U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

20–836PDF 2017

AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET PROPOSAL 

FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS 

AND TECHNOLOGY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

March 16, 2016 

Serial No. 114–66 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

RANDY K. WEBER, Texas 

JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

STEVE KNIGHT, California 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

DARIN LAHOOD, Illinois 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

ERIC SWALWELL, California 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts 

DON S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

MARK TAKANO, California 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

HON. BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

DARIN LAHOOD, Illinois 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

ERIC SWALWELL, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

March 16, 2016 

Page 

Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 

Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 

Opening Statements 

Statement by Representative Barbara Comstock, Chairwoman, Subcommittee 

on Research and Technology, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 

U.S. House of Representatives ............................................................................ 7 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 9 

Statement by Representative Elizabeth H. Esty, Subcommittee on Research 

and Technology, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House 

of Representatives ................................................................................................ 11 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 13 

Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ........................................................................................................... 16 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 18 

Statement by Representative Lamar S. Smith, Chairman, Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 21 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 22 

Witness: 

Dr. Willie E. May, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 24 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 27 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 38 

Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions 

Dr. Willie E. May, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology ........... 50 

(1) 

AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET PROPOSAL 

FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 

STANDARDS 

AND TECHNOLOGY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2016 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 

2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Barbara Comstock 

[Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 
2 

lf\MAR S. SM!TH, T ,x-.;~. 

CHA:HMAN 

~ongress of the ~lnited ~rates 

!:'louse of 'lRcprcscntotiocs COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

2321 RAYBURN HOUSt OFFICE BUH .. DING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515~6301 

An Overview of the Budget Proposal for the National Institute 

of Standards and Technology for Fiscal Year 2017 

Wednesday, March 16, 2016 

10:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m. 

2318 Raybmn House Office Bnilding 

Dr. Willie E. May, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director, 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 
3 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY 

HEARING CHARTER 

An Overview of the Budget Proposal for the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

for Fiscal Year 2017 

Purpose 

Wednesday, March 16,2016 

10:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m. 

2318 Rayburn House Office Building 

On Wednesday, March 16, 2016, the Subcommittee on Research and Technology will hold a 

hearing to examine the Administration's proposed fiscal year 2017 (FYI7) budget request for the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). 

Witness 

Dr. Willie E. May, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director, 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Hearing Overview 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a non-regulatory science 

agency within the Department of Commerce. The Institute's mission is to promote U.S. 

innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and 

technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life. By working 

closely alongside industry, NIST is recognized as a provider of high-quality information utilized 

by the private sector. 

This hearing will examine NIST's funding priorities for FY17. The President's budget 

request for N!ST is $1.0 I billion, an increase of$50.5 million (5.2%) from the FY 2016 enacted 

level. Included in this number is a $14.9 million increase for inflationary cost changes. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Overview 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was originally founded in 

1901 as the National Bureau of Standards. A non-regulatory agency within the Department of 

Commerce, NIST works to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing 

measurement science, standards, and technology. By working closely alongside industry, NIST 

has become recognized as a provider of high-quality information utilized by the private sector. 
4 

NIST operates two main research laboratories in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and Boulder, 

Colorado where it employs nearly 3,000 scientists, engineers, technicians, and support 

administrative personnel. In addition, NIST hosts about 3,500 associates and facility users from 

academia, industry, and other government agencies each year. 1 At these locations, NIST 

Laboratories conduct research that advances the nation's technology infrastructure and helps U.S. 

companies continually improve products and services. 

National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) Spending 

(dollars in millions) 

FY17 Request vs. 

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY16 Enacted 

Account Actual Enacted Request $ % 

Scientific & Technical Research and 

Services (STRS) 675.5 690.0 730.5 40.5 5.9 

Construction of Research Facilities 

(CRF) 50.3 119.0 95.0 -24.0 -20.17 

Industrial Technology Services (ITS)* 138.1 155.0 188.9 33.9 21.9 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership 

(MEP) 130.0 130.0 1420 12.0 9.2 

Advanced Manufacturing Technology 

Consortia (AMTech)'As of January, 

2016, AMTech and the NNMI have been 

merged. 11.7 

National Network for Manufacturing 

Innovation 25.0 47.0 22.0 88 

Totals: 863.9 964.0 1,014.4 50.5 5.2 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Budget Summary2 

The President's budget request for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (N 1ST) is 

roughly $1.01 billion, an increase of$50.5 million (5.2%) from the FY 2016 enacted level. 

Included in this number is a $14.9 million increase for inflationary cost changes. 

2 
5 

Scientific and Technical Research Services 

The FY 17 Budget Request for NIST' s Scientific and Technical Research Services (STRS) is 

$730.5 million, an increase of$40.5 million (5.9%) from FY 16 enacted levels. STRS includes 

NIST's laboratory programs, the national measurement and standards labs and user facilities, 

which would receive increased funding through the President's request. The Strategic & 

Emerging Research Initiative fund and postdoctoral research associates program would also be 

slightly increased in the request. The request includes increases for work conducted on 

measurement science for future computing technologies and applications, advanced sensing for 

manufacturing, biomanufacturing/engineered biology, addressing spectrum issues, neutron 

research, and lab to market/technology transfer promoting data sharing efforts. 

Construction of Research Facilities 

The FY 17 Budget Request for NIST's Construction of Research Facilities (CRF) is about $95 

million, a decrease of over $24 million from FY 16 enacted levels (-20%). Base funds of$40.0 

million will continue the multi-year effort to renovate and modernize the Radiation Physics 

Building 245. The FY 2017 funding will allow NIST to begin the next phase of a multi-phased 

project for the Building 245 Modernization. NIST requests a $4.751 million decrease to reduce 

the Safety, Capacity, Maintenance, and Major Repairs (SCMMR) program to approximately $55 

million for FY 2017, and a $20 million decrease to rellect the completion of the initial efforts to 

improve the condition of the Gaithersburg Radiation Physics Building 245 with funding received 

in FY 2016. 

Industrial Technology Services 

NIST utilizes several programs to carry out its mission. The Hollings Manufacturing Extension 

Partnership (MEP) is a nationwide network of local centers offering technical and business 

assistance to smaller manufacturers to help them create and retain jobs, increase profits, and save 

time and money. NIST partners with 1,300 manufacturing specialists and staff at more than 400 

MEP locations around the country. 

Further, the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) aims to create a 

manufacturing research infrastructure for U.S. industry and academia to solve industry-relevant 

problems. In December 2014, the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 

2014 (RAMI Act), was signed into law as part of the Consolidated and Further Continuing 

Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L. 113-235), which directed the Secretary of Commerce to establish 

a Network for Manufacturing Innovation program at N!ST. Under this, NlST is authorized to use 

up to $5 million per year of appropriated funds for FY20 15-2024 to carry out its responsibilities 

under the act. This budget program was first explicitly appropriated funds in FY 2016 under the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (P.L. l I 4-113), which provides NlST with $25 million in 

discretionary funds 

The FY 17 budget request for NIST's Industrial Technology Services (ITS) is $188.9 million, an 

increase of$33.9 million or nearly 22 percent from FY 16 enacted levels. The Administration's 

request would zero out funding levels for the Advance Manufacturing Technology Consortia 

(AMTech) as AM Tech has been merged with NNMI. The request includes $142.0 million for the 

3 
6 

Hollings Manufacturing Extension Patinership (MEP), a $12.0 million increase from FY 16. The 

MEP will complete the effort started in FY 2014 to bring to a close the final round of 

competition of the MEP centers, maintain the funding of states previously competed, and provide 

funding for additional performance-based awards to high performing centers. 

The ITS request also includes a $22.0 million increase for NNMI, for a total of$47.0 million 

(88% increase). The $47 million request would be used to fund and maintain three institutes for 

up to seven years. 

4 
7 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. The Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of 

the Committee at any time. 

Welcome to today’s hearing entitled ‘‘An Overview of the Budget 

Proposal for the National Institute of Standards and Technology for 

Fiscal Year 2017.’’ I now recognize myself for five minutes for an 

opening statement. 

I would first like to thank Dr. Willie May, Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and Under 

Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology, for appearing today to discuss the NIST budget request for fiscal year 2017. 

This Committee has a long, bipartisan record of support for NIST 

and its contributions to research and development. As a non-regulatory agency within the Department of Commerce that works 

closely alongside industry, NIST works to promote U.S. innovation 

and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, 

standards, and technology. 

The fiscal year 2017 budget request for NIST totals $1 billion, an 

increase of $50.5 million or about five percent from the fiscal year 

2016 enacted level. A large portion of this request is $730.5 million 

for NIST’s Scientific and Technical Research Services. The STRS 

request includes increases for work conducted on measurement 

science for future computing technologies and applications, advanced sensing for manufacturing, biomanufacturing or engineered 

biology, addressing spectrum issues, neutron research, and lab-tomarket or technology transfer promoting data-sharing efforts. 

The requested increases from NIST for fiscal year 2017 would 

also be devoted in large part to bolster advanced manufacturing 

initiatives at NIST. In fact, $47 million dollars is requested for the 

National Network for Manufacturing Innovation. This program was 

authorized by the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2014 authored by Chairman Smith and approved by this 

Committee on a bipartisan basis. 

NIST is authorized to use up to $5 million per year of appropriated funds for fiscal year 2015 to fiscal year 2024, and the Department of Energy is authorized to transfer to NIST up to $250 

million of appropriated funds for that same period of time. 

To administer NNMI, the RAMI Act also established strategic direction for the program and rules to assure fair competition for federal dollars. The fiscal year 2017 request for NNMI is an 88 percent increase from what was appropriated for fiscal year 2016, and 

my colleagues and I will be asking questions this morning about 

that increase and other aspects. We will also learn more today 

about the Institute’s investment in cybersecurity and the NIST Cybersecurity Framework. 

As you all know, one of the great challenges of the 21st century 

is cybersecurity. This committee has held multiple hearings on cybersecurity since the news over the summer that the OPM was the 

target of two massive data breaches, exposing the sensitive information of over 21 million Americans, including me and many of my 

colleagues and many of our staff here on Capitol Hill, as well as 

tens of thousands of our constituents. 
8 

More recently, we have seen the example of the security breach 

at the IRS, affecting hundreds of thousands of American taxpayers. 

Considering the constantly evolving cyber threats and technology, it is imperative that we do everything that we can to protect our citizens. In order to ensure this, NIST plays a very important role by providing guidelines and standards to help reduce 

cyber risks to federal agencies and critical infrastructure. 

Solutions are needed not only to prevent and detect cyber attacks, but also to bolster rapid response and recovery. Last week, 

I participated in several events on cybersecurity, and I’m very 

pleased that in my district this is an issue they are very much focused on, and certainly look forward to working with NIST to make 

sure that we are on top of all of these key issues. 

I look forward to and am appreciative of the opportunity to hear 

from Dr. May on how NIST plans to prioritize and manage funding, 

as well as how it sets its budget. 

[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Comstock follows:] 
9 

For Immediate Release 

March 16, 2016 

Media Contact: Zachary Kurz 

(202) 225-637 I 

Statement ol Research & Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbaro Comstock (R-Vo.) 

An Overview of the Budget Proposal for the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology for Fiscal Year 2017 

Chairwoman Comstock: I would first like to thank Dr. Willie May, Director of the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Under Secretary of 

Commerce for Standards and Technology, for appearing today to discuss the NIST 

budget request for fiscal year 2017. 

This Committee has a long, bipartisan record of support for NIST and its contributions to 

research and development. As a non-regulatory agency within the Department of 

Commerce that works closely alongside industry, NIST works to promote U.S. innovation 

and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science. standards, and 

technology. 

The fiscal year 2017 budget request for NIST totals $1 billion, an increase of $50.5 million 

or about 5 percent from the fiscal year 2016 enacted level. A large portion of this 

request is $730.5 million for NIST's Scientific and Technical Research Services (STRS). 

The STRS request includes increases for work conducted on measurement science for 

future computing technologies and applications, advanced sensing for 

manufacturing, biomanufacturing or engineered biology, spectrum issues. 

neutron research, and lab to market or technology transfer data sharing 

efforts. 

The requested increases from NIST for FY17 would also be devoted in large part to 

bolster advanced manufacturing initiatives at NIST. In fact, $47 million dollars is 

requested for the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI). This program 

was authorized by the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2014 

(RAMI Act). authored by Chairman Lamar Smith and approved by this Committee on 

a bipartisan basis. 

NIST is authorized to use up to $5 million per year of appropriated funds for FY2015-

FY2024, and the Department of Energy is authorized to transfer to NIST up to $250 

million of appropriated funds for that same period of time. 

To administer NNMI, the RAMI Act also established strategic direction for the program 

and rules to assure fair competition for federal dollars. The FY 17 request for NNMI is an 
10 

88 percent increase from what was appropriated for FY 16. and my colleagues and I 

will be asking questions this morning about that increase and other aspects of NNMI. 

We will also learn more today about the Institute's investment in cybersecurity and the 

NIST Cybersecurity Framework. 

As you all know, one of the great challenges of the 21st Century is cybersecurity. This 

Committee has held multiple hearings on cybersecurity since the news over the 

summer that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) was the target of two 

massive data breaches - exposing the sensitive information of over 21 million 

Americans, including me and many of my constituents. 

More recently, we have seen the example of the security breach at the IRS affecting 

hundreds of thousands of American taxpayers. 

Considering the constantly evolving cyber threats and technology, it is imperative that 

we do everything that we can to protect our citizens. In order to ensure this, NIST plays 

a very important role by providing guidelines and standards to help reduce cyber risks 

to federal agencies and critical infrastructure. 

Solutions are needed not only to prevent and detect cyber-attacks, but also to bolster 

rapid-response and recovery. Last week, I joined the Northern Virginia Technology 

Council (NVTC) and many stakeholders in my district for a round table discussion. 

NVTC brings the best minds of the Northern Virginia Technology sector together to 

promote innovative policies in all sectors and grow our 21st century economy in our 

region. This is the kind of solutions we need to be working on together with the private 

sector to develop the programs, hardware. and strategies to make themselves and 

their customers safer and more secure. 

We have a constitutional obligation and a responsibility to ensure every dollar 

earmarked is spent as effectively and efficiently as possible. 

I look forward to and am appreciative of the opportunity to hear from Dr. May on how 

NIST plans to prioritize and manage funding as well as how it sets its budget. 

### 
11 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. I now recognize the gentlewoman from 

Connecticut, Ms. Esty, for an opening statement. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Chairwoman Comstock, and thank you for 

holding today’s important hearing to examine the fiscal year 2017 

budget request for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which we will refer to as NIST because it’s a whole lot 

shorter. 

Dr. Willie May, thank you so much for testifying this morning 

and for your leadership at NIST. 

For more than 100 years, NIST has supported the competitiveness of American companies. NIST’s broad and deep technical experience has advanced measurement science, standards, and technological innovation, creating a strong U.S. economy and improving 

our quality of life. And I’m pleased that the President’s budget for 

NIST recognizes its importance to this country, enabling the agency to play a prominent role in revitalizing American manufacturing 

and expanding technology transfer activities. 

The Administration’s budget request proposes increases for two 

important manufacturing programs: the Manufacturing Extension 

Partnership, the MEP program; and, as was already referenced by 

Chairwoman Comstock, the National Network for Manufacturing 

Innovation. 

MEP centers help manufacturers increase their profitability, 

streamline their processes, and adopt cutting-edge manufacturing 

technologies. The Connecticut State Technology Extension Program, or CONNSTEP as we call it, has helped numerous Connecticut manufacturing companies. For example, in my district, 

CONNSTEP helped Hologic, Incorporated, a leading developer and 

manufacturer of medical imaging systems, by working on one of 

their main manufacturing facilities. This facility, located in Danbury, employs more than 300 people and develops digital imaging 

technology for 3–D mammography. CONNSTEP helped this company optimize their shop floor layout in order to accommodate a 

new line of 3–D mammography equipment and develop new training. 

After working with CONNSTEP, the manufacturing facility saw 

the following improvements: Their unit production increased by 11 

percent, lead time reduced by 50 percent; they achieved $280,000 

in cost savings; they had an increase in sales of $80 million and 

100 percent on-time shipment rate. Those are real figures and real 

jobs and real savings for the American people. And they are pretty 

impressive results and represent only one example, one of many, 

where the MEP program has been serving communities and serving companies across this country. 

The National Network for Manufacturing Innovation is a partnership among federal agencies, the private sector, and colleges 

and universities to create a national research and workforce training infrastructure for advanced manufacturing. At a time when 

American manufacturers face workforce challenges such as the 

growing skills gap, NNMI gives us a reason to be optimistic. And 

I am pleased that Congress funded NIST this year to establish the 

NNMI coordinating office. 

I’m also happy to see that, last month, NIST announced an opentopic competition for the formation of two new institutes. As the 
12 

only agency that isn’t limited to a single mission, NIST can invite 

a broad range of proposals to help grow America’s manufacturing 

future. 

Finally, I’m pleased that the Administration’s budget request increases funding for technology transfer activities. Federally funded 

research has changed our society and our economy and has led to 

major job creation. It’s difficult to imagine or even remember a 

world without the Internet, GPS, health- and life-saving technology 

that has all originated from federally funded research. 

In this Subcommittee we often discuss the value of transferring 

federally funded research to the commercial marketplace, and I 

was pleased to see that this budget proposes developing and expanding platforms for sharing information and knowledge. These 

programs represent only a small fraction of the important work 

done at NIST. 

NIST is a small federal agency with a grand purpose of promoting U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness. At a time 

when U.S. leadership in these areas is being challenged, NIST is 

more important than ever. 

Ms. Chairwoman, thank you again for holding this hearing, and 

I look forward to working with you and our colleagues to ensure 

that NIST has the resources it needs to fulfill its role in promoting 

innovation, increasing our competitiveness, and enhancing our national security. Thank you again, and I yield back the balance of 

my time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Esty follows:] 
13 

Opening Statement 

Representative Elizabeth Esty (D-CT) 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

Subcommittee on Research and Technology 

"An Overview of the Budget Proposalfor the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

(NJST)for Fiscal Year 2017" 

March 16,2016 

Thank you, Chairwoman Comstock. And thank you for holding today's hearing to examine the 

fiscal year 2017 budget request for the National institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). 

