[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
A REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE
OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET REQUEST
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 9, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-11
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
35-877PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
ZOE LOFGREN, California FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois Ranking Member
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon MO BROOKS, Alabama
AMI BERA, California, BILL POSEY, Florida
Vice Chair RANDY WEBER, Texas
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania BRIAN BABIN, Texas
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
HALEY STEVENS, Michigan ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
BRAD SHERMAN, California TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee PETE OLSON, Texas
JERRY McNERNEY, California ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
PAUL TONKO, New York JIM BAIRD, Indiana
BILL FOSTER, Illinois JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
DON BEYER, Virginia JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida Rico
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois VACANCY
KATIE HILL, California
BEN McADAMS, Utah
JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
------
Subcommittee on Research and Technology
HON. HALEY STEVENS, Michigan, Chairwoman
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois JIM BAIRD, Indiana, Ranking Member
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
BRAD SHERMAN, California NEAL DUNN, Florida
PAUL TONKO, New York TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
BEN McADAMS, Utah ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
BILL FOSTER, Illinois
C O N T E N T S
April 9, 2019
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Haley Stevens, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Research and Technology, Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives........... 8
Written Statement............................................ 10
Statement by Representative Jim Baird, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Research and Technology, Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives........... 12
Written Statement............................................ 13
Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chairwoman,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 15
Written Statement............................................ 16
Statement by Representative Frank D. Lucas, Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 18
Written Statement............................................ 19
Witness:
Hon. Dr. Walter G. Copan, Undersecretary of Commerce for Science
and Technology and Director of NIST
Oral Statement............................................... 21
Written Statement............................................ 24
Discussion....................................................... 32
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Hon. Dr. Walter G. Copan, Undersecretary of Commerce for Science
and Technology and Director of NIST............................ 48
A REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE
OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
FISCAL YEAR 2020 BUDGET REQUEST
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 2019
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Research and Technology,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Haley
Stevens [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Stevens. The hearing will come to order. Without
objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at any
time.
Good morning, and welcome to this hearing to review the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Fiscal
Year 2020 Budget Request. Dr. Copan, welcome to the Committee
and to what I hope will be a meaningful dialog about the
critical national asset that is NIST. It was great to recently
have you in Michigan's 11th District in Plymouth at our
Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center, and it is a delight
to have you here today.
NIST works with industry, academia, and other government
agencies to advance science, support technological innovation,
and increase competitiveness of U.S. companies. NIST's
recognized excellence in measurement science and standards has
underpinned U.S. leadership in areas as diverse as additive
manufacturing, spectrum sharing, smart grid, biotechnology,
cybersecurity, forensic science, and infrastructure resiliency.
And that list goes on for quite a while. The agency has also
played and will continue to play a key role in U.S.
advancements in artificial intelligence and quantum science. I
am happy to see increases for these two important areas of
research in the Fiscal Year 2020 budget proposal for NIST.
Most Americans--and possibly most Members of Congress--
don't know about NIST or understand the nature or impact of
their work, but we all benefit from it. NIST's reference
materials, technical standards, measurement services, and
technical guidance have been used to validate the performance
of the smoke alarms in our homes, ensure our law enforcement
officers have body armor that they can rely on, develop the
first widely used measurement standard for breast cancer
diagnosis, and protect us all from bad actors in cyber space.
These are just a few tangible examples of NIST's work that
benefit everyday Americans.
For U.S. manufacturers of all sizes and sectors, NIST's
measurement services and standards are essential to their
ability to compete, grow, and create jobs. To say this is a
disappointing budget request is an understatement. The
Administration is once again proposing to zero out the
Manufacturing Extension Partnership program even though in
2018, MEP (Manufacturing Extension Partnership) resulted in $16
billion in sales, $1.7 billion in cost savings, $4 billion in
new client investments, and more than 122,000 jobs created and
retained at a total cost to the Federal Government of $140
million. I'll say, that's some ROI (return on investment).
The Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center, an MEP center
that's located in Plymouth, has helped create small and medium-
sized manufacturing jobs. They've serviced manufacturing
clientele and retained nearly 11,000 jobs. MEP also leads the
Nation in getting ready for cybersecurity services. This is
something we have seen at the Michigan Manufacturing Technology
Center. It has been critical to helping manufacturers protect
their operations on the factory floor and the devices that they
produce as the industrial Internet of Things (IOT) continues to
grow exponentially.
This budget would also result in the layoff of 400 NIST
staff, including 17 percent of its scientists and engineers, a
loss that would be hard and likely impossible to recover from.
NIST scientists have won five Nobel Prizes. They are the best
and brightest. They could work anywhere, for probably double
that salary, but they have chosen NIST because of its
excellence, because of its delivery and their commitment to the
public good. This request may be one of the more callous
examples of this Administration's slash-and-burn approach to
the Federal budget, but it is also one of the most troubling.
To save $300 million, the Administration is putting on the line
billions of dollars of economic growth for U.S. companies, not
to mention our national security, our health, and our
environment. It is hard for me to overstate the return on
investment for our Nation from the money that we put into
NIST's work.
Finally, for those of us who have visited the NIST campus
in Gaithersburg, we understand why NIST has more than $300
million in deferred maintenance and is undertaking major
renovations of some of their laboratories. We cannot expect
NIST's scientists, as bright as they are, to do cutting-edge
research with outdated equipment, leaking pipes, and crumbling
buildings. I encourage all of my colleagues--in fact, I implore
my colleagues to visit either of the NIST campuses and see for
yourself both the incredible work that they do and how
desperate their facilities situation has become.
I have had the privilege of visiting NIST in Gaithersburg
several times throughout my career, and I am encouraged and I
am inspired, and I am ready to do more.
I understand hard decisions have to be made in every
budget, but the proposed $300 million cut to NIST would cause
irreversible damage to our Nation.
Dr. Copan, I look forward to your testimony, and I thank
you for being here. It is my hope that in our conversation
today we will bring attention to the important work at NIST and
the likely impacts of the proposed budget cuts. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Stevens follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Stevens. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Baird for
an opening statement.
Mr. Baird. Well, good morning, Chairwoman Stevens. I really
want to thank you for convening today's hearing on the Fiscal
Year 2020 Budget Request for the National Institute of
Standards and Technology. And, Dr. Copan, I appreciate the
opportunity to visit with you again.
