2003 Annual Report

THE NIST VISITING COMMITTEE

ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

JANUARY 2004
Report prepared by:

Dr. Bruce F. Field

VCAT Executive Director

For information regarding the NIST Visiting Committee

on Advanced Technology, contact:

Ms. Carolyn Peters

VCAT Administrative Coordinator

National Institute of Standards and Technology

100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 1004

Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1004

(301) 975-5607

Email: carolyn.peters@nist.gov
i

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. The VCAT reviews and makes recommendations regarding

general policy for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, its organization, its

budget, and its programs, within the framework of applicable national policies as set forth by the

President and the Congress. It submits an annual report to the Secretary of Commerce for submission to the Congress. This Fiscal Year 2003 annual report covers the December 2002

meeting through the September 2003 meeting.

The Committee studies the allocation of resources employed to achieve NIST’s mission as well

as the policies and processes employed by NIST management to optimize the overall effectiveness of the Institute’s programs. Over time, the Committee seeks to cover the full spectrum of

activity at NIST. In addition to direct discussion with NIST leaders and professionals, the

committee reviews reports from the National Research Council Board of Assessment (of the

technical excellence of NIST’s programs), the MEP Advisory Board, and the ATP Advisory

Committee. In light of the broad experience represented by the VCAT and the other Boards, this

approach delivers a reliable overview of NIST. Reactions and observations are discussed

candidly with the NIST representatives involved at each meeting. This feedback is positively

received, and we see much evidence of constructive response to it.

Members of the Committee are selected on the basis of their backgrounds and experience

and are appointed by the NIST Director to staggered 3-year terms. Three new members

joined the Committee during 2003, Mr. Scott C. Donnelly, Dr. Lou Ann Heimbrook, and

Mr. Robert T. Williams.

Preface
ii

DR. JUAN M. SANCHEZ

VCAT Chair

Vice President for Research

University of Texas, Austin

MR. GARY D. FLOSS

Business Partner

Bluefire Partners

DR. RICHARD M. GROSS

Corporate Vice President of

Research and

Development

The Dow Chemical

Company

DEBORAH L. GRUBBE

Corporate Director, Safety &

Health

DuPont Safety, Health,

Environment

DR. JENNIE C.

HUNTER-CEVERA

President

University of Maryland

Biotechnology Institute

DR. CAROLINE A. KOVAC

Vice President

Life Sciences Solutions

IBM

DR. THOMAS A. MANUEL

Retired President

Council for Chemical Research

WAYNE H. PITCHER, JR.

Technology Management

Consultant

DR. F. RAYMOND SALEMME

Retired President and Chief

Scientific Officer

3-Dimensional Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

DR. APRIL M. SCHWEIGHART

Product Business Manager

Motorola

ROBERTT. WILLIAMS

Director,

Manufacturing Operations

Support & Technology

Caterpillar Inc.

2003 Visiting Committee Members

LLOYD R. HARRIOTT

Professor

Dept. of Electrical and

Computer Engineering

University of Virginia

LOU ANN HEIMBROOK

Vice President of

Global Operations

Merek & Co., Inc.

MR. SCOTT C.

DONNELLY

Senior Vice President

GE Corporate Research &

Development

General Electric Company
1

The NIST Visiting Committee on

Advanced Technology (VCAT)

reviews and makes recommendations regarding general policy for

the National Institute of Standards

and Technology (NIST), its organization, its budget, and its

programs, within the framework of

applicable national policies as set

forth by the President and the

Congress. We present these

findings in this annual report to the

Secretary of Commerce for submission to the Congress.

The VCAT continues to be

impressed with the quality of the

technical work at NIST. The

results of NIST research provide

real, tangible, benefits to the U.S.

economy. NIST’s mission and

role, which focus on measurement

and standards, are indispensable to

maintaining and enhancing productivity and competitiveness;

enabling international trade; and

improving public health, safety,

and environmental quality.

Particularly noteworthy accomplishments this year are:

• The NIST 2010 Strategic Plan

is becoming central to the leadership and operations of NIST.

This is a high-value activity

that will give NIST a good

sense of where it needs to go

and the resources required.

Over the past two years NIST

has moved from the development of a framework to actual

implementation of the Plan, has

aligned its research strategies

with the Plan goals, and is

beginning to develop a set of

goals that cascade down

through the OU operating

plans. The Committee is

highly impressed with the

progress that NIST has made,

and now that NIST is over this

initial hurdle, expects progress

to accelerate rapidly. 

• NIST’s reaffirmation of its

commitment to its traditional

measurement and science

mission and its leadership of a

National Measurement System

(NMS), is an important

strategic decision. NMS leadership is a challenging role that

is likely to produce significant

economic benefit, if NIST and

other organizations collaborate

to promote an efficient,

possibly global, non-redundant,

measurement infrastructure. 

• NIST has increased its

emphasis on performance

metrics and accountability.

NIST is making progress on a

NIST-wide balanced scorecard

that includes two or three

metrics in each of the five main

areas of management priorities.

I. Executive Summary

In one of many nanotechnology projects, NIST scientists are fabricating magnetic traps to

improve manipulation and analysis of single strands of DNA or RNA.

© Geoffrey Wheeler
Several of the metrics are

currently included in OU

Director performance plans. 

• NIST has made good progress

during the past year in developing external partnerships, particularly notable is the joint

Postdoc program with NIH.

This approach will increase the

leverage of taxpayer investment

at both institutions through

using the special competencies

of each. This collaborative

model could be useful in other

areas.

The VCAT views these developments as highly positive, and

encourages NIST to continue and

extend these practices to become

even more flexible to meet

emerging opportunities. The

VCAT offers the following complementary comments and recommendations for enhanced effectiveness and further progress.

