I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 296

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 27, 1999

Referred to the Committee on Science

AN ACT

To provide for continuation of the Federal research investment in a fiscally sustainable way, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Research In5 vestment Act’’.
2

S 296 RFH

1 SEC. 2. GENERAL FINDINGS REGARDING FEDERAL INVEST2 MENT IN RESEARCH.

3 (a) VALUE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—The

4 Congress makes the following findings with respect to the

5 value of research and development to the United States:

6 (1) Federal investment in research has resulted

7 in the development of technology that saved lives in

8 the United States and around the world.

9 (2) Research and development investment

10 across all Federal agencies has been effective in cre11 ating technology that has enhanced the American

12 quality of life.

13 (3) The Federal investment in research and de14 velopment conducted or underwritten by both mili15 tary and civilian agencies has produced benefits that

16 have been felt in both the private and public sector.

17 (4) Discoveries across the spectrum of scientific

18 inquiry have the potential to raise the standard of

19 living and the quality of life for all Americans.

20 (5) Science, engineering, and technology play a

21 critical role in shaping the modern world.

22 (6) Studies show that about half of all United

23 States post-World War II economic growth is a di24 rect result of technical innovation; and science, engi25 neering, and technology contribute to the creation of

26 new goods and services, new jobs and new capital.
3

S 296 RFH

1 (7) Technical innovation is the principal driving

2 force behind the long-term economic growth and in3 creased standards of living of the world’s modern in4 dustrial societies. Other nations are well aware of

5 the pivotal role of science, engineering, and tech6 nology, and they are seeking to exploit it wherever

7 possible to advance their own global competitiveness.

8 (8) Federal programs for investment in re9 search, which lead to technological innovation and

10 result in economic growth, should be structured to

11 address current funding disparities and develop en12 hanced capability in States and regions that cur13 rently underparticipate in the national science and

14 technology enterprise.

15 (b) STATUS OF THE FEDERAL INVESTMENT.—The

16 Congress makes the following findings with respect to the

17 status of the Federal Investment in research and develop18 ment activities:

19 (1) Federal investment of approximately 13 to

20 14 percent of the Federal discretionary budget in re21 search and development over the past 11 years has

22 resulted in a doubling of the nominal amount of

23 Federal funding.

24 (2) Fiscal realities now challenge Congress to

25 steer the Federal government’s role in science, engi-
4

S 296 RFH

1 neering, and technology in a manner that ensures a

2 prudent use of limited public resources. There is

3 both a long-term problem—addressing the ever-in4 creasing level of mandatory spending—and a near5 term challenge—apportioning a dwindling amount of

6 discretionary funding to an increasing range of tar7 gets in science, engineering, and technology. This

8 confluence of increased national dependency on tech9 nology, increased targets of opportunity, and de10 creased fiscal flexibility has created a problem of na11 tional urgency. Many indicators show that more

12 funding for science, engineering, and technology is

13 needed but, even with increased funding, priorities

14 must be established among different programs. The

15 United States cannot afford the luxury of fully fund16 ing all deserving programs.

17 (3) Current projections of Federal research

18 funding show a downward trend.

19 SEC. 3. SPECIAL FINDINGS REGARDING HEALTH-RELATED

20 RESEARCH.

21 The Congress makes the following findings with re22 spect to health-related research:

23 (1) HEALTH AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS PRO24 VIDED BY HEALTH-RELATED RESEARCH.—Because

25 of health-related research, cures for many debili-
5

S 296 RFH

1 tating and fatal diseases have been discovered and

2 deployed. At present, the medical research commu3 nity is on the cusp of creating cures for a number

4 of leading diseases and their associated burdens. In

5 particular, medical research has the potential to de6 velop treatments that can help manage the esca7 lating costs associated with the aging of the United

8 States population.

9 (2) FUNDING OF HEALTH-RELATED RE10 SEARCH.—Many studies have recognized that clinical

11 and basic science are in a state of crisis because of

12 a failure of resources to meet the opportunity. Con13 sequently, health-related research has emerged as a

14 national priority and has been given significantly in15 creased funding by Congress in fiscal year 1999. In

16 order to continue addressing this urgent national

17 need, the pattern of substantial budgetary expansion

18 begun in fiscal year 1999 should be maintained.

