transmission
through the food chain; (6) biomass research; and (7) strategies for farm production and climate
change. To improve transparency and accountability, the President requested $8 million to
consolidate and modernize NIFA’s grant management systems, which is also expected to help the
agency better track research accomplishments.
The President’s budget seeks to reorganize several science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) programs across the executive branch. Under the reorganization, the
National Science Foundation would play a leadership role in federal undergraduate and graduate
STEM education efforts, the Department of Education would focus on K-12 STEM education,
and the Smithsonian Institution would focus on informal STEM education. Under the President’s
plan, NIFA’s STEM education programs would be transferred to these agencies. (For additional
information, see “Reorganization of STEM Education Programs.”)
The FY2014 budget request proposes $78.5 million for ERS, nearly the same as the FY2012
enacted level. The House and Senate committees recommended $75.5 million and $78.5 million,
respectively. ERS supports economic and social science information analysis on agriculture, rural
development, food, commodity markets, and the environment. It collects and disseminates data
concerning USDA programs and policies to various stakeholders.
Funding for the National Agricultural Statistics Service is proposed at $159 million in the
FY2014 request, the same as the FY2012 enacted level. The House and Senate committees
recommended $154.8 million and $162.5 million, respectively. The FY2014 request includes new
funding to maintain production of four high-priority Current Industry Reports (CIR) that were
formerly produced by the U.S. Census Bureau.
86 The numbers 1862, 1890, and 1994 in this context refer to the years laws were enacted creating these classifications
of colleges and universities.
Congressional Research Service
43
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Table 14. U.S. Department of Agriculture R&D
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
Actual
Estimate
Request
Agricultural Research Service
Product Quality/Value Added
101
n/a
85
Livestock Production
76
n/a
73
Crop Production
229
n/a
229
Food Safety
106
n/a
119
Livestock Protection
76
n/a
80
Crop Protection
194
n/a
180
Human Nutrition
85
n/a
96
Environmental Stewardship
189
n/a
220
National Agricultural Library
21
n/a
26
Repair and Maintenance of Facilities
18
n/a
18
Buildings and Facilities
0
155
Total, ARS
1,095
1,072
1,279
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Smith-Lever Sections 3b&c
294
286
294
Hatch Act Formula
236
230
236
1890 Research and Extension
93
n/a
93
McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Research
33
32
33
Animal Health and Disease Research
4
4
0
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative
264
290
383
Pest Management/Crop Protection Activities
32
n/a
29
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension
19
14
23
Higher Education Programs
46
n/a
37
1890 Facilities
20
n/a
20
Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program
68
n/a
68
Federal Administration
14
n/a
14
Other 84
n/a
63
Total, NIFA
1,207
1,202
1,293
Economic Research Service
78
75
79
National Agricultural Statistics Service
159
175
159
Total, Research, Education, and Economics
2,539
2,524
2,810
Sources: For FY2012 and FY2014 data, U.S. Department of Agriculture, FY2014 Budget Summary and Annual
Performance Plan, April 2013; for FY2013 estimates, a rescission of 2.713% is subtracted from amounts appearing
in Explanatory Statement for the Senate Substitute Continuing Resolution for P.L. 113-6.
Note: FY2013 estimates exclude deduction for sequestration. n/a = not available. Totals may differ from the
sum of the components due to rounding.
Congressional Research Service
44
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Department of the Interior87
The Administration has requested $963.1 million in R&D funding for the Department of the
Interior (DOI) for FY2014, $143.6 million above its FY2012 funding level of $819.5 million.
(See Table 15.) According to DOI,
This funding supports scientific monitoring, research, and analysis to assist decisionmaking
in resource management and the special trust responsibilities of Interior and other federally-
mandated and nationally-significant programs. Specific activities supported include energy
permitting, ecosystem management, oil spill restoration, Earth observations, such as water
and wildlife monitoring, invasive species control, and tribal natural resource management.88
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) accounts for most of DOI’s R&D ($760.5 million, 79% of
total DOI R&D). USGS is also the most R&D-intensive agency in DOI, with approximately two-
thirds of its FY2014 request devoted to R&D activities.