• The NIST 2010 Strategic Plan

provides an excellent vehicle

for NIST to better articulate its

commitment to continue to

provide significant economic

benefit to the U.S. economy.

The next revision of the Plan

should identify clear and reasonably direct economic

benefits for each of the Plan’s

major elements. 

• In order to make effective a

National Measurement System,

NIST must define the overall

goals for the NMS. Then NIST

must identify its distinctive

competencies, articulate why

NIST should lead the effort,

and gain support from involved

external entities. 

• In order to move the organization to the next level of performance, it is essential that the

Strategic Plan be reflected as

quickly as possible in the

operating plans and in real-time

program decisions. More detail

is needed on the linkage of

specific research programs to

higher-level plan goals, consistent with customer needs.

NIST must continue the

process it has started--to

continue developing a method

for managing resources on a

NIST-wide basis. 

• NIST’s leadership’s increased

emphasis on safety is appreciated. However given the importance of safety, the staff must

become involved in actively

reducing the reportable injury

rates. 

These and related points are

discussed in more detail in Section

II. Section III summarizes and

consolidates the information from

NIST presentations to the

Committee. Further details can be

found on the VCAT web site:

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

2
3

The VCAT continues to be

impressed with the quality of the

technical work at NIST. The

results of NIST research provide

real, tangible, benefits to the U.S.

economy. NIST’s mission and

role, which focus on measurement

and standards, is indispensable to

maintaining and enhancing productivity and competitiveness;

enabling international trade; and

improving public health, safety,

and environmental quality.

The Committee was pleased to see

significant organizational changes

this year intended to increase the

effectiveness in a changing environment. The announced changes

in the senior management team are

supported by the Committee and

these changes give NIST management the opportunity to prioritize

the issues affecting the organization and develop effective areas of

responsibility. Continuing efforts

to include broad participation of

the Operating Unit Directors in a

NIST-wide planning process are

necessary to identify the types of

multi-disciplinary research projects

that will be needed in the future.

Reinvigorating the concept of a

National Measurement System will

help sharpen strategic thinking and

is a powerful method to help

identify appropriate new research

topics for NIST. 

Given the recognized overall

technical excellence of NIST,

however, the Committee can best

provide value to NIST and its

stakeholders by focusing on areas

where NIST can improve. Issues

and recommendations that the

Committee views as important to

NIST were discussed thoroughly at

the quarterly meetings, and the

results of those discussions are

presented in this section.

A. NIST 2010 Strategic Plan 

The Committee has reviewed the

NIST 2010 Strategic Plan during

its development process over the

past two years and finds that the

Plan is an effective mechanism for

charting NIST’s future. It is an

excellent sign that NIST management has instituted a process in

which they continuously examine

the Plan for inadequacies and that

they have set up processes to

correct those inadequacies. Over

the past two years, NIST has

moved from the development of a

framework to actual implementation of the Plan, has aligned its

research strategies with the Plan

goals, and is beginning to develop

a set of goals that cascade down

through the OU operating plans.

The Committee is highly

impressed with the progress that

NIST has made, and now that

NIST is over this initial hurdle,

expects progress to accelerate

rapidly. Because of the importance the Committee attaches to

the evolution of the Plan and its

implementation, it has focused

most of its attention on those

issues this year.

NIST’s programmatic Strategic

Focus Areas are in good alignment

with the Administration’s present

R&D budget priorities. But, part

of a long term strategy is to be

prepared to support technological

change. NIST has strongly

demonstrated the capability to

rapidly organize its resources to

meet national needs in homeland

security technologies, in part,

because of its broad base of fundamental measurement competencies. An effective strategic plan

needs to have the flexibility to go

beyond explicitly defined focus

areas. Thus, the Committee

supports reaffirming NISTs commitment to its traditional measurement and science mission through

leadership of a National

Measurement System (NMS).

NIST may understand the NMS

but it needs to strongly and

broadly communicate the benefits

of an NMS to identified constituencies. It is not possible for

NIST to carry out all the necessary

processes of an NMS, but it should

be the holder of the processes,

with the work done in cooperation

with other agencies, and other

national measurement bodies.

NIST must define the overall goals

of an NMS, identify its distinctive

competencies, articulate why NIST

should lead the effort, and gain

support from involved external

entities. 

Plan implementation

It is evident that the NIST 2010

Strategic Plan is a living process

and is becoming central to the

leadership and operations of NIST.

II. Discussion of Key Issues
4

This is a high-value activity that

will give NIST a good sense of

where it needs to go and the

resources required. NIST is

gradually adjusting its work

portfolio and competencies to

conform to the strategic plan.

However, it is essential that the

Plan continue to be implemented

as quickly as possible to move the

organization to the next level of

performance.

Given the current environment and

budget situation, NIST management has decided to focus first on

implementing two of the four programmatic Strategic Focus Areas

(SFAs), Nanotechnology and

Homeland Security. This

narrowed focus is appropriate. 

Implementation of the nanotechnology SFA is being accomplished

at the Operating Unit (OU) level.

Two roles have been identified:

measurements and standards, and

critically evaluated data. The OUs

expect a 50% increase (FY2002 to

FY2004) in nanotechnology

related research funding as a result

of reprogramming within the OUs.

During FY2003, the OUs have

been characterizing their present

portfolio of projects, and through

resource reallocation move them to

be more consistent with the

strategic plan. The next steps are

to establish an on-going customer

focus. 

NIST has the technical capabilities

to contribute strongly to measurements and standards for homeland

security. Of the total funding in

FY2002 applied to homeland

security, approximately 70% was

derived from reprogramming from

other projects. In many cases the

“reprogramming” effort was

accomplished by leveraging

Determining the radiation exposure of

an amino acid sample as part of a

project to help ensure effective sterilization of U.S. government mail.

