VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

2007 Annual Report 

 

Visiting Committee on 

Advanced Technology 

of the 

National Institute of 

Standards and Technology 

U.S. Department of 

Commerce 

March 3, 2008 
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

i

PREFACE 

The Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT) of the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) was established in its present form by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 

1988 and updated by the America COMPETES Act. The VCAT charter includes reviewing and making 

recommendations regarding general policy for NIST, its organization, budget and programs within the 

framework of applicable national policies as set forth by the president and the Congress. In addition, the 

America COMPETES Act calls for the VCAT to comment on NIST’s three-year programmatic plan in its 

annual report to Congress This 2007 annual report covers the March 2007 meeting through the February 

2008 meeting. 

The Committee reviews the Institute’s strategic direction, performance and policies, and provides the 

Secretary of Commerce, Congress, and other stakeholders with information on the value and relevance 

of NIST to the U.S. science and technology base and to the economy. Over the past year, the Committee 

has been active in assessing NIST’s progress in the following areas: 

• Strategic direction and performance 

• Infrastructure and process in support of strategic needs 

• Outreach - Assessing and responding to external drivers 

• Organizing and executing with excellence 

Throughout the year, the Committee seeks to cover a significant portion of NIST programs through direct 

discussion with NIST leaders, scientists and engineers. Reactions and observations are discussed 

candidly with the NIST representatives and other guests at each meeting. This feedback is used to seed 

continuous improvement in key areas in the overall operation. The Committee also visits various NIST 

laboratories and discusses the research projects directly with the technical staff. These laboratory tours 

help the committee assess the relevancy of measurement technology research and NIST’s progress 

against the strategic plan and the development of the NIST infrastructure. 

Members of the Committee have careers in industry and in academia, and are selected solely on the 

basis of established records of distinguished service and eminence in their fields: research, engineering, 

business and other fields relevant to the NIST mission. Appointed by the NIST Director for staggered 

three year terms, the members have diverse backgrounds and provide a representative cross-section of 

traditional and emerging U.S. industries. Three new members joined the Committee during 2007: 

Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, Google; Dr. William Happer, Princeton University; and Dr. Elsa Reichmanis, 

Georgia Institute of Technology. 

This report highlights the Committee’s observations, findings and recommendations. Detailed meeting 

minutes and presentation materials are available on the NIST web site at www.nist.gov/director/vcat. 

VCAT Members During the Period Covered by this Report: 

Dr. E. David Spong, VCAT Chair 

Boeing Company (retired) 

Dr. William Happer 

Princeton University 

Dr. Thomas M. Baer 

Stanford University 

Dr. Lou Ann Heimbrook 

Merck & Co., Inc 

Dr. John F. Cassidy 

United Technologies Corp. (retired) 

Dr. Elsa Reichmanis 

Georgia Institute of Technology 

Dr. Vinton G. Cerf 

Google 

Dr. James W. Serum, Vice Chair 

SciTek Ventures 

Dr. Paul A. Fleury 

Yale University 

Mr. W. Wyatt Starnes 

SignaCert, Inc 

Mr. Gary D. Floss 

Marvin Windows and Doors 

Mr. Robert T. Williams 

Caterpillar, Inc. 
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

1. Introduction

The VCAT formed three subcommittees to better focus our oversight and reviews. We selected the 

areas of Bioscience/Healthcare, Nanotechnology, and Information Technology (IT) since we believe 

that these are the high impact areas deserving of our attention. During 2008 we plan to review the 

effectiveness of these subcommittees to ensure we are covering all the important emerging areas of 

technologies. 

The VCAT held four meetings over the past year in the Gaithersburg, MD, facility, the Boulder, CO, 

facility, and the Hollings Marine Laboratory in Charleston, SC. At each facility, we were pleased with 

the technology and relevancy of the research focus on industry and the enthusiasm of all the staff. 

Based on these visits and the interactions between the VCAT members and the NIST staff, we 

identified findings and formulated recommendations, as follows: 

2. Overall Committee Observations on the FY 2009 President’s Budget 

Request and NIST’s Three-Year Programmatic Plan

• The committee believes that one of the more important recent developments was the 

planned budget increase for NIST as part of the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) 

and the America COMPETES Act. We strongly support the proposed significant budget 

increases. 