Article 1 of Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants the
Congress the power to fix the standard of weight and measure.
And Congress created NIST and its predecessor agencies to
fulfill that important Federal responsibility. Since 1901, NIST
has been at the forefront of setting those standards for the
United States and the world. Almost every Federal agency and
U.S. industry sector uses the standards and the measurements
and the certification services that NIST labs provide. I think
many of our constituents may not appreciate how fundamental
this work is to our economy and to the national security. From
genetic sequencing to cybersecurity, NIST is at the forefront
of advancing innovation.
As new technologies develop and evolve, NIST's services are
critical. The President's budget request prioritizes
investments in three critical technology areas: Quantum
information science, microelectronics, and artificial
intelligence. These investments will launch discoveries and
advances that will significantly affect America's economy in
the coming decades. I look forward to hearing more about them
today.
NIST also works with small and medium manufacturers to help
them compete in the emerging global marketplace for advanced
manufacturing. By working with industry and universities like
my alma mater Purdue, NIST is helping U.S. manufacturers adopt
new technologies and processes to overcome shared technical
obstacles. The adoption of new technologies is speeding up and
improving development, driving efficiencies in production, and
enabling new business models. I look forward to discussing what
the next steps should be for the public-private sector
partnership in manufacturing.
Finally, NIST plays a critical role in our Nation's
cybersecurity. NIST provides mandatory guidelines and standards
to help reduce cyber risk to Federal agencies and critical
infrastructure. NIST also provides voluntary standards for the
private sector.
One of the great challenges of the 21st century is
cybersecurity. It is imperative that we do everything we can to
protect our citizens and their privacy. The President's budget
request prioritizes NIST's cybersecurity work, and I hope to
learn more about those efforts today.
We have a constitutional obligation and a responsibility to
ensure every taxpayer dollar spent is used as effectively and
efficiently as possible. I appreciate that today's hearing
gives us the opportunity to fulfill that duty, and I thank Dr.
Copan for being here today and yield back the balance of my
time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the
Chairwoman of the Full Committee, Ms. Johnson, for an opening
statement.
Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much and good morning
and welcome to Dr. Copan before this Committee, really for the
first time, so--and in this hearing today, we will review the
Administration's Fiscal Year 2020 budget request for the
National Institute of Standards and Technology.
In short, it is a myopic and harmful request given NIST's
critical role in our Nation's economic competitiveness and
national security. Once again, the Administration is proposing
deep cuts to NIST's important work across nearly the entire
portfolio of the agency, from its basic measurement science to
its industrial partnerships. The consequences of the 35-day
partial government shutdown that closed NIST's doors this past
winter may be instructive if this budget proposal is enacted.
The shutdown of NIST's neutron research facility, according
to NIST's own briefing materials, had repercussions on
important industrial research and delayed the Ph.D. work of
many graduate students who represent our future capacity to
lead and innovate. Yet this budget proposes to cut--to shut
down two of the facility's instruments and reduce maintenance
funding, ensuring that the entire facility will have more
frequent shutdowns.
The shutdown resulted in lost opportunities and delays in
research critical to U.S. competitiveness, including research
in advanced computing and communications. Yet this budget
proposes to eliminate programs addressing multiple information
technologies and data challenges.
The shutdown resulted in NIST's inability to participate in
and contribute to important international dialog addressing
emerging technology issues that will shape the future economy
such as cybersecurity, Internet of Things, and digital
connectivity. Yet this budget proposes to lay off 17 percent of
NIST's scientists and engineers, the very U.S. experts who are
needed to participate in the international discussions. Those
are just three examples out of many.
It should be puzzling to all of us that the Administration
can be so devoted to ``cut, cut, cut'' that they don't stop to
think about the consequences of the cuts, even when the
evidence is laid bare before them. NIST gets much more--much
less recognition and support than it deserves, among both the
general public and the political leadership in Washington.
While this hearing is to examine the troubling consequences
of the 2020 budget request, it is also an opportunity to bring
positive attention to NIST's mission and the critical work of
NIST's dedicated scientists and engineers. I thank you, Dr.
Copan, for being here this morning, and I look forward to the
discussion. Thank you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Stevens. The Chair now recognizes the Ranking
Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Lucas, for an opening
statement.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Chairwoman Stevens and Ranking Member
Baird, for holding this hearing today. And thank you, Dr.
Copan, for being here to testify on the National Institute of
Standards and Technology's priorities for Fiscal Year 2020.
Many Americans may not know just how important and far-
reaching this work is and how much it impacts our lives and
businesses. For example, NIST keeps the official time for the
United States with cutting-edge atomic clocks. This may seem
trivial, but this precise and accurate time keeps our GPS
system working. NIST conducts research and develops standards
for building codes and new materials. In my home State of
Oklahoma, NIST has provided critical research and guidance for
constructing tornado-resistant buildings and infrastructures.
NIST also plays an important role in cybersecurity. NIST
sets mandatory guidelines and standards for Federal agencies
and provides voluntary standards for private industry. The NIST
Cybersecurity Framework is considered the gold standard for
cyber protection. Private industry trusts NIST because it has a
track record of providing high-quality, reliable measurement
and standards service and information. The world-class
scientists and facilities at NIST help give United States
industry a competitive edge that we must maintain.
The President's budget request prioritizes funding at NIST
in three new areas that are critical to national security and
the economy, including the National Quantum Initiative,
microelectronics, and artificial intelligence, and I look
forward to hearing more about these new efforts.
This Committee has a long, bipartisan record of support for
NIST and its contributions to research and development. Our
challenge is to set funding priorities that ensure America
remains a leader in science and technology, while being able to
balance the government's budget.
I'll remind my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the
President's budget proposal is just the start of the budget
process. Under the Constitution, the President proposes but
Congress decides how much will be funded. It is our job to
ensure taxpayer dollars are properly spent, and this hearing is
the next step in that process.
Thank you, and I yield back, Madam Chair.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lucas follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Stevens. If there are any Members who wish to
submit additional opening statements, your statements will be
added to the record at this point.
At this time, I would like to introduce our witness. Dr.
Walter G. Copan was confirmed as Undersecretary of Commerce for
Standards and Technology and NIST Director in October 2017.