Funding for DOI R&D is generally included in line items that also include non-R&D funding.
Therefore it is not possible to know precisely how much of the funding provided for in
appropriations bills will be allocated to R&D unless funding is provided for at the precise level of
the request. In general, R&D funding levels are known only after DOI agencies determine their
allocation of appropriations. In May 2013, DOI provided detailed information to CRS on R&D
funding levels proposed by the President for each of its agencies and for broad program areas;
these data were used for much of the analysis in this section.89
U.S. Geological Survey
All USGS funding is provided through a single account, Surveys, Investigations, and Research
(SIR). USGS R&D is conducted under seven SIR activity/program areas: Ecosystems; Climate
and Land Use Change; Energy, Minerals, and Environmental Health; Natural Hazards; Water
Resources; Core Science Systems; and Administration and Enterprise Information.
The President’s FY2014 budget request for USGS is $1.167 billion, and includes $760.5 million
for R&D, an increase of $87.7 million (13.0%) over the FY2012 R&D funding level of $672.8
million. The largest R&D increases over FY2012 are for Ecosystems, up $22.5 million (14.2%);
Climate and Land Use Change, up $15.3 million (14.9%); and Core Science Systems, up $18.9
million (21.4%).
Other DOI Agencies
Under the President’s FY2014 budget request:
87 This section was written by John F. Sargent, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
88 Unpublished document, Research and Development: 2014 Budget Summary, provided via private email
correspondence between the DOI budget office and CRS, May 2, 2013
89 Private email correspondence between the DOI budget office and CRS, May 2, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
45
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
• The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would receive $50.1 million in FY2014 for
applied research, an increase of $21.6 million (75.6%) over its FY2012 level.
• The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management would receive $39.6 million in
FY2014 for applied research, an increase of $1.0 million (2.6%) over FY2012.
• The National Park Service would receive $34.1 million in FY2014 for applied
research and development, an increase of $7.8 million (29.7%) over FY2012.
• The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement would receive $28.0
million in FY2014 for applied research, up $3.3 million (13.2%) over FY2012.
• The Bureau of Land Management would receive $27.1 million in FY2014 for
applied research and development, up $10.5 million (63.3%) over FY2012.
• The Bureau of Reclamation would receive $17.6 million in FY2014 for applied
research and development, up $5.5 million (45.8%) over FY2012.
• The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Surface Mining would receive
$5.0 million and $1.2 million, respectively, in FY2014 for applied research.
Neither agency received R&D funding in FY2012.90
Table 15. Department of the Interior R&D
(budget authority, in millions of dollars)
FY2013
FY2012
Enacted
FY2014
Actual
P.L. 113-6
Request
U.S. Geological Survey
672.8
n/a
760.5
Bureau of Land Management
16.6
n/a
27.1
Bureau of Reclamation
12.0
n/a
17.6
National Park Service
26.3
n/a
34.1
Fish and Wildlife Service
28.5
n/a
50.1
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
38.6
n/a
39.6
Bureau of Safety and Environmental
n/a
Enforcement 24.7
28.0
Bureau of Indian Affairs
0
n/a
5.0
Office of Surface Mining
0
n/a
1.2
Total, DOI R&D
819.5
n/a
963.1
Source: Unpublished data provided to CRS by the DOI Budget Office.
Note: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding. n/a = not available.
90 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
46
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Environmental Protection Agency91
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 research and
development activities to provide 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. Funding for
EPA R&D is generally included in line-items that also include non-R&D funding, therefore it is
not possible to identify precisely how much of the funding provided for in appropriations bills
will be allocated to R&D (see discussion later in this section). 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.