19 (3) INTERDISCIPLINARY NATURE OF HEALTH20 RELATED RESEARCH.—Because all fields of science

21 and engineering are interdependent, full realization

22 of the nation’s historic investment in health will de23 pend on major advances both in the biomedical

24 sciences and in other science and engineering dis25 ciplines. Hence, the vitality of all disciplines must be
6

S 296 RFH

1 preserved, even as special considerations are given to

2 the health research field.

3 SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REGARDING THE LINK BE4 TWEEN THE RESEARCH PROCESS AND USE5 FUL TECHNOLOGY.

6 The Congress makes the following findings:

7 (1) FLOW OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND

8 TECHNOLOGY.—The process of science, engineering,

9 and technology involves many steps. The present

10 Federal science, engineering, and technology struc11 ture reinforces the increasingly artificial distinctions

12 between basic and applied activities. The result too

13 often is a set of discrete programs that each support

14 a narrow phase of research or development and are

15 not coordinated with one another. The government

16 should maximize its investment by encouraging the

17 progression of science, engineering, and technology

18 from the earliest stages of research up to a pre-com19 mercialization stage, through funding agencies and

20 vehicles appropriate for each stage. This creates a

21 flow of technology, subject to merit review at each

22 stage, so that promising technology is not lost in a

23 bureaucratic maze.

24 (2) EXCELLENCE IN THE AMERICAN RESEARCH

25 INFRASTRUCTURE.—Federal investment in science,
7

S 296 RFH

1 engineering, and technology programs must foster a

2 close relationship between research and education.

3 Investment in research at the university level creates

4 more than simply world-class research. It creates

5 world-class researchers as well. The Federal strategy

6 must continue to reflect this commitment to a strong

7 geographically-diverse research infrastructure. Fur8 thermore, the United States must find ways to ex9 tend the excellence of its university system to pri10 mary and secondary educational institutions and to

11 better utilize the community college system to pre12 pare many students for vocational opportunities in

13 an increasingly technical workplace.

14 (3) COMMITMENT TO A BROAD RANGE OF RE15 SEARCH INITIATIVES.—An increasingly common

16 theme in many recent technical breakthroughs has

17 been the importance of revolutionary innovations

18 that were sparked by overlapping of research dis19 ciplines. The United States must continue to encour20 age this trend by providing and encouraging oppor21 tunities for interdisciplinary projects that foster col22 laboration among fields of research.

23 (4) PARTNERSHIPS AMONG INDUSTRY, UNIVER24 SITIES, AND FEDERAL LABORATORIES.—Each of

25 these contributors to the national science and tech-
8

S 296 RFH

1 nology delivery system has special talents and abili2 ties that complement the others. In addition, each

3 has a central mission that must provide their focus

4 and each has limited resources. The nation’s invest5 ment in science, engineering, and technology can be

6 optimized by seeking opportunities for leveraging the

7 resources and talents of these three major players

8 through partnerships that do not distort the mis9 sions of each partner. For that reason, Federal dol10 lars are wisely spent forming such partnerships.

11 SEC. 5. MAINTENANCE OF FEDERAL RESEARCH EFFORT;

12 GUIDING PRINCIPLES.

13 (a) MAINTAINING UNITED STATES LEADERSHIP IN

14 SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND TECHNOLOGY.—It is im15 perative for the United States to nurture its superb re16 sources in science, engineering, and technology carefully

17 in order to maintain its own globally competitive position.

18 (b) GUIDING PRINCIPLES.—Federal research and de19 velopment programs should be conducted in accordance

20 with the following guiding principles:

21 (1) GOOD SCIENCE.—Federal science, engineer22 ing, and technology programs include both knowl23 edge-driven science together with its applications,

24 and mission-driven, science-based requirements. In

25 general, both types of programs must be focused,
9

S 296 RFH

1 peer- and merit-reviewed, and not unnecessarily du2 plicative, although the details of these attributes

3 must vary with different program objectives.