Dr. Willie May, thank you for testifying this morning and for your leadership at NIST. 

For more than I 00 years, NIST has supported the competitiveness of American companies. 

NIST's broad and deep technical expertise has advanced measurement science, standards, and 

technological innovation- creating a strong U.S. economy and improving our quality oflife. 

I am pleased that the President's budget for NIST recognizes its importance, enabling the agency 

to play a prominent role in revitalizing American manufacturing and expanding technology 

transfer activities. 

The Administration's budget proposes increases for two important manufacturing programs: the 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program and the National Network for 

Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI). 

MEP Centers help manufacturers increase their profitability, streamline their processes, and 

adopt cutting-edge manufacturing technologies. The Connecticut State Technology Extension 

Program or CONNSTEP has helped numerous Connecticut manufacturing companies. In my 

district, CONNSTEP helped Hologic, Inc. a leading developer and manufacturer of medical 

imaging systems by working with one of their main manufacturing facilities. This facility, 

located in Danbury, employs more than 300 people and develops the digital imaging technology 

for 3-D mammography. CONNSTEP helped the company optimize their shop floor layout in 

order to accommodate a new line of 3-D mammography equipment, and develop new training. 
14 

After working with CONNSTEP, the manufacturing facility saw: unit production increase by ll 

percent, lead time reduced by 50 percent, $280,000 in cost savings, an increase in sales of $80 

million, and a I 00 percent on-time shipment rate. Those are pretty impressive results and 

represent only one example of what the MEP program has accomplished. 

The National Network for Manufacturing Innovation is a partnership among federal agencies, the 

private sector, and colleges and universities to create a national research and workforce training 

infrastructure for advanced manufacturing. At a time when American manufacturers face 

workforce challenges, such as the growing skills-gap, NNMI gives us a reason to be optimistic. I 

am pleased Congress funded NIST this year to establish the NNMI coordinating office. I was 

also happy to see that last month NIST announced an open-topic competition for the formation 

of two new institutes. As the only agency that isn't limited to a single mission, NIST can invite a 

broad range of proposals to help grow America's manufacturing future. 

Finally, I'm pleased that the Administration's budget request increases funding for technology 

transfer activities. Federally funded research has changed our society and our economy, and has 

led to significant job creation. It is difficult to imagine (or remember!) a world without the 

internet, GPS, and numerous·health saving treatments that all originated from federally funded 

research. In this Subcommittee, we often discuss the value of transferring federally funded 

research to the commercial marketplace. l was pleased to see that this budget proposes 

developing and expanding platforms for sharing information and knowledge. 

These programs represent only a small fraction of the important work done at NIST. NIST is a 

small federal agency with the grand purpose of promoting U.S. innovation and industrial 

competitiveness. At a time in which our leadership in those areas is being challenged, NIST is 

more important than ever. 

Ms. Chairwoman, thank you again for holding this hearing and I look forward to working with 

you and our colleagues to ensure that NIST has the resources it needs to fulfill its role in 

promoting innovation, increasing our competitiveness, and enhancing our national security. 
15 

I yield back the balance of my time. 
16 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you. 

And I now recognize the Ranking Member of the full Committee 

for a statement, Ms. Johnson. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, 

Madam Chairwoman, for holding this important hearing. 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST, is 

an agency that is central to the federal role in advancing science, 

promoting innovation, and creating a more prosperous nation. I 

look forward to hearing from our distinguished witness, Dr. May, 

this morning. 

It would be almost impossible to overstate the importance of 

NIST, the federal agency that promotes U.S. innovation and competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and 

technology. In his first address to Congress, President George 

Washington said, ‘‘Uniformity in the currency, weights, and measures of the United States is an object of great importance, and will, 

I am persuaded, be duly attended to.’’ 

This responsibility was first given to an office in the Treasury 

Department but then was moved over to the National Bureau of 

Standards, NIST’s predecessor, in 1901. Every industry and nearly 

every technology relies on the measurement and standards work at 

NIST, from the smart electric power grid, to the computer chips, 

to building safety. NIST supplies industry, academia, and government and other users with thousands of standard reference materials in addition to doing much of the testing and validation work 

in their own laboratories. 

Along with working with industry, academia, state and local governments, and consumer groups to develop U.S. standards, NIST 

accomplishes its mission of promoting U.S. innovation and competitiveness through their research laboratories, Centers of Excellence, 

and manufacturing programs. 

I was happy to see the proposed increase in the fiscal year 2017 

budget request for those programs, and I hope that Congress will 

fully support the request. In particular, I was happy to see the proposed increases in NIST’s programs to develop the measurement 

tools needed to support the engineering biology research and biomanufacturing. 

Engineering biology research and technologies are very exciting 

and have the potential to solve some of society’s greatest challenges, including providing food for a growing population, improving human health, reducing our dependency on fossil fuels, and 

dramatically transforming manufacturing. Given the promise of 

this research and its applications, I introduced the Engineering Biology Research and Development Act of 2015 with my Science Committee colleague Mr. Sensenbrenner. 

Additionally, I am pleased the President’s budget recognizes the 

importance of NIST’s role in American manufacturing. The budget 

proposes an increase for both the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, or the MEP program, and the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, the NNMI. 

Finally, I’m happy to see NIST leadership in the area of forensic 

science and standards. The partnership between NIST and the Department of Justice must continue to recognize NIST’s critical role 

in the development of technical standards for forensic evidence. 
17 

However, I’d like to emphasize that NIST must ensure that forensic standards being developed are consistent with NIST’s longstanding commitment to science and a fair and balanced standardssetting process. 

As I have said in the past, NIST may be the most important federal agency that most people have never heard of. I appreciate that 

there are many worthy programs across the government, and we 

cannot fund everything, but supporting the agency that promotes 

U.S. innovation and competitiveness should be an easy choice. 

Madam Chairwoman, I thank you again for holding this hearing, 

and I look forward to working with you and our colleagues to ensure that NIST has the resources it needs to fulfill its critical role. 

I thank you and yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:] 
18 

Opening Statement 

Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

Subcommittee on Research and Technology 

"An Overview of the Budget Proposal for the National institute o{Standards and Technology 

(N!S1)for Fiscal Year 2017" 

March 16,2016 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman for holding this important hearing. 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is an agency that is central to the 

federal role in advancing science, promoting innovation, and creating a more prosperous nation. I 

look forward to hearing from our distinguished witness, Dr. May, this morning. 

It would be almost impossible to overstate the importance ofNIST, the federal agency that 

promotes U.S. innovation and competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, 

and technology. 

In his first address to Congress, President George Washington said that, "Uniformity in the 

currency, weights, and measures of the United States is an object of great importance. and will, I 

am persuaded. be duly attended to". This responsibility was first given to an office in the 

Treasury Department, but then was moved over to the National Bureau of Standards (NIST's 

predecessor) in 190!. 

Every industry and nearly every technology relies on the measurement and standards work at 

NIST -from the smart electric power grid to computer chips to building safety. NIST supplies 

industry, academia, government, and other users with thousands of Standard Reference 

Materials, in addition to doing much of the testing and validation work in their own laboratories. 

Along with working with industry, academia, state and local governments, and consumer groups 

to develop U.S. standards, NIST accomplishes it mission of promoting U.S. innovation and 

competitiveness through their research laboratories. Centers of Excellence, and manufacturing 
19 

programs. I was happy to see the proposed increases in the FY 20 !7 budget request for those 

programs, and I hope that Congress will fully support the request. 

In particular, l was happy to see the proposed increases for NIST's programs to develop the 

measurement tools needed to support engineering biology research and biomanufacturing. 

Engineering biology research and technologies are very exciting and have the potential to solve 

some of society's greatest challenges, including providing food for a growing population, 

improving human health, reducing our dependency on fossil fuels. and dramatically transfonning 

manufacturing. 

Given the promise of this research and its applications, l introduced the Engineering Biology 

Research and Development Act of 20 I 5, with my Science Committee colleague, Mr. 

Sensenbrenner. 

Additionally, lam pleased the President's budget recognizes the importance ofNIST's role in 

American manufacturing. The budget proposes an increase for both the Manufacturing Extension 

Partnership (MEP) program and the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (l'.'NMI). 

Finally, lam happy to see NIST's leadership in the area of forensic science and standards. The 

partnership between NIST and the Department of Justice must continue to recognize NIST's 

critical role in the development of technical standards for forensic evidence. 

However, l would like to emphasize that NIST must ensure that the forensic standards being 

developed arc consistent with NIST's long-standing commitment to science and a fair and 

balanced standards setting process. 

As I have said in the past, NIST may be the most important federal agency that most people have 

never heard of. I appreciate that there are many worthy programs across the government and we 

cannot fund everything, but supporting the agency that promotes U.S. innovation and 

competitiveness should be an easy choice. 
20 

Madam Chairwoman, thank you again for holding this hearing and I look forward to working 

with you and our colleagues to ensure that N!ST has the resources it needs to fulfill its critical 

role, Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time. 
21 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And I now recognize the Chairman of the full Committee, Mr. 

Smith. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Madam Chair, and, Dr. May, 

thank you for being here today as well. 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology supports 

fundamental scientific research that is critical to American innovation and competitiveness. NIST helps maintain industrial and technical standards and manages cybersecurity guidelines for federal 

agencies. Our challenge is to set funding priorities that ensure 

America remains a leader in the global marketplace of ideas and 

products, while also being able to balance the government’s budget. 

As Chairwoman Comstock pointed out, the area of proposed 

funding of $47 million for the National Network of Manufacturing 

Innovation program is of particular concern with the NIST fiscal 

year 2017 budget request. In 2014, this Committee and the full 

House approved H.R. 2996, the Revitalize American Manufacturing 

Innovation Act of 2014, or RAMI Act. 

The RAMI Act was subsequently included in the fiscal year 2015 

omnibus bill and signed into law by the President. This bill authorized up to $5 million per year for NNMI from NIST. The bulk of 

the program funding is to be transferred from the Department of 

Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy budget. 

Why hasn’t this happened? It must if the program is to continue. 

In addition, there are concerns surrounding the explosion at 

NIST that occurred when a senior officer with NIST Police Services 

attempted to manufacture meth in a NIST facility. It is surprising 

that a federal agency didn’t know that a meth lab was being run 

on its property, and without an explosion, it might have never been 

discovered. The meth lab explosion and subsequent investigation 

have raised serious concerns about the safety and security of the 

entire NIST campus. 

Information obtained during this Committee’s investigation of 

the meth lab at NIST appears to show a culture of waste, fraud, 

abuse, and misconduct at NIST Police Services. For example, time 

and attendance fraud occurred regularly at NIST Police Services. 

In one instance, 84 hours of overtime was recorded during a two 

week period while a full-time shift was being covered. If accurate, 

that would mean the officer worked 16 hours a day, seven days a 

week. It also appears that police equipment worth tens of thousands of dollars is unaccounted for or missing from the police force. 

These unfortunate examples undermine NIST’s mission to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness, which enhances economic security and improves our quality of life. 

I hope to hear what steps have been taken in the wake of the 

meth lab explosion to prevent further misuse of taxpayers’ dollars. 

Just as important is to find out why NIST continues to ignore the 

RAMI Act. 

I look forward to hearing from our witness today and yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Smith follows:] 
22 

For Immediate Release 

Morch 16,2016 

s HN 

Media Contact: Zachary Kurz 

(202) 225-6371 

Statement of Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) 

An Overview of the Budget Proposal for the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology for Fiscal Year 2017 

Chairman Smith: Thank you, Chairwoman Comstock, and thank you Dr, May for being 

with us today. 

The National institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) supports fundamental 

scientific research that is critical to American innovation and competitiveness. 

NIST helps maintain industrial and technical standards and manages cybersecurity 

guidelines for federal agencies. 

Our challenge is to set funding priorities that ensure America remains a leader in the 

global marketplace of ideas and products, while also being able to balance the 

government's budget. 

As Chairwoman Comstock pointed out, the area of proposed funding of $47 million for 

the National Network of Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) program is of particular 

concern with the NIST Fiscal Year 2017 budget request. 

In 2014, this Committee and the full House approved H.R. 2996, the Revitalize American 

Manufacturing Innovation Act of 2014 {RAMI Act). The RAMI Act was subsequently 

included in the Fiscal Year 2015 omnibus bill and signed into law by the President. 

This bill authorized up to $5 million per year for NNMI from NIST. The bulk of the program 

funding is to be transferred from the Department of Energy's Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) budget. Why hasn't this happened? It must if 

the program is to continue. 

In addition, there are concerns surrounding the explosion at NIST that occurred when a 

senior officer with NIST Police Services attempted to manufacture methamphetamine 

in a NIST facility. 

It is surprising that a federal agency didn't know that a meth lab was being run on its 

property, and without an explosion, it might have never been discovered. 

The meth lab explosion and subsequent investigation have raised serious concerns 

about the safety and security of the entire NIST campus. 
23 

Information obtained during this Committee's investigation of the meth lab at NIST 

appears to show a culture of waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct at NIST Police 

Services. 

For example, time and attendance fraud occurs regularly at NIST Police Services. In 

one instance, 84 hours of overtime was recorded during a two week period while a 

full-time shift was being covered. If accurate, that would mean the officer worked 16 

hours a day, seven days per week. 

It also appears that police equipment worth tens of thousands of dollars is 

unaccounted for or missing from the police force. 

These unfortunate examples undermine NIST's mission to promote U.S. innovation and 

industrial competitiveness, which enhances economic security and improves our 

quality of life. 

I hope to hear what steps have been taken in the wake of the meth lab explosion to 

prevent further misuse of taxpayers' dollars. Just as important is to find out why NIST 

continues to ignore the RAMI Act. 

I look forward to hearing from our witness today and yield back. 

### 
24 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you. 

Now, let me introduce our witness. Our witness today is Dr. 

Willie May, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director of the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, NIST. 

Prior to his Congressional confirmation, Dr. May served as Acting NIST Director and Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Standards and Technology since June 2014. Prior to that assignment, Dr. May was Associate Director for Laboratory Programs 

where he was responsible for oversight and direction of NIST’s 

seven laboratory programs and served as the Principal Deputy to 

the NIST Director. In addition, Dr. May has led NIST research and 

measurement service programs in chemistry-related areas for more 

than 20 years. 

Dr. May received his undergraduate degree from Knoxville College and his Ph.D. in analytical chemistry from the University of 

Maryland. 

I welcome you here today, and I now recognize Dr. May for five 

minutes to present his testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. WILLIE E. MAY, 

UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR STANDARDS 

AND TECHNOLOGY AND DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS 

AND TECHNOLOGY 

Dr. MAY. First, good morning to Committee Chairwoman COM- STOCK. Full Committee Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

Subcommittee Chairwoman Comstock and Ranking Member Esty 

and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to appear before you today to present the President’s fiscal year 

2017 budget request from the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology. 

This budget request reflects the important role that NIST plays 

in American innovation, productivity, trade, and public safety. The 

measurement science and technology foundation that NIST provides is essential to accelerating American innovation through 

breakthroughs such as next-generation computing to strengthening 

the digital economy and more efficient wireless technology to overcome the spectrum crunch. 

Additionally, researchers supported by this budget will help 

embed NIST industrial center technologies to the factory floor, 

thereby extending NIST’s success with the electronics industry to 

applications such as laser welding and bioengineering. 

To achieve our mission, the President has proposed a budget for 

us of slightly more than $1 billion, a $50 million increase over the 

enacted fiscal year 2016 budget. In addition to this discretionary 

request, the President has proposed an additional $2 billion in 

NIST mandatory funding to fully fund a network of 45 institutes 

in the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation at $1.9 billion and an additional $100 million to renovate and modernize the 

NIST facilities. 
25 

The President’s budget continues to recognize the important role 

that the NIST laboratory programs play by requesting $730.5 million for our Scientific and Technical Research and Services account, 

basically our lab program. This is a $4.5 million increase over the 

enacted fiscal year 2016 level. This increase will allow NIST to lay 

the foundation for next-generation computing and wireless revolution, transfer money-saving technology to the factory floor, and 

bring our precision engineering prowess to bear on emerging markets. 

The fiscal year 2017 request will also continue to fund critical 

work that we are doing in the areas of cybersecurity and forensics 

but with no additional request. However, we are requesting increases of $13.6 million for our Measurement Science for Future 

Computing Technologies and Applications program to position the 

United States to unlock the potential of future computing technologies. 

We are requesting an additional $2 million for advanced sensing 

manufacturing to accelerate research efforts targeting the development of advanced sensors, an additional $2 million for biomanufacturing and engineering biology to assure the quality of predictability in the design of synthetic biological systems, and $2 million 

for Advanced Communications Research to develop the measurement science and tools necessary to improve spectrum-sharing and 

increase spectrum efficiency of commercial wireless radiofrequency 

communication systems, an additional $4.8 million to assure that 

NIST’s world-class neutron facility can continue to purchase the 

fuel needed to operate this critical facility, and finally, $2 million 

to expand our Lab-to-Market initiative, which focuses on transfer 

of technology from the government, the public sector through datasharing and collaborative tools. 

To support our outreach to the manufacturing industry, NIST is 

requesting $189 million for our Industrial Technology Services account. That’s an increase of $34 million. 

The requested $12 million increase for MEP will be used in fiscal 

year 2017 to complete the final round of a multiyear competition 

of our MEP centers and $22 million to support the NNMI program 

that would allow us to fund additional institutes and provide coordination for the network. 

To support our aging facilities, our Construction of Research Facilities, our CRF account, the request is $95 million. This is actually a decrease of $24 million over fiscal year 2016. 

And at this point I’d like to thank the Subcommittee for its continuing strong support of the renovations of our aging and deteriorating infrastructure that would otherwise threaten our ability to 

deliver our mission. 