The President’s FY2014 budget request of $807.5 million for the EPA S&T account, including
transfers from the Superfund account, is $9.2 million (1.1%) less than the $816.7 million
provided for FY2012 in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74 Title II of
Division E, H.R. 2055) enacted December 23, 2011. The amount included in the FY2014 budget
request for the EPA’s S&T account (including transfers) represents roughly 10% of the agency’s
total $8.15 billion request for FY2014. (Note: FY2012 enacted amounts presented in this section
of the report reflect the application of a 0.16% rescission.)92
The FY2014 request reflects the reorganization of the EPA S&T budget presentation of certain
program activities below the appropriations account level as proposed by the Administration and
accepted by the Conferees for FY2012.93 The reorganization included consolidation and
modifications of specific line-items, making it difficult to make direct comparisons with the prior
fiscal years’ enacted levels for sub-account level line-items. Program areas revised as part of the
modifications within the S&T account include Clean Air and Climate; Research: Air, Climate and
Energy; Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability; and Research: Sustainability and Healthy
Communities.
As indicated in Table 16, the total base (prior to transfers) requested funding of $783.9 million
for FY2014 for the S&T account is a decrease compared to the FY2012 enacted level. The $23.5
million proposed transfer from the Superfund account for FY2014 is a slight increase above the
$23.0 million transferred in FY2012. As indicated in EPA’s FY2014 congressional budget
91 This section was written by Robert Esworthy, Specialist in Environmental Policy, CRS Resources, Science, and
Industry Division. For a broader overview of EPA’s FY2013 appropriations, see CRS Report R42520, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Appropriations for FY2013: Debate During the 112th Congress, coordinated by Robert
Esworthy; for FY2012 see CRS Report R42332, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) FY2012 Appropriations, by
Robert Esworthy.
92 Title IV, Division E of P.L. 112-74, Section 436(a): “Across-the-board Rescissions—There is hereby rescinded an
amount equal to 0.16 percent of the budget authority provided for fiscal year 2012 for any discretionary appropriation
in titles I through IV of this Act.” FY2012 enacted amounts presented in EPA’s FY2013 Congressional Budget
Justification include the subsequent application of the rescission. The total FY2012 enacted appropriations for the EPA
S&T account, including transfers, in P.L. 112-74 was $818.0 million prior to the rescission.
93 Reorganized as proposed by the President for FY2012, U.S. EPA, Fiscal Year FY2012 Justification of Appropriation
Estimates for the Committee on Appropriations: Science and Technology, pp.66-240, available on EPA’s Historical
Planning, Budget, and Results Reports website at http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/archive.
Congressional Research Service
47
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
justification94 and reflected in Table 16, 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 FY2012
appropriations. For some activities, the amount of the request for FY2014 remained relatively flat
compared to the FY2012 appropriation.
Examples of FY2014 requested reductions below the FY2012 levels, as reflected in Table 16 for
programmatic areas within EPA’s S&T appropriations account, include $147.4 million for
Sustainable and Healthy Communities (human health and ecosystem) Research, $26.2 million
(roughly 15%) less than FY2012 enacted; and $40.0 million for FY2014 for EPA’s Homeland
Security research activities,95 $1.8 million (4.2%) less than FY2012.
The largest requested percentage decrease for FY2014 below FY2012 enacted levels within the
S&T account is for the Climate Protection Program activity within the Clean Air and Climate
program area. The $8.3 million requested for the Climate Protection Program for FY2014 is $8.0
million (nearly 50%) less than the FY2012 appropriation of $16.3 million.96 The requested
decrease reflects the Administration’s proposal to eliminate the vehicle engine development under
the Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) program, and reallocate funds that previously supported
the CAT to support implementation and compliance activities associated with EPA’s new
greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) fuel economy standards and EPA emission
standards for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles and engines. The funding for this activity—
Federal Vehicle and Fuel Standards and Certification—is also within the Clean Air and Climate
program area: $100.4 million for FY2014, an $8.5 million (9.2%) increase above the FY2012
enacted amount.