• The committee endorses the four pillars of strategic planning found in the three-year 

programmatic plan (pages1-4 and 3-6), namely: 

(i) Enhanced stakeholder outreach and identification of critical measurement and technology 

challenges; 

(ii) Strategic, multi-year investment framework; 

(iii) Development of infrastructure to optimize and support the Nation’s technological and 

organizational innovation – and the staff and equipment so that NIST can succeed; and 

(iv) Rigorous evaluation of all NIST investments 

• The committee agrees with the Core Competencies identified in the three-year 

programmatic plan (section 2.4), namely: 

(i) Measurement science; 

(ii) Rigorous traceability; and 

(iii) Development and use of standards 

• The committee agrees with NIST that biotechnology, advanced materials (including 

nanomaterials) and IT infrastructure and communications are areas in which strategic 

investments are needed (page 5-13 of the plan). We also endorse the plan’s details of the 

construction and renovation needs described in Appendix D. 

• The committee supports NIST’s commitment to phasing in and phasing out of programs 

(section 5 of the plan) and agrees with NIST’s investment posture in quantum science and 

atomic, molecular and optical physics. 

• The committee concurs with NIST that it must be responsive to mandates (e.g., Help 

America Vote Act) and to other national needs in manufacturing; energy demand and 

supply; climate change measurement, modeling and analysis; and safety in commerce. 

1
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

• The committee endorses the articulation of the issues surrounding Nanotechnology 

Measurement Science (section 9.1.1.3 of the plan) and the movement of Nanotechnology 

from Discovery to Manufacture (section 9.1.2.2 of the plan). The importance of this field to 

both U.S. technological leadership and industrial competitiveness is clearly described. 

• The negative impact of the FY 2008 budget on the important role NIST must play in the 

responsible development of nanotechnology cannot be overemphasized. We agree with 

the assessment of the importance of enhancing the NIST Center for Neutron Research 

(NCNR) (section 9.1.3.2 of the plan) but suggest that the case could be even stronger by 

enhancing the important symbiosis between NCNR and the Center for Nanoscale Science 

and Technology (CNST), as expanded upon in Section 3c of this report. 

• The committee also strongly endorses NIST’s evaluation strategy, in particular the seven 

Heilmeier questions from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 

adapted to NIST’s work: 

(i) What is the problem and why is it hard? 

(ii) How is it solved today and by whom? 

(iii) What is the new technical idea and why can we succeed now? 

(iv) Why should NIST do this? 

(v) What is the impact if successful and who would care? 

(vi) How will you measure progress? 

(vii) How much will it cost and how long will it take? 

• The committee is satisfied that NIST has a vigorous process for consulting with customers, 

industry and academia for purposes of formulating its strategic and tactical plans For 

example, see a summary of IT organizations inside and outside the U.S. Government in 

which NIST collaborates. 1

 

• The committee notes the extensive collaboration undertaken by NIST1

 and recommends 

continued support for these wide-ranging activities. 

• The committee commends the NIST staff for its responsiveness to questions posed about 

the nature of the NIST customer base and the mandates that it is required to fulfill. 2

 

                                                           

1

 Interim report of the VCAT Information Technology Subcommittee, Wyatt Starnes, Chair, NIST VCAT IT 

Subcommittee, December 11-12, 2007, presentation available at 

http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/starnes_it_feedback_121207.pdf

2 “Information Technology Research at NIST”, Cita Furlani, Director, Information Technology Laboratory, August 14, 

2007, presentation available at http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/furlani_0807.pdf

2
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

3. Detailed Observations, Findings and Recommendations Developed 

from the Work of the Three VCAT Subcommittees 

3a. VCAT Information Technology Subcommittee

Chair: Wyatt Starnes; Members: Vinton Cerf, Gary Floss, David Spong

The subcommittee identified a variety of high-level trends and technologies that are having or will 

have notable effects on NIST and its customers. These are summarized briefly below. 