4 (2) FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY.—The Congress

5 must exercise oversight to ensure that programs

6 funded with scarce Federal dollars are well man7 aged. The United States cannot tolerate waste of

8 money through inefficient management techniques,

9 whether by government agencies, by contractors, or

10 by Congress itself. Fiscal resources would be better

11 utilized if program and project funding levels were

12 predictable across several years to enable better

13 project planning; a benefit of such predictability

14 would be that agencies and Congress can better ex15 ercise oversight responsibilities through comparisons

16 of a project’s and program’s progress against care17 fully planned milestones.

18 (3) PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS.—The United

19 States needs to make sure that government pro20 grams achieve their goals. As the Congress crafts

21 science, engineering, and technology legislation, it

22 must include a process for gauging program effec23 tiveness, selecting criteria based on sound scientific

24 judgment and avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy.

25 The Congress should also avoid the trap of meas-
10

S 296 RFH

1 uring the effectiveness of a broad science, engineer2 ing, and technology program by passing judgment

3 on individual projects. Lastly, the Congress must

4 recognize that a negative result in a well-conceived

5 and executed project or program may still be criti6 cally important to the funding agency.

7 (4) CRITERIA FOR GOVERNMENT FUNDING.—

8 Program selection for Federal funding should con9 tinue to reflect the nation’s 2 traditional research

10 and development priorities: (A) basic, scientific, and

11 technological research that represents investments in

12 the nation’s long-term future scientific and techno13 logical capacity, for which government has tradition14 ally served as the principle resource; and (B) mis15 sion research investments, that is, investments in re16 search that derive from necessary public functions,

17 such as defense, health, education, environmental

18 protection, and raising the standard of living, which

19 may include pre-commercial, pre-competitive engi20 neering research and technology development. Addi21 tionally, government funding should not compete

22 with or displace the short-term, market-driven, and

23 typically more specific nature of private-sector fund24 ing. Government funding should be restricted to pre25 competitive activities, leaving competitive activities
11

S 296 RFH

1 solely for the private sector. As a rule, the govern2 ment should not invest in commercial technology

3 that is in the product development stage, very close

4 to the broad commercial marketplace, except to meet

5 a specific agency goal. When the government pro6 vides funding for any science, engineering, and tech7 nology investment program, it must take reasonable

8 steps to ensure that the potential benefits derived

9 from the program will accrue broadly.

10 SEC. 6. POLICY STATEMENT.

11 (a) POLICY.— This Act is intended to—

12 (1) assure a base level of Federal funding for

13 basic scientific, biomedical, and pre-competitive engi14 neering research, with this base level defined as a

15 doubling of Federal basic research funding over the

16 11 year period following the date of enactment of

17 this Act;

18 (2) invest in the future economic growth of the

19 United States by expanding the research activities

20 referred to in paragraph (1);

21 (3) enhance the quality of life and health for all

22 people of the United States through expanded sup23 port for health-related research;
12

S 296 RFH

1 (4) allow for accelerated growth of agencies

2 such as the National Institutes of Health to meet

3 critical national needs;

4 (5) guarantee the leadership of the United

5 States in science, engineering, medicine, and tech6 nology; and

7 (6) ensure that the opportunity and the support

8 for undertaking good science is widely available

9 throughout the United States by supporting a geo10 graphically-diverse research and development enter11 prise.