Additionally within the S&T account, the FY2014 request includes $105.7 million for Air,
Climate, and Energy (ACE) Research, a $7.8 million (7.8%) increase above FY2012, and $117.9
million for Safe and Sustainable Water (SSW) Research, a $5.1 million (4.4%) increase. Primarily
contributing to these two requested increases are $3.8 million and $4.3 million increases
requested above FY2012 under ACE and SWW research program activities respectively, as part
of EPA’s overall research efforts to address questions regarding the safety of hydraulic
fracturing.97 Concerns regarding potential drinking water impacts associated with hydraulic
fracturing continue to be an area of considerable interest during the 113th Congress.98
Additional examples of increases and reductions within the S&T account activities highlighted in
the EPA FY2014 Congressional Budget Justification and supporting documents99 include:
94 U.S. EPA, Fiscal year FY2014 Justification of Appropriation Estimates for the Committee on Appropriations:
Science and Technology, pp. 72-199, http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/cjfy14.pdf.
95 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.
96 See footnote 94, EPA’s FY2014 Congressional Justification, pdf, pp. 84-85.
97 See footnote 94, EPA’s FY2014 Congressional Justification, pdf, pp. 36, 151-154, and 160-165.
98 CRS Report R41760, Hydraulic Fracturing and Safe Drinking Water Act Regulatory Issues, by Mary Tiemann and
Adam Vann.
99 See FY2014 Congressional Justification, and “FY2014 EPA Budget in Brief,” http://www2.epa.gov/planandbudget/
fy2014.
Congressional Research Service
48
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
• $4.1 million increase for research to develop processes and products that
minimize the hazardous impacts of the manufacture, use, and disposal of
chemicals, including nanomaterials;
• $3.2 million increase for climate change research to understand the impacts of
climate change on human health and vulnerable ecosystems;
• $1.8 million increase to support development of regional projects that integrate
natural and engineered water infrastructure as well as research to monitor effects
of existing integrated natural, engineered, and green infrastructure;
• $1.3 million increase to expand understanding of the potential impacts of biofuel
production on human health and ecosystems;
• $16.4 million decrease from Science to Achieve Results (STAR)/Greater
Research Opportunities (GRO) fellowships, as part of the Administration’s
proposal for reorganization and consolidation of science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs100 to facilitate a
national unified strategy for federal education fellowships and scholarships;101
• $2.3 million decrease from drinking water research including center for research
on small drinking water systems competitive grants and drinking water and water
quality research for technical support activities; and
• $1.2 million decrease for endocrine disruptors research.
The activities funded within the S&T account include research conducted by universities,
foundations, and other non-federal entities that receive 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
account, as well as a portion of the former Salaries and Expenses, and Program Operations
accounts, which had been in place until FY1996.102 Although the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) reports103 historical and projected budget authority (BA) amounts for R&D at EPA
100 See White House Office of Science and Technology, April 10, 2013, Press Release: the FY2014 Federal R&D
Budget, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/2014_R&Dbudget_STEM.pdf. See also
http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/rdbudgets.
101 See footnote 94 EPA’s FY2014 Congressional Justification, pp. 172 and 176, http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/
files/documents/cjfy14.pdf.
102 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. Because of the
differences in the scope of the activities included in these accounts, apt comparisons before and after FY1996 are
difficult.
103 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reports R&D budget authority (BA) amounts in its Analytical
Perspectives accompanying the annual President’s budget request. See OMB, Fiscal Year 2014 Budget of the United
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
49
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
(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 as a whole. (BA as reported by OMB is included in
Table 16 for purposes of comparison to fiscal year appropriations.) This is an indication that not
all of the EPA S&T account funding is allocated to R&D.