Prior to joining NIST, Dr. Copan founded and served in
leadership positions for several innovation and technology
transfer organizations and companies. Dr. Copan was formerly
Managing Director of Technology Commercialization and
Partnerships at the Department of Energy's Brookhaven National
Laboratory and Principal Licensing Executive for Technology
Transfer at Department of Energy--DOE's--National Renewable
Energy Laboratory.
Dr. Copan received his Ph.D. in physical chemistry,
bachelor-of-science degree in chemistry, and bachelor-of-arts
degree in music from Case Western Reserve University.
Dr. Copan, as you should know, you will have 5 minutes for
your spoken testimony. Your written testimony will be included
in the record for the hearing. When you've completed your
spoken testimony, we will begin the questions. Each Member will
have 5 minutes to question the panel--or you. And with that,
Dr. Copan, your 5 minutes begins.
TESTIMONY OF HON. DR. WALTER G. COPAN,
UNDERSECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR STANDARDS
AND TECHNOLOGY, AND DIRECTOR OF NIST
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much. Chairwoman Stevens, Ranking
Member Baird, Chair Johnson, and Ranking Member Lucas, thank
you so much for being here, together with the Committee
Members. I'm Dr. Walter Copan, 16th Director of the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, and I am deeply
honored to serve our Nation at this world-leading science and
technology institute and to advance its mission for our
economy, for innovation, and for U.S. industrial
competitiveness.
In this role I serve as the President's principal advisor
on standards policy, and standards are more important than ever
before, essential to commerce and to global trade. Thank you
again for the opportunity to testify today before you on the
proposed fiscal budget for 2020 for NIST. I'm deeply grateful
to this Committee for your continued work on behalf of NIST,
its people, programs, and facilities.
NIST, as has already been said, plays a unique role as the
measurement science institute of the United States. Advances in
precision measurement enable advancing the frontiers of science
itself, as well as engineering and manufacturing. As one of
America's great women of science, U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Grace
Hopper said, ``One accurate measurement is worth a thousand
expert opinions.'' This is why NIST is such a vital partner to
U.S. industry, to academia, and to all of government.
The Fiscal Year 2020 budget request continues this
Administration's effort to manage fiscal spending and to put
the Nation on a sustainable path. The budget request for NIST
aligns with the Administration's key priorities. The
Administration requests $686.8 million for NIST in Fiscal Year
2020. This will support the Administration's efforts to lead
the industries of the future by prioritizing Federal investment
in key technology areas: Artificial intelligence, quantum
science and engineering, advanced manufacturing,
microelectronics, and advanced communications, including 5G,
while maintaining NIST's core measurement science standards,
technology, and cybersecurity capabilities.
NIST is the best in the world in its metrology mission, as
evidenced by the unanimous agreement of the nations of the
world to redefine the International System of Units in
Versailles, France last November. NIST's leadership in this
monumental achievement for universally accurate measurements,
now based on the unchanging constants of nature, is rooted in
our core values of excellence and perseverance, integrity, and
inclusivity.
The budget requests $611.7 million for the Scientific and
Technical Research Services account. This funds the NIST
research programs, the frontiers of measurement science, which
enable technology development in our manufacturing progress.
NIST research and services are central to U.S. innovation,
economic, and national security. Studies show that for every
single dollar invested in NIST creates over $50 of direct value
for the American economy.
Let me highlight some of our proposed investment increases:
$8 million increase for artificial intelligence to expand our
ongoing research, measurements, and standards supporting the
market adoption of AI technologies; increase of $10 million for
microelectronics to advance measurement science standards and
new materials; an increase of $10 million for quantum science
and engineering and industry consortium collaborations to
accelerate quantum R&D (research and development) and its
applications. This aligns with the White House strategy for
quantum information science and with the National Quantum
Initiative Act, which was championed by this Committee and
passed by Congress earlier this year. NIST has a critically
important role in this initiative.
NIST is the Department of Commerce's lead agency for
cybersecurity, and the FY 2020 request maintains strong support
for cybersecurity and privacy, including the full funding for
the NIST Cybersecurity Center of Excellence.
With this budget, NIST will focus on critical priority
areas of science and technology such as the standards
accelerating deployment of next-generation communications
technologies, including 5G, and NIST's work is essential for
interoperable secure systems, self-driving vehicles, the
Internet of Things, drones, trusted AI applications.
The Fiscal Year 2020 budget request for the NIST
Manufacturing USA program is $15.2 million. The request
continues to fund the National Institute for Innovation and
Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals in Delaware, as well as
program coordination for Manufacturing USA network.
In addition, the FY 2020 request includes $59.9 million for
construction, including maintenance, improvements, and
renovation of NIST facilities. It also requests $288 million
for needed renovations to Building 1 in Boulder, Colorado, to
be funded through a new General Services Administration (GSA)
capital revolving fund.
In conclusion, NIST's broad technical portfolio, scientific
and engineering depth positions the agency to contribute
effectively to emerging national needs. With NIST's brilliant
dedicated staff, unique facilities, and trusted, objective,
nonregulatory role, we are positioned to continue delivering
high-leverage impact for our economy, quality-of-life, and
national security. Thank you again for this opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Copan follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you, Dr. Copan.
At this point we will begin our first round of questions,
and the Chair recognizes herself for 5 minutes.
Dr. Copan, our Committee recently held a hearing on the
importance of the Manufacturing USA program started in the
Obama Administration. In addition to housing one of the
institutes, NIST has played a leading role among the
Manufacturing USA institutes writ large. And based on the
feedback that we received during the hearing and over time from
various stakeholders, the Committee is looking at reauthorizing
the program and updating it where necessary. What
recommendations, if any, do you have for continuing to
strengthening the Manufacturing USA program so that it can meet
its statutory goals? And I'm also particularly interested in
your views of the interagency work as it relates to R&D and
technology transfer throughout the supply chain and workforce
development. Thank you.
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Stevens.
Manufacturing USA has been an outstanding program for the
country, and it represents really one of our leading public-
private partnerships. It brings together industry, academia,
and government to address the main challenges of the future. We
have seen that the institutes have delivered great value. There
is uncertainty currently in terms of future funding for the
institutes and for maintaining their mission, but the program
of engagement and also the open competition process that was
utilized for funding and initiating the National Institute for
Innovation and Manufacturing of Biopharmaceuticals, which is
closely engaged with NIST and located in Delaware, has been an
outstanding example of delivering value to the business
community, as well as to ensure the retooling of the American
workforce.