High Level Emerging Trends

The need for cyber security is increasing rapidly. Recent reports from the company AV Test reported 

that during 2007, five times as many novel samples of malicious software were detected (5.49 million 

in 2007 versus 972 thousand in 2006). Improvements are needed in software and systems quality, 

reliability and trustworthiness. There are deep questions about the vulnerability of browsers and other 

network-based applications, operating systems, and server systems on the Internet or in private 

enterprise networks. Ability to measure the risks and to find means to mitigate them will determine 

whether electronic commerce on the Internet, among many other applications, will survive. 

It is also clear that data centers are among the most resource consuming systems in the ecology. 

They consume a lot of electrical power and consume a lot of water for cooling. As computing and 

storage demands increase, these problems will be exacerbated. NIST could help to establish profiles 

of Green Data Centers that operate in sustainable ways. 

Digital Information is an extremely useful form of data but archiving and retrieval depend on timely 

indexing and ability to recover and interpret the stored information. This often means that the software 

that knows how to interpret the data must be available at retrieval time. This cannot always be 

guaranteed and steps are needed to assure that the bits we store today can be retrieved and 

interpreted a hundred or a thousand years from now. Standards for representing information are 

needed. Document references need to be permanent and usable for hundreds of years to come. 

Moreover data describing data is needed to allow for data retrieval at times long remote from the 

original capture. Standards are needed for this so-called “metadata” so that all forms of information 

can be correctly interpreted in the distant future. We are also seeing increasing levels of data mining 

in which digital information and metadata is searched for patterns and other indicators of economic, 

social or political trends. 

The subcommittee also sees substantial degrees of collaborative, online activity, aided by tools for 

visualization and modification in real time and often in the presence of voice or video conversation. 

Resources are becoming virtualized so that physical facilities can be assigned and re-assigned freely 

to meet demands, without dedicating them unnecessarily. IT is becoming pervasive and increasingly 

mobile. Laptops and mobiles have become powerful computing engines in their own right with 

substantial memory and communication capacity. All of this increased information technology use is 

increasing demand for human capital resources for research, development and operation. This puts 

stress on the national educational system and in the global competition for work in the IT space. 

As IT becomes more pervasive, it is also playing a role in software-assisted devices (for example, 

measurement devices that report their condition and data online or accumulate it for pickup later). 

This increases the need for standards of data identification, calibration of measurement equipment, 

and global agreement on metrics. Some of the economic and ecological challenges in this century as 

well as the challenges of operating extremely large scale systems have increased the need for 

predictive modeling and measurements to validate the models. As the information ecology expands, 

the nation is in need of greater risk mitigation. We want to avoid technological surprise (e.g., someone 

else comes up with the first workable quantum computer). We want to protect our democratic roots 

3
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

with secure and efficient electronic voting by mitigating risks inherent in online voting systems. And we 

want to limit the risks of nanomaterials that could pose health, safety or environmental hazards. 

State of the Art in Technology

The state of the art of IT is also evolving significantly. The Internet will be adding IP version 6 (IPv6) 

with its vastly increased address space. It will also expand the use of digitally-signed Domain Names 

that can mitigate various forms of fraud, for example misdirecting users to the wrong web site. NonLatin domain names will also be added to the Internet at the top levels during 2008. There are risks 

for ambiguity and confusion and it will be important to mitigate that risk as much as possible. 

The so-called “Web 2.0” technology will add virtual data centers and virtual personal computing to the 

array of tools already available to today’s modern Internet user. Contributing to this virtualization are 

“service oriented architectures” that render virtual the physical resources needed to put up web based 

services. Multi-core chipsets are driving the need for new pipelining and parallelization algorithms. 

Finally, the subcommittee sees rapid evolution of robotic devices, telepresence and automation in 

general, some of which will color the workload and opportunities of NIST and also its set of tools for 

carrying out its work. 

The subcommittee also observes that there are significant IT implications for nanotechnology. New 

nanotechnologies can influence the development of new computing capacity (e.g., quantum 

computing) on the one hand and on the other, developing nanotechnologies of all kinds can be 

accelerated with the use of large scale computing capacity to design and analyze the physical 

properties of nanomaterials and structures. Quantum computing, if successfully implemented, could 

vastly improve our ability to model, analyze and even predict the effects of climate change and natural 

disasters. Even in the absence of prediction and modeling, the ability to amass and present large 

quantities of geographically indexed information (e.g., Google Earth, Virtual Earth) can be highly 

beneficial in natural disaster mitigation including medical epidemics. 