The CRF number is a decrease, as I said earlier, from the fiscal 

year 2016 enacted level, but it reflects a significant initial investment of $119 million in fiscal year 2016 to begin the renovation of 

our Radiation Physics building. At least $40 million of the ’17 request will fund the second phase of the multiyear renovation of 

that building, and the remaining $55 million of the request will be 

used to fund maintenance, repair, improvements, and major renovations of our facilities in Gaithersburg, Colorado, and Hawaii. 
26 

In conclusion, the fiscal year 2017 budget reflects the Administration’s recognition of the important role that NIST plays in innovation, as well as the impact of the research that we do and the 

measurement services we provide in laying and maintaining the 

foundation for our nation’s long-term job creation and prosperity. 

Through our laboratory programs, our outreach efforts, and our 

standards development work, we are dedicated to providing U.S. 

industry with the tools it needs to innovate, compete, and flourish 

in this fierce global economy. 

Madam Chairwoman, I look forward to continuing to work with 

you and Members of the Subcommittee, and would now be happy 

to answer questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. May follows:] 
27 

Testimony of 

Willie E. May, Ph.D. 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology 

and Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology 

United States Department of Commerce 

Before the 

United States House of Representatives 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

Subcommittee on Research & Technology 

An Overview of the Fiscal Year 2017 Budget 

for the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

March 16, 2016 
28 

Chairwoman Comstock, Ranking Member Lipinski, and other members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to present the President's Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2017 budget request for the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST). This budget request reflects the important role that NIST plays in American 

innovation, productivity, trade, and public safety. 

The President, in his FY 2017 budget message, observed that "by accelerating the pace of 

American innovation, we can create jobs and build the economy of the future ... " The 

measurement science and technology foundation that NIST provides is essential to accelerating 

American innovation toward breakthroughs in areas such as next-generation computing to 

strengthen the digital economy, and more efficient wireless technology to overcome the 

"spectrum crunch." Additionally, research supported by this budget will help embed NIST 

industrial sensor technologies on the factory floor, thereby extending NIST's success with the 

electronics industry to applications such as laser welding and bioengineering. In support of the· 

Administration's emphasis on serving industry through outreach services, this budget pushes 

NIST to further embrace its role as "Industry's National Lab" by keeping its facitities open to 

industry partners and extending the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation to tackle the 

manufacturing challenges that industry identifies as most in need of co-investment to :nurture 

innovation and accelerate commercialization. 

To achieve these goals, the President has proposed a budget for NIST of $1.0 billion. This is 

$50.5 million above the FY 2016 enacted level. These funds will support NJST's work to foster 

the innovation that creates jobs and strengthens the U.S. economy. 

In addition to the discretionary request, the President has proposed an additional $2.0 billion in 

NIST mandatory funds to fully fund a network of 45 institutes in the National Network for 

Manufacturing Innovation ($!.9 billion) and to renovate and modernize NIST facilities ($100 

million). The latter is needed to complete the major renovation of the Radiation Physics Building 

-over a half-century old -that was begun in FY 2016 and that will create state-of-the-art 

laboratories for research in health, manufacturing, safety, and security. Mandatory funding is 

presented in the FY 2017 President's Budget throughout the Federal R&D enterprise to support 

research across a range of topics from health to clean energy technologies, reflecting the high 

priority of R&D in a time of limited discretionary funding. 

Scientific and Technical Research and Services (STRS) Account {$730.5M, 

+$40.5M) 

The NIST laboratory programs work at the frontiers of measurement science to ensure that the 

U.S. system of measurements is firmly grounded on sound scientific and technical principles. 

Today, the NIST laboratories address increasingly complex measurement challenges, ranging 

from the very small (nanoscale devices) to the very large (vehicles and buildings), and from the 

physical (renewable energy sources) to the virtual (cybersecurity and cloud computing). As new 

technologies are developed and evolve, NIST's measurement research and services remain 

central to innovation, productivity, trade, and public safety. 

2 
29 

The President's budget continues to recognize this imp011ant role ofNIST laboratory programs 

by requesting $730.5 million for Scientific and Technical Research and Services, which is a 

$40.5 million increase above FY 2016 and includes inflationary adjustments. This increase will 

allow NIST to lay tbe foundation for the next computing and wireless revolutions, transfer its 

money-saving technology to the factory floor, and bring its precision engineering prowess to 

bear on emerging markets. 

The FY 2017 request also continues to fund critical NIST work in the areas of cybersccurity and 

forensic science at FY 2016 levels. In the area of cybersecurity NIST is investing a total of 

$74.2 million with $38.7 million supporting cyber R&D efforts at NIST, $31.5 million 

supporting the National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence including work on Identity 

Management, and $4M to support the National Initiative on Cybersecurity Education. In the area 

of forensic science NIST will continue to invest $9.8 million to address forensic measurement 

and standards needs. 

Information about each of the new FY17 initiative requests follows: 

Measurement Science for Future Computing Technologies and Applications 

(+$13.6M) 

NIST has supported the U.S. semiconductor industry from its inception, providing measurement 

tools and scientific insights that have helped to drive a steady increase in computing power. As 

we reach the limits oftoday's semiconductor technology, this budget increase of$13.6 million 

would position the U.S. to unlock the potential of future computing technologies to revolutionize 

and transform U.S. economic competitiveness. 

Within that amount, $8.8 million will support the development of measurement science, 

standards, tools, and technologies to advance new computing paradigms. NIST will develop, test, 

prototype, and benchmark potential types of logic, memory, and storage device concepts with the 

potential to become integral to a future "exascale" machine, some 30 times more powerful than 

today's most powerful computer. 

The balance oftbe increase- $4.8 million- will be used to develop and deploy measurement 

science for next-generation computing applications. NIST will develop frameworks for 

uncertainty quantification in scientific computing and for calibration of modeling and simulation. 

These will help increase the capacity and capability of an enduring national high-performance 

computing ecosystem. 

This initiative recognizes NIST as an essential part of the National Strategic Computing 

Initiative because of its continued success in pushing measurement science forward to advance 

computing technologies. In a recent report1 submitted to the Department of Commerce, the 

Council on Competitiveness made the following observation about the potential benefit from 

modeling, simulation and analysis, and high performance computing: 

1 Modeling, Simulation and Analysis, and High Performance Computing: Force Multiplier for American Innovation, 

Final Report to the US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration, Council on 

Competitiveness, 2015. 

3 
30 

"Widespread deployment across the U.S. industria/landscape would dramatically 

enhance the U.S. ability to innovate, accelerate the development and commercialization 

of new products, and improve mamifacturing productivity, driving U.S. economic 

growth and global market competitiveness. " 

Advanced Sensing for Manufacturing (+$2.0M) 

A highly integrated effort across NIST laboratories in measurement science and standards will 

accelerate the design, development, and manufacturability of advanced electronic and photonic 

devices that require new concepts, architectures, materials, and manufacturing methods. 

The budget requests an increase of $2.0 million to accelerate research efforts targeting the 

development of advanced sensors needed to support the manufacture of advanced electronics and 

nanoengineered devices. With this increase, NIST will develop in-process imaging and analysis 

to enable improved process performance, quality control, and optimization. 

The NIST laboratodes have a long tradition of developing and delivering measurement science 

tools that support advanced manufacturing technologies. NIST will leverage its existing 

capabilities in materials modeling and simulation, in support of the Administration's Materials 

Genome Initiative, as well as its expertise in nanomanufacturing, digital design, chip-scale 

measurement technologies, robotics, additive manufacturing, and eyber-physical systems. 

Biomanufacturing/Engineered Biology: Developing Engineering Principles for 

Efficient Biomanufactnring (+$2.0M) 

Biomanufacturing has the potential to usher in the next Industrial Revolution to many U.S. 

manufacturing sectors. However, for biomanufacturing to reach a sustainable maturity in all 

sectors, there are three main hurdles that need to be overcome: reducing the risk of 

contamination; maintaining high productivity and efficiency; and reducing product variability. 

When techniques to provide accurate, quantitative measurements in biomanufacturing are not 

available, an inefficient trial-and-en·or approach is often employed. The biomanufacturing and 

engineering biology research communities have therefore requested NIST's help in providing 

confidence in these measurements and to establish robustness and harmonization of results. 

The requested budget increase of $2.0 million will ensure quality at1d predictability in the design 

of synthetic biological systems for efficient production of fuels, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and 

medical therapies. 

This funding increase will support development of a suite of quantitative methods for accurate 

measurement of biological systems and create the necessary tools to methodically design and test 

engineered organisms, and engage relevant stakeholders to develop and evaluate predictive 

models. While data generation is important, assessing the data quality is equally critical; 

therefore, NIST will develop methods for data validation, including relevant reference data and 

standards. 

4 
31 

Advanced communications: Addressing the Spectrum Crunch (+$2.0M) 

The availability of secure, reliable, high-speed wireless communications is essential for the 

Nation's future economic health and security. Consumers and industry are becoming 

increasingly reliant on wireless devices to conduct their daily business and for the development 

of new technologies in areas as diverse as public safety communications, electrical power grid 

management, medical devices communications, and advanced manufacturing. While demand for 

wireless continues to grow, the available spectrum itself is a limited resource. 

The proposed budget requests an increase of$2.0 million to develop the measurement science 

and tools necessary to quantify spectrum sharing and measure the spectrum efficiency of 

commercial wireless radio-frequency communication systems. This investment will accelerate 

the deployment of future wireless communications systems. 

A portion ofthe increase will be used to enable more efficient sharing of the currently allocated 

spectrum by extending NIST's antenna meas4rement capability to include leading-edge adaptive 

antenna systems, and to provide a facility where industry can test these systems prior to their 

deployment. 

The remaining new funds will be used to analyze the effectiveness of spectrum sharing, as one 

means to overcome spectrum scarcity. The requested funds will bolster the development of 

performance metrics, measurement methods, and tools, and will allow their implementation in a 

test and evaluation environment. The dissemination of simulation models and software building 

blocks of key spectrum-sharing functions will facilitate research and development of innovative 

spectrum-sharing technologies and expedite product development. 

Ensuring a World Class Neutron Facility (+$4.8M) 

Neutron scattering has been enormously successful as a unique probe of the structure and 

dynamics of materials for researchers from many different disciplines. One ofNIST's top 

priodties this year is ensuring the continued operation and availability to industry and academic 

users of one of the world's foremost neutron research facilities -the NIST Center for Neutron 

Research (NCNR). 

The NCNR is the sole facility of its kind in the United States with a focus on enhancing 

American industrial competitiveness. It is therefore essential to U.S. industry, and to our 

Nation's long-term economic growth, that the NCNR is optimally equipped to provide state-ofthe-art measurement tools to the U.S. scientific and engineering community. The NCNR operates 

24 hours a day, seven days a week, for approximately 250 days of the year to support 

experiments by over 2,000 research participants annually. 

The budget proposes an increase of $4.8 million to ensure that NIST continues to provide access 

to the sophisticated measurement tools available through the NCNR. NIST is requesting these 

5 
32 

funds to account for continued price increases for fuel manufacturing and shipping, and is 

investing in a lifetime extension of the neutron source facility to maintain availability. 

Lab-to-Marketffechnology Transfer: Expand Technology Transfer Activities to 

Leverage Existing Authorities to Promote Data Sharing Efforts (+$2.0M) 

A wide range of life-changing commercial technologies has been nurtured by federally funded 

research and development (R&D), from the Internet, to the global positioning system (GPS), to 

life-saving vaccines. The federal R&D enterprise continues to support fundamental research and 

to expand the frontiers of human knowledge. One of the ways in which federal laboratories 

diffuse this knowledge is to make data and publications more easily accessible. 

Federally funded R&D has historically led to dramatic economic growth, and there is significant 

potential to increase the public's return on this investment in terms of innovation, job creation, 

societal impact, competitiveness, and economic prosperity. 

The proposed budget requests an increase of $2.0 million to expand lab-to-market and 

technology transfer activities through the development and deployment of data-sharing and 

collaborative tools and services. 

With this funding, NIST will lead the development of infrastructures for information sharing, 

data dissemination, and increased collaboration to address national priorities and enhance 

business competitiveness. NISTwill work with the Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) and 

offices within the Executive Office of the President (EOP) in the development of digital 

platforms to enhance cross-agency collaborations on technology transfer and development. 

These platforms will expand to enable data-sharing and synchronization across government, nonprofit, and for-profit platforms. NIST will coordinate its efforts across all departments and 

agencies that fund research and development (both intramural and extramural), consistent with 

each agency's mission. 

Industrial Technology Services (ITS) ($189M, +$34.0M) 

More than ever before, national priorities require the united efforts of diverse participants. 

NIST's convening power and technical independence can help bring those participants together 

to meet those needs. NIST's Industrial Technology Services (ITS) appropriation supports its 

external partnership programs that are designed to enhance American innovation and global 

competitiveness through partnerships with State and local organizations. 

The FY 2017 request of$189.0 million, an increase of$34 million above FY 2016, for the ITS 

appropriation is directed to two programs: the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership 

(MEP); and the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI). 

Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) (+$12.0M) 

6 
33 

The MEP program provides awards to a network of Manufacturing Extension Pattnership 

Centers in every state and in Puerto Rico. These Centers work directly with local manufacturing 

companies to strengthen the competitiveness of our Nation's domestic manufacturing base, with 

particular focus on small and medium-size enterprises. 

The requested $12.0 million increase will be used in FY 2017 to complete the final round of the 

multi-year competition of the MEP Centers, maintain the funding of states previously competed, 

and provide funding for additional performance-based awards to high-performing Centers. 

The increased funding will allow the program to allocate funds across the network to reduce the 

variation in funding across the system, and to target additional resources for key performance 

objectives including improved data collection and dissemination. The increase in funding for 

MEP Centers will allow them to work with more very small, rural, and statt-up firms, and will 

significantly improve market penetration with manufacturers having l to 19 employees. 

The expected economic impacts that will be generated as a result of this increased investment are 

highly leveraged, and include an additional $800.0 million in new and retained sales, $352.0 

million in new investment, $120.0 million in cost savings, and nearly seven thousand new and 

retained jobs. 

National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) (+$22.0M) 

The budget provides increased funds for federal investment in the National Network for 

Manufacturing Innovation program, which serves to create an effective manufacturing research 

infrastructure for U.S. industry and academia to solve industry-relevant problems. The NNMI 

consists of linked Institutes for Manufacturing Innovation with common goals, but unique 

concentrations. Within an Institute, industry, academia, and government partner to leverage 

existing resources, collaborate, and co-invest to nmturc manufacturing innovation and accelerate 

commercialization. 

Each Institute in the NNMI has a unique technology focus with the objective of creating selfsustaining regional manufacturing hubs that have national impact. The institutes help support an 

ecosystem ofmanutacturing activity in regions of the U.S. The manufacturing innovation 

institutes support manufacturing technology commercialization by helping to bridge the gap 

from the laboratory to the market and address core challenges in scaling manufacturing process 

technologies. 

The FY 2017 President's Budget request includes a $22.0 million increase for the program, for a 

total of$47.0 million, to fund an additional Institute. Funds are also provided within the totals 

for NIST to coordinate network activities of all institutes in the NNMI. This additional funding 

will keep NIST on a path to build out the network, together with our federal agency partners. 

The FY 20 17 President's budget request also proposes a mandatory appropriations accOtmt 

beginning in FY 2018. The mandatory request includes an additional $1.890 billion in one-time 

7 
34 

mandatory appropriations in FY 2017 for this program, to be executed from FY 2018 to FY 

2025, to complete the network of 45 institutes envisioned by the President. 

Construction of Research Facilities (CRF) ($95M, -$24.0M) 

Before I address the budget request for Construction of Research Facilities (CRF), I would like 

to take this opportunity to thank the Subcommittee for its strong support of critical renovations 

of aging and deteriorating infrastructure that would otherwise threaten NIST's ability to meet its 

mission. In particular, the FY 2016 appropriation has allowed NIST to begin work on our 

Radiation Physics Building, Building 245. The work conducted by NIST in Building 245, now 

over a half-century old, is essential to U.S. health and safety. 

For example, some 39 million mammograms in this country every year are performed on 

machines, the reliability of which is traceable to calibrations performed in Building 245. Other 

examples of technologies relying on traceability carried out in this facility include: external 

radiation beam therapies (cancer treatment); internal radiation therapies; metabolic studies; 

nuclear imaging; portal monitoring; solar satellites; nuclear power safety; radiological 

emergency response; personnel monitoring; and medical device sterilization. 

The FY 2017 CRF appropriation request of $95 million supports both new construction and 

renovation efforts for NIST's physical plant and infrastructure. While the CRF number is a 

decrease from the FY16 enacted level, that reflects the significant initial investment in FY16 to 

begin the renovation of Building 245. Forty million dollars in this request will fund the second 

phase of the multiyear renovations of Building 245; specifically, excavation and waterproofing 

of existing subterranean laboratory spaces that, today, routinely flood, and construction of an 

addition to house modern environmental control systems, thereby eliminating ongoing delays in 

calibrations and research. The remaining $55 million of the appropriation will be used to fund 

maintenance, repair, improvements, and major renovation of facilities occupied or used by NIST 

in Maryland, Colorado, and Hawaii, to protect the critical facility and infrastructure needs of the 

Institute. 

In addition to the discretionary funding request for CRF, authorizing legislation will be proposed 

that would provide $100.0 million in mandatory funds to renovate and modernize NIST facilities 

in order to maintain and enhance current research and development capabilities. NIST will use 

the funding to accelerate ongoing construction projects at our Gaithersburg and Boulder sites. 

Summary 

In conclusion, the FY 2017 NIST budget request reflects the Administration's recognition ofthe 

important role that NIST plays in innovation, as well as the impact ofNIST research and services 

in laying, and building, the foundation for our Nation's long-term job creation and prosperity. 

NIST will continue its work with the private sector to ensure U.S. manufacturers have the 

research suppott they need. Through its laboratory programs, outreach efforts, and standards 

8 
35 

development work, NIST is dedicated to providing U.S. industry with the tools needed to 

innovate, compete, and flourish in today's fierce global economy. 

I look forward to continuing to work with you, Madame Chairwoman and members of the 

Subcommittee, and would be happy to answer any questions. 