I encourage this Committee to continue its work in looking
to the future of the reauthorization of the Manufacturing USA
program, the RAMI (Revitalize American Manufacturing and
Innovation Act of 2013) legislation as well, and we look
forward to engaging with you to ensure that you have the
information required so that the best decisions are made.
Chairwoman Stevens. Dr. Copan, I'm also particularly
interested in NIST's scientific and technical research
services, in particular your lab programs, advanced
communications networks and scientific data systems, which the
current budget proposes a 41.2 percent decrease in funding,
advanced manufacturing and material measurement, cybersecurity
and privacy, exploratory measurement sciences, biosciences,
fundamental measurement, quantum science and measurement and
dissemination.
And in part with your labs I was recently at the Canadian
Embassy, and they were reflecting on their partnership with
several European countries in artificial intelligence. And I
got a little elbow nudge saying, well, we're waiting for the
United States to jump in and to show us the way.
And the current, you know, budget kind of doesn't do enough
for what I'd like to see us doing in the advanced
communications network, with AI and the IOT space, I think this
is a real role for leadership. But I don't think our labs are
getting enough attention in NIST. And what I'd love for you to
reflect on here is how you're working if at all throughout the
Federal Government with other agencies informing interagency
collaborations.
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much for that question, Chairwoman
Stevens. NIST indeed is a great collaborator across the entire
Federal network. With artificial intelligence we're actually
the co-leads of the National Science and Technology Council's
expert committee on AI, and also have leading engagements
around the industrial and other applications, such as the
Internet of Things. The collaborations are very strong. We have
an opportunity, I believe, for the Nation to step forward and
to demonstrate leadership because the collaborations are there.
I believe that NIST has generally taken a bit of a low-key
approach, and some of the comments made by the Members this
morning have reinforced that perception.
But I believe we do have the chance because we are rooted
in the integrity of science and the ability of using
measurements to assure the trustworthiness of artificial
intelligence systems to advance U.S. leadership globally in
artificial intelligence, AI, and advanced communications, and a
series of other important fields that you've mentioned. Thank
you.
Chairwoman Stevens. And with my remaining time, I would
just like to commend you for your recent report on the return
on investment, which I think showcased some of this interagency
work and the collaboration that we're seeing throughout our
government as it pertains to scientific advancement and the
work of NIST, and thank you for your leadership and your
phenomenal team.
Now, I'd like to recognize Mr. Baird for 5 minutes.
Mr. Baird. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Dr. Copan, since 1901--and we made reference to this
earlier in her questioning and comments--NIST has been at the
forefront of setting standards for the United States and the
world. I understand that over 400 NIST staff regularly
participate in international standards activities, as technical
experts and in leadership roles. So I guess my question has two
parts. Would you mind elaborating on what the value is to have
our own NIST experts participate in those kind of programs? And
then how does this affect our broader U.S. effort to lead in
emerging technologies like the quantum and the AI that you made
reference to, please?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Baird. The
role that NIST plays in setting standards is both a national
and a global role. NIST coordinates with other agencies across
the Federal Government to ensure that the Federal Government's
standards needs are addressed with one voice in a coordinated
way. NIST also works as a partner to U.S. industry to ensure
that in national, as well as international negotiations, that
the U.S. positions are well-coordinated and articulated to
ensure that U.S. industries' needs are at the forefront of the
standards-setting process.
Documentary standards are a negotiation process that affect
both the key players across industry, as well as the key
players across international boundaries. We are now seeing for
the first time a highly organized international competition for
standards setting. NIST's role in this process, is of course,
to continue to provide the leadership that's established
through our technical leadership within each of the science and
technology committees where we have a role but also to provide
the underpinning technical excellence that's needed to guide
the standards negotiators who may be leading committees on
behalf of the United States' interest.
And so with this changing dynamic internationally, it's
important for us to remember that of course this is a free-
market society, and each company has freedom to negotiate for
its own internal corporate strategic needs and goals. And so it
winds up being a challenge for us sometimes to ensure that
those industry players actually do speak together with one
voice, that the outcomes that are most important for U.S.
leadership in these emerging fields are ultimately achieved,
and within the international standards process, we have seen
other nations now taking a much more aggressive position for
committee leadership to try to dominate committees that are in
their nation's best interest. And so it's important for U.S.
industry to remain highly engaged. And recommendations have
come from the ROI Initiative that Chairman Stevens had
referenced, talks about encouraging U.S. industry once again to
fully engage in this process. Thank you.
Mr. Baird. One additional question, as we all know, the
world is becoming more and more interconnected, as you made
reference to, and the relative insecurity of many devices
present enormous challenges. And that's why I've cosponsored
H.R. 1668, the Internet of Cybersecurity and Improvement Act of
2019. So if you could, how does this budget proposal support
NIST's examination of the IOT capabilities and the growing
measurement and security challenges created by the convergence
of digital technologies with the physical world?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Baird.
Cybersecurity is obviously a top priority for NIST. It's a top
priority for the Nation, and thank you so much for your
leadership in that effort. The budget proposal for NIST for
2020 maintains our core capabilities for cybersecurity, as well
as our commitments to advance the privacy framework and the
privacy agenda for this Nation in an open, transparent, and
collaborative process with stakeholders from the public and the
private sectors.
The National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence is one of
the leading centers globally for the Internet of Things and for
its assessment for the evaluation of vulnerabilities and for
the determination of interoperability and standards challenges
and opportunities, together with the players across multiple
U.S. industry sectors. Thank you.
Mr. Baird. Thank you very much, and I yield back my time.
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you. And before we move to our
next round of questioning, I'd just like to welcome the
students that I think made their way into the Committee
hearing. Do you mind identifying yourself quickly and where you
all are from?
Voice. We're from Paul VI Catholic High School in Fairfax.
Chairwoman Stevens. Wonderful. Well, welcome to the
committee of the future. This is the Science, Space, and
Technology Committee. It is the Subcommittee for Research and
Technology. You are dipping into the future with us, and you
are seizing hold of a vision of that future, so thank you, and
welcome to the hearing.
I now recognize our Chairwoman, Ms. Johnson, for 5 minutes
of questioning.
Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you very much. And I will add my
welcome for the students as well.
Dr. Copan, what analyses did the Administration use in
deciding what programs to prioritize or eliminate?