Table 16. Environmental Protection Agency S&T Account
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
FY2013
Enacted
Enacted
FY2014
Environmental Protection Agency
(P.L. 112-74)
(P.L. 113-6)a
Request
Science and Technology Approps. Account
Clean Air and Climate
124.4
n/a
126.0
- Climate Protection Program
16.3
n/a 8.3
- Federal Vehicle & Fuel Standards & Certification
91.9
n/a 100.4
Enforcement 15.3
n/a
15.9
Homeland Security
41.8
n/a
40.0
Indoor Air and Radiation
6.8
n/a
6.7
IT/Data
Management/Security
3.7 n/a 4.0
Operations & Administration
72.0
n/a
75.7
Pesticide
Licensing
6.6 n/a 6.2
Research: Air, Climate, and Energy
98.0
n/a
105.7
Research: Safe and Sustainable Water
112.8
n/a
117.9
Research: Chemical Safety and Sustainability
130.2 n/a
134.8
- Research: Computational toxicology
20.8
n/a 21.4
- Research: Endocrine disruptor
16.9
n/a 15.9
- Research: Fellowships
16.4
n/a 0.0
Research: Sustainable and Healthy Communities
173.5
n/a
147.4
Water: Human Health Protection
3.8
n/a
3.6
Research: National Priorities (Water Quality and
n/a
Availability) 5.0
0.0
—Subtotal S&T Account Base Appropriations
$793.7
n/a $783.9
—Transfer in from Hazardous Substance
n/a
Superfund Account
$23.0
$23.5
Total Science and Technology
$816.7
n/a $807.5
R&D Budget Authority Reported by OMB
$568.0
n/a $560.0
est.
(...continued)
States: Analytical Perspectives—Special Topics/Research and Development, pp. 369-375, http://www.whitehouse.gov/
sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/topics.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
50
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Source: Prepared by CRS. FY2012 enacted amounts are as presented by the House Appropriations Committee
in its report accompanying the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2013 (H.R. 6091,
H.Rept. 112-589, pp. 170-177), as reported July 10, 2012, and reflect the subsequent application of the 0.16%
across-the-board rescission required by Section 436 of P.L. 112-74. FY2014 requested amounts are based on the
Fiscal year FY2014 Justification of Appropriation Estimates for the Committee on Appropriations: Science and Technology,
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/cjfy14.pdf. OMB amounts of R&D budget authority are as
reported in OMB, Fiscal Year 2014 Budget of the United States: Analytical Perspectives—Special Topics/Research and
Development, pp. 369-375, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/topics.pdf.
Notes: Totals may differ from the sum of the components due to rounding; n/a=not available.
a. FY2013 enacted amounts will be added to the table following agencies and departments’ submissions to the
House and Senate Appropriations Committees pursuant to Section 113 Title I Div. F of P.L. 113-6,
reporting allocations at the program, project or activity level within each statutory account and reflecting
the effects of sequestration and rescissions.
Department of Transportation104
President Obama has requested $940.6 million for Department of Transportation R&D in
FY2014, an increase of $20.3 million (2.2%) from the FY2012 enacted level. (See Table 17.)
Two DOT agencies—the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA)—account for more than three-fourths of the department’s R&D funding
(76.6% in the FY2014 request).
The FHWA would receive $379.8 million in R&D funding in FY2014 under the President’s
request, a decrease of $26.1 million (6.4%) from the FY2012 enacted level.105 The FHWA budget
proposes to restructure its existing research, development, and technology activities into three
programs, as authorized by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP -21, P.L.
