NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS AUTHORIZATIONS TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 1985 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:40 a.m., in room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Slade Gorton (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Staff members assigned to this hearing: Charlene Woods, staff counsel, and Pat Windham, minority professional staff member. OPENING STATEMENT BY SENATOR GORTON Senator GORTON. Welcome to this hearing on the plans and programs of the National Bureau of Standards for fiscal year 1986. The National Bureau of Standards is an agency with an extremely broad mission, relevant to nearly every national problem area and every economic sector. Many of us take for granted the measures, standards, and technologies developed at the Bureau which affect us daily. For example, scientists at the Bureau developed an ultrasound device for identification of tumors which is significantly cheaper and safer than the use of most advanced x ray instruments. The Bureau first made it possible for radios to operate on household current, and the performance standards for flammability of children's sleepware and for residential smoke detectors were developed by Bureau scientists. Of particular interest to my home State of Washington, the Center for Applied Mathematics at the Bureau developed several models for more efficient and economical fishery management for Washington State salmon fisheries along the Columbia River. These models continue to provide an intelligent basis for management of this precious and scarce natural resource. At today's hearing, we will examine closely the proposed budget for fiscal year 1986 for the National Bureau of Standards. There are substantial budget decreases, as well as several new initiatives. In the National Engineering Laboratory, both the Center for Building Technology and the Center for Fire Research are proposed for elimination. In addition, the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology is proposed for drastic reductions. New initiatives for the Bureau include a role for the Bureau in the rapidly growing biotechnology field, construction of a cold neutron research facility, increased funding for process and quality control measurements, and funding for advanced ceramics research. We will scrutinize carefully those proposed changes, assess their impact on the overall mission of the Bureau, and then make our recommendations with respect to the budget for the National Bureau of Standards for fiscal year 1986. Senator Gore, do you have an opening statement? OPENING STATEMENT BY SENATOR GORE Senator GORE. I am pleased to take part in this hearing on the National Bureau of Standards. The NBS performs a valuable function for this Nation by providing a research and measurement base for a variety of private section activities that are in the public interest. In my years in the Congress, I have been impressed by the quality of the work performed by the NBS, and I have been a supporter of the agency's many programs. In his testimony today, the Director of the NBS presents this subcommittee with an impressive list of activities now being conducted, or soon to be conducted, by the Bureau. While I am pleased to see the NBS involved in so many worthy activities, however, I must voice my concern over two activities the NBS will not be conducting under its proposed fiscal year 1986 budget. I am speaking specifically of the proposed elimination of the Center for Building Technology and the proposed elimination of the Center for Fire Research. Over the years, the CBT has proved to be one of the more valuable of the NBS' programs. The CBT has performed pioneering work on such areas as energy conservation in buildings and has led investigations into major structural failures, such as the collapse of the skywalk at the Kansas City Hyatt Regency hotel in 1981. As chairman of the Science and Technology Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight in the House of Representatives, I held hearings on the problem of structural failures. As one result of those hearings, I became convinced of the value of the CBT in investigating the cause of structural failures in this country and in preventing other failures in the future. The CBT has clearly performed its job well. Additionally, and perhaps even more importantly, the CBT plays a central role in our national earthquake hazards reduction program. I come from a State-Tennessee-that could be severely affected by an earthquake along the New Madrid faultline. West Tennessee-and the city of Memphis in particular-could be especially hard hit. In order to minimize the damage that could occur, it is absolutely essential that we have the best available data on the possible effects of a major quake on buildings and other structures. The CBT is the best source for that information. Yet, the administration proposes to eliminate it. It seems ironic that at a time when people in the Central and Eastern United States are beginning to become more cognizant in the need to take steps to protect themselves against earthquakes, the administration proposes to remove one of the best tools for helping these people help themselves. It is especially ironic since much-needed attention is at long last beginning to be focused on the potential