Dr. Copan. Thank you very much for that question,
Chairwoman Johnson. The analysis that was utilized to make
these decisions I don't have the exact insight. I know that
there have been very clear statements made by the
Administration, and NIST certainly was at the table in defining
the key industries of the future and the requirements to invest
for ongoing U.S. competitiveness. And so it's been the NIST
response to the budget proposal from the Administration to do
the very best that we could in laying out our priorities to
meet also our legislative mandates in stepping up to ensuring
that the core initiatives for the Nation around artificial
intelligence, around the future of the U.S. microelectronics
industry, for the future of quantum science, which represents
both a great opportunity as well as a threat to our secure
communications and cryptography. And so the NIST response quite
clearly had to reflect those national priorities in our budget
response.
Chairwoman Johnson. What is the state of the facilities of
NIST's campuses, and what is the impact of NIST's ability to
carry out its mission with this proposed direction of the
Administration?
Dr. Copan. This Administration has very clearly made a
strong point about the importance of U.S. infrastructure and
investment in the infrastructure requirements of the future.
And I believe that the U.S. science and technology
infrastructure is an essential element of U.S. leadership. The
ability to carry out state-of-the-art research in state-of-the-
art facilities or at least facilities that are trustworthy in
their performance is an essential element that we're looking
forward to the future of NIST.
The budget request for NIST is a significant reduction from
our previous levels, but we will certainly be as responsive as
we can to make the most of the investments in the facilities,
and I'm encouraged by the opportunity to finance the $288
million that's needed for our Building 1 reconstruction in
Boulder, Colorado, with a creative financing approach through
the GSA revolving fund that's been proposed.
Chairwoman Johnson. OK. What would be the impact of the
proposed budget on U.S. leadership in international standards
development, including for emerging technologies?
Dr. Copan. Thank you very much for that question. NIST is
committed to do the very best it can with the budget that we
are ultimately allocated through this process, and we're so
grateful for the work of this Committee to ask the questions
about these issues. We have had certainly publicized challenges
that have been created through failures of NIST's
infrastructure, our water systems, our electrical systems,
flooding in buildings, and so on. We have a very resilient
team, and so they have worked in a very cost-effective way
within the funding that's been made available.
The NIST maintenance budget itself, just according to
government standards, would be on the order of $140-150 million
per year just to maintain the systems, and that does not even
refer to the rebuilding process that we've just described the
needs for. And so I look forward to the work of this Committee.
As Chairwoman Stevens had encouraged the Committee Members,
we invite you to come out to make a visit to Gaithersburg or to
Boulder, see the leading-edge science that's done in our
facilities and how we can make the most of the facilities in
sometimes challenging conditions to still carry out leading-
edge science for this Nation for our global leadership.
Chairwoman Johnson. Well, thank you. Now, has NIST done any
recent workforce planning, and do you face some graying of your
technical workforce? And how are you planning to deal with
that?
Dr. Copan. Thank you. And I'm glad that we have the next
generation of NIST scientists in this room with us today. This
is wonderful because we look to the next generation. NIST's
workforce planning focuses around the industries, the trends of
the future. Measurement science is at the core of our ability
to lead. And, as I indicated in my opening remarks, to measure
ultimately enables the United States to lead.
And so the workforce requirements that we've identified for
both NIST and for the Nation focus on the requirements of our
country for communications technologies, for cybersecurity, for
advanced materials, and for the people involved in the field of
artificial intelligence. NIST has issued a report on the future
of cybersecurity education in this country, and that's tied
with the curriculum and the expectations of the NIST
cybersecurity education program.
And the other elements that we see that are so important
are the future of our advanced telecommunications, as well as
the chip designs of the future. We've issued a workforce on
those electronic systems as well.
Chairwoman Johnson. Thank you. I yield back my time.
Chairwoman Stevens. I now recognize Mr. Marshall for 5
minutes.
Mr. Marshall. Yes, thank you, Chairwoman. I think first I
just want to compliment all my fellow minority Members for
making it to these hearings, and it looks like that once again
the dais kind of tilted over here toward our right, so I
appreciate the participation.
My first question, Dr. Copan, would be to do with
cybersecurity framework, which has been a success. In September
2018, NIST announced the launch of its privacy framework
effort. It's intended to complement the cybersecurity framework
to help organizations manage privacy risk. Maybe got two or
three questions. You can bundle them together here. How is the
development of the privacy framework progressing? What's NIST
heard from government, industry, academia regarding the
usefulness or necessity of guidance like the privacy framework?
Is it something government and industry have asked for or
suggestions that might be helpful in managing their privacy
risk?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much, Congressman. This is a key
area of NIST's focus currently. NIST launched its work in the
development of the privacy framework actually at the
encouragement of the private sector, who was being challenged
with a patchwork of regulations that they were seeing to manage
across the United States, as well as globally. And the success
that we've had in the cybersecurity framework was seen as an
excellent model. It's one where the private sector, government,
public-sector entities could collaborate and look to the
aspirations of the future to have a framework that truly
represents best practices and not a regulatory approach, a
checkbox kind of mindset. Industry has appreciated so much the
approach of having a framework that looks always to managing
the risk environment, the threat environment.
And so after the launch of the privacy framework activities
in which I've been personally involved and delighted to
support, NIST has had several public engagement opportunities
to bring feedback together. On February 27, we issued a
framework outline and initial summary of feedback received from
public--private sector stakeholders. We are planning our
follow-up workshop in Atlanta, Georgia, May 13 and 14. We had
originally planned that during February, but a certain thing
called a government funding lapse kind of got in the way.
But we are pleased that we're back on track. We're looking
to make a lot of progress this year, and we're anticipating a
working draft of this framework for public feedback within the
next several months.
Mr. Marshall. Great. Let's talk about microelectronics for
a second. As a physician, I've always been curious about the
microelectronics, and it's been actually like 20 years ago,
that they introduced these little cameras that they could drop
into someone's mouth and it would go through the stomach and
the small intestines and of course through the colon as well.
Anybody who's had the pleasure of an EGD
(esophagogastroduodenoscopy) or a colonoscopy, this was great
promise, but yet it's still not really taken hold. It's still
not the gold standard. We're still doing of course
colonoscopies and EGDs. So you've got $10 million for the
microelectronics. Maybe just share a little bit more about it
and its importance to United States' security and economic
competitiveness and access to trusted and assured
microelectronics.