NIST has cited biotechnology, advanced materials and IT infrastructure and communications as key 

priorities for the agency. The IT subcommittee agrees and believes that computing and networking 

capabilities are essential for the support of biotechnology research, materials research and modeling, 

and the use of IT in collaborative research work. Sharing of large databases and large scale 

computing capacity will be the key to advances in these three areas. IT standards for format and 

communication are key to the development and use of personal and interoperable health records and 

the analysis of aggregate health records for purposes of detecting and reacting to potential epidemics 

or identifying general population health risks. Clearly, initiatives in these areas require advances in 

techniques to support confidentiality of personal health records. 

Recommendations

• Basic and applied research work is vital to maintaining NIST’s ability to deliver new and needed 

measurement capabilities in nanotechnology, biotechnology and information technology spheres. 

NIST needs to maintain a vigorous program of research to support evolution of the U.S. 

Measurement System (USMS) as dictated by the strategic planning, consultation and outreach 

programs. 

• NIST could materially assist the IT industry through the development of multi-core chip 

performance metrics and measurement. 

• NIST could materially assist the IT industry through development of standards in software 

measurement and metrics to assess the proactive readiness and security of IT systems at all 

levels. This idea could be extended through research on ability to assess and maintain the 

integrity of software as deployed and to validate the provenance, pedigree and lineage of software 

used in systems critical to national security and IT infrastructure. This is not only crucial to create 

4
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

social trust with electronic voting systems, but increasingly necessary to positively affirm that the 

software used in the National infrastructure remains trusted and reliable over usage lifetime. 

• The subcommittee recommends that NIST consider investigating computing requirements and 

algorithms used for climate and natural disaster modeling with the objective of validating them. 

There seems to be a gap between fine-grained models (e.g., of buildings) and large scale models. 

The gap inhibits efforts to provide predictability and validation of models. 

• The subcommittee strongly endorses the research program in quantum computing and 

communication. This is a high risk, high payoff area. While there is serious quantum computing 

and communication work in progress in the private and academic research sectors, it is often the 

case that only governments can afford to make the sustained investments needed to achieve 

results. NIST has been at the forefront of work in this area and should continue its efforts. 

• NIST has made a very strong case for the importance of outreach in the development and focus of 

the USMS (see section 4 of NIST’s three-year programmatic plan). While the text focuses on 

physical measurement, it is important to recognize the need for IT-related metrics that reveal 

computing and communications capacity, security, compliance and reliability. 

• The United States is lagging in broadband capacity and better data is needed on national access 

to and use of high capacity data communications capabilities. The subcommittee recommends 

that NIST consider possible measurements and metrics to assist in the assessment of broadband 

access to Internet and related services in the United States. 

• The United States may be lagging in its production of technically trained and qualified IT workers. 

NIST should consider working with other U.S. and international agencies to characterize U.S. 

performance in comparison with other countries. Other approaches to measure, quantify and 

improve IT management efficiency could offset demand for lower level IT maintenance personnel, 

providing a competitive advantage to government and industry. 

• Congress should support the President’s FY 2009 budget proposals for NIST and the general plan 

for multi-year budget growth. NIST works with many agencies, and coordinates much of that work 

through interagency organizations and plans. Still, there is opportunity to better coordinate the 

NIST budget allocations with other U.S. government agencies whose research interests overlap 

those of NIST. It is recommended that coordinated investments in facilities, staffing and programs 

can have multiplier effects across agencies with related agendas. 

• NIST needs to be salary and benefit competitive with industry, especially in new areas of 

nanotechnology, biotechnology and information technology. 

• NIST will need breakthrough levels of research results to keep up with the measurement needs of 

the research community and industry. 

• NIST needs more flexibility in hiring of non-U.S. citizens. A significant fraction of American 

university degrees are granted to non-U.S. citizens and many of them could be highly productive 

working in areas of importance to NIST. We should be taking advantage of the available workforce 

in IT and others areas of specific relevance to the NIST programs. 