9 
36 
37 

1992; American Chemical Society Distinguished Service in the Advancement of Analytical 

Chemistry Award, 2001; Keynote Speaker-Winter Commencement Ceremonies, University of 

Maryland, College of Life Sciences, 2002; Council for Chemical Research Diversity Award; 

NOBCChE Henry Hill Award for exemplary work and leadership in the field of chemistry; 

Science Spectrum Magazine Emerald Award, 2005; Alumnus of the Year Award from the 

College of Chemical and Life Sciences at the University of Maryland, 2007; Member of the first 

class of inductees into the Knoxville College Alumni Hall of Fame, 201 0; Fellow of the 

American Chemical Society, 2011; Honorary Doctor of Science and Speaker at Graduate School 

of Arts and Sciences Commencement Exercises, Wake Forest University, 2012; Keynote 

Speaker-Winter Commencement Ceremonies, University of Maryland, College of Computer, 

Mathematical and Natural Sciences, 2015. 

Employment History: 

Worked as a senior analyst at the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant for three years prior to 

coming to the National Bureau of Standards in 1971. Led research activities in analytical 

chemistry for more than 20 years with his personal research being focused in the area of trace 

organic analytical chemistry, with special emphasis on retention mechanisms in liquid 

chromatography, the development of liquid chromatographic methods for the determination of 

individual organic species in complex mixtures (i.e., extracts of environmental, food, and 

clinical samples) and the determination of physico-chemical properties such as aqueous 

solubilities, octanol/water partition coefficients, and vapor pressures of organic compounds. 

This work is described in more than 100 peer-reviewed publications. More than 250 invited 

lectures have been presented at U.S. industrial sites, Colleges/Universities and Technical 

Meetings throughout the world. 

Education: 

1968 

1977 

Knoxville College 

University of Maryland 

B.S. 

Ph.D. 

11 
38 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you very much. 

As you discussed and we’ve discussed here, NIST will continue 

to fund the works in the areas of cybersecurity, and I’ve certainly 

been very interested in that given all of the recent problems that 

we’re running into there. So I wanted to ask, of the $74.2 million 

request in cybersecurity, more than half supports R&D efforts. Can 

you just give us a picture of some of that R&D taking place and 

how academia and industry are involved and just, you know, a little view on that if you could. 

Dr. MAY. Well, we have a number of efforts in cybersecurity. 

First of all, we have a very robust laboratory-based research program in cybersecurity, but this is an area that is moving very, very 

rapidly, and we saw the need for reaching out and including industry in this. And we established our National Cybersecurity Center 

of Excellence where we work with 22 companies in that area to 

work on problems that they see as a priority and take our standards that we developed, based on our authority, and put them into 

practice, working with these 22 companies. That is working very 

well, and we expect that work to continue in the future. 

We have a NICE program, which is the National Initiative on 

Cybersecurity Education, where we are trying to educate the next 

generation on the value of cybersecurity and actually provide training in that realm. And we are improving or increasing our bench 

depth in cryptography both from a defensive, as well as an offensive perspective if you will. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Okay. One of the things that I hear 

from the companies in my district is how difficult it is for people 

to get clearances. And, so oftentimes you get this talent, and these 

kids are really good and want to come out and work in this area 

so they can work for the government, but the clearance process 

takes forever. Have you found that a problem as you’re trying to 

get talent within the government, too? 

Dr. MAY. Well, certainly it’s a challenge in that area because 

there’s a limited supply. However, we are very aggressive and we 

are, I think, addressing that issue. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Are you able to shorten the time because the problem is, you know, these kids are coming out, they’re 

getting recruited by a lot of private companies where they’re going 

to make more money than in the government. So if we’re going to 

get them into the government and have them working for us, we 

need to make sure we can streamline that process and not lose 

them because it’s sort of bureaucracy within. 

Dr. MAY. I could not agree more. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Right. All right. 

Let’s see. How do you, given the importance of cybersecurity and 

it’s certainly in the forefront of our minds on a lot of these issues 

we’re dealing with, how do you decide to increase spending in other 

areas and pick your priorities on this? And do you feel comfortable 

where we’re at on the cybersecurity budget? 

Dr. MAY. The Committee has been very generous to us over the 

last several years in cybersecurity, and certainly we think we have 

the resources now to deliver our mission in that area. And we look 

forward to continuing to work with you to make sure we can titrate 

this as we go forward to make sure that we maintain the resources 
39 

necessary to deliver our mission and work with both government 

and industry to improve the cybersecurity posture for our country. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Okay. Thank you. And I know that 

NIST is hosting its next Cybersecurity Framework Workshop on 

April 6 and 7. Can you give us a little insight into what changes 

to the cybersecurity framework that we might see featured 

there—— 

Dr. MAY. Well, we—— 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. —give us a little preview of that? 

Dr. MAY. We actually don’t know. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Oh. 

Dr. MAY. The reason for this meeting is to work with industry 

to determine what changes we might need to make to the Framework, how quickly we might do that, and how. So this is an information-gathering meeting so that we know how to blaze the path 

forward with the Framework. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. All right. Thank you. 

And I now yield to Ms. Esty for her five minutes. 

Ms. ESTY. Again, thank you, Chairwoman Comstock, for holding 

today’s hearing. 

Dr. May, as a member of the Science Committee as well as the 

Transportation Committee, I understand the importance of reliable 

communications technology, particularly in our new, developing advanced transportation systems. From railroads to tech startups, 

our companies depend on advanced communications and spectrum 

to be able to communicate in real time. 

Dr. May, NIST is asking for a $2 million increase to $15 million 

in funding for its Measurement Sciences program to support advanced communications networks. Can you please describe for us 

the challenges we face with the rapid advances we’re experiencing 

on our communications technologies and how NIST intends to address these challenges through the proposed increase? 

Dr. MAY. Well, these activities will be focused primarily in our 

newly—or recently created Communications Technologies Laboratory. And we have three main work streams within that laboratory. 

One is public safety communications to improve the technology and 

provide the standards necessary to build out the nationwide LTE 

network for first responders. So we’re responsible for the measurement standards and testing to make sure that we can do this and 

do this in a manner that we provide open competition for the vendors of devices that would want to play in that space. Obviously, 

there are some measurement and standards issues associated with 

with spectrum-sharing and spectrum efficiency. 

And finally, we are working with players around the world to define what 5G will look like and to implement that to sort of make 

sure that the United States is not left behind when it comes to 

next-generation communications technologies. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you. That’s very helpful. And this is ongoing, 

particularly on the public safety front. I can tell you in the 41 cities 

and towns I represent, this is an ongoing challenge about interoperability and their ability to communicate with each other and 

coordinate, so I hope we can move rapidly forward. 

So those investments the taxpayers are making on the local level 

are really wise investments that are going to be good for a number 
40 

of years and they’re not going to have to, two years from now, 

change their whole systems out again, which will be very challenging. 

Connecticut has a thriving manufacturing community in my district. From Jonal Labs, which does aerospace and work for NASA, 

to United Technologies Corporation, to Click Bond, to Becton Dickinson Connecticut. Companies manufacture a broad range of products, aerospace and bond fasteners. Through my conversations with 

these companies, one common theme emerges, and that is a concern about workforce readiness. Do our young people have the 

skills necessary to compete in modern manufacturing? 

As you know, a strong domestic manufacturing base is essential 

for high-quality jobs and for a living wage for many people in this 

country. Can you explain to us a little bit how the MEP’s 

ExporTech program operates and what it’s doing to expand overseas markets and tech transfer for U.S. companies and the goals 

of this program in the fiscal year 2017 budget? 

Dr. MAY. Well, what we want to do is work with other entities 

within government to 1) demonstrate that manufacturing in fact is 

a viable career path for young folks and get the word out. We have 

established a National Manufacturing Day that takes place in early 

October every year where we point to the future, at least try to get 

the young folks to see and visualize the future that manufacturing 

is cool; there are good, high-paying jobs; but more than that, working in manufacturing is really being truly American because we 

need to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States. We 

need to be an exporter and not only an importer of goods. So we 

are working with the entire community to try to strengthen manufacturing and make sure that we get the word out that there is a 

future in manufacturing, and it’s critical to our country. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you very much. And I suspect that the Ranking 

Member of the full Committee will pick up with biomanufacturing, 

which I would love to ask some questions about, but my time is expired. Thank you very much, and I yield back. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you. And I now recognize Mr. 

Palmer for five minutes. 

Mr. PALMER. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Dr. May, NIST has its own police force. How much do you spend 

each year for that group? 

Dr. MAY. About $8 million, sir. 

Mr. PALMER. About $8 million. What activities or investigations 

justify having a police unit within NIST? 

Dr. MAY. Well, primarily, we’ve historically had a police force at 

NIST, and the Federal Protective Service has granted us the ability 

to maintain that on our campus. We also have some fairly sensitive 

assets that I won’t go into detail about here—but I will do in private conversations with the committee—that have to be maintained. 

Mr. PALMER. Well, is it a—— 

Dr. MAY. So that was the historical basis. 

Mr. PALMER. Is it a police force or a security force? 

Dr. MAY. Actually, we have both. We have a perimeter security 

force that guards the perimeter, and we actually have a police force 

that is responsible for policing the campus. 
41 

Mr. PALMER. What do you spend on this perimeter security force? 

Dr. MAY. The exact numbers I’ll have to get to you, but that is 

a contract police force. 

Mr. PALMER. It’s a contract—— 

Dr. MAY. Yes. 

Mr. PALMER. —force? All right. Does your police force have the 

authority to make arrests? 

Dr. MAY. They do have the authority to make arrests, and they 

have made arrests. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. How many officers does NIST employee in 

that force? 

Dr. MAY. As I said, I don’t have the numbers right before me, 

but I would imagine with the police force, if we were fully staffed, 

15 to 20, and the external security, probably another dozen. But I 

will get those numbers to you specifically. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. And I assume they’re armed? 

Dr. MAY. Well, I just don’t know that it’s appropriate for me to 

discuss that operation in detail—— 

Mr. PALMER. Well, you’re—— 

Dr. MAY. —but I can provide those numbers to you. 

Mr. PALMER. I don’t think there’s any issue here with that. I 

think it’s pretty evident that they are armed, and what I want to 

know is, is it side arms, is it small arms, is it military-style weapons? How are they equipped? 

Dr. MAY. Sir, I’ll be happy to provide that as a matter of record 

to the Committee. 

Mr. PALMER. Okay. How long would that take? 

Dr. MAY. We can get that to you by the end of the day if you 

want. 

Mr. PALMER. You outsourced your security. Why don’t you 

outsource your police force? 

Dr. MAY. Well, we are a science and technology agency, and 

knowing that, I’ve recently asked for an assessment of our overall 

security posture by three external security experts. They have 

given us their thoughts on the rightsizing and nature of security 

force for our campus, and the questions that you ask are being considered. 

Mr. PALMER. Do you have them on one campus or do you have 

multiple locations where your police are employed? 

Dr. MAY. We have police on our Gaithersburg campus and on our 

Boulder campus. 

Mr. PALMER. You know, I—— 

Dr. MAY. Boulder, Colorado. 

Mr. PALMER. I believe we have 70-something federal agencies 

that have armed agents, including the EPA that has spent several 

million dollars, and I don’t know if it bothers anybody else but it 

seems that it’s almost like we’ve militarized federal agencies. And 

I just don’t understand why we have to have so many agencies 

with their own armed agents providing security when you could 

outsource that. 

And I commend you for outsourcing your security force. I understand you have certain specific issues that would require protection, but I am very concerned about so many federal agencies having armed agents and being armed with military-style weapons. So 
42 

if you would get back with that information, and I think it will be 

helpful if you look at outsourcing your police force. 

Dr. MAY. Certainly, that issue is among the recommendations 

that we’ve gotten from our three security experts, and we are mulling over that issue now exactly how to move forward to improve 

the security posture for both of our campuses. 

Mr. PALMER. Well, thank you for your answers, Dr. May. 

I’ll yield back, Madam Chairman. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you. And I’ll now recognize Ms. 

Bonamici, who is also sitting in as our Ranking Member now. 

Thank you. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

And, Dr. May, welcome back to the Committee. I want to start 

by thanking you and your team at NIST for working with Oregon’s 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership OMEP. I know they appreciate the collaboration. And since 2003, OMEP has helped with creating or maintaining more than 15,000 manufacturing jobs in Oregon. And you talked about the importance of getting the word out 

there that these are good jobs. I think you said cool, cool jobs, and 

I want to mention that I went out to tour Fort George Brewery in 

my district. They got some help with OMEP to help with their canning process. That was pretty cool. 

I also have in my district A.R.E. Manufacturing. That’s a contract shop in Newberg, Oregon, that specializes in making precision 

equipment components for manufacturers. By working with OMEP 

to develop a job-training program for their employees, they were 

able to increase their entry-level hiring pool and hire more qualified people, and so I appreciate all the work that NIST has done 

with the MEP programs across the country but particularly those 

I’m familiar with in Oregon. 

Dr. May, over the past several years, our nation has experienced 

historic and devastating natural disasters, and numerous communities across the country are still recovering and rebuilding. NIST 

is the lead agency for two important natural disaster programs, the 

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program. Now, the Pacific 

Northwest is especially prone to earthquakes. We are sitting off the 

Cascadia subduction zone in the Northwest, and we are overdue, 

so it’s not a question of if there will be an earthquake; it’s when. 

So can you describe the role that NIST plays in these programs 

both as the lead agency, as well as your role in working on research to improve the performance of buildings and infrastructure 

in the face of a disaster? 

Dr. MAY. Well, we have a major program in our Engineering 

Laboratory, a part of which used to be a Building and Fire Research Laboratory, to provide the basic science and engineering 

technology to modify the construction of buildings for the areas to 

the hazards in that geographic locale. And that’s a longstanding 

program, and with support for this Committee, we have been able 

to strengthen the program. 

But we also coordinate NEHRP where we work with other agencies to develop new standards and codes based on knowledge that 

we gain from natural disasters that we actually can’t control that 
43 

we can sort of try to respond to them and make our built environment more resilient and resistant to things that we can’t control. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you. Certainly, more investment at the 

front end saves lives and property later. 

Also, Dr. May, federally funded research has led to many innovations. We’ve heard about some of those today: GPS, barcodes, lifesaving medications and treatments. In this Committee we often 

hear about the challenges and obstacles to successfully transferring 

federally funded research from the lab to the private marketplace. 

The budget proposes an increase in technology transfer activities to 

develop data-sharing and collaborative tools and services. So can 

you elaborate, please, on the efforts, how these efforts would help 

enable the transfer of the federally funded research to the marketplace? 

Dr. MAY. Well, certainly, as you mentioned and others have mentioned, there are a lot of very important technologies and tools that 

are being developed in our laboratories, but it’s a very large enterprise and we don’t right now have ready access to the information 

of the various components. For example, if I’m in the private sector 

and I want to make something, there might be inventions across 

several federal agencies where I could pull that together if I only 

knew that they were there. So our primary effort is to develop a 

resource, one-stop shopping if you will, to look at the investments 

and the technologies that are being developed in the public sector 

that can be brought to bear to develop new technologies, new inventions in the private sector. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Terrific. Thank you very much. 

I yield back. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you. 

And I now recognize Mr. Loudermilk for five minutes. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And, Dr. 

May, thank you for being here. 

During my first year in Congress here, I’ve been quite amazed. 

You know, we live in reality TV show, conspiracy TV show, those 

things dominate our culture today, but the more I’ve been here, the 

more I see that a lot of things that happen in the federal government would make—we feed a lot of the information to these. But 

can we bring up the first slide here? 

[Slide.] 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. I want to bring up an incident that I’m sure 

you’re aware of that happened in May of 2015 where one of the 

senior NIST police officers was operating a meth lab that apparently there was an explosion at the agency. He was using a vacant 

building to actually cook meth. Of course, thankfully, that police officer is currently in jail for manufacturing methamphetamine, but 

the fact that he was able to smuggle the necessary materials into 

a vacant NIST building is embarrassing, but it also raises serious 

questions about safety and security of the whole facility, as well as 

the people who live and work in Gaithersburg. I’m sure you, too, 

would agree that the meth lab explosion was a serious incident. I’m 

sure you’re aware of that incident. Do you feel that was a serious—— 

Dr. MAY. It certainly was, sir. 
44 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. It was. Is that one of the most serious incidents that has ever happened at NIST? 

Dr. MAY. From a perspective of the—— 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Since you’ve been there? 

Dr. MAY. —of embarrassment—I’ve been there 45 years. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Yes. 

Dr. MAY. I’ve been there a long time. On an embarrassment 

scale, yes. In terms of actual structural damage, no, because the 

structural damage was very, very minimal. We had a fire in one 

of our laboratories. So in terms of destruction of property, this 

ranks very low because the building that this activity took place in 

was designed for hazardous—it used to be called a Hazards Lab as 

a matter of fact, and it has blowout panels in case there is a pressure buildup. The panels behaved as they should. They were placed 

back in the next day, and there was minimal structural damage to 

the building. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. So the primary thing, though, is an embarrassment? 

Dr. MAY. Yes. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. So you don’t feel that there’s a security concern 

or that the money you’re spending on the officers, law enforcement 

officers at NIST actually committing felonies on property, that’s not 

a concern? 

Dr. MAY. Oh, that is a big concern. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. 

Dr. MAY. That is a big concern. As I had mentioned before you 

came in, after this incident took place, I requested input from security experts from three other sources that—— 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. 

Dr. MAY. that operate environments like us to give us their 

input—— 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. 

Dr. MAY. —on how we can strengthen the security posture of our 

campus beyond this, and all indicated that in a situation similar 

to this it would be hard to anticipate what a trusted member of 

your security staff might do. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. And I understand it, and I apologize for just 

popping in, but I am dealing with homeland security issues as well, 

which is very important. 

But after the explosion, you briefed this Committee staff on the 

incident. In the briefing you referred to the explosion as a near 

miss. You stand by that characterization that it was, you know, a 

near miss since no one was hurt or—— 

Dr. MAY. Well, it opened our eyes and made us—well, for one, 

it compelled me to get some outside expertise or input on how we 

might strengthen our security posture and to take a deep dive—— 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. 

Dr. MAY. —actually. So I guess near miss—— 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Yes. 