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much for that question in follow
up, Congressman. Microelectronics have been a core of U.S.
industrial leadership, and I'm pleased to indicate that NIST
has been involved from the very beginning of the NIST
electronic industry initiatives to enable industry to measure,
to create the kind of standards that are necessary to have the
advances in medicine, in communications, in computational
technologies, and so on. Our budget proposal would really
increase our ongoing efforts in the development of
measurements.
New materials are absolutely critical to achieve the kind
of device miniaturization and high degrees of performance and
also to be able to have the kind of connectivity that's
necessary and the ability to do remote medicine, for example,
and to have patients in other parts of the Nation who can take
advantage of 5G communications technologies that connect with
microelectronics systems and enable intelligent personalized
medical procedures to be carried out.
It's so important to have a rigorous standardization
process as well, and NIST works closely with industry to ensure
that in all aspects from the manufacturing process to the
standards of commerce and how these systems will be used, and
now we're working on standardization for all radiological
devices and for magnetic resonance imaging because there's been
so much repeated testing that's been done because of that lack
of standardization. We look forward to that work continuing
under this increased funding. Thank you.
Mr. Marshall. Thank you so much. I yield back.
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr.
Foster for 5 minutes.
Mr. Foster. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for
coming here to try to clear some things up for us. I'd like to
talk briefly about the budget cuts to some centers. You're
planning to end your $15 million Centers for Excellence
program, which currently sponsors three centers dedicated to
advanced materials, as you just mentioned the importance of,
also community resilience and forensic science.
And so I'm very concerned about this, you know,
particularly the Advanced Materials Center for Excellence,
which is located near my district in Illinois. The center was
awarded in December 2013 to the Center for Hierarchical
Materials Design, which is a partnership, which I'm going to
also return to, between the DOE national labs, Argonne and
Northwestern University and the University of Chicago, and
others. And not only does this center employ people living near
my district, but the research has the potential to
revolutionize materials science. The current research spans
metals, polymers, biological materials with applications in
areas such as electronics, energy, aerospace, health care, and
so on. Do you view these as unimportant technologies? What is
the motivation for shutting these down?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much, Congressman, for that
question. Indeed, the centers that you're talking about,
including CHiMaD (Center for Hierarchical Materials Design) in
Illinois, has been an absolutely outstanding example of public-
private partnerships. It's delivered tremendous value through
what's called a Materials Genome Initiative that's enabled the
effective creation of the application of artificial
intelligence machine learning to the much more rapid design of
materials. We are very pleased with the work of these programs.
We do see that they will have ongoing benefit, including in the
microelectronics area that I just described.
But under these budget proposals, difficult decisions need
to be made. And in order to be able to carry out the priority
needs of the industries of the future, these tough choices
unfortunately have resulted in these proposed changes. And so
we look forward to working with this Committee on the budget
implications, anything that we can do to provide insights on
the work that's planned and the ramifications, and we look
forward to the ongoing efforts of the Committee on behalf of
the budget process to be brought to completion.
Mr. Foster. Yes. Now, when you see the budget jerked around
this way, a program ramped up and then abruptly cutoff, do you
have a feeling from what sort of violence that does to the
attitudes of the incoming workforce to know that they may be
starting down a road that will be slammed shut without warning
by a future Administration such as we're facing?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much for that question. It is
indeed challenging. NIST has a wonderful global reputation, and
we look forward to continuing to be able to provide the kind of
leadership opportunities for science and technology for the
brightest and best of American talent in the future. It does
create challenges certainly, and we work hard at NIST to keep
people focused on their mission and regardless of budget ups
and downs--and some of our people have been through these
journeys during previous cycles, as you've intimated. And they
look forward to the hard work of this Committee to make sure
that the right choices are ultimately made and that the long-
term strategic goals of this Nation are ultimately addressed
regardless of Administration, regardless of political cycle,
that we can ensure that American leadership is secured.
Mr. Foster. Yes, but sometimes obviously the wrong choices
can be made at the top-line level in the budgets from which you
cannot--no amount of brilliance, you know, down deeper in the
budget can recover from.
Dr. Copan. Thanks for that question. We count on the
brilliance of Congress to work on budget issues. We recognize,
as I believe our Ranking Member had indicated early on, that
the budget proposal is the beginning of the journey, and we
look forward to the fiscal accountability, as well as to the
needs of the Nation ultimately to be exercised as a result of
the process.
Mr. Foster. OK. I'm pretty sure I can read between the
lines of what you're saying, and we're on your side in this.
And I just wish you luck in all your negotiations upwards in
the org chart. Thanks much, and I yield back.
Dr. Copan. Thank you.
Chairwoman Stevens. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Gonzalez
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Dr. Copan.
Great to see a fellow Clevelander. Welcome. Great to see you,
high school students. You're probably more brilliant than us,
despite what Dr. Copan just said, so you'll see that as this
unfolds.
So I think there's a lot to be excited about with the
current state of the economy, right? GDP is around 3 percent,
unemployment all-time low, wages finally starting to rise. We
can go through a whole litany of data that would suggest that
in the present moment the economy is doing better than it has
in a very, very long time.
This Committee is largely about balancing present with
future priorities, one of the reasons I love this Committee so
much, and when I look at the state of the global economy and
who our main competitors are and what we are going to be
competing on, it's China and cutting-edge technologies. That is
the race that we have to win. They know they have to win that.
They're investing like crazy. They're focused. They're very
diligent about it and cheating in a lot of ways, but, if
nothing else, they're focused.
My concern when I look at the budget is I'm worried that
maybe we're pulling back when I think we should be pressing
forward on some of these cutting-edge technologies. So my first
question would just be a basic one. With respect to the budget
for NIST, were you consulted, was NIST consulted, and how much
on this particular budget?
Dr. Copan. Thank you very much, Congressman Gonzalez, and
thank you for representing Ohio and northeastern Ohio in
particular. The budget process is one that I don't have full
transparency to in terms of the way in which the initial work
has been carried out. I know that as the proposal came to NIST,
we have done our very best to be able to respond to work with
the Department of Commerce. Secretary Ross certainly has been
involved in those negotiations and been looking after the
broader interests of the Department of Commerce. And of course
we're in the midst of preparing for the decennial census, which
is another challenge for budget realities.