effects of earthquakes in the Central and Eastern United States. The crucial role of the CBT in this area was highlighted at a hearing of this subcommittee last week on the Earthquake Reduction Act. Dr. Samuel Speck, the associate director for State and local programs at FEMA, told the subcommittee that FEMA relies heavily on the CBT for expertise in the Federal earthquake program. Although FEMA is the lead agency in the earthquake hazards reduction effort, it has nowhere near the expertise of the CBT in this area. Dr. Speck stated that if the CBT is eliminated, FEMA will likely have to contract out for the services now performed by the CBT. This would cost as much, and probably much more, than the current cost of the CBT's programs. I fail to see the logic in this proposal. I am also concerned about the elimination of the Center for Fire Research. CFR's functions are varied and valuable. It both provides information and expertise to other agencies, like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and conducts its own investigations into fire safety issues. The CFR performed the research that led to today's home smoke detectors, and it is currently working on ways to improve sprinkler systems and fire-retardant upholstery. The fire center's research has undoubtedly saved many lives and much money, and it will continue to do so. The importance of the CFR becomes especially clear when one considers that without it, the United States would be the only major industrialized nation without a central fire research effort. To put our country in such a position is neither sound policy nor an efficient use of our fiscal resources. Mr. Chairman, each year for the past several years, the administration has tried to eliminate these two extremely important programs. And each year the Congress has restored the funding for them. I know that we have witnesses here today who will speak in favor of the CBT and the CFR. I am glad they are participating in this hearing. I am also glad that we have the Director of the National Bureau of Standards with us today. I hope that he will try to explain the ra9tionale for what seems to me to be an unwise and uncalled-for decision to zero-out these centers. Senator Hollings is sorry that he could not be here but he has asked me to submit a statement for him. [The statement follows:] OPENING STATEMENT BY SENATOR HOLLINGS Mr. Chairman, as you know, I strongly believe that Congress must take swift and decisive action to reduce the Federal deficit. An important part of our strategy must be an effort to eliminate wasteful and unnecessary government spending. We aren't serving America well, however, if we begin cutting programs which are undoubtedly sound and essential investments in our nation's economic health and in the safety of our people. To look to these programs for budget savings is to be penny-wise and pound foolish. The Administration's proposed budget for the National Bureau of Standards is a striking example. This budget proposal contains some valuable new initiatives: process and quality control projects to help improve American manufacturing, programs to help U.S. industry with advanced ceramics and industrial biotechnology, and a "cold neutron source" that will allow neutrons from NBS's small reactor to be used to probe microscopic details of the advanced materials used in electronics and many other areas. These are important projects that will give American industry the instru ments and techniques it needs to stay competitive in the world marketplace. At a time when the President's Commission on Industrial Competitiveness has called for new Federal efforts to help American manufacturing, these initiatives-and the Bureau's programs in general-are sound investments in our economic future. But rather than funding these projects on their own merit, the Administration proposes to pay for them by cutting some of the Bureau's most valuable existing programs. Three of the proposed cuts we have seen before-in fact, this is the fourth year we have seen them. They are the elimination of the Center for Fire Research (CFR), elimination of the Center for Building Technology (CBT), and a sharp reduction in the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology (ICST). Over the past three years, this Committee and our House counterparts have demonstrated, beyond any doubt, that these NBS programs are important social investments. The Fire Center made possible modern smoke detectors. Think of the benefits this modest investment has reaped in lives saved. If you want to talk fiscal savings, the Building Center has pioneered energy conservation techniques for office buildings, thereby saving millions of dollars in both the private and public sectors. ICST, which formulates and recommends standards for computers, has helped bring compatibility and order to that rapidly changing industry. OMB claims that these are not Federal responsibilities, even though all three groups provide badly needed technical assistance to other Federal agencies. CBT is a central part of the Federal effort to reduce earthquake hazards to buildings. CFR advises the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Other Federal agencies turn to ICST for help with computer security. Think what the cost will be if Federal agencies have to turn to outside consultants for this help! OMB also