© Robert Rathe
ongoing work, but sharpening and

shifting its focus to apply to

homeland security. NIST has the

opportunity to work with the

Department of Homeland Security

and other federal laboratories, and

should continue to press for a collaborative role in facilitating measurements and standards. 

Performance metrics

Developing and using appropriate

performance measures are

essential to demonstrate that NIST

is a high-value organization

providing focused, effective

results. These may be considered

to fall into two categories: (1)

measures for external publication

to demonstrate the effectiveness

and value of NIST work to the

U.S. economy, and (2) internal

measures to determine compliance

with, and success of, the strategic

plan. 

Current measures of effectiveness

include 31 micro-economic impact

studies that NIST has conducted

over the past ten years to quantify

the impact of their work. These

provide a compelling, but incomplete story of the effectiveness of

NIST work. They are only a

small, carefully chosen, sampling

of the complete body of work and

are conducted on a microeconomic level, typically restricted

to estimating the direct impact on

one (or a few) industries.

Traditional output measures, such

as number of publications, sales of

Standard Reference Materials

(SRMs), number of calibrations,

etc., may not be fully under the

control of the organization. For

example, the introduction of

National Traceable Reference

Materials (NTRMs) has reduced

the need for some SRMs. Thus,

while traditional output measures

are useful in measuring change,

they should be used carefully. 

The NIST 2010 Strategic Plan also

provides an excellent vehicle for

NIST to better articulate its

message that it will continue to

provide significant economic

benefit to the U.S. economy. The

next revision of the Plan should

identify clear and reasonably direct

economic benefits for each of the

major elements. Estimating such

benefits can be difficult since the

role of standards is infrastructural

and generally hidden in the development process, but NIST has

developed some credibility and

expertise with its retrospective

studies and is now in a better

position to develop meaningful

prospective estimates. 

To ensure that NIST is able to

deliver on its projected benefits,

organization-wide performance

metrics must be developed for the

portfolio of its projects. Levels of

metrics should cascade down

through the levels of the strategic

plan with direct application to the

research programs. 

NIST is making progress on a

NIST-wide balanced scorecard,

and now has two or three metrics

in each of the five main areas of

management priorities. Several of

the metrics are currently included

in OU Director performance plans.

However, the Baldrige criteria

should be reviewed for applicability toward developing a better,

balanced scorecard with leading

indicators. Measuring customer

satisfaction appears difficult, but is

being done in industry, and NIST

is encouraged to include such

measures. 

B. Safety

The VCAT remains firmly supportive of improved safety and appreciates the increased emphasis on

safety at NIST. Indications of the

increased emphasis at the management level include: making safety

the first business item in every

Senior Management Board

meeting, preparing a comprehensive safety plan, and having

managers and supervisors visit

private industry (specifically the

DuPont Experimental Station) to

learn about their safety practices.

There is a new website on safety

that informs staff on how to report

injuries and hazards, provides

copies of the latest safety plans,

reports, and best practices, and

provides information about the

safety office and its activities in

Gaithersburg and Boulder. A new

safety training program, which

focuses on investigation and rootcause analysis of safety-related

incidents, is now available for

managers and is required for all

5
6

supervisors. And, an element on

safety is in all management and

staff performance agreements. 

Despite these efforts, there has not

been a significant decrease in

either the lost workday incident

frequency rate, or the lost workday

incident severity rate at NIST

overall. NIST is still higher than

the Department of Commerce

average. The incident rate in the

Laboratories may not be significant for any particular year, as it is

fairly low and thus can be

perturbed by one or two incidents,

however there is no long-term

downward trend. Presently, NIST

is focusing on reducing injuries in

the Office of the Director for

Administration/Chief Financial

Officer. These are the people who

take care of the facilities and are

subject to greater risks. 

The Committee understands and

appreciates the management

emphasis on safety but is

concerned that this emphasis has

not been entirely embraced by the

staff. A plan should be developed

to include the staff in actively

reducing the reportable injury

rates. The Committee observes

that there are inconsistent practices

for wearing personal safety protection equipment. Further, not all

injuries may be reported; there is

no mechanism to evaluate this

potential problem. Some

suggested steps are to implement a

hazard identification system and to

reinforce positively the reporting

of incidents. 

C. Organizational Efficiency

Reorganization

The VCAT is very supportive of

the reorganization of senior NIST

management positions and of the

choice of individuals to be part of

the top executive team. This

change gives the NIST Director,

and his team, an opportunity to

help prioritize, and deal with, the

issues affecting the organization

and to develop clear areas of

responsibility. However, the areas

of responsibility of the team

members are not fully clear at this

point, and further work is needed

to define those responsibilities to

minimize overlap between team

members and to free the NIST

Director to focus on external

relations. 

The NIST Chief Information

Officer (CIO) position was officially implemented on May 4,

NIST biomedical engineer places a

water sample on a tiny sensing chip that

detects toxic chemicals.

© Robert Rathe
7

2003 to advise NIST on the use of

information technology, and with a

support organization, to provide

computing and networking

services. The CIO has significant

challenges ensuring that mandated

federal requirements are met, and

that service is provided efficiently

and supports the mission of the

agency. The incorporation of the

CIO organization within the

Director’s Office is a positive sign.

The VCAT has identified the

establishment of such an office,

that has responsibility for all IT

expenditures, as a significant

opportunity to provide quality

customer service while realizing

savings from consolidation of IT

services purchases. 