Mr. Gonzalez. Thank you. And then specifically on the
manufacturing side, this proposal would eliminate the MEP
program I believe. And, as you know, in northeast Ohio we take
pride in our manufacturing base. We're excited about it, and we
want to make sure that we're always at the cutting edge. So if
this were to go through or if not, how would you make sure that
we aren't losing our edge in the manufacturing sector?
Dr. Copan. Thanks so much for that question. And indeed, as
the United States is looking at this particular budget and
fiscal responsibility and the U.S. deficit, we also are facing
unprecedented global challenge. And you mentioned China in
particular. I indicated earlier the highly organized way in
which China is working to achieve strategic advantage for its
companies and its national interests.
U.S. manufacturing is the heartbeat of this Nation, and as
people make things, they learn things, and we've seen that in
Manufacturing USA, we've seen that in our Manufacturing
Extension Partnerships. The Manufacturing Extension
Partnerships has been a long-term success for this Nation.
Fritz Hollings just passed away, and it was a great gift that
he gave to the U.S. in his legacy that he leaves with the MEP.
We would anticipate that under this budget scenario that
the MEP centers, if they do indeed lose Federal funding, would
have to work closely with NIST to try to transition to an
entirely different funding model. They would need to find
funding from the private sector to find new ways of increasing
their funding base from their client companies. States, of
course, and economic development organizations, the non-profit
sector has an important role to play there, but we realize that
if the budget would go through in this particular case, that
there would be an important transition process to ensure that
the long-term impacts of the MEP, such an important part of the
U.S. manufacturing sector, could continue to deliver value for
the Nation.
Mr. Gonzalez. Great. And then with my final question, with
respect to standards and codifying standards internationally,
what is NIST doing to ensure that the 5G standards are
developed in a collaborative manner? And how is it working with
international, interagency partners to ensure that we don't get
locked into a Chinese 5G standard?
Dr. Copan. Yes, thanks so much for that question. 5G is
absolutely essential. NIST is highly involved in that, and in
the budget scenario, even though the overall budget bucket that
includes advanced communications technologies has been reduced
in the budget response, our work in continuing 5G to maintain
U.S. leadership, to work with U.S. industry players, and to
ensure that U.S. industry interests are represented in the
global standards fora is an absolute top priority for us, and
we would look forward to continuing that close engagement for
American leadership.
Mr. Gonzalez. Great. Thank you, Dr. Copan, and I yield
back.
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you so much. It's certainly a
great day when we can dive a little bit deep. And for me it's
fair to say I came here for the Manufacturing Extension
Partnership centers. We're so admiring of what MEP has been
able to do across the country, and we also recognize that words
matter, that budgets matter. And while I don't expect MEP to be
eradicated, I will repeat what I said in my opening remarks,
which is $16 billion in sales, $1.7 billion in cost savings, $4
billion in new client investments, and more than 122,000 jobs
created or retained at a total cost of $140 million. This is a
best practice in our country. And so I will bellow here in this
Committee and anywhere that folks will listen about how
important the Manufacturing Extension Partnership centers are
to regional economies like mine in southeastern Michigan and
many of my colleagues.
I also appreciate the dialog that I have with my Ranking
Member, Mr. Baird, who is what I consider a budget expert but
also a believer and a fan and doer for the sciences and
workforce development and advanced manufacturing growth. So
rest assured we have a great partnership here and a commitment
to progress.
And now I would like to recognize Ms. Herrera Beutler for 5
minutes.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you. Just a couple quick
clarifications. This is the first time on this Subcommittee.
I'm new to the Committee, but I'm not new to Congress. I
actually serve on the Appropriations Committee. And just for
clarity's sake, there has been a recommendation from the
Administration, and that recommendation from the Administration
is bound under current law, meaning that the law that Congress
passed is what they're writing their budget to.
The majority here in the House, which would be the
Democratic party, has the authority to put forward a new budget
with higher levels with which you can then draw your budget. Am
I correct in that?
Dr. Copan. I believe that how you've described it is
accurate, yes.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Yes. So as someone who has yet--you
know, I serve on Appropriations, and we are waiting for a
budget direction from the majority party as to how to allocate
our Subcommittee assignments, including the Department of
Commerce and including NIST under that umbrella. We stand ready
to make sure that we are appropriately allocating funding,
manufacturing extended partnerships, and all the like. I mean,
I think manufacturing is one of the things that's helping drive
our economy. We want to see that continue.
And you know, I've heard a lot of comments about the
budget, but I just wanted to remind folks that the majority
here in the House has the authority to say thank you but no
thank you to the recommendation from this Administration or
any. You know, having served under the last Administration,
they put forward recommendations based on current law that we
took some of and we didn't take some of.
So before everybody gets all panicked about this, I would
just remind the majority they have the authority to increase
your budget, and I think many of this on this side of the aisle
support making sure that you can continue to do this work
because we're seeing the benefit of it in our districts, in our
regions.
And what I really love is the commitment to the public-
private partnership because I think that's one of the areas
where we get the science out of the academia, we get it out of
the theoretical and into practice. And there's so many in the
private sector within the innovating sector I would say who are
just raring to go. And you play such an important role, so
thank you.
Dr. Copan. Thank you.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. I just wanted to get that
clarification on record.
And in that vein, you know, my district in southwest
Washington I often refer to as a silicone forest. We used to
have a lot more development in our timber and timber
manufacturing, which I'd like to see continue, but now we have
a growing silicone forest essentially where we're manufacturing
chips and wafers and technology. And I feel like, you know, you
all responding and meeting some of those needs. I wanted to ask
about the Return on Investment Initiative for Unleashing
American Innovation. That's a long one--which is focused on
coordinating and improving technology transfer programs across
Federal agencies. So what role--this is--again, I'm learning
here--does NIST play in promoting the transfer of technology
from federally funded R&D to the private sector?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much for that question, for the
comments that you've laid out in terms of clarifying the budget
process and the expectations. And I'm delighted that the work
that NIST has been doing across the country and also in
Washington has delivered such benefit. It's also an important
part of retooling industry with new technologies and keeping
the United States' manufacturers at the leading edge.
NIST plays a very important role in the U.S. innovation
system because we do have oversight for some of the important
legislation and policy about Federal technology transfers. For
example, the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 truly enabled our Nation's
universities and many of our Federal labs to partner with
industry to hold intellectual property and to ensure that it
resulted in value for the economy through licensing, through
new company startups. And so that legislation had an
underpinning well before the digital economy.