Dr. MAY. —that no one was seriously hurt. And again, it opened 

our eyes that we needed to take a deep look and investigation into 

our security personnel. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. Can we bring up slide two? I want to 

make sure we get to this, too, as our time is running down. 
45 

[Slide.] 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. This is an email from your Chief of Staff Kevin 

Kimball in the aftermath of the meth lab explosion. Referring to 

the explosion, Mr. Kimball writes, ‘‘Can’t see how this rises to an 

audit risk. Don’t remember briefing the auditors after the plutonium’’—assume incident—‘‘and that was a thousand times more of 

a risk.’’ What incident is he talking about that was a thousand 

times worse than a meth lab exploding? 

Dr. MAY. Well, that was an incident that took place in our Boulder laboratory, I think, in 2007 where a small amount of plutonium 

was released into the sewer system based on some research that 

we were doing out there. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Into the sewer system? 

Dr. MAY. Yes. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Do you agree that that was a thousand times 

worse than the meth lab? 

Dr. MAY. Well, I had not thought about how I would quantify 

that, but certainly I think that in fact in terms of danger to the 

public, yes, that was more serious than that particular incident. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. So was this plutonium incident released—or 

reported to this Committee or any Members of Congress or—— 

Dr. MAY. It was, and in fact the then-Acting Director testified before this Committee about that incident. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. Are there any other incidents that we 

should know about that are a thousand times or a hundred times 

worse than the meth lab? 

Dr. MAY. Not that I am aware of. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Okay. Well, I think the other questions I have 

have already been answered, Madam Chairwoman, and so I yield 

back. Thank you. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Okay. I now recognize Mr. Tonko for 

five minutes. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Madam Chair. And welcome, Dr. May. 

As a representative for the capital region of New York, I realize 

that moving toward an innovation economy is the key to our economic growth. With that in mind, I’m pleased to witness our nation’s renewed desire to invest in high-tech manufacturing and in 

innovation economy. I see great hope for these efforts, especially inspired by the formulation of the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, or NNMI. 

I have some questions this morning that aim to seek clarity in 

the NIST NNMI selection process as we move forward. 

In December of 2015, NIST published a notice of intent that indicated that NIST was especially interested in two areas of focus, including collaborative manufacturing robots and biopharmaceuticals 

manufacturing. However, in the Federal Funding Opportunity, the 

FFO, neither topic was mentioned. 

This year, the Department of Defense issued a request for information for new manufacturing innovation institutes, and the Department of Defense listed six technical focus areas under consideration, including two topics: one, the assistive and soft robotics; and 

bioengineering for regenerative medicine as another, which are 

similar to NIST’s area of focus. Presumably, NIST and DOD would 

not want to select areas, I would imagine, that are too much alike. 
46 

So, Dr. May, can you further discuss the process that NIST 

would use or will use to select a proposal? 

Dr. MAY. Well, please excuse the colloquialism, but for the December announcement I’ll just say my bad. What we intended to 

do was address the concern that you’ve expressed that we were 

looking in our Institutes that we would sponsor to the Department 

of Commerce not to duplicate anything that was ongoing or 

planned by the Department of Energy or the Department of Defense or any other federal agency that would be standing up a 

manufacturing institute. And we gave two examples, the examples 

of biomanufacturing and engineering robotics were just two examples. 

And in retrospect, they probably should not have been called out 

because it did cause confusion. But I am here to guarantee to you 

that our process and the process that we launched about a week 

ago, week-and-a-half ago, is one that will be truly open, and we will 

not support any institute that is already in existence or planned by 

any other federal agency. 

Mr. TONKO. So, as you go forward, the coordination with DOD 

would be—— 

Dr. MAY. Yes. 

Mr. TONKO. —a very strong part of your interoperations? 

Dr. MAY. It will be, it has been, and through our Advanced Manufacturing Program Office, we actually provide the coordination 

and glue for the network, so we are in constant contact there. 

There is a call that I’m a part of, and with our representatives from 

the National Economic Council, as well as DOE and DOD on a regular basis, so we are in constant communication. 

Mr. TONKO. And could one agency decide to not select a proposal 

that was too similar to a proposed—a proposal that another agency 

is considering? 

Dr. MAY. As a matter of fact, I think we have a process in place 

where it wouldn’t be just the agency decides. We would decide as 

a collective because we are trying to operate a network, although 

it has individual nodes, but we’re trying to work on behalf of this 

again is a cliche, but the American people, and certainly we don’t 

want to have any duplicative activities. 

Mr. TONKO. Well, I know a number of institutions in my district 

have specific abilities in these disciplines, so I’m just concerned. Is 

NIST planning sequential awards? 

Dr. MAY. Can you explain what you mean by sequential? 

Mr. TONKO. Well, as you go forward, will there be additional 

awards that NIST is looking at where you would use the initial 

pool of proposals for future awards? 

Dr. MAY. Yes. What we are planning to do is to, with this call, 

essentially establish a queue, and we have resources to fund one 

institute from our fiscal year 2016 funds. The funds requested in 

the ’17 budget should allow us to establish two additional ones, and 

we would establish the queue based on the call that is out at 

present. 

Mr. TONKO. Okay. I would strongly encourage the continuation 

of some of these thematics that you’ve outlined. I think they’re critical to our manufacturing base, and certainly, I think that there’s 

a great contribution that many of our higher ed centers and private 
47 

sectors could offer through a collaborative. So I’m a very strong fan 

of NNMI and hope it continues in a way that’s targeted to the 

strength that we have in our nation—— 

Dr. MAY. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. TONKO. —to strengthen us across the board. 

Dr. MAY. Thank you. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you. 

Mr. TONKO. And with that—— 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. And I now recognize Mr. Hultgren for 

five minutes. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Chairwoman. I appreciate it so 

much. 

And thank you, Dr. May, for being here. I do really appreciate 

the work at NIST and see how important cooperation is, communication is, and wanted just to ask you a few questions. I apologize. 

I’ve got a couple hearings going on at the same time, so if any of 

this has been covered, I’m sorry. I wasn’t able to hear about it, but 

I did want to get some answers on this. 

I wondered, have any program funds come from DOE’s EERE 

program, as was stipulated in the bipartisan RAMI Act, which was 

something I supported and cosponsored? If not, why not, and is 

there any plan for funds to be transferred from EERE to the Department of Commerce to carry out NNMI in the future? 

Dr. MAY. Well, first of all, we are very appreciative of your support of the RAMI bill because that authorized us to, one, to sponsor 

institutes from the Department of Commerce, and it also gave 

NIST the authority to set up our Advanced Manufacturing Program Office to coordinate the activities for the network. 

However, that was an authorization bill and not an appropriation 

bill, and the bill says the Secretary of Energy may, it didn’t say 

shall, and to this date, this hasn’t happened. But we have gotten 

an appropriation in ’16 for $25 million to begin this process, and 

we’re going use funds from that to support at least one network in 

’16, and with the request in ’17, two more, and to begin activities 

of coordination, information-sharing within the network. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Well, I do hope it moves forward. Were you involved in or were you aware of any discussions between the Commerce Department and the Energy Department about carrying out 

the RAMI Act after it was signed into law? It sounds like there was 

some conversations there. Were you a part of those? 

Dr. MAY. Yes, I was. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Okay. And that was really what you’re referring 

to now where it was the difference between whether it was appropriations or an act? 

Dr. MAY. Yes. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Okay. Well, again, hopefully, that can be clarified. Hopefully, these important programs, some in Illinois, can 

move forward and absolutely will be making a difference. 

I wonder, how will NIST evaluate competing proposals from different industry sectors? Will NIST treat each industry as equal and 

decide on the basis of the proposal details and private financial 

contributions when you’re looking at the RAMI Act? 
48 

Dr. MAY. Well, in short, I think we are going to cut the best deal 

for the American people. 

Mr. HULTGREN. What does that—— 

Dr. MAY. I—— 

Mr. HULTGREN. Can you explain it a little bit better for me? 

Dr. MAY. Well, what we’re looking for in these institutes are institutes that have the potential to be sustainable. They need to address one of the needed areas in the advanced manufacturing domain. And we will look at all proposals and select the one based, 

one, on no duplication of activities currently ongoing within other 

institutes and address the greatest need, the strongest partnership 

among industry and academia. 

Mr. HULTGREN. So your plan is to treat each industry as equal 

and truly decide on the basis of proposal details and private financial contributions and not have a preset agenda—— 

Dr. MAY. Exactly. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Okay. And how do you plan to integrate new centers with existing ones? 

Dr. MAY. Well, new centers will be a part of the network, and 

they will have the services of the NIST Advanced Manufacturing 

Office to provide them with best practices, information-sharing, so 

they will again be a member of the team. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Okay. So, again, the RAMI Act, again, I was 

proud to support that, proud to be a cosponsor of it, but also a big 

reason why I support it was my understanding was it was a meritbased, nonpolitical process for—— 

Dr. MAY. Yes. 

Mr. HULTGREN. —soliciting, evaluating, and competitively funding new manufacturing innovation centers. That’s still your commitment to—— 

Dr. MAY. That’s still our commitment. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Okay. And we want to obviously see that happen. Hopefully, this will continue to move forward. We all agree it’s 

important. It’s been a little disappointing and frustrating on our 

part that it hasn’t moved more quickly, and my hope is that that 

will happen soon and that the commitment that you’ve made today 

and previous commitments of keeping politics out of this and really 

looking at industries that are best fit and can put the best proposals together will be the ones that are receiving the opportunity 

in the centers. 

So I’m out of time. I will yield back to the Chairman. Thank you. 

Dr. MAY. And, sir, that is our commitment to you and to the Subcommittee. 

Chairwoman COMSTOCK. Thank you, Dr. May. 

And I’d like to thank you also for your testimony and the members for their questions. And the record will remain open for two 

weeks for additional written comments and written questions from 

members. We appreciate your work on this important subject and 

look forward to continuing to work with you, Dr. May. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

Dr. MAY. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 11:07 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 
(49) 

Appendix I 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS
50 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS

Responses by Dr. Willie E. May 
51 

the Framework from the public. Similar recommendations were received in the preceding RFI responses 

and also through informal discussions over the past year. RFI respondents also requested that any nearterm updates to the Cybersecurity Framework cause 'minimal disruption' to use of the current version, 

1.0. NIST intends to accommodate these requests via refinements and clarifications commensurate with 

a minor update over the upcoming year. 

d. Does the federal government do a good job at adhering to the NIST Cybersecurity Framework? 

Please explain. 

Answer: 

The Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity is directed to private sector owners 

and operators of the Nation's critical infrastructure. It is aimed at reducing and better managing 

cybersecurity risks through voluntary adoption and use, and is not a one-size-fits-all approach. While 

some Federal agencies have found the Framework useful, no organization, private or public, is obligated 

to "adhere" to it. Organizations will continue to have unique risks- different threats, different 

vulnerabilities, different risk tolerances- and how they implement the practices in the Framework will 

vary. 

e. What are the costs associated with maintaining and updating the Cybersecurity Framework? 

Answer: 

NIST currently administers the Cybersecurity Framework program with $2.4M annually. 

Page 2 of36 
52 

Question #2: The NIST Cybersecurity Framework is meant to be a living document, undergoing 

modification to accommodate feedback. 

a. How often is the Framework updated, and is this adequate? 

Answer: 

There is no set update schedule for the Cybersecurity Framework. The decision to proceed with an 

update to the Cybersecurity Framework is heavily informed by stakeholder input through various 

engagement methods including workshops and RFI responses. 

b. Are proactive actions being incorporated into Framework updates? 

Answer: 

The Cybersecurity Framework is a risk-based approach to managing cybersecurity risk, which can 

facilitate the ability of organizations to take action on cybersecurity outcomes before issues occur. Since 

many effective cybersecurity implementation approaches preexisted, Cybersecurity Framework was 

architected to not replicate those approaches, and is technology-neutral. The Framework exists at a 

higher level of abstraction than implementation approaches. Discrete actions to fulfill Cybersecurity 

Framework outcomes are, and will be, left to those cybersecurity implementation approaches. 

c. Is there a method to evaluate the Framework to know how effective it is? 

Answer: 

Yes. Asking users whether they receive value from the Cybersecurity Framework is the most 

straightforward and comprehensive method of determining effectiveness. The value of the 

Cybersecurity Framework is frequently expressed in terms of business process and group dynamics. For 

example, effectiveness may be expressed in terms of enhanced communications, better team function, 

clarity regarding cybersecurity requirements, or efficient prioritization of resource decisions. 

Page 3 of36 
53 

Question #3: In 2013, amidst community concerns that a cryptographic algorithm in a NIST standard 

had been deliberately weakened, then-NIST Director Patrick Gallagher requested a Visiting Committee 

on Advanced Technology (VCAT) review of NIST's cryptographic standards and guidelines 

development process. One of the report's recommendations states, "NIST may seek the advice of the 

NSA [National Security Agency] on cryptographic matters but it must be in a position to assess it and 

reject it when warranted." 

a. What is the relationship between NIST and NSA today relative to cryptographic standards? 

Answer: 

NIST is committed to ensuring that its internal capabilities are strong and effective, and that it has access 

to highly-capable external cryptographers. NIST's research investment in the cryptographic arena helps 

to ensure that the algorithms and schemes in its standards and guidelines are secure. This research also 

aids in building the foundation for standards and guidelines, whether they are developed by NIST or by 

other organizations, including NSA. 

Multiple federal agencies contribute to NIST's cryptography efforts in research and in developing 

standards and guidelines. Consultation with several of those organizations- OMB, the Departments of 

Defense, Homeland Security and Energy, the NSA, and the Government Accountability Office- is 

mandated by the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) in order to avoid unnecessary 

and costly duplication of effort, and to assure that NIST's standards and guidelines are complementary 

and compatible with those employed for the protection of national security systems and information 

contained in those systems. 

As part of NSA and other agencies' collaboration with NIST, their staff may assist in the development of 

new standards and guidelines. This may take the form of coauthoring publications with NIST staff, 

providing comments on draft documents, or submitting cryptographic algorithms for consideration by 

NIST. All contributions that significantly affect the content of any standard or guideline- particularly 

normative statements- will be clearly and publicly acknowledged. In accordance with NIST's authorship 

policy, NIST will identify the names of any authors of standards or guidelines. If a NIST standard or 

guideline contains an algorithm that was designed by another agency's employees, NIST will 

acknowledge that agency as the designer, even though NIST may not be able to list specific individuals. 2 

As is the case with private sector organizations, NISTwill consider and acknowledge other agencies' 

comments, whether they are provided during the formal public comment period or other stages of 

development. That includes information that may be provided during monthly NIST meetings with NSA. 

Comments from federal agencies received during the public comment period will be posted and 

adjudicated in the same way as those submitted by the public. 

Another venue where NIST interacts with NSA about cryptography is the Committee on National 

Security Systems (CNSS), where NIST is an observer. The CNSS is chaired by the Department of Defense, 

while the NSA staffs the CNSS Secretariat. The CNSS mission is to set national-level information 

assurance policies, directives, instructions, operational procedures, guidance and advisories for United 

Page4of36 
54 

States Government departments and agencies for the security of national security systems. NIST reviews 

and comments on drafts of proposed CNSS documents, including policies, directives, instructions and 

standards. The CNSS policy CNSSP- 15 specifies the use of NIST standardized cryptographic algorithms 

for the protection of national security information. 

NIST understands that having its own independent cryptographic expertise is essential in order to carry 

out its statutory responsibility to develop strong cryptographic standards and guidelines to protect nonnational security federal information systems. Moreover, this capability is vital to NIST's development of 

standards and guidelines that promote economic development and protect sensitive personal and 

corporate information. 

b. How is NIST incorporating the VCAT report's recommendations- specifically, has NIST 

rejected any NSA advice since the publication of the report? 

Answer: 

In response to VCAT recommendations, NIST engaged in its public process to formalize its approach to 

development of cryptographic standards, culminating in the publication in March of NISTIR 7977, "NIST 

Cryptographic Standards and Guidelines Development Process." NISTIR 7977 sets forth formal 

processes which NIST considers necessary in developing robust, trustworthy, and effective cryptographic 

standards and guidelines. 

Ultimately, the final decision about what to include in a cryptographic standard or guideline rests with 

NIST. NIST understands that any such decision must reflect a high degree of integrity to ensure the 

support of cryptographic experts regardless of affiliation. NIST's mission includes the rigorous 

development of strong cryptographic standards for meeting U.S. federal security needs and promoting 

the U.S. economy and public welfare by providing technical leadership for the Nation's measurement 

and standards infrastructure. In order to make independent decisions, NIST stresses the importance of 

its access to sufficient expertise, both from within NIST and from organizations and individuals external 

to NIST. 

Page 5 of36 
55 

Question #4: In a November 2015 review of authentication processes at the IRS, the Treasury 

Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) noted that the agency's "Get Transcript" application, 

which was hacked last year, did not require multi-factor authentication to access the site_ The report 

explains that the IRS did not rate the risks associated with "Get Transcript" at NIST level three, which 

would require multifactor authentication. 

a. Should a level three designation be applied when the information at risk is very important, 

e.g., taxpayers' names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security Numbers, wages, incomes, 

tax account and tax returns? 

Answer: 

Risk Levels for identity proofing, identity credentials and authorizations are outlined in the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) memo 04-04, E Authentication Guidelines for Federal Agencies. NIST 

provides the technical guidance for agencies to implement security controls after an agency complies 

with OMB 04-04 and determines the risk level associated with that specific system. 

b. Did the IRS ask for NIST advice about the question of appropriate cyber security precautions 

for the "Get Transcript" application? If so, what advice did NIST give? Was that advice given 

in writing? 

Answer: 

IRS and NIST have consulted generally on the issues of identity proofing, issuing authentication 

credentials and authentication mechanisms. IRS and NIST have discussed NIST guidance in these areas 

as well, specifically, the written guidance NIST provides agencies in NIST Special Publication 800-63, 

Electronic Authentication Guidance. 

c. Did the IRS ask NIST for advice about the question of appropriate cyber security precautions 

for the Identity Protection Personal Identification Number (IP PIN) application? If so, what 

advice did NIST give? Was that advice given in writing? 

Answer: 

The IP PIN application was discussed with the IRS in the general context of applying NIST written 

guidance in NIIT SP 800-63 for implementation at the different risk levels specified in OMB 04-04. 