Strategic Partnerships

Improved collaborations with

appropriate organizations are

critical to enhancing NIST’s ability

to carry out its mission in a

climate of flat or declining

budgets. NIST effectively reaches

out to a variety of organizations at

the bench level, but has historically not explicitly developed

effective partnerships though management initiatives. Thus, NIST’s

progress during the past year in

developing external partnerships is

exciting, particularly the joint

Postdoc program with NIH. This

is an excellent approach to achieve

some leverage without conducting

all the research at NIST. This is

an opportunity that can become a

model for other technical areas.

The Committee challenges the

NIST management to continue to

develop partnership models,

possibly with a large virtual

component, with institutions

remote from NIST’s physical

locations, as an aid to broadening

its support base. 

Budget

Although the budget situation for

FY2003 is not as alarming as last

year, there is a continuing concern

that the budget process is not

stable, and with increasing needs

for Homeland Security and the war

in Iraq, there will be pressure to

maintain or reduce NIST’s budget.

This would produce a critical

situation as NIST is at minimal

funding levels now and must be

adequately funded to fulfill its

unique mission within the federal

government for developing and

maintaining a measurements and

standards infrastructure. As new

national needs continue to be identified, e.g., homeland security,

which have significant infrastructural needs for measurements and

standards, NIST needs funding to

help develop a program that is

complementary to the work of the

lead agency. This will promote

efficiency without creating a

redundant infrastructure. 

Further, a mechanism needs to be

found to promote stability and

long-range direction of the

agency’s budget. Annual budget

debates reflecting conflicting

viewpoints regarding funding of

the extramural programs, MEP and

ATP, have confounded discussion

of funds for NIST’s core mission

and its ability to maintain its facilities. The Advanced Technology

Program is a useful, well-administered program with modest impact.

But, the Committee sees budget

priorities as continued stewardship

of the facilities, preservation of the

core mission, and stabilization of

funding for the extramural

programs, in that order. 

The development and implementation of the NIST 2010 Strategic

Plan is a good step toward

ensuring that NIST is applying its

resources efficiently to the appropriate tasks. With the strong

economic benefits that NIST is

encouraged to include in the next

revision, NIST will be able to

demonstrate the consequences of

inadequate funding and the extent

to which they can reprogram and

reallocate resources to meet new

needs.
8

The Committee meets quarterly

with NIST management and staff

at NIST’s Gaithersburg (March,

June, December) and Boulder

(September) locations. This year,

in addition, several Committee

members made visits to the

Secretary of Commerce, selected

members of Congress and their

staff, and staff analysts at the

Office of Science and Technology

Policy and the Office of

Management and Budget. The

major points discussed at these

meetings are summarized below.

Additional information may be

found in the meeting minutes on

the VCAT Web site,

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

A. Strategic Plan

Planning Process

Future priorities for NIST were set

at the Senior Management Board

(SMB) Spring Retreat, April 3-4,

2003. An agreed-upon strategic

focus includes articulation and

implementation of NIST’s longterm strategic plan, and defining or

reaffirming NIST’s role in the

National Measurement System.

Operational focus topics included

continuous organizational

improvement, improved operating

effectiveness, and improved leadership and management development.

A review of the five phases of

development of the strategic plan

is as follows: 

Phase 1, Organizational

Development - A major result of

this effort was the emergence of a

distinct NIST-wide sense of programmatic purpose.

Phase 2, Environmental Analysis -

Three broad Strategic Focus Areas

(SFAs)--nanotechnology, health

care, and information/knowledge

management--were developed in

response to a challenging assessment of potential changes in the

long-term R&D environment.

Post September 11, a fourth in

homeland security was added.

III. Committee Review Activities

World-leading NIST research on

quantum computing and communications includes a recent demonstration

of a device that can count about

20,000 photons per second.

© Geoffrey Wheeler
Phase 3, Opportunity Assessment -

Specific opportunities for NIST

were characterized in those previously-defined broad areas by

teams led by the OU Directors and

NIST Deputy Director. The result

was a series of SFA reports that

recommended specific opportunities and resource needs. These

reports were the basis for the first

draft of the strategic plan. 

Phase 4, Review - A management

review of the opportunities

produced a revised version of the

strategic plan. This plan was used

to select programmatic budget initiatives in FY2004.

Phase 5, Implementation -

Implementation was started though

resource allocation at the OU

level. The NIST Director

reviewed and approved the 2-year

operational plans for each OU.

These plans were developed, at the

Director’s request, to describe the

work portfolio of each OU and

demonstrate how it is moving into

alignment with NIST’s long term

strategic goals. This will result in

incremental adjustment of NIST

programs toward the agreed-upon

long term goals.

Implementation of the Strategic

Plan

NIST has completed steps 1

though 4 and the individual NIST

Operating Units are now gradually

adjusting their work portfolios and

competencies to align to the

strategic plan. 

Given the current environment and

budget situation, NIST management has decided to focus nearterm on implementation of two of

the programmatic SFAs: homeland

security and nanotechnology (i.e.,

nanoscale measurements). To

develop a coherent explanation of

NIST homeland security activities

in the context of the Department of

Homeland Security needs, two

planning reviews were held. For

nanotechnology, NIST is in the

process of identifying those capabilities that can position it

uniquely in the marketplace.

9

A NIST physicist inserts a wafer into a

low-noise electrical probe station as part

of a project to develop methods for

testing the electrical properties of

molecules.

© Robert Rathe
National Measurement System

The Senior Management Board

perceived the need for NIST to

reaffirm its commitment to its traditional measurement and science

mission, to enhance its national

leadership, and to maximize the

impact of its work. The need to

focus on its traditional measurement and science mission was

highlighted in responses from the

recent employee survey. This is a

relatively new effort, but the SMB

has identified and initiated a

number of tasks, and is encouraged by this progress. The Board

has not yet reached convergence.

More work is needed and planned.