There are many things that are changing about public-
private partnerships. We need much faster, much more agile and
flexible tools to enable industry, academia, and government
entities to engage.
You are aware of my background in this field of innovation
and tech transfer, and I'm highly passionate to see the value
ROI created from our Nation's investment in basic science. And
no matter how much we invest that we'll get more value from
that by streamlining regulation, by removing known barriers or
those uncertainties for the private-sector investment, and
ultimately to enable so much more value to come for our economy
and for our people from this investment.
We've seen China and other nations have dramatically higher
trajectories later of their intellectual property filings, as
well as their work in standardization. These are areas that we
are very focused upon in the United States, and so we need the
Federal labs actually to have more access to intellectual
property protections not only in this country but around the
world to enable U.S. industry to compete globally.
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you so much. How lucky we are to
have an appropriator on our Committee who seems to intend to
reject the cuts to MEP. The majority certainly is eager to make
the intended investments to advance our scientific and research
agenda.
And a district that, you know, is south of Olympia and
Aberdeen and just north of Portland might not seem to have too
much in common with metro Detroit, but they're both export
destinations, and they're both regions that are contingent on a
robust supply chain and technology sectors. And when I look to
our audience, the reason why we have these debates and
discussions and why sometimes things in the budget become
upsetting like a cut to the Special Olympics or a cut to an
educational research program is because this is why we're doing
this is, we're doing this for the students. We're doing this
for the next generation. We're doing this to leave this place
better than we found it. So thank you.
I now yield to or recognize Mr. Balderson for 5 minutes.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Dr. Copan, thank
you for being here this morning and welcome, students, also.
I had the chance to ask about the Manufacturing Extension
Partnership, which has had some discussion here this morning.
And we've also had discussions in previous Committee hearings.
This program has helped businesses in my district, which is
also located in central Ohio----
Dr. Copan. Yes.
Mr. Balderson [continuing]. Innovate and adapt to changing
marketplace, as well as improve their products overall. Can you
speak to how NIST is leading the way in leveraging the public-
private partnership as a way of sparking innovation and
improving the American industrial competitiveness?
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much, Congressman Balderson. Thank
you for your service to the Nation and to Ohio. The public-
private partnership model that we're talking about in this
Committee, the Manufacturing Extension Partnerships is a great
example of leveraging Federal investment with other funding
sources to create much higher value for the economy to address
issues of workforce. I described earlier some of the work that
we do across NIST to look to the workforce needs and to help
prepare the workforce requirements so that, as industries
change and as manufacturing sectors evolve, that we have the
right skills with the right people at the right time for this
Nation.
We're looking forward to a very exciting time of artificial
intelligence, and many of our MEP centers, as well as
Manufacturing USA, are pioneers in the use of robotics
technologies, additive manufacturing, digital manufacturing
concepts that are so important to the supply chain of the
Department of Defense.
It's interesting actually, as we look at Manufacturing USA,
which is a sister public-private partnership that has an
intertwined mission with Manufacturing Extension Partnerships,
that was actually set up after--in a similar vein in Germany at
the Fraunhofer Institutes under the Marshall Plan. And the
United States has recreated its new version of the public-
private partnership as Manufacturing USA in this Nation.
And to follow up on the point that was raised earlier about
follow-on legislation and the importance of that program to
U.S. manufacturers across the Nation and even the access to
facilities such as America Makes in Youngstown and its partner
facilities in other parts of the Nation, it's so important to
revitalize our manufacturing communities across the Nation,
provide them the opportunities to rebuild workforce, as well as
to address new and entrepreneurial opportunities that are
created by industry change.
Mr. Balderson. Well, thank you very much for that answer.
And I look forward to working with you on another Committee
that I serve on, Small Business. Representative Crow from
Colorado is the Chairman, I'm the Ranking Member for the
Innovation and Workforce Development. And this is something
that's a passion of mine and making sure that those jobs are
out there and we educate and train these young adults that are
sitting behind you right now.
My last and final question, as we seek out a higher return
on investment for basic research at the Federal level, can you
share with us how you and your team ensure that NIST
partnerships and research lead industry to develop market-ready
products that will produce this return on taxpayers'
investment?
Dr. Copan. Thank you again, Congressman Balderson. The ROI
initiative is in part looking at some of the structural and
workforce--some of the strategic elements that are so important
for the United States to continue to get value from its Federal
investment in science and technology, at our national
laboratories, at our universities, and in collaborations with
industry. So we look forward to this process going forward.
The Green Paper on the Return on Investment Initiative is
expected to be released within the next several weeks, and we
look forward to continued robust engagement with the community
of practice.
Many of the technologies that come out of the Federal labs
and universities are relatively early-stage, and so as we look
to translational research to get those ready for the commercial
marketplace, that requires getting industry working side-by-
side with our labs and with our universities. And so having the
right kind of incentives, having the right kind of structures
that make it feasible for entrepreneurs to spin out a company
that's based on an emerging technology from our universities
and our Federal labs is absolutely an essential part of this
initiative.
There are many elements. I look forward to working with
you. We work closely across the Federal sector and with the
Small Business Administration as well. The SBIR (Small Business
Innovation Research) program has been a proven strong value for
the Nation's entrepreneurs and represents yet another example
of public-private partnership where strong recommendations have
come out of the ROI Initiative.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you.
Chairwoman Stevens. Thank you. And now three Midwesterners
remain: Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan. We got sworn in, the 116th
Congress, in an interesting time in the middle of a government
shutdown, a partial government shutdown, which we recognize
affected and impacted NIST greatly, furloughed workforce,
people working without pay, and I would like to take a minute
in this hearing to recommit to your workforce, how much they
mean to us, how much their talents mean to our economy, and our
intentions to advance scientific research innovations and grow
regional economies.
Sometimes being in Congress is like being on a boat. There
are two sides of the aisle. It rocks back and forth through
great debate and discourse, but yet we're still all on the same
boat looking up, looking for that North Star, looking for
progress, looking to create the most good.
And so before I bring this Committee hearing to a close, I
would like to thank our sole witness, Dr. Copan, for testifying
before us here today and shouldering all of the questions. You
did a fabulous job.
The record will remain open for 2 weeks for additional
statements from Members or for any other additional questions
the Committee may ask of our witness. The witness is excused,
and the hearing is now adjourned.
Dr. Copan. Thank you so much. Thank you all.
[Whereupon, at 11:13 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]