Page 6of36 
56 

Question #5: According to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report issued 

on November 19, 2015 (Reference Number: 2016-40-007), the IRS received guidance from NIST at the 

time thee-Authentication framework was being developed indicating that a Taxpayer Identification 

Number (TIN) was an acceptable form of identification. However, as the report further notes, in 

August 2015, NIST informed TIGTA that a TIN is not currently an acceptable Government identification 

number for the purpose of authentication. Please explain the discrepancy between guidance NIST 

provided to IRS and the response NIST provided to TIGTA. As part of this response, please provide all 

documents relative to this discrepancy that NIST sent to and received from the IRA and TIGTA. 

Answer: 

NIST guidance highlights the important distinction between identification and authentication, which are 

distinct steps in the overall identity management process. This process begins by first verifying the 

identity of a user through a process known as "identity proofing." The proofing process establishes 

confidence that the user is in fact the person he or she claims to be. As part of this process, a trusted 

authority will collect and verify evidence sufficient to uniquely identify the individual and that 

demonstrates that he or she holds that identity. NIST guidance describes different forms of evidence 

that can be used in this process, including tax identification numbers. 

Once the identity of an individual is confirmed through the proofing process, he or she will be issued a 

token that is unique to that individual. In the authentication process,_ individuals use their respective 

tokens to demonstrate they are who they claim to be. NIST guidance describes different types of tokens 

that provide varying levels of security. However, this guidance does not recommend the use of 

identification numbers, including the TIN, as authentication tokens. 

NIST Special Publication 800-63-2, Electronic Authentication Guide 

(http:/ /dx.doi.org,/1_0.6028/NISI5J'jl..Q.Q.-63..::l) specifically addresses the identity management process 

for identify proofing, token and credential issuance, and user authentication. 

Page 7 of36 
57 

Question #6: The Department of Commerce Budget in Brief FY 2017 states, "NIST will continue its 

outreach efforts associated with educating the public to reduce cyber risks to critical infrastructure as 

part of its follow-up actions after releasing the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure 

Cybersecurity." 

a. How much does NIST spend on educating the public in cybersecurity? 

Answer: 

NIST currently spends $500K annually on educating the public through our small business outreach and 

the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education efforts. 

b. What measures has NIST already taken to educate the public about cybersecurity outside of 

the Framework? 

Answer: 

NIST has several outreach programs intended to raise awareness of cybersecurity standards, guidelines, 

and practices to many constituencies including small and medium-sized businesses, educational 

institutions, state, local and tribal governments, and federal agencies. 

NIST standards and guidelines are developed in an open, transparent, and collaborative manner that 

enlists broad expertise from around the world. While developed for federal agency use, these resources 

are voluntarily adopted by other organizations because they are effective and accepted globally. These 

resources are disseminated through a variety of means that encourage the broad sharing of information 

security standards, guidelines, and practices, including outreach to stakeholders, participation in 

government and industry events, and online mechanisms. 

c. Are there any ways that public education in cybersecurity could and should be improved? 

Please explain. 

Answer: 

Educating the public on cybersecurity requires a concerted effort and sustained focus from government 

and industry. NIST continues to produce guidelines, practices, and tools to help stakeholders improve 

their ability to understand and manage cybersecurity risk. NIST will continue to identify and implement 

ways to improve the usability and accessibility of its guidelines, practices, and tools. 

d. Will there be any new approaches implemented in FY2017 to better educate the public to 

reduce cyber risks? 

Answer: 

NISTwill continue working with interagency partners, industry, and academia to identify opportunities 

to engage the diverse cybersecurity stakeholder community. This engagement may utilize a variety of 

mechanisms including new cybersecurity guidelines and practices, implementation tools and resources, 

and in-person and virtual outreach, awareness, and education events. 

Page 8 of36 
58 

Question 117: The Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act of 2014 (RAMI Act) states 

that "except as provided in paragraph {2), no funds are authorized to be appropriated ... ". Paragraph 

{2) goes on to say that "the Secretary [of Commerce] may use not to exceed $5,000,000 for each of the 

fiscal years 2015 through 2024 to carry out this section from amounts appropriated to the Institute for 

Industrial Technical Services." 

NIST FY16 appropriations from Congress included $25 million for the purpose of establishing Institutes 

for Manufacturing Innovation and coordinating their activities. 

a. Does NIST plan to follow the RAMI Act and spend no more than $5 million per fiscal year for 

implementation and administration of the NNMI program? If not, under what legislative or 

legal authority does NIST plan in FY2016 to exceed the $5 million annual limitation under the 

RAMI Act and/or ignore the RAMI Act stipulation that NIST use appropriated funds only for 

implementation and administration (i.e., not for the federal share for a new NNMI center)? If 

so, please furnish a legal memo to the Committee which sets forth (any) legislative authority 

for these actions. 

Answer: 

The RAMI Act was enacted within Division B, Title VII of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2015, 

Pub. L. No. 113-235, 128 Stat. 2130,2220-34 (2014). Section 703 of the RAMI Act amended the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Act by inserting within it a new Section 34, authorizing NIST 

to establish a "Network for Manufacturing Innovation Program." Section 34(e) provides that "[t]o the 

extent provided for in advance by appropriations Acts, the Secretary may use not to exceed $5,000,000 

iQ[_each of the fiscal years 2015 through 2024 to carry out this section from amounts appropriated to 

the Institute for Industrial Technical Services" (ITS). (emphasis added). 

NIST understands this language as precluding it from incurring obligations to carry out Section 34oft he 

NIST Act in the absence of a prior and specific appropriation for that purpose. NIST also interprets this 

language as precluding it from incurring obligations in excess of $5 million from amounts appropriated 

iQ[_each of the covered fiscal years. Given the "no-year" nature of the ITS appropriation, amounts 

appropriated to carry out Section 34 not obligated in the year for which appropriated may be carried 

over and obligated in subsequent fiscal years. For this reason, and because Section 34 does not prohibit 

NIST from incurring obligations exceeding $5 million to carry out Section 34 during a given fiscal year if 

amounts have been appropriated forth at purpose, NIST may be in a position where amounts made 

available for one fiscal year are not obligated during that fiscal year and are instead obligated during a 

subsequent fiscal year. This, we believe, is consistent with the terms of the statute. Moreover, it is our 

further understanding that if a subsequent Appropriations Act provides for a given fiscal year (thereby 

authorizing incurrence of obligations) a specific earmarked amount to carry out Section 34 in excess of 

the $5 million cap in Section 34(e) (thereby authorizing incurrence of obligations in the earmarked 

amount), this later-in-time enactment controls, and NIST may incur obligations from that fiscal year's 

appropriation not-to-exceed the amount so earmarked whether such obligations are incurred during or 

after the given fiscal year. 

Page9of36 
59 

The fiscal year 2016 Appropriations Act, Pub. L. No. 114-113, Div. B, Title I, provided NISTwith specific 

authority to obligate funds from its ITS appropriation "for the National Network for Manufacturing 

Innovation" as authorized by Section 34. The FY 2016 Appropriations Act not only provided NIST the 

authority to incur obligations against the ITS appropriation to carry out the program, it also 

appropriated a specific earmarked amount for that purpose, $25 million, to remain available until 

expended. This later-in-time enactment authorizes NIST to obligate $25 million from amounts 

otherwise appropriated under the ITS appropriation for fiscal year 2016 whether such obligations are 

incurred during or after fiscal year 2016. NIST, of course, understands that it may not incur obligations 

against amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2017 (or for each fiscal year through 2024) unless and until 

an Appropriations Act is enacted which specifically authorizes it to use ITS appropriations provided for 

thereunder to carry out Section 34, and further understands that, regardless of an Appropriations Act's 

specific authorization, it may not incur obligations in excess of $5 million to implement Section 34 unless 

appropriated a specific earmark that is in excess of that cap. 

b. How much oft he appropriated $25 million has been spent, and what has it been spent on? 

Answer: 

As of April14, 2016, approximately $1.25 M has been spent for implementation and administration of 

the NNMI program, and $20M has been committed to the on-going NIST competition to stand up an 

institute within NNMI, as required in the budget appropriation. 

c. In NIST's FY17 budget request, the Institute seeks nearly $50 million as the federal share for 

additional NNMI centers. Does this signal that NIST and the Department of Commerce intend 

to ignore the law and implement the program as the Administration sees fit? 

Answer: 

As explained in response to Question 7a, Section 34(e) of the NIST Act precludes NIST from incurring 

obligations to carry out that Section in the absence of a prior and specific appropriation for that 

purpose. Even if such authority were provided within its ITS appropriation, NIST may not incur 

obligations in excess of $5 million from amounts provided in an Appropriations Act for a given fiscal year 

covered by Section 34 unless specifically provided an earmarked amount exceeding that cap. The fiscal 

year 2016 Appropriations Act, in fact, appropriated $25 million "for the National Network for 

Manufacturing Innovation" as authorized by Section 34. The budget request for fiscal year 2017 

recognizes that unless and until additional amounts are appropriated specifically to carry out Section 34, 

or unless otherwise authorized by law, NIST may not incur obligations in excess of the $25 million 

appropriated for fiscal year 2016. NIST is committed to compliance with the law. NIST's FY17 budget 

request seeks a specific appropriation of $47,000,000 to carry out Section 34. Absent specific authority 

within the FY17 ITS appropriation to use those funds to carry out Section 34, NISTwill not incur any 

obligations for that purpose from the account. Absent such an appropriation with an earmarked 

amount in excess of $5 million, NISTwill not incur obligations to carry out Section 34 in excess of that 

limit from amounts appropriated for FY17. 

Page 10 of36 
60 

d. Why should Congress appropriate any more money for NNMI under the RAMI Act 

authorization? 

Answer: 

The NNMI Program operationalizes the purposes and requirements set forth in the RAMI Act and 

implements the recommendations made by the President's Council of Advisors on Science and 

Technology (PCAST). The structure of the NNMI Program is built around the recognition that investment 

in early stage basic research, while important, is not sufficient to ensure that new technologies progress 

smoothly from invention to product development or that they will eventually be scaled up for 

manufacturing in the United States. The NNMI Program aims to promote stable and sustainable 

domestic innovation ecosystems and the training of a skilled workforce to accelerate the development, 

scale-up, and deployment of promising advanced manufacturing technologies. 

The RAMI Act was very clear as to the importance of revitalizing the U.S. manufacturing sector and 

restoring leadership in advanced manufacturing, assigning eight critically important purposes for the 

NNMI Program: 

To improve the competitiveness of United States manufacturing and to increase the production 

of goods manufactured predominantly within the United States; 

To stimulate United States leadership in advanced manufacturing research, innovation, and 

technology; 

To facilitate the transition of innovative technologies into scalable, cost-effective, and highperforming manufacturing capabilities; 

To facilitate access by manufacturing enterprises to capital-intensive infrastructure, including 

high-performance electronics and computing, and the supply chains that enable these 

technologies; 

To accelerate the development of an advanced manufacturing workforce; 

To facilitate peer exchange of and the documentation of best practices in addressing advanced 

manufacturing challenges; 

To leverage non-Federal sources of support to promote a stable and sustainable business model 

without the need for long-term Federal funding; and 

To create and preserve jobs. 

Continuing additional appropriations are essential for the program to meet these purposes. The FY 2016 

NIST ITS budget is the first appropriation expressly for the NNMI Program, providing, as the 

accompanying Explanatory Statement notes, "$25,000,000 for the National Network for Manufacturing 

Innovation (NNMI), to include funding for center establishment and up to $5,000,000 for coordination 

activities." This coordination funding of up to $5 million is the sole and initial provision of funds for the 

Page 11 of36 
61 

program office to support the network of institutes, provide common services and best practices, and 

coordinate and report on the program. The first year of institute funding has enabled NIST to hold the 

first "open topic" institute competition and begin the establishment of the first Institute. $70 million in 

public funding over a five- to seven-year period is the minimum amount needed to establish an 

individual institute. $47 million is needed in FY17, of which $14 million is needed to continue funding 

for the first Institute, $5 million is needed to enable NIST to carry out its mandate to plan, manage, and 

coordinate the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation and $28 million is requested to make 

awards for additional two additional Commerce-led Institutes. 

Page 12 of36 
62 

Question #8: The RAMI Act also states that "The Secretary of Energy may transfer to the Institute not 

to exceed $250 million for the period encompassing fiscal years 2015 through 2024 for the Secretary 

[of Commerce] to carry out this section from amounts appropriated for advanced manufacturing and 

development within the EERE program of the Department of Energy". At our March hearing, Dr. May 

said that he has been part of discussions with the Department of Energy (DOE) about this, but no 

funding has come from DOE as the RAMI Act says "may transfer" instead of "shall" and therefore does 

not require DOE to provide support. 

a. Please provide the date, location and specifics of what was discussed at that meeting. 

Answer: 

To clarify, Dr. May's testimony pertained only to his general awareness of discussions between the 

Departments of Commerce and Energy on this issue. Dr. May does not recall any particular meetings 

where such conversations occurred. 

b. Will there be additional discussions with the Department of Energy about transferring money 

from the EERE program to the Institute for the federal share of new manufacturing innovation 

institutes to be established under NNMI? If not, why not? 

Answer: 

Paragraph 2 of Section 34(e) provides that "[t]o the extent provided for in advance by appropriations 

Acts, the Secretary of Energy may transfer to the Institute not to exceed $250,000,000 fort he period 

encompassing fiscal years 2015 through 2024 for the Secretary to carry out this section from amounts 

appropriated for advanced manufacturing research and development within the Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy account for the Department of Energy." (emphasis added). To the extent that 

authority to carry out a transfer of funds from the Department of Energy as contemplated by Section 

34(e) is authorized by an appropriations Act, further discussions will follow. 

Page 13 of36 
63 

Question #9: What metrics will NIST use to evaluate the success ofthe National Network of 

Manufacturing Innovation? How long will it take to receive results? 

Answer: 

The overarching goal of an NNMJ institute is to grow existing or establish new manufacturing hubs in the 

United States, via advancements in applied research and workforce skills. These hubs represent the 

advanced manufacturing jobs of the future, and as such represent long-term successes. There are many 

actions and results in that pathway which are medium- and short-term. Therefore, the best approach is 

a set of performance measures and metrics covering short-, medium- and long-term impacts. Although 

NNMI is very new, there are several significant successes already achieved. 

Pursuant to the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation (RAMI) Act, NIST has the 

responsibility of providing detailed reports on Institutes funded by the Department of Commerce, as 

well as an assessment of the participation in, and contributions to, the network by any Institute not 

receiving financial assistance under the NNMI program. The program today includes seven institutes 

funded by the Department of Defense or the Department of Energy. In accordance with these reporting 

responsibilities NIST prepared two reports to Congress: 

The first NNMI Program Annual Report -this documents the activities and success of the NNMI Program 

to date b.tm:/ /www.manu.f"-.cturing.gov/files/20161Qli20l_':;:N N M 1-Annuai-Rel?.2i.LQ.c:Jf 

The first NNMI Program Strategic Plan -this documents the NNMI program plans and metrics for 

meeting the objectives as defined by RAMI htt.rdfwww.manufacturin~.eov/files/2016/02/2015-NNi\ill· 

':;!rategic_-Pian. pdf 

Page 14of36 
64 

Question #10: What does NIST view as the appropriate use of federal funding versus industry funding 

in technology transfer programs? 

Answer: 

NIST has a variety of mechanisms to transfer our research results and technology from our laboratories 

to industry as an important part of our mission. Our technology transfer efforts are focused on making 

connections with industry to ensure our work is available to the public through the many ways we 

partner with industry, such as through standards, standard reference material, training, cooperative 

research and development, licensing, and other forms of knowledge transfer. These programs involve 

efforts on the part of NIST to provide results to industry for their use and hopefully, continued 

development as a part of our Nation's economy. 

Our Nation invests approximately $140 billion dollars annually in federal research and development, and 

as a leader in this area across government agencies, we are committed to helping not only NIST, but all 

agencies transition technology to the marketplace. While we believe NIST and other government 

research programs are a valuable resource, technology transfer programs generally do not involve 

providing government funding to the private sector. like other agencies, NIST does fund some 

extramural research focused on commercialization of program priorities through our Small Business 

Innovation Research (SBIR) Program and considers activities such as prize competitions under recent 

changes from the Congress, but we believe that it is private investment from industry that is needed to 

fuel economic growth for new businesses, products, and services that result from government research 

programs. 

Page 15 of36 
65 

Question #11: It was noted at the hearing that three external security experts have been brought in to 

help NIST reevaluate its security controls in the wake of the lab explosion at the NIST Gaithersburg 

campus? 

a. How were these external security experts selected? Are you able to share who those experts 

are? 

Answer: 

Two of these experts (one being the Chief Security Officer for a major defense contractor and the other, 

an Associate Director for Security and Emergency Response at another federal agency) were selected 

based on their specific experience in protecting a research, campus-like setting in Federal and private 

environments. The third was recently assigned to the Department of Commerce, Office of Security 

(OSY), and was selected due to his extensive physical security background. Each was asked to conduct 

an independent individual review of NIST's security posture, including staffing and processes. 

b. What suggestions have these external security experts made? Is there a specific timeline to 

implement these suggestions? 

Answer: 

The experts offered independent observations and suggestions for consideration by the NIST Director. 

Their feedback was shared with the Department of Commerce Security Director and is currently being 

reviewed and validated along with a recently received Federal Protective Service (FPS) audit report. 

Recurring themes from these experts included the organization and bifurcation of security functions, 

resourcing of security/police services, risk management, strategic planning, fostering a culture of 

security awareness at NIST, and oversight of the security contract and Federal Police training and 

certification programs. Based on these inputs, the Office of Security along with NIST is developing a 

security action plan to supplement existing security protocols and policies. 

c. Have NIST officials held meetings with these security experts? If so, when did these meetings 

take place, who attended, and what was discussed? Are there future meetings planned? 