5
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

3b. VCAT Bioscience/Healthcare Subcommittee 

Chair: Thomas Baer; Members: Lou Anne Heimbrook, Jim Serum

Since Bioscience/healthcare was identified as a major investment/growth area by NIST, a VCAT 

subcommittee was formed in 2007. NIST management requested the VCAT subcommittee to work 

with the organizational unit (OU) directors to evaluate existing programs and to work with the OU 

directors in developing an overall NIST wide strategic plan for Bioscience and Healthcare (BHC). 

Over the past year the VCAT has participated in a series of meetings with OU directors from the 

Chemical Science and Technology Laboratory (CSTL), the Materials Science and Engineering 

Laboratory (MSEL), the Physics Laboratory (PL), and the Information Technology Laboratory (ITL) 

where the majority of the Bioscience and Health Care (BHC) programs are located. These meetings 

have been focused on developing an Institute wide strategic plan for this industrial sector. The NIST 

senior management team and VCAT subcommittee members have agreed that the following strategic 

planning process is appropriate: 

• Identify industry sectors where measurement science plays a key role 

• Review NIST programs in these areas 

• Organize outreach to stakeholders in these areas to solicit industry input 

• Formulate institute wide BHC strategic plan 

• Circulate this plan to stakeholders for feedback 

• Recommend budget and structure to implement plan. 

The NIST senior leaders and the VCAT team are currently focusing on the third step in this process, 

and the subcommittee is working with the OU managers to help NIST to solicit input from the BHC 

industry. 

History and Background in Healthcare 

NIST has a long history of specific initiatives which have developed useful standards as well as 

making significant contributions to measurement science for the BHC industry. For example, in 1918, 

NBS launched a dental materials group that has made numerous important contributions to this area 

throughout many decades. In the 1920s, NIST helped to establish x-ray radiation exposure limits, 

which were quickly adopted nationwide and prevented significant harm to x-ray imaging technicians. 

Some of the current NIST programs evolved from these early efforts and are still producing useful 

Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) and contributing to measurement science in this area today. 

However, historically the fraction of NIST resources devoted to supporting the BHC sector is minute 

considering the size of the healthcare industry, currently estimated at approximately $2.2 trillion 

dollars, or roughly 20% of our gross domestic product. 

Although considerable progress has been made in recent years in understanding the cause of 

disease and the development of therapies to improve health and increase the quality of life, these 

advancements are limited by our ability to measure trace levels of biological materials in serum or 

blood, to image tissue and organ systems at resolution levels that distinguish healthy and disease 

states, and to understand disease from a systems perspective. In addition, the Bioscience industry 

has rapidly expanded to include not only healthcare areas but also energy, food products, forensics 

and biohazards. The current need for development of advanced measurement technology to support 

the U.S. BHC industries is critical. 

The sector has witnessed rapid development of quantitative molecular diagnostic and high resolution 

imaging technologies. These technologies complement the long standing qualitative, primarily 

observational, diagnostic methods previously used by physicians; providing revolutionary methods for 

early diagnosis and precise prescription of personalized therapies for patients. However, these 

methods often lack sufficient reproducibility, sensitivity, resolution, or measurement precision to 

achieve their full impact on the practice of medicine and meet the ever growing needs of the medical 

6
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

practitioner. These new quantitative molecular diagnostic and imaging methods could be dramatically 

improved by implementing focused standards and measurement science programs at NIST which will 

have immediate impact on the quality of life of U.S. citizenry. 

Findings

• Despite NIST’s successful historical record with a number of specific initiatives in this area and the 

enormous size of the industrial sector, there is no laboratory specifically devoted to supporting the 

BHC industry and technology sector. The existing programs are limited in scale and scope, and 

are located in multiple laboratories across many different sites. Although the majority of these 

separate programs are well managed by the individual labs, they are not part of an overriding 

strategic plan to provide coherence, systematic program prioritization or organizational 

effectiveness in looking for synergism between the different projects. Bioscience/Healthcare 

projects often reflect specific requests external to NIST or are due to individual researcher interest 

or expertise. In spite of these organizational obstacles and the limited resources available, we 

believe that the staff has recognized these challenges and is making efforts to cross fertilize 

program and leverage expertise across laboratories. However, significantly increased efforts are 

needed to adequately service the needs of the BHC sector. The BHC strategic plan now being 

developed is an important step and must be pursued aggressively. 