12 (b) AGENCIES COVERED.—The agencies intended to

13 be covered to the extent that they are engaged in science,

14 engineering, and technology activities for basic scientific,

15 medical, or pre-competitive engineering research by this

16 Act are—

17 (1) the National Institutes of Health, within the

18 Department of Health and Human Services;

19 (2) the National Science Foundation;

20 (3) the National Institute for Standards and

21 Technology, within the Department of Commerce;

22 (4) the National Aeronautics and Space Admin23 istration;

24 (5) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad25 ministration, within the Department of Commerce;
13

S 296 RFH

1 (6) the Centers for Disease Control, within the

2 Department of Health and Human Services;

3 (7) the Department of Energy (to the extent

4 that it is not engaged in defense-related activities);

5 (8) the Department of Agriculture;

6 (9) the Department of Transportation;

7 (10) the Department of the Interior;

8 (11) the Department of Veterans Affairs;

9 (12) the Smithsonian Institution;

10 (13) the Department of Education;

11 (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; and

12 (15) the Food and Drug Administration, within

13 the Department of Health and Human Services.

14 (c) DAMAGE TO RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE.—A

15 continued trend of funding appropriations equal to or

16 lower than current budgetary levels will lead to permanent

17 damage to the United States research infrastructure. This

18 could threaten American dominance of high-technology in19 dustrial leadership.

20 (d) FUTURE FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS.—

21 (1) GOALS.—The long-term strategy for re22 search and development funding under this section

23 would be achieved by a steady 2.5 percent annual in24 crease above the rate of inflation throughout a 11-

25 year period.
14

S 296 RFH

1 (2) INFLATION ASSUMPTION.—The authoriza2 tions contained in paragraph (3) assume that the

3 rate of inflation for each year will be 3 percent.

4 (3) AUTHORIZATION.—There are authorized to

5 be appropriated for civilian research and develop6 ment in the agencies listed in subsection (b)—

7 (A) $39,790,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;

8 (B) $41,980,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;

9 (C) $44,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;

10 (D) $46,720,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;

11 (E) $49,290,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;

12 (F) $52,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;

13 (G) $54,870,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;

14 (H) $57,880,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;

15 (I) $61,070,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;

16 (J) $64,420,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;

17 and

18 (K) $67,970,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.

19 (4) ACCELERATION TO MEET NATIONAL

20 NEEDS.—

21 (A) IN GENERAL.—If the amount appro22 priated for any fiscal year to an agency for the

23 purposes stated in paragraph (3) increases by

24 more than 8 percent over the amount appro25 priated to it for those purposes for the pre-
15

S 296 RFH

1 ceding fiscal year, then the amounts authorized

2 by paragraph (3) for subsequent fiscal years for

3 that agency and other agencies shall be deter4 mined under subparagraphs (B) and (C).

5 (B) EXCLUSION OF AGENCY IN DETER6 MINING OTHER AGENCY AMOUNTS FOR NEXT

7 FISCAL YEAR.—For the next fiscal year after a

8 fiscal year described in subparagraph (A), the

9 amount authorized to be appropriated to other

10 agencies under paragraph (3) shall be deter11 mined by excluding the agency described in sub12 paragraph (A). Any amount that would, but for

13 this subparagraph, be authorized to be appro14 priated to that agency shall not be appro15 priated.

16 (C) RESUMPTION OF REGULAR TREAT17 MENT.—Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), an

18 agency may not be excluded from the deter19 mination of the amount authorized to be appro20 priated under paragraph (3) for a fiscal year

21 following a fiscal year for which the sum of the

22 amounts appropriated to that agency for fiscal

23 year 2000 and all subsequent fiscal years for

24 the purposes described in paragraph (3) does

25 not exceed the sum of—
16

S 296 RFH

1 (i) the amount appropriated to that

2 agency for such purposes for fiscal year

3 2000; and

4 (ii) the amounts that would have been

5 appropriated for such purposes for subse6 quent fiscal years if the goal described in

7 paragraph (1) had been met (and not ex8 ceeded) with respect to that agency’s fund9 ing.

10 (D) NO LIMITATION ON OTHER FUND11 ING.—Nothing in this paragraph limits the

12 amount that may be appropriated to any agency

13 for the purposes described in paragraph (3).

14 (e) CONFORMANCE WITH BUDGETARY CAPS.—Not15 withstanding any other provision of law, no funds may be

16 made available under this Act in a manner that does not

17 conform with the discretionary spending caps provided in

18 the most recently adopted concurrent resolution on the

19 budget or threatens the economic stability of the annual

20 budget.