Answer: 

The security experts interviewed various NJST personnel during site visits to the Gaithersburg and 

Boulder campuses the week of November 30, 2015. The experts met with NIST leadership (including 

the Director's Chief of Staff, the Associate Director for Management Resources, and the Acting Associate 

Director for laboratory Programs), as well as the relevant personnel responsible for managing security, 

policing, and visitor access at both facilities (including the Acting Chief of the PSG, the OSY Director of 

Security at NJST, Chief of the Emergency Services Division, and Chief of the Security Systems and Access 

Controls Group). At both campuses, the experts discussed with the relevant personnel staffing, 

operations, inspections, and access controls. 

d. Have these external security consultants been paid for their expertise? If so, how much, and 

where in the NIST budget did that come out of? In addition, will they continue to be paid, or 

is this a one-time expense? 

Page 16 of36 
66 

Answer: 

The experts received no payment for their time. NIST covered travel expenses for the site visits for the 

two experts who were federal employees. These one-time only expenses were covered by the 

Director's office. 

e. What changes has NIST made to its physical security since the incident last summer to avoid 

future incidents? Where in the budget do we see these investments being made? 

Answer: 

Even prior to last summer, NIST had begun taking steps to enhance campus security, working closely 

with the Department's Office of Security (OSY). At the recommendation of OSY, a new NIST Security 

Director position was created and filled in June 2014. The Security Director is an OSY employee, funded 

by NIST, hired to assist with the transition of police services from NIST to OSY and to assume operational 

control for the Police Services Group and contract security operations once transferred. This transfer 

took place formally in November 2015. 

Following the incident last summer, the NIST Security Director also implemented enhanced patrol 

staffing requirements to ensure that at least two patrols and a supervisor are assigned each day. 

Also, a security contract was pursued to re-balance the policing and security functions at NIST, 

Gaithersburg, as had previously been done at Boulder. This contract provided relief for police manpower 

demands and aided in reducing overtime costs. OSY assisted with the contract, which incorporates the 

Interagency Security Committee (ISC) and FPS contract security standards. 

Acknowledging the need for improvements in training and qualification of both the police and contract 

security staff, OSY worked with NIST to hire a dedicated training manager. This position has recently 

been filled and will result in the tracking and oversight of critical program training requirements. In the 

immediate term, NIST is also funding several new security activities in Gaithersburg, including a pilot 

program to determine which advanced locking solution or solutions will best enhance the protection of 

our laboratories, upgrades to the physical access control system (PACS) server, and a study of how best 

to enhance security screening at the Gaithersburg main entrance /visitors center. 

These investments are funded through the NIST Working Capital Fund, specifically, via funds collected to 

cover general administration expenses. 

The NIST Director has directed the establishment of a Security Advisory Council to execute his vision for 

maintaining a collegial atmosphere conducive to research while ensuring the safety and security of both 

campuses and to provide advice and input to both OSY and the NIST Security Director on the 

implementation of security policy and procedures. The NIST Security Director, with support from the 

Council, will be tasked with developing a five-year security management strategy/sustainment plan 

(FY17-21). The Security Director will also develop a 5-year business plan that identifies the capital 

investments necessary to sustain and improve the NIST security infrastructure. This will include a 

comprehensive life cycle management plan/program for security programs and systems. 

Page 17 of36 
67 

f. Are there changes being made to the NIST police force in policy or procedure in light of recent 

events? If so, please explain. 

Answer: 

As noted above, a number of actions have already been taken and more are planned for the future to 

enhance the law enforcement and security functions at NIST. Since assuming operational control of law 

enforcement and security functions at NIST, OSY has also already reviewed a number of checklists and 

operating procedures and made improvements to these. These reviews are ongoing and are part of a 

continuing program to test, review and improve security operations. 

g. Has NIST compared the costs and benefits of having its own police force and having security 

contractors performing all of NIST's security needs not just to staff gate access, visitor 

centers, and the police/fire dispatch? If so, what would the cost difference be? 

Answer: 

The Department of Commerce Director of Security has been in discussions with Federal Protective 

Service (FPS) management regarding this issue. NIST requires some level of law enforcement support 

and response and the costs associated with this may vary depending on the decision to deploy: a 

reduced law enforcement footprint at NIST, i.e. substation; an FPS dedicated on-site or limited off-site 

response; or, local police support. In addition, any change in the security response needs to be fully 

coordinated to ensure the current law enforcement and security response plans fully support security 

requirements under Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing of the Gaithersburg facilities. Given the 

recent reviews, OSY will gather data in order to carefully weigh and recommend a prudent security 

posture that balances protective needs against costs, while also assessing federal police personnel 

considerations. 

h. How many NIST police officers and contract security are on duty at a time at the Gaithersburg 

and Boulder campuses? Is this sufficient? 

Answer: 

The manning of police and contract security positions varies depending upon the shift. As a general rule, 

police and security presence is increased during daytime hours as this is when the majority of the 

campus population requires these services. 

At Gaithersburg, this would include a total of six police personnel and ten contract security officers who 

perform functions ranging from entry control to visitor processing. Call-offs could reduce the policing 

level, but the contractor level remains constant since these are hours required under the contract. At 

Boulder, the daytime staffing is a total of three police personnel and five contract security officers. 

As the workforce transitions to a swing shift, and then to a midnight shift, the positions gradually reduce 

to reflect the law enforcement or policing need. In all cases, the minimum manning remains one police 

Page 18 of36 
68 

patrol and one police supervisor, and contract officers sufficient to man the entry gate(s) that may be 

open. 

OSY has taken steps to improve manning with the recent selection of a Police Chief and Training 

Coordinator. In addition, the hiring of eight officers is pending a decision on whether to transition to a 

contract security force or maintain a Federal police presence. 

i. What were the total expenses associated with the damage from the lab explosion last 

summer? 

Answer: 

NIST facilities personnel repaired the damage to the laboratory room, at a total estimated cost (time and 

materials) of $1430.10. NIST also contracted with a DEA-approved firm to clean the fume hood In the 

laboratory, at a cost of $3,320.00. 

Page 19 of36 
69 

Question #12: At the FY2016 NIST budget hearing, Dr. May mentioned that NIST employs fewer 

federal employees than non-federal "associates." Does NIST continue to see a transition toward a 

small ratio of federal employees to academic and private sector partnerships at its facilities? 

a. If so, what changes, if any, in terms of employee and NIST campus management have been 

made to accommodate this trend? 

The work of NIST's federal scientists is augmented by collaborations with non-federal associates that 

enable NIST to better meet the broad and complex technical requirements of its stakeholders. These 

associates work with NIST through a variety of collaborative arrangements, from post-doctoral 

associates from U.S. universities to industry partners working on Cooperative Research and 

Development Agreements with NIST, to contractors, to users at NIST's two designated User Facilities. 

While NIST has more associates now than it did forty-five years ago, the number of associates on the 

NIST campus hasn't increased significantly over the past 10 years. Between FY 2005 and FY 2015, the 

number of associates on the NIST campus increased less than 1% from 3,431 to 3,463. Over the same 10 

years, except for a blip in 2005 caused by a reduction in funding, the number of NIST federal employees 

has remained relatively stable and is today at 3,394. 

NIST benefits greatly from the flexibility, expertise, and perspective provided by these associates. 

Associates provide the NIST Laboratories with enough agility to pursue short-term research endeavors, 

as well as to build and explore competence in new areas. Associates bring with them the expertise and 

knowledge of their home institutions, and serve as an exceptional mechanism for technology transfer. 

NIST expects to continue to require both federal employees and associates to meet its mission, and 

continues to examine how to optimally manage its workforce. 

Page 20 of36 
70 

Question #13: The Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), over the past four or five 

years, has encountered some instances of wasteful spending, including on lavish conferences and 

improper overreliance on one particular contractor to fulfill its mission. 

More recently, in June 2015, the U.S. Attorney's Office in South Carolina announced that the former 

NIST grantee in that state pled guilty to wire fraud. Essentially, this individual was submitting false 

claims to the government and once the government paid the claim, this individual would pay friends, 

family and herself for work that was never completed. 

a. What steps are being taken to ensure that these kinds of taxpayer abuse are no longer 

happening? 

Answer: 

NIST takes its role as a steward of federal taxpayer dollars and financial accountability very seriously. In 

fact, the MEP program has one of the best return on investments in the federal government for program 

operations. MEP has taken a hard look at its controls and processes, and implemented a series of 

reforms designed to ensure continued financial accountability of the program. Notably, MEP has put 

into place policies and procedures addressing external meeting operations, strengthened the internal 

contract review process, instituted mandatory training on travel-related processes and developed a 

Financial Management Analysis Pilot Project to look deeper into Center financial operations. 

It is important to note that the South Carolina MEP issue was the result of a South Carolina MEP 

subrecipient submitting false claims to the Center, not to the federal government. MEP has since 

developed Conflict of Interest Policies for Centers and their governance Boards to ensure proper 

oversight of the Centers to eliminate any misunderstanding of roles. 

b. How would the $12 million increase for the MEP program be used? 

Answer: 

The increase will be used in FY 2017 to complete the final round of the multi-year competition of the 

MEP centers, and maintain the funding of states previously competed, as well as provide funding for 

additional performance-based awards to high-performing centers. This increase will allow Centers to 

work with more very small, rural and start-up firms and significantly improve market penetration with 

manufacturers with 1-19 employees, which are currently the most underserved client population. 

How does this program support NIST's underlying mission? 

Answer: 

MEP's network of Centers in every state and Puerto Rico provide direct access to manufacturers and 

shares the mission of NIST ... "to enhance the productivity and technological performance of U.S. 

Manufacturing." NIST carries out part of its mission through MEP, which offers, through its network of 

Centers technical and business assistance to smaller manufacturers to help them create and retain jobs, 

increase profits, and save time and money. 

Page 21 of36 
71 

In particular, the MEP program has a significant focus on technology acceleration to ensure that small 

and medium-sized manufacturers are aware of the technologies emerging from NIST, other federal 

laboratories, and universities. MEP is working with its network of Centers to better connect them with 

technology sources as well as the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) Institutes. 

Page 22 of36 
72 

Question 1114: How does NIST balance short-term, low-risk, low-reward research projects versus longterm, high-risk, high-reward research projects when making funding decisions? 

Answer: 

NIST is committed to providing a stable environment for world-class basic and applied research, though 

we do not limit high-risk, high-reward research to long-term projects only. Furthermore, it should be 

noted that just because a project is low-risk or short in duration does not mean that it will have 

insignificant impact. 

As the National Metrology Institute for the U.S., NISTworks at the frontier of measurement science and 

develops, maintains, and disseminates measurement tools, standards, and services to help America 

compete. To do so, NIST must maintain a strong fundamental base of long-term research programs 

while supporting the continuous and improved delivery of products and services. The reward to the 

nation from these programs is high, as NIST programs evolve to meet national needs- such as the ability 

to carry out interstate and international commerce based on trusted weights and measures, including 

the digital economy; real-time metrology for manufacturing, including additive manufacturing; and the 

foundation for effective building and fire codes, including new construction. 

At the same time, NIST maintains programs that fund high-risk short-term research. For example, the 

Innovations in Measurement Science (IMS) Program provides initial funding enabling NIST scientists to 

explore high-risk, leading-edge research concepts in order to position NIST to successfully address the 

future measurement and standards needs of industry and science. These funds are a principal tool to 

enable the kind of research agility that NIST requires in order to keep pace with technology 

development. 

a. How does NIST determine the proportion of basic research versus applied research projects 

when allocating funding? 

Answer: 

The NIST structure creates the necessary stable environment proportioning funding to basic and applied 

research, with the NIST Metrology laboratories driving innovation through measurement science, 

Technology Laboratories accelerating the adoption and deployment of advanced technology, and 

National User Facilities providing world class, unique research facilities to industry, academia and 

government. 

Although NIST basic research is primarily carried out by the Metrology Laboratories, both basic and 

applied research are integrated across the laboratory structure. For example, basic research in neutron 

physics is carried out by the NIST Physical Measurement laboratory (PML) at the NIST Center for 

Neutron Research (NCNR) user facility. likewise, PML, and NCNR scientists collaborate to apply basic 

physics in the design of new neutron scattering and imaging instruments in the NCNR used by industry 

researchers in support of applied materials research, neutron imaging, chemical and biological analysis. 

Completing the cycle, the NIST Materials Measurement Laboratory also uses the NCNR to carry out NIST 

material science research, for instance to support the creation of NIST Standard Reference Materials 

needed by the biologic drug industry. 

Page 23 of36 
73 

Furthermore, NIST maintains strategic partnerships to broaden both ends of its basic-to-applied 

research spectrum. NIST partnerships with academia, such as the Joint Quantum Institute {JQI) and the 

Institute for Bioscience & Biotechnology Research {IBBR) in Maryland, and JILA in Boulder, foster 

interdisciplinary research and train the next generation of world class scientists dedicated to precision 

and novel measurement at NIST and elsewhere. The basic research at these institutes feeds into applied 

research projects, for example basic atomic physics research at liLA has been leveraged by other groups 

at NIST to develop atomic clocks. 

On the other end of the spectrum, private-public partnerships provide an avenue for NIST to develop 

ways to directly support and transfer technology to industry. For example, NIST is working with Intel and 

other companies to develop X-ray measurements that enable the manufacturing of next-generation 

electronics. To further address real world needs, NIST funds Centers of Excellence as private-public 

partnerships. For example, in September 2014, NIST launched the first Federally Funded Research and 

Development Center (FFRDC) solely dedicated to enhancing the security of the nation's information 

systems. That National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence develops sector-specific cybersecurity 

problems defined by a community of sector technical professionals and business leaders, and building 

blocks, which address technology gaps affecting multiple sectors. 

b. Is there a balance that should be maintained across NIST activities between more 

fundamental vs. more applied type of work that NIST funds? 

Answer: 

NIST is a unique Federal scientific institution, in that our focus is on measurement science, or metrology. 

Because measurement is at the foundation of science itself, it is natural that successful fundamental 

research has the potential to be applied to practical measurement solutions at NIST and beyond. It is 

therefore necessary to maintain a balance between fundamental and applied research and 

development, and to enable research endeavors to evolve from fundamental to applied. This balance 

varies across the NIST portfolio and will vary over time with specific projects. 

Page 24of36 
74 

Question #15: What is the status of renovation and modernization of the NIST Radiation Physics Building 

245? When do you expect this construction to be complete? 

Answer: 

Engineering and planning studies were completed utilizing the $2.0 million approved for the project in 

FY 2015. A contract is anticipated to be awarded in the fourth quarter of FY 2016. 

Building 245 modernization needs to be accomplished in phases since portions of the building will 

remain occupied while the construction takes place. Phase 1 is to design and construct additions to the 

existing building that provide strict environmental tolerances for critical research being undertaken in 

the building. When these Phase 1 additions are completed, the research in other sections of Building 

245 requiring this type of space will be relocated. Once the research has been relocated, Phase 2 will 

modernize the areas in the building that were vacated. The final phase, Phase 3, will modernize those 

laboratories that contain unique and custom instruments that cannot be relocated. In Phase 3, these 

instruments will be shut down, protected, and the laboratory space will be modernized around the 

instruments. 

FY16 appropriations provided $60 million for this project and the FY17 Budget's request for an 

additional $40 million in discretionary funds. Combined, these will be used to complete the A/D and B/C 

wing additions that make up Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project. Additional funds required to complete 

modernization of Building 245 will be determined in future budget requests. 

Page 25 of36 
75 

Question #16: Can you please speak to the specific costs and timeline for the renovation work taking 

place at the NIST Boulder campus? 

Answer: 

To date, including the FY 2016 NIST Appropriation, the total funding for the Building 1 Renovation (B1R) 

project is $91.5 million. 

Phase 1, the exterior renovations, was completed in the third quarter of FY 2014. Phases 2 and 3, the 

interior fit-out of Wings 3 and 6, were awarded in September 2013. Wing 6 is currently scheduled to be 

completed in the third quarter of FY 2016, with Wing 3 completed in the fourth quarter of FY 2016. 

In FY 2015, the B1R project was re-phased in an effort to create swing space and to accommodate the 

space requirements of the newly created Communication Technology Laboratory. To this end, the 

Building 3 Renovation (B3R) was inserted into the plan. B3R was procured using a design-build approach 

and was awarded in February 2016 with the Notice to Proceed issued in March 2016. The renovation of 

B3R is expected to be substantially completed by the end of FY 2017. 

The FY 2016 B1R appropriated funds are being used for the completion of B3R and the renovations of 

Wing 5. In FY 2017, the $10.0 million in the President's Request will continue renovations on B1R Wing 

5. Additionally the President's FY17 Budget recognized that discretionary levels set by the Bipartisan 

Budget Act are not sufficient for the nation to take full advantage of the opportunities for R&D 

investments, and includes a mandatory funding proposal throughout the Federal R&D enterprise. As 

such NIST's FY17 budget presents $100 million in mandatory funds to further renovate and modernize 

NISTfacilities. 

Page26 of36 
76 

Question 1117: While the FY17 request for the Construction and Research Facilities account is a 

decrease of over $24 million from FY16 enacted levels, do you anticipate a need for increased funding 

in the near future? If so, what would that funding be used for? 

The FY 2016 enacted level of $119.0 million for Construction of Research Facilities (CRF), includes $60.0 

million to begin work on the Gaithersburg Building 245 Modernization (B245M) project. We are also 

funding a major project at the Boulder site from NIST's yearly Safety, Capacity, Maintenance, and Major 

Repair (SCMMR) budget and allocated $15.0 million from that fund in FY2016 for this work. Future 

funding will be necessary to complete both of these major projects. 

The B245M project is a multi-year effort comprised of three major phases consisting of: (1) construction 

of new laboratory and laboratory support space that meet the required tight environmental controls 

required for today's science onto the existing building; (2) modernization of vacated laboratory and 

laboratory support space in the existing building; and (3) modernization of laboratories that contain 

unique scientific equipment that can't be relocated. The FY 2016 enacted funds for B245M in the 

amount of $60.0 million provide for the design and construction of Phase 1a (B/C Wing addition). Phase 

1b (A/D Wing addition) will complete Phase 1 of the B245 project with $40.0 million included in the FY 

2017 President's Request. 

For the Boulder renovation project, the allocated FY 2016 enacted funds are being used for the 

completion of Building 3 Renovation (B3R) and concept development for the renovations of Wings 4 and 

5 and the Center Spine. The B3R project is needed to create swing space for the Boulder 1 Renovation 

(BlR) project and to accommodate the space requirements of the newly created Communication 

Technology Laboratory. The FY 2017 President's Request of $10.0 million provides sufficient funds to 

continue with the design effort. 