The approach is to break the goal

into two pieces: to reaffirm NIST’s

role as leader of the Nation’s

measurement system, and to define

how best to perform that role to

maximize NIST’s impact. The

final step is to develop a marketing

plan.

The concept of a National

Measurement System (NMS) was

started in the 1960s under thenNBS Director Allen Astin. NIST

has developed some definitions of

the NMS that are exact, contain a

great deal of caveats, and are fine

for internal discussion but need to

be honed for external consumption. Different definitions for the

NMS will be needed for different

audiences. The present NMS definition only addresses some of the

needs of the country, and it must

be integrated with the national

measurement systems of other

countries. By 2020 the NMS

should evolve to a global measurement system, with particular

emphasis on how this serves the

customer.

B. Strategic Focus Areas (SFAs)

As noted above, NIST management has decided to focus nearterm on implementation of two of

the programmatic SFAs: homeland

security and nanotechnology.

NIST is at the beginning of implementing NIST 2010. In an environment of static resources this

will require reprogramming

existing resources. This is being

done at the OU level where NIST

believes that customers and

customer needs can be best understood. 

Homeland Security

NIST presently has activities that

tie into almost every function of

the new Department of Homeland

Security (DHS). A NIST Division

Chief, Bert Coursey, has been

detailed as Director of Standards

in the Office of Research and

Development in the Science and

Technology Directorate. A

National Research Council report

on “Making the Nation Safer: The

Role of Science and Technology in

Countering Terrorism” described

how science and technology could

support the DHS, and specifically

mentioned NIST, but at this point

enabling legislation does not give

NIST a specific role in the

Department’s work. 

However, NIST is working closely

with the DHS in developing a

standards infrastructure. There is a

tremendous demand for standards

for homeland security and applicable standards have been developed

in a fragmented fashion. Neither

the federal government, nor the

nongovernmental sector, presently

has a comprehensive, consolidated

program for developing new preparedness standards. The NIST

role in homeland security

standards development will be to

provide critical technical expertise

and support for standards development in key areas and, where

appropriate, to coordinate and

facilitate standards development

activities. Mary Saunders, who is

co-chair of the American National

Standards Institute (ANSI)

Homeland Security Standards

Panel (HSSP), will be involved

with DHS and developing

homeland security standards.

There will be a push to develop

standards and certifications much

more quickly than usual, and

perhaps develop interim standards.

These are approaches that are new

to NIST and will require changes

in the way NIST traditionally

operates.

NIST presently has about 120 ongoing homeland security projects.

These are funded with more than

$50 million of NIST-appropriated

funds and other agency funds.

Example projects that the

Committee heard about include:

the National Construction Safety

10
11

Team Act, which gives NIST new

authority to gather evidence at

building disasters and allows them

to establish an advisory

committee; detection of radiological and nuclear threat material; the

World Trade Center investigation;

characterization of trace explosive

detection equipment for airport

security applications; concealed

weapons detection; metal detector

standards; gas mask performance

standards; first responder interoperable communications; standard

references for bullets and casings;

and longer-term projects for tomographically imaging luggage and

cargo containers. 

The NIST role needs to be better

understood by other agencies, have

a single point of contact in support

of DHS, and have a defined

responsibility to work with DHS. 

Nanotechnology

For nanotechnology, NIST is in the

process of identifying those capabilities that can position it

uniquely in the marketplace. Two

clear roles have been identified:

measurements and standards, and

critically evaluated data. NIST

needs to maintain focus on its role

of providing measurements

standards and data in an environment where many people are

working on nanotechnology. 

NIST expects a 50 % increase

(FY2002 to FY 2004) in nanotechnology related research as a result

of reprogramming. NIST is

exploring partnerships with the

University of Maryland, the

National Institutes of Health

(NIH), and others, in developing a

nanomanufacturing center. A

major portion of nanotechnology

investment at NIST will be in the

Advanced Measurement

Laboratory. The creation of stateof-the-art clean rooms offers NIST

opportunities for strategic partnerships. Current NIST activities in

nanotechnology include: nanomagnetics, single photonics, quantum

information, nanoparticle, single

molecule measurement and manipulation, and gene expression. The

intent is to characterize the present

NIST portfolio relative to the

NIST 2010 strategic plan and,

through decisions and resource

allocation at the OU level, realign

this and future work consistent

with the plan. The problem is to

effectively apply NIST resources

A hand-held detector is used to check

for radiation emissions from a truck

trailer. NIST is collaborating with other

national organizations to develop new

standards for a variety of radiation

detectors and monitors.

© Robert Rathe
to a variety of technical opportunities serving a variety of industries.

The next steps are to establish an

on-going customer focus.

Presently, some NIST work does

not address specific markets.

Information/Knowledge

Management

The VCAT heard presentations on

projects which support three broad,

high-level opportunities within

Information/Knowledge

Management: trustworthy

computing, interoperability technologies, and virtual measurements

and dynamic data evaluation. 

Trustworthy computing can be

defined as being able to make

good decisions based on valid

data, and having confidence in the

information used. It is the vehicle

for achieving a level of reliability

that results in complete confidence

in the system output. It requires a

systemic approach addressing

multiple aspects including functionality, performance, security,

and dependability. To start, infrastructure technologies should be

functionally correct, thus NIST has

a strong program in XML technologies and networking protocols.

Other NIST work, which was

described, is designed to ensure

trustworthy computing in voting

systems, health care informatics,

homeland security, and ensuring

access to legacy data. Most of

NIST’s work focuses on conformance testing. This provides a

significant benefit to industry

standards-developing-groups since,

as NIST develops the testing

program concurrently with the

specification, they can provide

feedback to the group on potential

ambiguities. 