• The NIST management team is becoming more proactive in soliciting “customer” needs. We are 

also quite pleased to note over this past year increased dialog and cooperation between 

laboratories to explore needs in Bioscience and Healthcare. We fully support these trends and 

encourage the team to expand their efforts 

• The three-year programmatic plan and proposed budgets for NIST should more specifically 

emphasize the importance of this BHC area. 

• We strongly support NIST’s recognized role in the America COMPETES Act and the American 

Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) and we believe that funding of BHC programs will greatly enhance 

U.S. competitiveness and encourage innovation in this critical industrial sector. 

• The NIST management team identified five areas of focus in 2007; Biospectroscopy, Cell and 

Tissue Measurement, DNA Technology, Structural Biology, and Quantitative Imaging. In most of 

these projects, NIST lacks sufficient funding resources and applications expertise to be successful 

or to have a major impact. 

• NIST’s FY 2009 budget proposal appropriately identifies characterization and measurement of 

proteins as a critical need for the sector. However, most of the effort will need to be further defined 

and would still remain underfunded. 

• The NIST management team has identified Bioimaging as one of its key opportunities. We 

support a significantly greater effort in this area. We believe that increased understanding of the 

measurement science underpinning this field will yield improvements in imaging resolution and 

sensitivity, enabling this field to contribute significantly not only to the field of diagnostics for early 

diagnosis of diseases like cancer, but also for the monitoring of biomarkers to predict disease 

recurrence and play a major role in speeding drug development, enhancing the competitiveness of 

the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. 

• Many of the VCAT findings and recommendations are recognized by the NIST management team 

and they have requested assistance from the Bioscience/Healthcare subcommittee to assist in 

addressing the first of the foundation pillars in 2008, “outreach and identification of critical 

measurement and technology challenges” for Bioscience and Healthcare. 

7
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Specific goals and recommendations for CY 2008

• We recommend that the OU directors and NIST senior management develop a comprehensive 

Bioscience/Healthcare Strategic Plan during 2008. 

• We recommend that the management team explore establishing additional strategic alliance 

partnerships in order to gain application expertise for implementation of its strategic plan. 

• The subcommittee recommends that NIST staff organize a series of small workshops consisting of 

five to ten scientific and technology leaders in key industries within the BHC sector. Several key 

industries that could be included in this outreach effort are: diagnostics, drug discovery, BHC 

related information technologies such as electronic medical records, consumer and food product 

safety, and medical devices and materials. A primary goal of these workshops would be to identify 

critical measurement challenges and standards needs for the BHC industry. A secondary goal of 

these workshops is to educate the BHC sector about NIST capabilities, since most commercial 

organizations active in this sector are unaware of NIST. 

• We support the efforts by NIST staff to organize a conference which will cover the long- term 

needs and priorities in Bioscience which will help to identify strategic thrusts and programs for 

NIST. 

• Reports from these workshops and conference should be used to prepare a preliminary strategic 

plan which will be distributed to workshop and conference participants for comment. 

• We recommend that the strategic plan be revised as appropriate to incorporate these comments 

and then be used to develop an infrastructure plan and corresponding budget to support the 

strategic initiatives in the BHC area. 

3c. VCAT Nanotechnology Subcommittee

Chair: Paul Fleury; Members: John Cassidy, Elsa Reichmanis, Robert Williams 

The National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) was reviewed under Congressional mandate in 2006 

and judged to be on track in its responsibilities to communicate and coordinate among the more than 

two dozen Federal Agencies engaged in nanoscale research and education. The U.S. government 

invests over $1 billion annually in these efforts, has initiated dozens of centers and institutes across 

the country, and supported thousands of researchers and students over the past half decade or more. 