claims, without a shread of evidence, that the States and the private sector will pick up these important projects if they are eliminated. I find it sad, although not surprising, that OMB doesn't care about the thousands of American lives that are lost every year to fire or the thousands that could die in collapsing buildings during a major earthquake. I find it repugnant that OMB cuts these programs year in and year out, knowing that we support them and will restore them. It's all part of David Stockman's silly game of budgetary "chicken”—a ploy he uses to blame Congress for the Administration's huge deficits. Once again, Mr. Chairman, I expect that the Congress will be more responsible than the Administration. There are wasteful activities in government that should be cut. These valuable programs are not among them. Senator GORTON. We are pleased to have with us today, in addition to Dr. Ernest Ambler, Director of the Bureau of Standards, several outside witnesses who will aid in the evaluation of the Bureau's proposed budget. I would like to welcome: Mr. John Bush, board member of the National Institute of Building Sciences, Mr. John Gerard of the National Fire Protection Association; Mr. Vico Henriques, president of the Computer & Business Equipment Manufacturers Association; Mr. Pete England, president of the National Conference of Standards Laboratories; Mr. Fred Hume of John Fluke Manufacturing Co., Inc.; and Mr. Frank Samuel, president of the Health Industry Manufacturers Association. Mr. Hume, I know that you have traveled all the way from my home State of Washington; and Mr. England, you have traveled all the way from California, and I want to extend a special welcome to both of you. We will begin with an overview from Dr. Ambler, Director of the Bureau. Doctor, as you are well aware, your entire written statement will be included in the record and we would appreciate your summarizing it for us so we will have time for questions. STATEMENT OF DR. ERNEST AMBLER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL I am accompanied by my Deputy Director, Raymond Kammer, and I am pleased to appear before you again to request authorizations for the National Bureau of Standards for fiscal year 1986. NBS is requesting an appropriation of $120.1 million, which is a net decrease of $3,984,000 from the Bureau's current appropriation of $123,985,000. This request includes cost of living increases and built-in adjustments of $4,897,000, decreases of $8,819,000 as part of the President's deficit reduction program, and program increases of $16,444,000 which you mentioned, and decreases of $16,506,000 which you also mentioned. I was pleased with the remarks you made about the work at the National Bureau of Standards, Mr. Chairman, and it is my feeling, that I have had for some time, that the National Bureau of Standards has been very fortunate in many respects, particularly in having had since its very foundation a clear legislative mission. Our organic act has given to our institution a clear sense of direction. To be sure, the particular emphasis given to different aspects of our work changes as national priorities change. These changes in priorities have been brought out each year at these authorization hearings, as well as at other hearings before Congress. But at no time in the past can I remember the mission of NBS being so much in tune with the times, whether we relate our objectives to the Department of Commerce, to national science policy as stated by the President's science adviser, or to the general sentiment, as we perceive it, in both Houses of Congress. I refer particularly to assuring the continuing growth and strengthening of our economy, especially through the application of science and technology to our industries. This is a theme that most, if not all, sectors of our society seem to support enthusiastically. For example, the call for cooperation among the various sectors carrying out research and development-universities, industry, and Government-is universal and is being responded to by each of these sectors, not by following some central and rigid prescription, but by groups in different parts of the country getting together voluntarily to cooperate to their mutual advantage. In this climate, as Director of the National Bureau of Standards I feel excitement, I feel enthusiasm and pride. Our mission is vital and more important than ever before, and not only in our own view but in following the policies of this administration and also of Congress, and in the tangible expressions of support from our users. The budget that we are presenting to you today contains four major program initiatives. The first is the cold neutron facility. The budget proposal contains a request for $4 million to establish a cold neutron facility adjacent to the NBS reactor by constructing an experimental hall equipped with beam handling tubes that will service 15 experimental stations. This is to be a national research facility and will be a uniquely critical capability to the advancement of materials science in the United States. Funding for the development of the cold neutron source was provided in fiscal year 1985 for NBS, and the increase that we are requesting is the first of 4 years that would provide the facilities necessary to fully exploit the source. The fiscal year 1986 funds would 46-508 0-85--2 |