Headlines show that U.S. manufacturing is in a rapid decline due

to increasing manufacturing in

China, and further competition is

expected resulting from the

European “Sixth Framework”

industrial research initiative. To

be competitive, U.S. industry

needs to transfer data, information,

and knowledge throughout the

design and manufacturing system

seamlessly and efficiently.

Interoperability throughout the

supply chain is critical to reducing

costs, time, and improving the

product. NIST will provide

technical leadership and participation in standards development

organizations and perform collaborative research with OEMs and

Small Manufacturing Enterprises

(SMEs) in multiple industry

sectors. A second aspect of the

problem is assuring conformance

with the standard, and NIST is

active in developing testbed and

reference implementations to test

conformance with newly

developed standards. 

There is an increasing reliance on

modeling and information systems

for the materials, ceramics, glass,

energy, and chemical industries; all

of which require reliable data.

Provision of physical, chemical,

biochemical, and materials

property information and data is a

traditional NIST role. To facilitate

data collection, NIST is helping to

develop data exchange standards

including structure identification

standards and software. NIST is

working with academia and other

government agencies to enhance

and improve the Protein Data

Bank (PDB), a structural archive

for atomic coordinates of biological macromolecules and assemblies. NIST is developing expert

systems in information synthesis to

replace the highly skilled experts

that presently review the data.

This approach, not only will

reduce the time and cost to

produce reference quality recommended data specifically tuned to

current customer needs, it could

ultimately provide tools that

customers can use to facilitate

their assessment of data quality.

NIST is also researching virtual

measurement (expert) systems.

These can be used to fill the gaps

in experimental data by computationally predicting the data from

appropriate estimation schemes or

first principles quantum chemistry

and molecular simulations thereby

“making” measurements that are

not possible or too expensive to

make in the lab. 

Customer Focus

The Industrial Liaison Office was

created to target specific industries

to determine what current, or

potential NIST products and

services are needed. Specifically,

the Office analyzed a portfolio of

12
13

NIST projects and selected 11 on

which to survey industry for

feedback. Of the 80 surveys

returned, the importance of NIST

work was often rated high, and

many of those surveyed asked for

additional information. 

A pilot project focused on the

automotive and health care industries. One result of these interactions with industry is that the

Automotive Industry Action Group

(AIAG), a not-for-profit association of companies involved in the

automotive industry, is advocating

for NIST to their 1500 members.

Other outcomes are an increased

interest in licensing of NIST work

and developing Cooperative

Research and Development

Agreements (CRADAs). In at

least two cases, a project was in

transition and the pilot project

helped them move to better

support the automotive industry. 

Several lessons have been learned

from the pilot project. Project

level feedback is very useful but

difficult to do comprehensively.

Future interactions will need to

focus on portfolios of projects.

Direct one-on-one interaction is

very important. Industry is very

interested in the portfolio-level of

detail, and wants a single point of

contact at NIST. There is an ongoing need to align industry needs

with the NIST Strategic Focus

Areas (SFAs). 

Also as part of the project, a

database of existing NIST projects,

KnowledgeNet, was created.

KnowledgeNet is publicly

available for industry viewing.

The Public and Business Affairs

Division reports a number of

external contacts that reference the

database. Information in the

database includes the project

name, a description of the project,

the name of the Principal

Investigator, and contact information for the Principal Investigator.

This year, the Office is in transition from pilot program to an

established role. Key recommendations accepted by the Senior

Management Board are to shift the

focus from the project level to the

portfolio level, ensure that established outreach channels will be

maintained, get additional

customer input on future NIST

plans, and institutionalize the

customer liaison role within the

NIST Program Office.

C. Program Results

Measuring NIST’s Economic

Impact

NIST has been at the forefront of

government agencies in assessing

the economic impact of its

programs. Over the past ten years,

NIST has conducted 31 independent, retrospective impact studies.

The selection was not random;

however, projects were selected

based on their assessed potential

for revealing the range and

magnitude of NIST economic

impacts. In all cases, estimation of

the benefits accrued has been

limited to a specific time period

and to the industries directly

targeted by the research project.

Usually, this has meant one to

three industries. 

This methodological approach

used by NIST requires multidisciplinary consultant teams. NIST has

certified a small number of firms

that are capable of performing

these analyses. One of the early

deliverables of these studies is a

description of the technical outputs

of the program. With these

outputs in hand, one can develop

an analytical framework for estimating the economic impacts.

Profits and employment are the

critical elements in the business

sector’s contribution to the GDP;

therefore, these two metrics are the

preferred objectives of the

economic analysis. 

Other difficulties arise when one

estimates economic impacts from

government R&D projects.

Whereas corporations collect

economic impact data in real time,

government economic studies

require going back in time to

collect impact data. This puts constraints on the time periods that

can be addressed by the study. It

is also important to know where in

the technology life cycle the government program is having an

impact to properly quantify the

impact and the cost of government

technical support. 
14

NIST has

developed an

excellent

database from

these studies

which gives it

some credibility for conducting prospective

studies to

support its

strategic

planning

process. Here

the scope is

broader; first

one must look

at industry

sectors, and

then using

appropriate

methodology

to extrapolate

the benefits to

the larger U.S.

economy.

National

Research

Council Board on Assessment of

NIST Programs

Dr. Linda Capuano, Chair of the

National Research

Council/National Academies

Board on Assessment of NIST

Programs reviewed the Board’s

recent evaluation of the NIST

Laboratories. The Board was

asked to review the NIST laboratory programs based on (1) technical

merit; (2) relevance to customer

needs; and (3) adequacy of facilities, equipment, and human

resources. The assessment is the

combined judgment of 150 panel

members, comprised of a very

diverse group of industry, university, and agency representatives. The

2003 review process took one year

with a new member orientation

session held in December 2002,

laboratory visits conducted in

January through March, and a final

report delivered in September

2003. 