The VCAT Nanotechnology Subcommittee has reviewed NIST’s roles and participation in the NNI with 

special attention to those aspects that intersect the NIST mission most strongly. The 2006 NNI review 

endorsed the seven major program component areas (PCAs) of the NNI: Fundamental nanoscale 

phenomena and processes; Nanomaterials; Nanoscale devices and systems; Instrumentation 

research, metrology, and standards for nanotechnology; Major research facilities and instrumentation 

acquisition; Nanomanufacturing; Societal dimensions – Education; Environmental, health and safety 

(EHS); and Ethical, legal and other societal issues (ELSI). We found those PCAs in italics to be 

particularly relevant to NIST. From this list the critical importance of NIST to the NNI and the country’s 

global position in nanotechnology is both obvious and compelling. 

Prominent among the recommendations of the NNI Report was to “expand research on the EHS 

effects of nanotechnology including effects of exposure on humans, wildlife and other ecological 

receptors; characterize and manage risks associated with exposure.” NIST must play a leading role in 

meeting the challenge of the responsible development of nanotechnology. We are pleased to report 

below that they are well launched on this path. 

8
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Specific Findings and Recommendations with respect to Strategic Planning 

Findings

• Nanotech research is widely distributed at NIST with several OUs participating. The total level of 

activity is estimated to be of order 20% of NIST effort. In line with earlier directives and briefings to 

the VCAT, the Nanotechnology Subcommittee focused on the specific strategic planning efforts in 

the new Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST) and the activities of the new 

NanoEHS program. While both have had input from and interactions with the other relevant OUs, 

the roles of the latter in the strategic planning processes were not explicitly reviewed by this 

subcommittee. 

• The role of CNST is to provide measurement methods, standards and technology to support all 

phases of nanotechnology development from discovery to production; develop and maintain a 

national shared use facility, the Nanofab, with state-of-the-art, nanoscale fabrication and 

measurement capabilities; apply a multidisciplinary approach to problem solving that involves 

partnering with industry, academia, and other government agencies; serve as a hub to link the 

external nanotechnology community to the vast measurement expertise that exists within the NIST 

Laboratories; and help to educate the next generation of nanotechnologists. 

• The three part structure of the CNST plan centers upon its Nanofabrication Facility; its Research 

Program; and its intellectual infrastructure including key partnerships. Near term goals are to fully 

establish the Nanofab facility, broaden its capabilities, and expand its user base. For the Research 

Program, the goals are to determine the community’s research needs, determine core 

competency requirements and major new program areas. The intellectual infrastructure building 

requires recruiting the best talent, as well as establishing key partnerships with the NIST OUs and 

with both external academic, government and industrial players. 

• Concerning CNST, we find that with respect to both the Nanofab and the research programs 

residing in CNST, there has been significant progress in planning and execution. During the past 

year, the VCAT has received detailed briefings on this progress from Dr. Robert Celotta, Director 

of the CNST. The acquisition, installation and commissioning of the major equipment for CNST is 

essentially complete. Approximately 85% of the planned technical personnel have been hired or 

authorized under existing funding. Completion of the personnel and equipment ramp-ups will 

require restoration of the funds deleted from the FY 2008 budget to at least the level in the 

President’s proposed FY 2009 budget. Still developing are NIST internal partnerships, which 

involve the following OUs: MSEL (Nanomagnetics; thin film nanostructure, bistable switch; probe 

beams); Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory (EEEL) (Nanomagnetics; low noise 

sensors; theory; magnetization dynamics); ITL (Nanomagnetics; domain properties); CSTL 

(Atomic Scale Measurement; atom switching dynamics); PL (Nanofabrication; edge roughness); 

and the NIST Center for Neutron Research (NCNR). Other connections and projects are under 

consideration. 

• In response to a widespread concern about the responsible development of nanotechnology as 

well as a recommendation by the VCAT, NIST initiated in 2007 a program to develop standards 

and metrics associated with the responsible development of nanotechnology, which we refer to 

here as NanoEHS. At the NIST December 2007 meeting, a full briefing on the plans and activities 

of this initiative was provided by Dr. Laurie Locascio, Chief of the Biochemical Science Division 

and NIST NanoEHS Coordinator. She noted the on-going active participation by members of 

several OUs in NanoEHS, including: MSEL, PL, the Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory, and 

CSTL - with growing participation from the CNST and EEEL. 