21 (f) BALANCED RESEARCH PORTFOLIO.—Because of

22 the interdependent nature of the scientific and engineering

23 disciplines, the aggregate funding levels authorized by the

24 section assume that the Federal research portfolio will be

25 well-balanced among the various scientific and engineering
17

S 296 RFH

1 disciplines, and geographically dispersed throughout the

2 States.

3 SEC. 7. PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL BUDGET REQUEST.

4 The President of the United States shall, in coordina5 tion with the President’s annual budget request, include

6 a report that parallels Congress’ commitment to support

7 federally-funded research and development by providing—

8 (1) a detailed summary of the total level of

9 funding for research and development programs

10 throughout all civilian agencies;

11 (2) a focused strategy that reflects the funding

12 projections of this Act for each future fiscal year

13 until 2010, including specific targets for each agency

14 that funds civilian research and development;

15 (3) an analysis which details funding levels

16 across Federal agencies by methodology of funding,

17 including grant agreements, procurement contracts,

18 and cooperative agreements (within the meaning

19 given those terms in chapter 63 of title 31, United

20 States Code); and

21 (4) specific proposals for infrastructure develop22 ment and research and development capacity build23 ing in States with less concentrated research and de24 velopment resources in order to create a nationwide

25 research and development community.
18

S 296 RFH

1 SEC. 8. COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNTABILITY STUDY FOR

2 FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH.

3 (a) STUDY.—The Director of the Office of Science

4 and Technology Policy, in consultation with the Director

5 of the Office of Management and Budget, shall enter into

6 agreement with the National Academy of Sciences for the

7 Academy to conduct a comprehensive study to develop

8 methods for evaluating federally-funded research and de9 velopment programs. This study shall—

10 (1) recommend processes to determine an ac11 ceptable level of success for federally-funded re12 search and development programs by—

13 (A) describing the research process in the

14 various scientific and engineering disciplines;

15 (B) describing in the different sciences

16 what measures and what criteria each commu17 nity uses to evaluate the success or failure of a

18 program, and on what time scales these meas19 ures are considered reliable—both for explor20 atory long-range work and for short-range

21 goals; and

22 (C) recommending how these measures

23 may be adapted for use by the Federal govern24 ment to evaluate federally-funded research and

25 development programs;
19

S 296 RFH

1 (2) assess the extent to which agencies incor2 porate independent merit-based review into the for3 mulation of the strategic plans of funding agencies

4 and if the quantity or quality of this type of input

5 is unsatisfactory;

6 (3) recommend mechanisms for identifying fed7 erally-funded research and development programs

8 which are unsuccessful or unproductive;

9 (4) evaluate the extent to which independent,

10 merit-based evaluation of federally-funded research

11 and development programs and projects achieves the

12 goal of eliminating unsuccessful or unproductive pro13 grams and projects; and

14 (5) investigate and report on the validity of

15 using quantitative performance goals for aspects of

16 programs which relate to administrative manage17 ment of the program and for which such goals would

18 be appropriate, including aspects related to—

19 (A) administrative burden on contractors

20 and recipients of financial assistance awards;

21 (B) administrative burdens on external

22 participants in independent, merit-based evalua23 tions;

24 (C) cost and schedule control for construc25 tion projects funded by the program;
20

S 296 RFH

1 (D) the ratio of overhead costs of the pro2 gram relative to the amounts expended through

3 the program for equipment and direct funding

4 of research; and

5 (E) the timeliness of program responses to

6 requests for funding, participation, or equip7 ment use.

8 (6) examine the extent to which program selec9 tion for Federal funding across all agencies exempli10 fies our nation’s historical research and development

11 priorities—

12 (A) basic, scientific, and technological re13 search in the long-term future scientific and

14 technological capacity of the nation; and

15 (B) mission research derived from a high16 priority public function.