The Board has developed a

process of continuous improvement. Improvements this year

included: defining and disseminating the themes for the assessment

in December, implementing a vicechair position in order to smooth

the leadership transitions, and

implementing skip-level sessions

and feedback sessions with

Laboratory Directors. Another

change implemented this year is

biennial reporting, starting with the

2004-2005 cycle. An official report

will only be issued in odd years

although panel meetings will

continue every year. This will put

less emphasis on report writing

and more time on individual peerto-peer contact. Panels will also

clarify their data needs to reduce

the amount of preparation by

NIST, and hold longer panel

meetings to expose members to

multiple Divisions. 

Briefly summarizing the findings

of the Board, Dr. Capuano

reported that the technical quality

of NIST’s work is high: very good

to excellent. NIST has successfully

An adjustment is made to the prototype

NIST Electrostatic Force Balance designed

to measure nanoscale forces.

© Robert Rathe
achieved a good balance between

research and services, and

programs are well aligned with

NIST’s goals and missions.

Programs are generally aligned

with the needs of the currently

identified customer base, and

NIST works to achieve a balance

between good customer focus and

new program development. NIST

has also demonstrated its flexibility to react to unanticipated needs,

as exemplified by its responsiveness in homeland security activities. NIST strengths are its expert

staff, but budgets are eroding

staffing levels. As a result, NIST

needs to continue to emphasize

succession planning. The

equipment and facilities situation

is mixed. Upgraded facilities and

equipment are excellent, but

legacy systems are deteriorating.

When NIST has the budget, they

do a good job of identifying

effective and efficient equipment,

but constrained budgets present

difficulties. 

The NIST Strategic Plan has been

effectively guiding its programs.

The Board sees continuous

improvement in the way strategic

planning is impacting NIST

actions. The Board is aware of a

lot of collaboration at the bench

level and the Board encourages

more collaborative planning at the

higher levels. Finally, in an era of

flat budgets the Strategic Plan

takes on greater importance to

more clearly define critical new

research areas, and those areas that

can be considered less strategically

important.

D. External Interactions

S&T Priorities in the

Administration

Dr. Kei Koizumi, Director of the

American Association for the

Advancement of Science (AAAS)

Budget and Policy Program,

described his organization’s activities tracking the federal budget and

gave VCAT members an early

insight into the FY2004 budget

and its implications for NIST.

AAAS is a non-profit membership

organization with 132,000

members and is a one-stop

resource for federal funding information. 

The priorities in the FY2004

budget are for tax cuts. Budget

forecasts show budget deficits,

with no return to surpluses in

sight. The FY2004 budget (as of

March 2003) did not include any

estimates of a war with Iraq or a

Medicare drug benefit. Thus, the

Department of Commerce and

other agency budgets will likely

be flat for the near term. Dr.

Koizumi noted that non-defense

R&D has been increasing substantially since 1997, however that

was largely due to a budget

surplus and a campaign to double

the NIH budget. Commerce and

other domestic R&D agencies

have not had significant increases

since the 1980’s. Overall

Commerce R&D is down 12 %

for FY2004, resulting from the

proposed elimination of ATP and

MEP. 

Strategic Partnerships

NIST is developing opportunities

to partner with other government

agencies and universities and is

meeting with various industry

groups to strengthen relationships

with them. In particular, meetings

have been held with representatives from the automotive industry

and the health care industry. NIST

brings a unique mission, world

renowned scientists and engineers,

and unique capabilities and facilities to a partnership. Example

facilities include: the NIST Center

for Neutron Research (NCNR), the

(soon-to-be) Advanced

Measurement Laboratory (AML),

and the Advanced Chemical

Sciences Laboratory (ACSL). The

NCNR is the most versatile

neutron user facility in the U.S.

with more than 1750 annual users.

The ACSL has cold rooms for

biotechnology research and an

excellent ventilation system and

capabilities to handle corrosive

chemicals.

Dr. Esin Gulari, Acting Assistant

Director for Engineering, of the

National Science Foundation

(NSF) recently visited NIST, and

was given a tour of the NCNR as a

prelude for exploring closer relationships in nanoscience and engineering. NIST currently has a

Memorandum of Understanding

with NSF and is working to

expand it to sponsor new fellow15
16

ship and training programs at

NIST. Dennis O’Connor, Vice

President for Research and Dean

of Graduate Studies, University of

Maryland, visited NIST on March

5, 2003 to discuss possible opportunities to increase collaboration,

particularly in the area of nanofabrication. This is part of an ongoing relationship to explore

potential areas of interaction. 

Angela Hight Walker is working to

establish a new Postdoc program

with the National Institutes of

Health (NIH). This program will

provide for a two-year research

project with one year spent at each

institution. Scientists at both institutions will work together to

manage the Postdoc’s research and

learn about each other’s work.

Advertising for positions began in

June 2003. The most notable

feature of the program is that

NIST and NIH equally fund it with

two advisors per fellow, one from

NIH and one from NIST. Funds

are available for five postdoctoral

fellows. It is expected that the

researcher will spend approximately equal time at NIH and NIST.

The program was announced in

March 2003 to NIST and NIH staff

and 50 joint research project

descriptions have been collected. 

As reported earlier, NIST is also

exploring partnership opportunities

with the National Institute of

Biomedical Imaging and

Bioengineering (NIBIB), a newly

created institute within NIH. The

NIBIB is looking to NIST for its

expertise in physical science measurements. NIST has been participating in their strategic planning

process, and the NIST Director sits

on the NIBIB Advisory Council.

The NIBIB Director and executive

team have visited NIST and a draft

MOU with NIBIB is underway,

where NIBIB would co-locate

their intramural program at the

NIST site. 