112-141): Highway Research and Development (HRD), Technology and Innovation Deployment,
and Training and Education. The President’s FY2014 request includes $115 million for HRD. The
House Committee on Appropriations recommended the requested amount for FHWA. The Senate
Committee on Appropriations also recommended the requested amount for FHWA, plus an
additional $500 million for bridges in critical condition.106
As in the President’s FY2013 budget request for the FHWA, the FY2014 request would transfer
the functions of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) to a new office,
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology. Funding for RITA in the
FY2014 budget request appears in the account for the Office of the Secretary. The department
asserts that the establishment of the new office would “improve coordination and collaboration
among operating administrations, resulting in higher quality research outcomes.” Activities to be
administered by this office include Intelligent Transportation Systems ($100 million in the
FY2014 request), University Transportation Centers ($72.5 million), and the Bureau of
Transportation Statistics ($26 million).107 The House committee endorsed the President’s proposal
to move RITA to the Office of the Secretary under the direction of an Assistant Secretary for
104 This section was written by John F. Sargent, Specialist in Science and Technology Policy, CRS Resources, Science,
and Industry Division.
105 FHWA, Budget Estimates Fiscal Year 2014: Federal Highway Administration, http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/
files/docs/FHWA_FY2014_Budget_Estimates_0.pdf.
106 S.Rept. 113-45, p. 42.
107 U.S. Department of Transportation, Budget Highlights: Fiscal Year 2014, http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/
docs/OST_FY2014_Budget_EstimatesV2_0.pdf, p. 1.
Congressional Research Service
51
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Research and Technology, instead of a separate administrator. The House committee
recommended $14.2 million for the new office, $545,000 below the President’s request. The new
office would be responsible for
coordinating, facilitating, and reviewing the Department’s research and development
programs and activities; coordinating and developing positioning, navigation and timing
(PNT) technology; maintaining PNT policy, coordination and spectrum management;
managing the Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System; and overseeing and
providing direction to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, the Intelligent Transportation
Systems Joint Program Office, the University Transportation Centers program, the Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center and the Transportation Safety Institute.108
The Senate committee also endorsed the President’s proposal to move RITA to the Office of the
Secretary under the direction of an Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology,
recommending funding of $14.8 million, the same as the President’s request.109
The FAA budget justification reflects a request for $340.7 million for R&D and R&D facilities in
FY2014, a decrease of $26.0 million (7.1%) from the FY2012 enacted level.110 The request
includes $166.0 million for Research, Engineering, and Development (RE&D), a decrease of $1.5
million (0.9%) from the FY2012 level. The RE&D budget is focused on improving aviation
safety, economic competitiveness, and environmental sustainability. The request includes $90.9
million for safety, up 1.8% over FY2012; $35.8 million for economic competitiveness, up 4.8%
over FY2012; and $33.5 million for environmental sustainability, down 13.1%. The FAA request
includes $61.4 million in funding for NextGen in the RE&D account, an increase of 2%. The
RE&D NextGen-specific funding supports research in wake turbulence, human factors, and clean
aircraft technologies.111 The House committee recommended $145.0 million for RE&D, $21.0
million below the President’s request; the Senate committee recommended $160.0 million for
RE&D, $6 million below the request. The House recommended no funding for the Joint Planning
and Development Office (JPDO) stating that the “FAA has failed to establish a clearly defined
role for the JPDO.”112 The Senate recommended $9.0 million for JPDO, $3.1 million below the
request. The House committee also recommended less than the President’s request for NextGen
activities in wake turbulence (down $4.3 million, 46%), air ground integration human factors
(down $5.8 million, 56%), and weather technology in the cockpit (down $1.2 million, 28%), and
more for NextGen environmental research in aircraft technologies, fuels, and metrics (up $3.0
million, 16%).113 The Senate recommended some reductions in the NextGen activities cut by the
House, and recommended $2.4 million more than the request for NextGen environmental
research.114
Funding for Federal Railroad Administration R&D would more than double under the President’s
FY2014 proposal to $90.8 million, an increase of $51.1 million (128.7%) above the FY2012
108 H.Rept. 113-136, p. 8.
109 S.Rept. 113-45, p. 21.
110 FAA, Budget Estimates Fiscal Year 2014: Federal Aviation Administration, http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/
docs/FAA_FY2014_Budget_Estimates.pdf.