17 (b) ALTERNATIVE FORMS FOR PERFORMANCE

18 GOALS.—Not later than 6 months after transmitting the

19 report under subsection (a) to Congress, the Director of

20 the Office of Management and Budget, after public notice,

21 public comment, and approval by the Director of the Of22 fice of Science and Technology Policy and in consultation

23 with the National Science and Technology Council shall

24 promulgate one or more alternative forms for performance

25 goals under section 1115(b)(10)(B) of title 31, United
21

S 296 RFH

1 States Code, based on the recommendations of the study

2 under subsection (a) of this section. The head of each

3 agency containing a program activity that is a research

4 and development program may apply an alternative form

5 promulgated under this section for a performance goal to

6 such a program activity without further authorization by

7 the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

8 (c) STRATEGIC PLANS.—Not later than one year

9 after promulgation of the alternative performance goals in

10 subsection (b) of this section, the head of each agency car11 rying out research and development activities, upon updat12 ing or revising a strategic plan under subsection 306(b)

13 of title 5, United States Code, shall describe the current

14 and future use of methods for determining an acceptable

15 level of success as recommended by the study under sub16 section (a).

17 (d) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:

18 (1) DIRECTOR.—The term ‘‘Director’’ means

19 the Director of the Office of Science and Technology

20 Policy.

21 (2) PROGRAM ACTIVITY.—The term ‘‘program

22 activity’’ has the meaning given that term by section

23 1115(f)(6) of title 31, United States Code.

24 (3) INDEPENDENT MERIT-BASED EVALUA25 TION.—The term ‘‘independent merit-based evalua-
22

S 296 RFH

1 tion’’ means review of the scientific or technical

2 quality of research or development, conducted by ex3 perts who are chosen for their knowledge of sci4 entific and technical fields relevant to the evaluation

5 and who—

6 (A) in the case of the review of a program

7 activity, do not derive long-term support from

8 the program activity; or

9 (B) in the case of the review of a project

10 proposal, are not seeking funds in competition

11 with the proposal.

12 (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There

13 are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the study

14 required by subsection (a) $600,000 for the 18-month pe15 riod beginning October 1, 2000.

16 SEC. 9. EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

17 FOR FEDERALLY-FUNDED RESEARCH.

18 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 11 of title 31, United

19 States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the

20 following:

21 ‘‘§ 1120. Accountability for research and develop22 ment programs

23 ‘‘(a) IDENTIFICATION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PRO24 GRAMS.—Based upon program performance reports for

25 each fiscal year submitted to the President under section
23

S 296 RFH

1 1116, the Director of the Office of Management and

2 Budget shall identify the civilian research and develop3 ment program activities, or components thereof, which do

4 not meet an acceptable level of success as defined in sec5 tion 1115(b)(1)(B). Not later than 30 days after the sub6 mission of the reports under section 1116, the Director

7 shall furnish a copy of a report listing the program activi8 ties or component identified under this subsection to the

9 President and the Congress.

10 ‘‘(b) ACCOUNTABILITY IF NO IMPROVEMENT

11 SHOWN.—For each program activity or component that

12 is identified by the Director under subsection (a) as being

13 below the acceptable level of success for 2 fiscal years in

14 a row, the head of the agency shall no later than 30 days

15 after the Director submits the second report so identifying

16 the program, submit to the appropriate congressional com17 mittees of jurisdiction:

18 ‘‘(1) a concise statement of the steps necessary

19 to—

20 ‘‘(A) bring such program into compliance

21 with performance goals; or

22 ‘‘(B) terminate such program should com23 pliance efforts fail; and

24 ‘‘(2) any legislative changes needed to put the

25 steps contained in such statement into effect.’’.
24

S 296 RFH

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—

2 (1) The chapter analysis for chapter 11 of title

3 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at

4 the end thereof the following:

‘‘1120. Accountability for research and development programs’’.

5 (2) Section 1115(f) of title 31, United States

6 Code, is amended by striking ‘‘through 1119,’’ and

7 inserting ‘‘through 1120’’.

Passed the Senate July 26, 1999.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.