Dr. Locascio noted several aspects of NIST’s outreach, planning and participation in key 

standards and coordinating bodies such as: participating in the Nanotechnology Environmental 

and Health Implications (NEHI) Working Group of the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and 

9
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Technology (NSET) Subcommittee, the coordinating office of the NNI; participating in and leading 

efforts in ISO, IEC, ASTM, IEEE; hosting the NNI-sponsored workshop to initiate interagency, 

academic, industrial cooperation and consensus building; developing first nanoscale reference 

materials; developing analytical methods to characterize nanomaterials; and developing highthroughput multiplexed screening methods for quantitative, reliable toxicity measurements. She 

also noted that all of these efforts were seeded by funds from other programs in prior years. The 

deletion of this item from the FY 2008 budget was a setback that needs to be rectified at least to 

the level of the FY 2009 President’s budget. 

• Despite the positive progress in strategic planning for both CNST and the NanoEHS program, and 

the participation of several OUs in both, we find that the coordination and planning of 

nanotechnology on a NIST-wide level is not optimal. 

Recommendations

• The natural differences in responsibilities, funding and resources between line organizations and 

lab wide programs are evident in all broad organizational strategic initiatives. Nanotechnology at 

NIST is no exception. These differences and their associated issues need to be addressed if NIST 

and the nation are to take full advantage of the opportunities presented by nanotechnology. 

While the EHS aspects of nanotechnology illustrated these issues to some degree, there seems to 

be general agreement that the de facto point person in this area is Dr. Locascio. And for the 

moment, no action might seem to be needed. But there are several cross-cutting issues in 

nanotechnology such as manufacturing, electronic applications, energy problems, etc that 

highlight the absence of and need for a higher level structure in carrying forward the formation and 

execution of a NIST strategy for Nanotechnology. 

• We recommend that the Director establish a Nanotechnology Coordinating Council to develop a 

NIST-wide strategic plan, to establish appropriate points of contact for both internal and external 

stakeholders, and to help coordinate and prioritize nanotechnology programs within NIST. 

Infrastructure and Process

Findings

• Because of our strong focus on the CNST and NanoEHS, we do not know how all of the OUs 

involved in nanotech go about meeting their challenges relative to either physical or intellectual 

resources or infrastructure. However, following our investigation of the start-up of CNST, we have 

a fairly complete picture of how the CNST is addressing these issues. 

• As noted above, the physical infrastructure for the CNST is on track, as is the recruiting of 

technical personnel. They are now developing the methods and metrics related to their outreach 

and collaborative interactions. In particular, they and the NCNR are beginning to build mutually 

beneficial new programs. The NCNR has been widely recognized as the leading neutron 

scattering facility in the United States for several years, and is expected to remain in that position 

for at least the next decade, even with the operation of the new Spallation Neutron Source at Oak 

Ridge. Because of the importance of materials in nano and biotechnology, the NCNR should give 

NIST a prominent role in the development of both. The CNST is critical to NIST’s exploiting that 

opportunity. 

Recommendations

• We recommend that NIST follow through on plans to complete ramp-ups for the CNST and 

NanoEHS programs as well as the Nanotech measurement science and other priorities as 

described in sections 9.1.1.3 and 9.1.2.2 of the three-year programmatic plan. Funding increases 

for these programs were not provided as requested in the FY 2008 President’s budget. 

10
VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 

National Institute of Standards and Technology

11

• We recommend that the proposed Nanotechnology Coordinating Council work to enhance 

collaborations among all the relevant OUs involved in NIST nanotechnology. 

• NIST participation on a myriad of standards bodies is applauded and their continued partnering 

with industry particularly on international standards bodies is strongly urged. 

• We believe there is need and opportunity for a more strategic approach to such partnering when it 

comes to Nanotechnology in particular to help ensure a level playing field for American industry in 

this arena. To this end, we suggest that the VCAT receive a briefing on this issue from Dr. George 

Arnold and his colleagues in Technology Services at a subsequent VCAT meeting.