NIST is continually working to ensure that NIST is equipped with the infrastructure necessary to meet 

the needs of the precision research being conducted in the NIST laboratories. NISTwill be evaluating 

how best to address these needs in future years. 

Page 27 of36 
77 

Question #18: What issues, if any, were encountered with the operation of NIST labs in the previous 

fiscal year and what changes will be made in the organization and management of the laboratories in 

FY 2017? 

Answer: 

In FY 2015, the NIST Laboratories continued their work developing the measurement science, standards, 

and technology necessary to support U.S. economic competitiveness, especially in areas of recent NIST 

priority including advanced manufacturing, bioengineering, cybersecurity, precision measurement, 

advanced communications, disaster resilience, and forensics. To support this work, the NIST 

Laboratories held workshops to solicit industry input, hired new scientific and technical staff, and 

developed new partnerships through the Center of Excellence program. 

The NIST Laboratories also saw some change in management. In April 2015, Gordon Gillerman was 

selected to be the Director of the NIST Standards Coordination Office, which works closely with the NIST 

Laboratories to support and coordinate work in documentary standards. In November 2015, Dr. Kent 

Rochford, previously the Director of the Communications Technology Laboratory (CTL), was selected to 

be the Associate Director of Laboratory Programs of NIST. Dr. Rochford's selection in NIST's most senior 

career position will provide stable leadership for the NIST laboratory program. 

In the next year, the NIST Laboratories will be working to fill the Director position of the NIST 

Communications Technology Lab, vacated by Dr. Rochford. 

Page 28 of36 
78 

Question #19: What improvements are planned for the operation of NIST labs to support the FY 2017 

program priorities, i.e., advanced manufacturing and precision metrology, biosciences, built 

environment, and digital economy? 

a. Will buildings dedicated to former priority research areas be repurposed for current program 

priorities? 

Answer: 

NIST is prepared to support the FY 2017 program priorities with its existing laboratory buildings and 

infrastructure, using the requested funds to enable NISTto grow beyond current capabilities in each of 

the priority areas. The request will significantly increase NIST's level of competence in these critical 

areas, by partnering with experts and in some cases hiring new full time employees. In some of these 

program areas, for example the largest requested increase in future computing technologies, the new 

funds will also allow NIST to purchase technical equipment required to accomplish the program goals 

described in the President's Budget Request. This growth can be accommodated in the existing buildings 

on the NIST campus. 

Page 29 of36 
79 

Question #20: The fiscal year 2017 request includes a $40.5 million increase for the Scientific and 

Technical Research Services (STRS) account. 

a. What are the priorities for the proposed STRS increase? How would NIST plan to use the 

additional $40.5 million it has requested? 

Answer: 

The NIST STRS account supports the work of the NIST laboratory programs, a broadly diverse research 

organization that plays an important role within the nation's innovation infrastructure. NIST research in 

advanced measurement science, and work in standards help U.S. industry manufacture superior 

products and to provide services more reliably. Besides helping enable innovation and efficient trade, 

NIST's measurement science research impacts the daily well-being of our citizens. The quality of the 

water we drink, the air we breathe, and the food we eat depends in part on that work. NIST 

measurement technologies and processes ensure that consumers are confident of the quantity and 

quality of the product purchased, whether it is a gallon of gasoline or the amount of electricity used and 

stated in the monthly bill. They protect our banking at ATMs and our online purchases. They improve 

the accuracy of our medical tests and treatments and help to make sure that we know the nutritional 

content of what we are eating. They help to convict criminals and free the innocent through more 

accurate and faster DNA tests. They provide crucial timekeeping that we depend upon for navigation, 

telecommunications, financial transactions, and basic research. Lastly, they improve the equipment and 

tools used by first responders and homeland security. The President's FY2017 budget request 

recognizes the important role of the NIST laboratory programs and contained a request of $730.5 million 

in FY2017, which is $40.5 million above FY 2016 funding levels. 

As was outlined in the budget request, the written testimony, and explained to Committee staff through 

in person briefings, the $40.5 million increase in STRS funds over the FY 2016 appropriated budget will 

be used in the following manner: 

$26.4 million will support 6 new initiatives: 

$13.6 million will support NIST measurement science research focused on future computing 

technologies and applications in support of the National Strategic Computing Initiative. With 

these funds NIST will support the development of measurement science, standards, tools and 

technologies to advance new computing paradigms. This includes measurements so fast that 

they can watch a single computer switch as it switches. NIST will develop, test, prototype, and 

benchmark potential types of logic, memory, and storage device concepts that are likely to 

become integral to a future "exascale" machine. In addition, NIST will develop frameworks for 

uncertainty quantification in scientific computing and for calibration of modeling and simulation. 

These will help increase the capacity and capability of an enduring national high-performance 

computing ecosystem. 

$2 million will support increased NIST activities focused on developing advanced sensing 

technologies needed for advanced manufacturing. The new funds will accelerate research 

efforts targeting the development of advanced sensors needed to support the manufacture of 

advanced electronics and nanoengineered devices. With this increase, NISTwill develop inprocess imaging and analysis to enable improved process performance, quality control, and 

optimization. 

Page 30 of36 
80 

$2 million will support additional NIST work in the area of engineering biology and 

biomanufacturing. The work enabled by this new funding will ensure quality and predictability 

in the design of synthetic biological systems for efficient production of fuels, chemicals, 

pharmaceuticals, and medical therapies. This funding increase addresses the technical 

challenges facing the biomanufacturing industry by developing a suite of quantitative methods 

for accurate measurement of biological systems, creating the necessary tools to methodically 

design and test engineered organisms, and, by engaging relevant stakeholders, developing and 

evaluating predictive models. While data generation is important, assessing the data quality is 

equally critical. Therefore, NIST will develop methods for data validation, including relevant 

reference data and standards. 

$2 million will support increased NIST efforts in the area of advanced communications. 

Specifically, with the new funds NISTwill develop the measurement science and tools necessary 

to improve spectrum sharing and increase spectrum efficiency of commercial wireless radiofrequency communication systems. This investment will accelerate the deployment of future 

wireless communications systems. 

$4.8 million is requested to procure additional fuel for the NIST Center for Neutron Research 

(NCNR), one the nation's premier scientific user facilities. NCNR is the only neutron facility in 

the U.S. with a focus on enhancing industrial competitiveness. It is therefore essential to U.S. 

industry, and the long-term economic growth of the U.S., that the NCNR is optimally equipped 

to provide state-of-the-art measurement tools to the U.S. scientific and engineering community. 

The NCNR operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week for approximately 250 days of the year to 

support experiments by over 2,000 research participants annually. 

$2 million will be used to expand federal technology transfer activities under the lab to Market 

Initiative. With this funding, NIST will lead the development of infrastructures for information 

sharing, data dissemination, and increase collaborations to address national priorities and 

enhance business competitiveness. This initiative will strengthen NIST and Federal Technology 

Transfer activities. NISTwill work with the Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) and offices 

within the Executive Office of the President (EOP) in the development of digital platforms to 

enhance cross-agency collaborations on technology transfer and development. 

The remaining $14.1 million will be used to address increased inflationary costs (labor, utilities, etc.) and 

to cover additional shared service investments within the DOC Working Capital Fund including network 

security initiatives and replacement of degrading IT infrastructure. 

Page 31 of36 
81 

Question #21: What is the status of the three joint research institutes, or Centers of Excellence? 

Answer: 

NIST has three operational Centers of Excellence, each targeting a different technical focus area. In 

order of their establishment they are: The Center for Hierarchical Materials Design (CHiMaD), the Center 

for Risk-Based Community Resilience Planning, and the Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic 

Science (csafe). For details, see htto:(/www.nist.~_CQ.Ei. Each is functioning effectively, generating 

new knowledge and research collaborations in each of the three respective areas. NIST has ongoing and 

close interaction with the centers. 

a. What direction does NIST plan to take these institutes in 2017? 

Answer: 

There are ongoing discussions between center members and NIST about the current and future research 

directions of each center. For example: 

CHiMaD held its second annual meeting at headquarters on the Northwestern University 

Campus in March 2016, reporting on progress in a number of use case projects that involve NIST 

researchers working together with scientists and engineers affiliated with the CHiMaD partners. 

The community resilience center of excellence held a gathering of all members in November 

2015 in Gaithersburg, MD, and is holding the next meeting at the end of April in Fort Collins, CO 

where the lead institute for the center, Colorado State University, is located. 

The forensic science center, csafe, held a kickoff event at Iowa State University in October 2015. 

The csafe members gathered on the NIST campus in Gaithersburg, MD in January 2016 to 

further develop relationships with NIST staff and advance the research directions of the center. 

b. Does NIST plan to establish additional joint institutes to enable innovation in other specialized 

areas? 

Answer: 

At this time NIST has no plans to establish additional institutes. The 3 existing institutes described above 

will be evaluated near the end of their initial 5-year award to determine whether to extend those 

awards for an additional 5 years, or whether to establish a Center in a new topic area of importance to 

NIST. 

Page 32 of36 
82 

Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

Question #1: I was pleased to see the increase in the budget for supporting engineering biology and 

biomanufacturing. In your testimony, you describe efforts that would ensure quality and 

predictability in the design of engineered biological systems for producing fuels, chemicals, 

pharmaceuticals, and medical therapies. These efforts are aligned with the guidance in H.R. 591, the 

Engineering Biology Research and Development Act of 2015, introduced by myself and Mr. 

Sensenbrenner. Could you please expand on NIST's efforts in biomanufacturing and how these 

activities will help the nation attain the benefits of the engineering biology? 

Answer: 

NIST has leveraged our expertise in the quantitative physical sciences to provide the measurement 

infrastructure to underpin innovation in the biosciences by strengthening our partnerships, growing our 

in-house capabilities in interdisciplinary bio-related fields, and engaging our federal and private partners 

in biotechnology and biomedicine. We perform cutting edge measurement science research to support 

better measurements and we develop the highest quality measurement science and standards for 

confidence in biological data. 

In biomanufacturing, NIST has established a program to support the US biopharmaceutical industry's 

delivery of high quality protein drugs around the world. We develop standards, measurement science, 

and state of the art tools that support advances in development, characterization and manufacturing of 

protein drugs and biosimilars (generic versions). The program was developed through close working 

relationships with members of the US biopharmaceutical industry, the FDA and international standards 

organizations (i.e. NIBSC, USP) to assess and authenticate current unmet and future measurement needs 

related to the manufacturing of protein drugs. 

NIST is working to connect the tools for designing, measuring, and testing synthesized biological systems 

with predictive testable models. NIST is doing this by strategically growing its engineering biology 

program with the goal of harnessing the power of biological systems for a variety of manufacturing 

applications including advanced therapeutics, sustainable fuels, feedstocks, and advanced materials. The 

technologies for designing organisms with specific functions are advancing rapidly, and assuring that the 

organism produced is designed as intended is critical. Also, currently much of the design of biological 

systems is done through trial-and-error, which is costly and inefficient. Improved fundamental 

understanding of cellular control mechanisms will enable greater predictability of the impact of genetic 

modifications, but will also require precise and relevant data, based on sound measurement strategies. 

The principles arising from this data/theory pipeline will drive understanding of the fundamental 

regulatory systems of biological organisms and will advance engineering biology. 

Page 33 of36 
83 

Question #2: A few years ago, this Administration took the very important step of developing a 

partnership between the Department of Justice and NJST in order to strengthen the scientific basis for 

forensic evidence presented in courtrooms around the country. This effort was in part a response to 

the 2009 National Academies report on the status of forensic science. The report's conclusions have 

been validated time and time again as significant and widespread cases of improper forensic science 

and forensic testimony have been uncovered. 

What is the status of your partnership with DOJ? 

Answer: 

NIST has had a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with DOJ since February 2013 that recognizes 

and addresses the responsibility and expertise of the two agencies to provide national leadership in the 

Federal government's role in strengthening the practice of forensic science. The MOU provided the 

foundation for the creation of the DOl-Federal Advisory Committee known as the National Commission 

on Forensic Science and the NIST-administered Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC). 

Although the current version of the MOU is set to expire in April2017, DOJ and NISTwill continue to 

work together for the foreseeable future, because both agencies are committed to bringing their 

perspectives, experience and expertise to the critical effort of strengthening forensic science. 

What is the status of your efforts to lead the development of voluntary consensus standards 

for forensic evidence through the organization of Scientific Area Committees, or 0-SAC? 

Answer: 

The OSAC organization was created in 2014 and populated with 542 members from the stakeholder 

community, including forensic science service providers, academic researchers, quality managers, and 

members of the legal community. OSAC efforts in 2015 have involved coordination of this large and 

diverse organization, beginning the vetting process of existing documentary standards, identifying gaps 

in standards, and starting the process of drafting new standards to meet the needs of stakeholders. A 

monthly OSAC newsletter was begun in August 2015 to inform members of the OSAC community and 

other interested parties about progress being made. In March 2016, the first document placed on the 

OSAC Registry of Approved Standards- an existing document regarding seized drug analysis- was the 

subject of some concerns to NIST, based on its own extensive experience in documentary standards. 

NIST is working with OSAC leadership to learn from that process and to strengthen the approach to 

populating the registry, so that the OSAC Registry of Approved Standards can become be a valuable and 

trusted resource of information to help move the forensic science community forward on a solid 

scientific foundation. 

Page 34of36 
84 

Question #3: I was very concerned to learn that a NIST police officer was arrested, charged, and 

sentenced to prison for attempting to make methamphetamine in a NIST building on the Gaithersburg 

campus. 

What has NIST learned from that incident? 

Answer: 

Unfortunately, a situation in which a trusted and fully vetted employee in a position of responsibility 

violates that trust is exceedingly difficult to anticipate and among the most difficult threats faced by the 

private and public sectors. But this experience underscores the value of a prompt and active response in 

addressing head-on the lessons of this violation of trust. Following the July 18, 2015, incident, the NIST 

Director mandated an immediate review with NIST research managers to ensure that current protocols 

were being uniformly implemented to ensure appropriate use and security of laboratory spaces. Unlike 

the laboratory spaces in Building 236, the great majority of NIST laboratory spaces are in active use 

daily. NIST holds regular safety inspections and requires hazard reviews for every approved activity in 

every laboratory. 

NIST also conducted an internal review of actions taken in the immediate aftermath of the explosion. 

While the response was generally handled effectively, and even courageously, by NIST first-responders, 

NIST has identified some opportunities for improvement and has taken actions to address these. 

Specifically, we have reinforced that the NIST Dispatch Center performs as a focal point for all security 

and emergency notifications and response efforts. To support this expanded role, we are increasing 

Dispatch Center staffing to two personnel on duty during peak hours and are improving our quick 

reaction checklists. We have also installed four surveillance cameras at Building 236, with three 

providing external views and one located at the entrance to the building. 

Has NIST conducted any security reviews of the campus in the wake of this incident? 

Answer: 

Yes. In addition to our own internal review, the NIST Director asked three external security experts to 

conduct independent, individual reviews of NIST's security posture, including its staffing, processes, 

policies and procedures. These experts offered observations and suggestions for consideration by the 

NIST Director. Their feedback was shared with the Department of Commerce Security Director and is 

currently being reviewed and validated. In addition, in September, the Department and NISTwere 

notified of a Federal Protective Service (FPS) audit, conducted in conjunction with the FPS law 

enforcement authority delegation to the Department for security on the NIST campuses. This audit took 

place from Nov 2015 -Jan 2016, and the Department received the audit results on 25 March, 2016. The 

audit results, independent security reviews and the internal review conducted, are all under active 

consideration by NIST and the Department as we formulate an action plan to address key opportunities 

to improve NIST's security. 

If so, what, if any, new policies have or will be implemented to strengthen security at NIST? 

Page 35 of36 
85 

Æ 

Answer: 

Even prior to the explosion incident, NIST had begun taking steps to enhance campus security, working 

closely with the Department's Office of Security (OSY). At the recommendation of OSY, a new NIST 

Security Director position was created and filled in July 2014. The Security Director is an OSY employee, 

funded by NIST, hired to assist with the transition of police services from NIST to OSY and to assume 

operational control for the Police Services Group and contract security operations once transferred. 

This transfer took place formally in November 2015. 

A contract for security guard services is in place in both Boulder and Gaithersburg. This contract 

incorporates current Interagency Security Committee (ISC) and FPS contract security standards and 

enables us to balance the policing and security functions at both campuses. Following the July 2015 

incident, the NIST Security Director implemented enhanced patrol staffing requirements to ensure that 

at least two patrols and a supervisor are assigned each day. Acknowledging the need for improvements 

in training and qualification of both the police and contract security staff, OSY worked with NIST to hire a 

dedicated training manager. This position has recently been filled and will result in the tracking and 

oversight of critical program training requirements. 

We are in the process of reorganizing our security and emergency services, as recommended by the 

external security reviewers, and are evaluating other recommendations along with other inputs as we 

make necessary changes to strengthen NIST's security posture. 

In the immediate term, we funding several new security activities in Gaithersburg, including a pilot 

program to determine which advanced locking solution or solutions will best enhance the protection of 

our laboratories, upgrades to the physical access control system (PACS) server, and a study of how best 

to enhance security screening at the Gaithersburg main entrance/visitors center. 

The NIST Director has directed the establishment of a Security Advisory Council to execute his vision for 

maintaining a collegial atmosphere conducive to research, while ensuring the safety and security of both 

campuses, and to provide advice and input to both OSY and the NIST Security Director on the 

implementation of security policy and procedures. The NIST Security Director, with support from the 

Council, will be tasked with developing a five-year security management strategy/sustainment plan 

(FY17-21). The Security Director will also develop a long range business plan (5 years) that identifies the 

capital investments necessary to sustain and improve the NIST security infrastructure. This will include a 

comprehensive life cycle management plan/program for security programs and systems and the 

necessary funding to execute it. 

Page 36of36