NIST is also working closely with

DHS in developing a standards

infrastructure. Mary Saunders is

co-chair of the American National

Standards Institute (ANSI)

Homeland Security Standards

Panel (HSSP) and will be involved

with homeland security standards.

Further, Bert Coursey has been

detailed as Director of Standards

in the Office of Research and

Development in the Science and

Technology Directorate. 

Preparing a fuel cell for neutron imaging

at the NIST Center for Neutron Research.

© Robert Rathe
17

Meeting with Secretary Evans

The Visiting Committee members

met with Department of

Commerce Secretary Evans on

December 11, 2002. The VCAT

expressed their pleasure with the

steps that Arden Bement, the NIST

Director, has taken to change the

organization to be responsive to

the changing environment. They

were particularly appreciative of

his efforts to include broad participation by the Operating Unit

Directors. They agree that the

focus on homeland security is a

proper one for NIST and application of NIST’s varied competencies to these problems will likely

significantly benefit the Nation.

The Committee commented that

they have reviewed the NIST 2010

Strategic Plan, are pleased that

NIST is moving forward with it,

and anticipate a healthy interaction

between NIST and the Committee

with this process. They also

thanked the Secretary for his

support on the budget issues and

encouraged him to remain focused

on maintaining adequate funding

for Adjustments to Base and

equipping the Advanced

Measurement Laboratory.

Meetings with Congressional

members and staff

During the past year, Committee

members met with a variety of

Congressional members and staff

primarily to discuss the NIST

budget situation. In each case, the

meeting gave the members an

excellent opportunity to expound

their message that NIST is a wellrun and valuable organization that

is contributing significantly to the

U.S. economy. Further, the

Committee voiced its recognition

that developing industrial support

for NIST is difficult, as the role of

standards is infrastructural and

generally hidden in the development process. However, it was

learned that industrial sector

support is critical to raising

awareness within Congress of the

value of NIST. 

On March 19, 2003, eight VCAT

members met with Mr. Mike

Quear, Professional Staff Member

of the House Science

Subcommittee on Environment,

NIST physical scientist positions a tissueengineering polymer scaffold sample for

imaging with a new dual microscope

system.
18

Technology, and Standards. Also

attending was Jennifer Barrett,

Senior Legislative Advisor, Office

of Representative Mark Udall.

The same Committee members

met later in the day with

Representative Vernon Ehlers,

Chairman, House Science

Subcommittee on Environment,

Technology, and Standards; David

Goldston, Staff Director, House

Science Committee; John

Mimikakis, Deputy Staff Director,

House Science Committee; and

Eric Webster, Staff Director, House

Science Subcommitee on

Environment, Technology and

Standards. 

On June 11, 2003, several

members of the Committee met

with Jean Eisen, Democratic

Professional Staff Member, Senate

Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation.

Members also met with

Representative Gill Gutknecht (RMN) on the same day. For the

final visit that day, members met

with Mr. Floyd Des Champs. 

Meeting with OMB and OSTP

staff

Meetings with OMB and OSTP

staff were arranged at the request

of the VCAT to convey their views

and findings related to the

programs, budget, and strategic

direction of the NIST. On October

15, 2003, two members of the

VCAT met with Erin Wuchte, the

OMB Examiner for NIST, and

Randy Lyon, Chief of the

Commerce Branch in OMB. The

OSTP meeting included Kathie

Olsen, Associate Director for

Science, and Richard Russell,

Associate Director for Technology.

Patrick Looney and Sharon Hayes

also attended. The VCAT and

OMB agreed to meet at least on an

annual basis, and the VCAT

members encouraged OMB to

contact them directly at any time. 

E. Laboratory Tours

To gain an appreciation for the

technical excellence of NIST

research, Committee members

periodically visit laboratories that

are related to presentations to the

VCAT. In 2003, members visited

and held discussions with staff in

the following laboratories:

Advanced Measurement

Laboratory (AML) Mr. Jorge

Urrutia, Director for

Administration and Chief

Financial Office, gave members an

overview of the planning and construction progress of the AML.

Members were then conducted on

a tour of the partially-finished

Instrument East laboratory

building.

Homeland Security 

• Detection of Radiological and

Nuclear Threat Material,

Leticia Pibida, Dr. Michael

Unterweger and Dr. Lisa

Karam, Physics Laboratory

• World Trade Center

Investigation, Dr. Frank Gayle,

Dr. Richard Fields and Steve

Banovic, Materials Science and

Engineering Laboratory.

• Characterization of Trace

Explosive Detection Equipment

for Airport Security

Applications, Dr. Greg Gillen

and Robert Fletcher, Chemical

Science and Technology

Laboratory.

• Concealed Weapons Detection,

Erich Grossman, Electronics

and Electrical Engineering

Laboratory

• Maintaining the Nation’s

Critical Infrasturcture-World

Trade Center Investigation,

Pipeline Infrastructure

Protection, J. David McColskey

and Dr. Alan Clark, Materials

Science and Engineering

Laboratory

Nanoscale Measurements

• Single Molecule Measurement

and Manipulation, Dr. Michael

Gaitan, Electronics and

Electrical Engineering

Laboratory

• NIST Fountain Clock Time

Standards, Dr. Steven Jefferts,

Physics Laboratory

Biometrology

• Tissue Engineering Metrology,

Dr. Newell Washburn,

Materials Science and

Engineering Laboratory, and
19

Dr. Anne Plant, Chemical

Science and Technology

Laboratory

The laboratory tours were considered excellent this year. An

improvement was to split the

group into two or three smaller

groups which allowed the

members more interaction with the

NIST staff. The Committee, as

expected, was impressed with the

outstanding work and the quality

of the people. One challenge for

NIST is to communicate the availability of that talent to potential

external strategic partners.