111 Ibid.
112 H.Rept. 113-136, p. 28.
113 Ibid, p. 28.
114 S.Rept. 113-45, p. 37.
Congressional Research Service
52
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
level. This increase is due primarily to the proposed establishment of a new account (the
Research, Development, and Technology account) which would support high-performance rail
R&D ($24.5 million), a National Cooperative Research Program ($5.0 million), and Workforce
Development R&D-related activities ($24.8 million).115 The House committee recommended the
requested amount ($35.3 million) for the Railroad Research and Development account, but
recommended no funding for the Administration’s proposed Railroad Research, Development,
and Technology account noting that “it has not received formal legislative proposal for such
program.”116 The Senate committee also recommended the requested amount for the Railroad
Research and Development account and recommended no funding for the Administration’s
proposed Railroad Research, Development, and Technology account.117
Federal Transit Administration R&D would more than double to $17.2 million, an increase of
$10.2 million (152.4%) over FY2012. This is due primarily to congressional redirection of
funding for the Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment account to support
R&D activities in contrast to its FY2012 funding support for technology investments.118 The
House recommended $20.0 million for the Research, Development, Demonstration, and
Deployment account, $10.0 million below the President’s request. In addition to the authorities
given to the FTA under MAP-21, the House committee provides FTA authorization to “award
grants to demonstrate and deploy new technologies that promote clean energy and improve air
quality with low-emission or no-emission vehicles.”119 The Senate committee recommended
$43.3 million for the Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment account, $13.3
million above the President’s request.120
115 FRA, Budget Estimates Fiscal Year 2014: Federal Railroad Administration, http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/
docs/FRA_FY2014_Budget_Estimates.pdf,
116 H.Rept. 113-136, p. 44.
117 S.Rept. 113-45, p. 189.
118 Congress articulated the new direction in MAP-21, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (P.L.
112-141).
119 H.Rept. 113-136, p. 54.
120 S.Rept. 113-45, p. 80.
Congressional Research Service
53
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Table 17. Department of Transportation R&D
(budget authority, in millions of dollars)
FY2013
FY2012
Enacted
FY2014
FY2014 House
Actual
(P.L. 113-6)
Request
Committee
Federal Highway Administration
405.9
n/a
379.8
n/a
Federal Aviation Administration
366.7
n/a
340.7
n/a
Federal Railroad Administration
39.7
n/a
90.8
n/a
National Highway Traffic Safety
n/a
Administration 68.7
n/a
73.4
Federal Transit Administration
6.8
n/a
17.2
n/a
Pipeline & Hazardous Materials
n/a
Safety Administration
9.8
n/a
16.4
Office of the Secretary
16.0
n/a
14.8
n/a
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
n/a
Administration 6.7
n/a
7.5
Total, DOT R&D
920.4
n/a
940.6
n/a
Source: DOT FY2014 department and agency budget justifications.
Notes: Figures include R&D and R&D facilities. n/a = not available. Totals may differ from the sum of the
components due to rounding. Research and development funds are included in accounts that also have non-R&D
activities.
Congressional Research Service
54
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2014
Author Contact Information
John F. Sargent Jr., Coordinator
Wendy H. Schacht
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
jsargent@crs.loc.gov, 7-9147
wschacht@crs.loc.gov, 7-7066
Robert Esworthy
Pamela W. Smith
Specialist in Environmental Policy
Analyst in Biomedical Policy
resworthy@crs.loc.gov, 7-7236
psmith@crs.loc.gov, 7-7048
Heather B. Gonzalez
Harold F. Upton
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
hgonzalez@crs.loc.gov, 7-1895
hupton@crs.loc.gov, 7-2264
Daniel Morgan
Dennis A. Shields
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
dmorgan@crs.loc.gov, 7-5849
dshields@crs.loc.gov, 7-9051
John D. Moteff
Specialist in Science and Technology Policy
jmoteff@crs.loc.gov, 7-1435
Congressional Research Service
55